How much power with a 60-1?

[quickt]

Tom Lorek went mid 9s with a 60-1 back in 1993 when he was racing NMCA.

 

[RIFF RAFF]

Tom Lorek went mid 9s with a 60-1 back in 1993 when he was racing NMCA.

IM GETTING CLOSE LONNIE .. IVE GOT MY FINGERS CROSSED THE TRANNY HOLDS UP .. :biggrin:

 

[quickt]

IM GETTING CLOSE LONNIE .. IVE GOT MY FINGERS CROSSED THE TRANNY HOLDS UP .. :biggrin:

Dont be scared let it have it.

 

[RIFF RAFF]

dont be scared let it have it.

im beating on it like you own it ... Lol

 

[bison]

Tom Lorek went mid 9s with a 60-1 back in 1993 when he was racing NMCA.

This turbo is probably from 1993. This car would have that potential if it weighed about 500 lbs less. That's some feat. Idk of anyone who has come close to that. I heard of 10.30's with a pt54 similar turbo with just a 69 ex wheel. With a stator change in the converter, higher CR, slightly smaller cam lobe, and a couple degrees more timing I could see the 60-1 making another 40-50whp and 100 ft lbs more torque than I did on this one. I only made 3 hits on the 60-1.

 

[bison]

According to the 60-1 map, the max mass flow is MUCH lower than the PR you ran it. (I am sure )
So, . . . . I am going to say . . . with the compressor out of breath . . . peak 603WHP/575TQ, 5500 rpm, 5% slip.
Having said that . . . it is still WAAAAAY of the map. LOL!
After you post the numbers, we will see how clueless I am. :tongue:

When thinking about the pressure ratio keep in kind this engine is way more efficient than most. You will be surprised

 

[bison]

what size injector?what fuel pumps and fuel is being used?

Injectors are 3105's. 2 340 pumps at 16v. Idk why that matters. Very small shot of alky, c16. The targets I used are for safety. Not peak dyno numbers or I would be using a target at least half a point leaner.

 

[jasjamz]

Sooooo..... what did it make?

 

[Jerryl]

When thinking about the pressure ratio keep in kind this engine is way more efficient than most. You will be surprised

Probably right about me being surprised!
Well . . . If the engine is more efficient, the compressor would max out sooner. . . .
Now, based on my first gut feeling, I am going to say . . . 527WHP, 2.45PR, 66lb/min, 5700 rpm, BSFC 0.55, 5% slip, 50F MAT, 98% VE, 18% drivetrain loss :redface:

Disclaimer: If the turbo supplies more than that, the map is wrong ! LOL

 

[bison]

Probably right about me being surprised!
Well . . . If the engine is more efficient, the compressor would max out sooner. . . .
Now, based on my first gut feeling, I am going to say . . . 527WHP, 2.45PR, 66lb/min, 5700 rpm, BSFC 0.55, 5% slip, 50F MAT, 98% VE, 18% drivetrain loss :redface:

Disclaimer: If the turbo supplies more than that, the map is wrong ! LOL

Damn compressor maps!

 

[Mr.Spool]

im going to say 612 to the tire.

 

[Mr.Spool]

im going to say 512 to the tire.sorry wrong button

 

[bison]

im going to say 612 to the tire.

:biggrin:

im going to say 512 to the tire.sorry wrong button

 

[Kip]

Yup. Remember when I said THS was a 9.3-9.4 class? Well it isn't. It's a 9.2 class. I wonder if it will evolve in the next couple years?

Why don't you field an entry and show people how to do it?

Thanks, Kip

 

[bison]

Why don't you field an entry and show people how to do it?

Thanks, Kip

Not going to happen. The expense of building an engine to compete in a couple races and the proximity of races makes it a no go. If it was 10 years ago and there was some class racing that was closer id consider it but i cant justify the time and expense in my mind.

 

[marleyskater420]

subbed.

 

[TurboTom72]

Subscribed

 

[V6sleeper]

gonna say 529....

 

[kidglok]

625 is my guess :biggrin:

 

[bison]

The peak number was 592whp. I had the PAC alky set on about 4.5 and the dc was 58-59% with 3105 injectors and about 45psi baseline pressure. 16v. Ill post the dyno graph later.