Car count = 61mm turbo.This class has the potential for a really high car count if the average salary guy can compete. Keep it fun for a while before people get stupid with spending money trying to out do everyone. He who has the most $$ wins.
New Buick heads up class (67 turbo, etc...)
- Thread starter KevinB
- Start date
I think Shane summed it up pretty well, keep it limited to a 61-62mm turbo, 200r4 trans, max tire size of 275/60 DRs, and no trans-brakes. That will keep it in the 10's and keep it away from being a TSM Jr. type class. I'd venture to say you would also have several guys that can compete with a stock unopened motor if you keep it 61-62mm turbo which should help increase car count.
In my opinion , the turbo should be smaller than a 67. The 61 MM units can go 10.70's, the new Billet 62s probably mid 10's.
As further reminder of the performance of the 67mm turbo , Don Palumbo went 9.80s at Reynolds with a 235 CI motor, Q trim 67, iron heads and a 218 roller.
That car could have easily gone 9.60s but he parked it as it had a stock crank, rods and no girdle.
As further reminder of the performance of the 67mm turbo , Don Palumbo went 9.80s at Reynolds with a 235 CI motor, Q trim 67, iron heads and a 218 roller.
That car could have easily gone 9.60s but he parked it as it had a stock crank, rods and no girdle.
Here's a good example of what this class should be IMO!!! ~> Little Buick V6 goes 10.83 @ 124- Video
The car had the following combo~
"GT6152, PTE Stock Location, 65lbs inj, Postons Headers, ATR 3” DP & 3” Crossflow, 3000 Precision, Extreme, MAFT+ w/ Truck Maf, 206/206, Ported Irons, Champion Lower – With a 27/25 tune – 10.834 @ 124.29 with 1.567 60’ – Stock Wheels!"
This car was previously owned by a local guy named Dave Povio board member "F-1" on here and to me this was a car that was built with a very simple low budget combination that plenty of guys on here could probably afford to duplicate.
The car had the following combo~
"GT6152, PTE Stock Location, 65lbs inj, Postons Headers, ATR 3” DP & 3” Crossflow, 3000 Precision, Extreme, MAFT+ w/ Truck Maf, 206/206, Ported Irons, Champion Lower – With a 27/25 tune – 10.834 @ 124.29 with 1.567 60’ – Stock Wheels!"
This car was previously owned by a local guy named Dave Povio board member "F-1" on here and to me this was a car that was built with a very simple low budget combination that plenty of guys on here could probably afford to duplicate.
BLACK6PACK
1 sec reaction King
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
Steve,
Isn't that car a perfect example of a street car. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that car have less than 20k original miles on it?
Sam Colalillo
low 9's w/ a 109
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2005
I really think if you allow the this class to have a trans brake, slicks and a 67 turbo AffordableGN will be going deeper into the nines than anyone anticipates.
He will put the effort into being a contender. Look how fast he is going now, with out alot of effort. He drives the car all the time and has not really pushed the car hard.
I see this class focused on a field of cars that are to slow to hang with TSM cars.
I still say DOT approved Drag radials, and no trans brake (200r4 only
). Consider reducing the turbo size to increase reliability and car count.
He will put the effort into being a contender. Look how fast he is going now, with out alot of effort. He drives the car all the time and has not really pushed the car hard.
I see this class focused on a field of cars that are to slow to hang with TSM cars.
I still say DOT approved Drag radials, and no trans brake (200r4 only
). Consider reducing the turbo size to increase reliability and car count.affordablegn
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
Turbo Hot Street THS
Everyone,
I talked with Kip tonight!
We had our debate and I made my claims.
We went over the differences between TSM & THS (Turbo Hot Street)
The main DIFFERENCES right now are:
Transmission=200r4 only
Turbo Size=67mm 3 in 2 out
No Front Tubular Control Arms
Must have AC/Heat.
Alky is allowed.
8.5 Rear End Only, Spool is Allowed.
I still think TSM is too close to this class.
I made my claim about the turbo size.
I think the maximum turbo should be the 61mm
Kip mentioned the new 62 will put out more than the 67!
Any transmission should be allowed with no transbrake.
Drag radials should be allowed, no slicks.
I think he would get more racers involved with high 10 second passes.
Everyone needs to keep posting their opinions about this class!!!
I again thanked Kip for his time and hard work on this class.
I hope it all works out!
Just my $06 cents.
Jason
AffordableGN
Everyone,
I talked with Kip tonight!
We had our debate and I made my claims.
We went over the differences between TSM & THS (Turbo Hot Street)
The main DIFFERENCES right now are:
Transmission=200r4 only
Turbo Size=67mm 3 in 2 out
No Front Tubular Control Arms
Must have AC/Heat.
Alky is allowed.
8.5 Rear End Only, Spool is Allowed.
I still think TSM is too close to this class.
I made my claim about the turbo size.
I think the maximum turbo should be the 61mm
Kip mentioned the new 62 will put out more than the 67!
Any transmission should be allowed with no transbrake.
Drag radials should be allowed, no slicks.
I think he would get more racers involved with high 10 second passes.
Everyone needs to keep posting their opinions about this class!!!
I again thanked Kip for his time and hard work on this class.
I hope it all works out!
Just my $06 cents.
Jason
AffordableGN
affordablegn
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
Sam,
I agree with you totally.
I am just a "SLOW TSM CAR"!
And I will dominate this new class.
Especially with my new stroker and a FAST system.
I can't wait for my mid 9 second pass!
I wish Kip would slow this class down for everyone else sake!
Maybe I could run both classes, TSM & THS???
I would then have a dual purpose car.
What a deal!!!
Jason
AffordableGN
To be honest trying to go TSM racing is the reason I no longer have a buick. It just plain got to expensive! This class interests me very much about getting back to my beloved buicks. If we are looking for an "affordable" class (which i love by the way) I think Grumpy and Affordablegn have hit on a great set of starting rules. 235", iron heads only, hyd cam only, 275/60drag radial, 200,350,or 400 without transbrake, 61mm turbo, 3" d/p, alky, 8.5 rear, factory gass tank, heat & a/c, no fiberglass, no liquid i/c. This is stuff almost every TR owner does anyway. The only other thing should be a factory ecm with chip. this is very very interesting to me!
affordablegn
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
Poll for New Class
Great Idea!!!
I second that!!!
I think mainly on the Turbo issue?
Just include people that might run in the class.
Not just everyone on the board should be included on the vote.
You have to remember this event will be in Columbus & Osceola 2009?
Maybe all the events in 2010???
Don't vote if you know you cannot make it to the event.
What do you think KIP???
Jason
AffordableGN
Great Idea!!!
I second that!!!
I think mainly on the Turbo issue?
Just include people that might run in the class.
Not just everyone on the board should be included on the vote.
You have to remember this event will be in Columbus & Osceola 2009?
Maybe all the events in 2010???
Don't vote if you know you cannot make it to the event.
What do you think KIP???
Jason
AffordableGN
I believe this is the car. I bookmarked the thread. This is what I am trying to achieve with my car.
http://www.turbobuick.com/forums/cars-sale/196151-white-chrome-solid-10-sec-87-t-florida.html
Brad, as SMS posted the link to Dave's old forsale thread on the car it actually had 113K miles although by looking at in person you'd never know. It was the perfect example of a street car right down to the stock "T" wheels, anybody that checks out the pics in that thread can see for themselves.
BLACK6PACK
1 sec reaction King
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
Got the car mixed up with his low mile WE4. I think I remember him getting this thing and it was bone stock when he bought it.
johnplogii
Senior citizen
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2005
I have been following this thread and the one on t6p and the impression I get is that most people wanting a smaller turbo rule (with the exception of Jason) aren't even going to race in the class. I for one like going faster, not the same or slower. That is why I don't like bracket racing. If I buy a new turbo for my car it would be bigger not smaller.
John
John
yup .. I was asked for an "opinion" and I gave it
Like Jason White posted
This seems just like the discussion we had back in the beginning of TSM. We all thought mid 10s would be the class and a few 10.20 cars.. Then Jason Cramer went 9s.. and now....
With a 67 turbo and someone who wants to be in the top of the class, you will see this class move into the 9s.
ahhhhh the "net"
There was never a question that a hi 9 could be done. Has been done. Its the attitude from some that think running 9.50 is easy all you need is the 67 Turbo. If you will look at the rounds in TSM most of the Year The Fastest Cars in the class ran many more Ets closer to 9.50s than 9.20. The cars are lighter. The turbo pumps out 100 more HP. ET ran in Nov. at the fastest tracks in the series is not the performance standard for the year as so many think it is. I think its unfair to compare THS to TSM. Some of the racers spent 8 years preparing thier car for this class. Thus the hard work shows. "The Bad Boys of TSM" Jason and Don's North South Rivalry has created new interest in the TSM class and pushed some to dig deep looking for more ET. Hope they hang around for another season. 08 is shaping up to be a real shoot out.
The 67 turbo we ran was 4x2.5 with T4. I see the turbo for this class is 3x2 excluding the new 67. So there are 67 supporters that I am sure will need a turbo change. Yes I have a clue of where the turbo will go. Just like to see those who have no clue parakeet opinion as if it were fact. As for the turbo given a chance. Not my call. I have nothing to do with the rules or anything else with the class. Just want to help my son Rob race his car. I personally think a 3x2 63-66 is what the turbo should be. As I stated we are running a 66. If the turbo rule is smaller then we run smaller.
I dont know you or JC so I am not familiar with your cars. Congrats showing what true Buick Street Performance can do. Would love to see you guys race the class. Come to the BPG Event. Have A car that fits the rules. And Run the 9.7999999 in competition. I will be more than glad to post my opinion was wrong.
What Jason says is true. The GT turbo is the largest reason for this. Put the old 70P trim from 8 years ago back on the cars and we are back in the 10.0s hi 9s. Jason C. did not run a 9 in competition. He ran 9 after he won the race. He ran low 10s all week.
just because you have a 67 turbo does not mean you will automatically run in the 9's or even 10's.....it takes alot of other parts and a whole lot of tunining to make that happen....look at me as an example..11.599 @ 119.91...with a whole lot of tuning left to do.....from talking to Kip this is the first year/event for this class the rules will need to be fairly broad to generate the largest field...there will not be big money to be made....I PLAN on running this class...and fit the rules as they apply without haveing to do anything to my car...and I know there are lots of others out their with similar combinations....remember...the quickest car does not always win.....
If this is going to be a heads up class with a 67 turbo and an HPQ exhaust it will be well into the 9's. Even with iron heads. Forget about running 10's. You will be bus lengths behind. It will be very expensive to compete in and will still require the racer to spend thousands to even think about being competitive. Even if the rules required a stock turbo and slic intercooler it would price out most of the guys on this board. Unless they wanted to be .5 slower than the guy who spent thousands more and built his entire combo around the stock turbo. If you dont have money to burn then you shouldnt be racing. Theres no other way to say it. We have threads in the lounge about the cost of gas and people complaining about that. How does racing fit in with that type of member? To me it doesnt at all.
