Tony's BHP
- Thread starter Alky V6
- Start date
Welcome!
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
Yeah and go figure he is limited to TSO requirements. Imagine if he could drop 300lbs and run any configuration he wanted. Theres a lot more in it imo seeing he "only" posted a 1.346 60' . Ill bet a months pay the Mustangs arent 3450lbs.
No, they aren't. Tube chassis.
Looks like 1600 bhp or a little under that.
The TC is freakin tight.
There is a little more at the launch if the tires are capable of holding. I would say mid 1.2s.
Tire growth seems to be more like 3 percent.
The power comes on like a bomb after the launch. Very impressive power curve.
The TC is freakin tight.
There is a little more at the launch if the tires are capable of holding. I would say mid 1.2s.
Tire growth seems to be more like 3 percent.
The power comes on like a bomb after the launch. Very impressive power curve.
Dusty Bradford
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 5,802
Tony's car is capable of another tenth in the 60' if the track is right. It's not an issue of enough power, it's an issue of doing what the stock suspension, radials and track conditions allow.
Now you see more about how the converter works. It's loose down low to allow spooling large turbo's and then locks up tight with rpm. Very few are capable of this behavoir.
Yes. I was impressed by it. I almost ran out of setting range for the slip. I was thinking, "Man, I'm going to run out of setting here if this keeps going." Ended up with a very low setting. That TC would definitely not work with my lower hp, small engine/large turbo setup. Waaay too tight.
I also came up with the same slippage through the traps. A solid 9%.
Dusty Bradford
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 5,802
It's looser down low than you think. I can go another 500 rpm looser easily. No doubt it would be a tough set-up for yours but you could most likely use less of a hit to get the engine spooled. On the lower hp cars such as the 8.50 and slower cars, I have to play with the fin angle to keep them from getting too tight if they turn over 7000 rpm. There is so much adjustment in this converter I use it from stock engine TR's to twin turbo big blocks. Once the engine size reaches near 600ci I go to the 10.5.
I agree, my setup would be a challenge. I'm not making nearly the torque down low that Tony is with his particular engine/turbo combination. That helps him a lot to get on the TC. I'm close to half the amount of torque in the midrange compared to Tony, with the nitrous!
It seems pretty evident to me that anyone that hopes to compete in the same class that Tony is, better have some heads that flow better than 300 cfm on the intake. From what I understand, they're able to do that now with the stage I style heads.
It seems that heads is always key in class racing.
It seems that heads is always key in class racing.
Assuming he picks up roughly 33-34mph out the back which he likely will even though it doenst seem like it could based off the eighth mph id guess around 1050hp if he weighs 3250. I cant remember the weight of Dons car but if i recall correctly its under 3300. Fwiw my black car was over 3600 with me in it and went a best of 114mph in the eighth with a hyd cam and THS legal. Assuming it picks up 28mph out back it is about 800hp. At 24-25 psi it did 686whp on a dynojet. Looks to be right in line with the drivetrain loss of 15-17%. Tony's car would likely put down 1200-1250 on the same dyno and Don's car would put down roughly 875hp. Morrisons car did a click over 800whp and went about 152mph (likely 155-156 if he ran out the last pass on DR's)and it weighs 3600lbs. At 155mph its about 1050hp also. If he came back and dynoed again on the tune as he was on his last pass id bet $500 the car would put down 850whp + or - 20hp. I dont need all this crazy data to accurately calculate the hp of an engine. The weight and mph in hte quarter tell me plenty. I will say comparing a tube chassis race car that is 2.5" off the ground to a stock ride height G-body like Tony's does account for huge gains in mph out the back due to the tremendous reduction of air drag. Comparing a TSO car to something like that is like trying to swing a full sheet of plywood in the air vs a knife through the air. Not to mention the amount of down force those cars are getting past the eighth mile mark. Id love to see one of them nasty TSO engines in a 2300lb tube chassis. Id bet another $500 that they would go at least 195mph and likely closer to 200mph.
What makes this analyzer so neat, is that once you've dialed in the specs to closely match real world performance, you can then try looser or tighter TCs, different rear axle ratios, tire sizes, power curves, etc. to see how the different specs might affect the car before buying the parts.
An interesting story. A friend of mine bought a race car and wanted to try to improve on the performance of the car. The car was already setup by someone before he bought it. He tried different things, and nothing helped improve the performance.
He gave me some very basic specs on the car and I came up with a TC, rear axle ratio and tire size for him. That's what he was mainly concerned about. After I told him what I came up with, he said, "Hmmm." I said, "What?" He answered, "That's how the car was setup when I bought it."
I had no idea what those specs were before I started analyzing the car. That even surprised me.
An interesting story. A friend of mine bought a race car and wanted to try to improve on the performance of the car. The car was already setup by someone before he bought it. He tried different things, and nothing helped improve the performance.
He gave me some very basic specs on the car and I came up with a TC, rear axle ratio and tire size for him. That's what he was mainly concerned about. After I told him what I came up with, he said, "Hmmm." I said, "What?" He answered, "That's how the car was setup when I bought it."
I had no idea what those specs were before I started analyzing the car. That even surprised me.
A fax number where I can send you a form for you to fill out on the specs of your car.
Some other performance specs on the car like the specs I asked for about Tony's car here in this thread.
Since you're using nitrous, it's going to be harder to simulate the power curve. I'll most likely need a little more info about the launch.
how about email, can you scan. I will not be around a fax? quintclothier@yahoo.com. Thanks
I think that dyno number is optimistic the reason I say this is don Cruz made 800 on the dyno and he runs 124+ in the 1/8 and his car weighs 3560# also if the turbo rolls over slow the number would be lower. 25% drivetrain loss would nessatate a major revamping!!!!!!
Similar threads
