What Is the Fastest B4 Black car around...

[CamoDeafie]

does anyone know what else Ron COsner did to this racer to get it in the 10s without turbos?

from B4Black.net's article-courtesy of B4Black.net's owner...if i can post it here..

Before the SFI Turbo Buicks came along, Ron Cosner was demonstrating the capabilities of the Buick V6. This car is listed by Kenne-Bell as recording a best 1/4 mile pass of...

9.18 sec e.t. @ 146.50 mph!!!!!

This is without a turbocharger or fuel injection! The engine, named "Little Bit", is a Stage block with two four barrel carburetors. While it is obviously a race prepared vehicle, it is still none the less impressive. It shows there is hope for the non-Turbo Buick V6. Not many SFI Turbo/Intercooled Regals can match this cars performance.

Also, notice that this car's beautiful paint scheme is patterned of the 1981 Regal Indy Pace Car. Even the interior is done in Pace Car fashion.

Some details about this car from the February, 1983 Super Stock "Regal Racer" article. The cars best at this time was 10.39 sec @ 127.47 mph.

Engine: Stage 1 252 block, heads and crank. Destroked to 243 ci. Prepared by Jim Bell.
Induction: Dual Holley 660 cfm 4-bbl carbs on top of a Cosner home-built tunnel-ram.
Transmission: Doug Nash 5-speed
Rear: 9" Ford with 5.82 gears
Wheels: Centerlines; 3.5x15 front and 12x15 rear
Body: All steel except, hood, deck lid and bumpers.
Chassis: Built by Cosner.

now i'm prety sure the gearing, wheels (chassis and tires) and the engine all contributed quite a bit.... obviously, its nowhere near stock lol...clearly this is a purpose built racer..what other specs were in that special engine? as in which fuel, which compression, which cam!? seems like the Buick V6 design, with exceptions obviously can do such power on NA.....(imagine a Stage 1 or 2 block with Stage Heads and Stage NASCAR intake.. or Indy...?)
otherwise, WarWagon's the record..somewhat?
seems one dont get the respect unless they're doing it all on stock block and street gearing no less!

 

[Swathdiver]

I believe a lot of the parts used can be found in the Buick Powersource catalog. It was a very hi-revving engine if memory serves and not something you'd drive on the street.

The technology existed in the 1980s to have a 300hp naturally aspirated 231 which would make for a nice 13-second car. Kenne Bell and Buick had nice intakes for them. Personally, I resisted my buddies and continued working with the turbo 4bbl, much more challenging!

 

[mat231v6]

i have not seen this post in a long time. back then i was talking about putting nitrous on my car and now i have nitrous on the car.:tongue:

 

[charlief1]

No, don't have any of the cars any more, just some parts and my old books and such.

Indeed, on top of the fan shroud the car did have a computer of sorts to control the spark retard. I remember the goo melting and exposing the circuits underneath.

It was nothing more than a timing puter, not a full control. It's a very crude system but it's necessary for the early systems.

do you have any 83 books? if so you shold sell me some.

A little pushy aren't you kid?

I believe a lot of the parts used can be found in the Buick Powersource catalog. It was a very hi-revving engine if memory serves and not something you'd drive on the street.

The technology existed in the 1980s to have a 300hp naturally aspirated 231 which would make for a nice 13-second car. Kenne Bell and Buick had nice intakes for them. Personally, I resisted my buddies and continued working with the turbo 4bbl, much more challenging!

You are right. My old Skyhawk ran in the low 14's with not much more than the 86-87 cam, a modified 4.1 intake, ported heads, and the KB headers. KB did a 209 CID fuelie back in the day that turned 9500 and was in the 10's but the class for the cars kinda disapeared after the 80's. I've got some of the old tech stuff that they sent out once in a while and one of the best ones is where they took a stock Skyhawk and showed how to put it in the 13's. It was an oddfire though but I don't think it would make that much of a difference now if it was done as an evenfire.

 

[83turbomon]

It was nothing more than a timing puter, not a full control. It's a very crude system but it's necessary for the early systems.



A little pushy aren't you kid?



You are right. My old Skyhawk ran in the low 14's with not much more than the 86-87 cam, a modified 4.1 intake, ported heads, and the KB headers. KB did a 209 CID fuelie back in the day that turned 9500 and was in the 10's but the class for the cars kinda disapeared after the 80's. I've got some of the old tech stuff that they sent out once in a while and one of the best ones is where they took a stock Skyhawk and showed how to put it in the 13's. It was an oddfire though but I don't think it would make that much of a difference now if it was done as an evenfire.

yeah i guess:redface: Im trying to gather as much information as possible before I park the car, which should be soon.

 

[MNcarbturbo]

Mines kinda fast. It takes forever to get up to 25 with the turbo lag from a stand, but once the turbo spools up it gets moving. No reason it shouldnt run high 13's. Only thing holding me back is 2.41's and the turbo lag. When I get my 87 GN internals put in and get an alky setup it should run better.

The 2.5" dp, opening up the seconary flaps, a good air filter, and getting it running right have helped a lot.

 

[Swathdiver]

If it cannot get off the line it will be hard pressed to turn 13s. Which sized turbine housing is on the turbo?

 

[MNcarbturbo]

I missed a part. If I brake boost to 3 PSI or so, it runs great. Im guessing 13:97 type of thing if I brought it to the track how it sits now. Wouldn't suprise me if it ran 14:50 though. Id be depressed if it ran a high 15. Theres a 1/4 mile track 50 miles away, dont know why I havnt gone there yet.

Its just if it doesnt have a chance to kick down from a roll, or if I am brake boosting the lag is pretty bad. Ive also noticed my boost retard on my MSD has a big effect on turbo spool. At 1.5 degrees per pound it will spool decently quick. At 2 degrees its a lot slower. If I didnt care, Id turn it to 1 degree per pound, but I care about my pistons after pulling out 2 burned pistons out of the engine when I rebuilt it.

 

[mat231v6]

Mines kinda fast. It takes forever to get up to 25 with the turbo lag from a stand, but once the turbo spools up it gets moving. No reason it shouldnt run high 13's. Only thing holding me back is 2.41's and the turbo lag. When I get my 87 GN internals put in and get an alky setup it should run better.

The 2.5" dp, opening up the seconary flaps, a good air filter, and getting it running right have helped a lot.

mine too i have been looking for a 84/85 or 86/87 turbo core but havent found one yet.

 

[MNcarbturbo]

Ohh, and its a stock 80 turbo.

 

[83turbomon]

I missed a part. If I brake boost to 3 PSI or so, it runs great. Im guessing 13:97 type of thing if I brought it to the track how it sits now. Wouldn't suprise me if it ran 14:50 though. Id be depressed if it ran a high 15. Theres a 1/4 mile track 50 miles away, dont know why I havnt gone there yet.

Its just if it doesnt have a chance to kick down from a roll, or if I am brake boosting the lag is pretty bad. Ive also noticed my boost retard on my MSD has a big effect on turbo spool. At 1.5 degrees per pound it will spool decently quick. At 2 degrees its a lot slower. If I didnt care, Id turn it to 1 degree per pound, but I care about my pistons after pulling out 2 burned pistons out of the engine when I rebuilt it.

do what Rich said and build boost against the brake, it works wonders for acceleration.

 

[Swathdiver]

1980 Turbo?

I believe those were .82 A/R turbines, same as the earlier cars.

I think in '81 but surely for the '83 they had smaller .63 A/R turbines which decreased the lag and brought the power on much faster.

Carefull with how the cars "feel".

I once spent a small fortune on a 9" converter (2800 stall?) for my '85 GN and driving it around the neighborhood it felt awesome! However on test and tune night the time slips revealed the truth. The car lost over .30 seconds and 3mph, even the short times were worse! Sure looked great though, nearly snatching the left tire off the ground at launch!

Quickly pulled the tranny and sent out my old stock converter to be slightly modified (2600 stall - I have it written down somewhere!) and got the 1/4 mile times back to normal.

The best advice a racer gave me was this, "If you're going to modify the car for performance, do ONE change at a time and make at least 3 passes! Patience will pay off."

Back in the day my cars were far faster then my buddies compared to $$$ spent. They had so much stuff that wasn't needed and in fact slowed them down.

Bits and pieces of memory are starting to come back. I think my '79 turned 2.30 short times with 205-70-14 tires and a 2.29 open rear. What do your cars turn?

 

[charlief1]

The biggest issue with any car is making sure the combo will work together. If you miss match componants then it won't work right. I've looked at this more times than I'd like to admit but it's 100% true. There may be changes you have to make along the road to building it like I have, as well as Aj and Adam, but you have to figure out what combo will work best, period. The stock turbo is a big drawback for thses cars on both sides so just changing the hot side to the better design of the 84-85 or 86-87 is a huge reduction in lag time. A bigger inducer wheel will help but you're still stuck with a .42 AR inducer so it'll heat up the air more than one of the 301 TTA inducers.

 

[WarWagon]

It's going to be very hard to try and make alot of top end power using the stock drawthru intake manifold period. It's designed for midrange power and that is the only thing it's designed to enhance. The Long LOW intake runners with virtually no ROOF made to build torque and keep the engine happy in midrange. If one were to use even a stock 4.1 intake and keep it drawthru by adding a carb pad plate to mount the turbo foot(Like A.j did) you will get an instant boost in performance just from the increase in the intake runner volume. It might kill off a little low end torque up to mid range, but after that even with a stock turbo it's going to breathe freer on top. The turbocharger and Intake manifold is the cork on the drawthru system.

 

[mat231v6]

It's going to be very hard to try and make alot of top end power using the stock drawthru intake manifold period. It's designed for midrange power and that is the only thing it's designed to enhance. The Long LOW intake runners with virtually no ROOF made to build torque and keep the engine happy in midrange. If one were to use even a stock 4.1 intake and keep it drawthru by adding a carb pad plate to mount the turbo foot(Like A.j did) you will get an instant boost in performance just from the increase in the intake runner volume. It might kill off a little low end torque up to mid range, but after that even with a stock turbo it's going to breathe freer on top. The turbocharger and Intake manifold is the cork on the drawthru system.

that why i wish i could see ajs engine so i knew what to do to make my car fast. I’m a visual person. one day i guess.

 

[usetaboost]

If one were to use even a stock 4.1 intake and keep it drawthru by adding a carb pad plate to mount the turbo foot(Like A.j did) you will get an instant boost in performance just from the increase in the intake runner volume.

I wonder if AJ would be so kind to send me a pic of this? My friend is on a tight budget and wouldn't mind seeing some alternative ideas.

 

[charlief1]

The only way to make more top end on the stock intake is to cut it apart and port it. I've been doing a lot of research on it and when I get the car a little further along it's going to be done. The top will look as stock as I can but the bottom will look entirely different.

 

[CamoDeafie]

wouldnt a tunnel ram intake work if you can mount the turbo system up top? would be interesting to see, Im aware tunnel ram intake with 2 4bbls are considered the standard for v8s, but i wonder about turbocharged tunnel ram with draw through..or maybe the blow through would work better....hmm ideas.

 

[charlief1]

Do a search for Rotomaster and see what you find. Aj has a few of them and it was very effective back in the day but is extremely out dated.

 

[mat231v6]

The only way to make more top end on the stock intake is to cut it apart and port it. I've been doing a lot of research on it and when I get the car a little further along it's going to be done. The top will look as stock as I can but the bottom will look entirely different.

i did that it cost me more to have it welded together than it was worth. i dont have anything to weld alum so i should have looked into how much it would have costed me first. whats done is done. i knew i should have taken more pictures when i was doing that.