[laynlo15]

So I thought this would be an interesting comparison. It's not rocket science it's just a comparison so please don't get into some big mathematical argument about how I compared the two cars.
Both cars are Lt1s Camaro's
Duramacr1 bolt on, cam, heads, converter, custom built intake w/modified Rotofab CAI, drag pack, etc
Car weight with driver is 3400 lbs with 1/4 tank of gas, he runs full E85 race fuel, not just pump E. Lt4 injectors, Lt4 intank pump unlocked A10 Trans.
Best pass 6.39@111 w/1.44 60ft. Dyno results were 532/470
My car is has 2300 Maggie,ToohighPsi Port Injection, Rotofab CAI weight is about 3815 with 1/2 tank of E65, that includes driver and drag pack. Stock Lt1 motor, stock fuel system except for the port injection, stock locked A10 Trans.
Best pass 6.38@112 w/1/46 60ft, Dyno results were 707/662.
Na 6.39 111 1.44 60ft. 3400 lbs with driver 1/4 tank of E85 532/470
SC 6.38 112 1.46 60ft 3815 lbs with driver 1/2 tank of E65 707/662
So basically it takes 175 more rwhp and 192 lbs of torque to move 3815 lbs down the track compared to 3400 lbs to run basically same ET and MPH. Obviously DA and Temps will affect both cars but Mike's DA and Temps were pretty much comparible to my best ET/MPH that I ran in the fall.

[94guy]

do you have a 1ss or 2ss? i have a 2ss loaded edelbrock charger with drag pack 3920lbs w/driver 1/2 tank of gas.

[Duramacr1]

This is very interesting because it goes against the old theory that 100lbs equals 1/10 in the 1/4 mile. I know we are talking 1/8 mile here but the theory still exists . For example , I went 6.39@ 110 but when I put my jockey in the car he went 6.30 @111 . He’s is exactly 150lbs lighter then me . I guess weight affects these newer cars a lot more due to 10spd transmissions and what not . I will post the slips here so you can see what 150lbs difference makes. It affects the 60ft tremendously .

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by laynlo15

So I thought this would be an interesting comparison. It's not rocket science it's just a comparison so please don't get into some big mathematical argument about how I compared the two cars.
Both cars are Lt1s Camaro's
Duramacr1 bolt on, cam, heads, converter, custom built intake w/modified Rotofab CAI, drag pack, etc
Car weight with driver is 3400 lbs with 1/4 tank of gas, he runs full E85 race fuel, not just pump E. Lt4 injectors, Lt4 intank pump unlocked A10 Trans.
Best pass 6.39@111 w/1.44 60ft. Dyno results were 532/470
My car is has 2300 Maggie,ToohighPsi Port Injection, Rotofab CAI weight is about 3815 with 1/2 tank of E65, that includes driver and drag pack. Stock Lt1 motor, stock fuel system except for the port injection, stock locked A10 Trans.
Best pass 6.38@112 w/1/46 60ft, Dyno results were 707/662.
Na 6.39 111 1.44 60ft. 3400 lbs with driver 1/4 tank of E85 532/470
SC 6.38 112 1.46 60ft 3815 lbs with driver 1/2 tank of E65 707/662
So basically it takes 175 more rwhp and 192 lbs of torque to move 3815 lbs down the track compared to 3400 lbs to run basically same ET and MPH. Obviously DA and Temps will affect both cars but Mike's DA and Temps were pretty much comparible to my best ET/MPH that I ran in the fall.

Originally Posted by 94guy

do you have a 1ss or 2ss? i have a 2ss loaded edelbrock charger with drag pack 3920lbs w/driver 1/2 tank of gas.

Both cars are LT1 package cars, so neither 1SS or 2SS.

[Duramacr1]

I would think 1/10 in the 1/8 is almost 2/10’s in the 1/4 and 1mph in the 1/8 is 2mphs in the 1/4 so maybe for the 6th Gen the math works out to 15rwp per 100lbs instead of 10rwp.
At least that’s my opinion

[jlaudio11]

This is good info comparing the different ways of getting to the same destination. I know the weight definitely makes a difference. I wonder how much the converter and trans tuning is making a difference in this scenario.

[KingLT1]

NA cars tend to be more efficient in the front half. The S/C setup is not fully utilizing it's extra torque to get it moving. Fully optimized with trans tune, the S/C car should be able to 60ft low 1.3's if not a high 1.2x. The extra 400lbs also makes the biggest difference in the front half. Out the back door and beyond the S/C setup will start to show its power advantages.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

NA cars tend to be more efficient in the front half. The S/C setup is not fully utilizing it's extra torque to get it moving. Fully optimized with trans tune, the S/C car should be able to 60ft low 1.3's if not a high 1.2x. The extra 400lbs also makes the biggest difference in the front half. Out the back door and beyond the S/C setup will start to show its power advantages.

That was my experience, too, running against NA pre-refresh SS cars back when all I had was the Maggie and an intake, that is, +180-200 crank hp. The difference was small in the first 1/8 mile (granted, most launches including mine were crap through and through, but at least similar between cars), then I pulled away clean and finished 1-1.2 seconds ahead by the end.

[laynlo15]

Originally Posted by 94guy

do you have a 1ss or 2ss? i have a 2ss loaded edelbrock charger with drag pack 3920lbs w/driver 1/2 tank of gas.

I have an Lt1 so its lighter then the 1ss but barely. My weight saving is in the RC drag pack which is almost 95 lbs. Mine weighed about 3925 at the LS Fest with stock wheels and 305-35-20 Nitto Drag Radials on the rear, I did have around 3/4 tank when at the LS Fest.

[laynlo15]

Originally Posted by jlaudio11

This is good info comparing the different ways of getting to the same destination. I know the weight definitely makes a difference. I wonder how much the converter and trans tuning is making a difference in this scenario.

Not sure on the converter but on an NA car it more beneficial then on a PD car, my 16ss with 2300 then a 2650 ran on the stock trans and converter, 1.35 was my best 60ft and 5.99@119 was the 1/8. Although the new owner ran 5.83@120, he was at least 60 lbs lighter than me so that's probably the difference.

[laynlo15]

Originally Posted by Duramacr1

This is very interesting because it goes against the old theory that 100lbs equals 1/10 in the 1/4 mile. I know we are talking 1/8 mile here but the theory still exists . For example , I went 6.39@ 110 but when I put my jockey in the car he went 6.30 @111 . He’s is exactly 150lbs lighter then me . I guess weight affects these newer cars a lot more due to 10spd transmissions and what not . I will post the slips here so you can see what 150lbs difference makes. It affects the 60ft tremendously .

Sometimes that factor of a 100 lbs works out, but the car could have been a little cooler when the Jockey ran, temp and DA could have changed also.

[laynlo15]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

NA cars tend to be more efficient in the front half. The S/C setup is not fully utilizing it's extra torque to get it moving. Fully optimized with trans tune, the S/C car should be able to 60ft low 1.3's if not a high 1.2x. The extra 400lbs also makes the biggest difference in the front half. Out the back door and beyond the S/C setup will start to show its power advantages.

Our times slips are so close its within a hundredth of a second so mine is losing it with the trans locked at 2600 it pulls 9 degrees of timing and doesn't start putting back in till 3100. We'll fix that next month when I buy a T87 unlock and we can control the Torque Management, now it's controlling us. We should be able to go at least upper 1.30s on 60ft short times and dive into the 6.20s at 113 or so.

[Duramacr1]

Laynlo, zoom in on the slips . I ran the 6.39 15 minutes after the jockey ran the 6.30. With that new manifold I got , we were able to hot lap the car . That manifold doesn’t even get warm . It’s crazy . I drive it to the track in traffic for an hour and the manifold was still cold when I teched . The bottom of the runners were maybe 10 degrees over ambient

[laynlo15]

Originally Posted by Duramacr1

This is very interesting because it goes against the old theory that 100lbs equals 1/10 in the 1/4 mile. I know we are talking 1/8 mile here but the theory still exists . For example , I went 6.39@ 110 but when I put my jockey in the car he went 6.30 @111 . He’s is exactly 150lbs lighter then me . I guess weight affects these newer cars a lot more due to 10spd transmissions and what not . I will post the slips here so you can see what 150lbs difference makes. It affects the 60ft tremendously .

Attachment 1118868