Jump to content
TEAM SHELBY FORUM

GT500 RUNS LOW 12,S


STSVT

Recommended Posts

I'm all for the new laws, in my area it's the a$$ punk kids with their 102 hp civic that think they have a race car and always speed and race. Hope they all end up in the slammer. I'm 41 years old and 45 min away from a race track so why race on the street??? It's not worth it

 

SVTPower I agree but I do wish I was 41 again. I had a new 70 Mach I and at times I did race on the street with friends and all those great 60's cars. The worse thing we had to fear though was a stray dairy cow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

What do you engineering types think about the possibility of running regular grade fuel in the GT500 in a pinch? Will the sensors adjust the timing and run ok? I know it'll be lower H.p. ,but will it work w/o damaging the engine?

 

 

I'm only hypothesizing here, as I don't know the engine management software well...but here goes...

 

The octane requirement is most critical during peak loads, such as hard acceleration, hot ambient temperatures, uphill grades, high speeds where there is significant wind drag, towing ,etc. I think if you HAD TO run regular octane for a single tank or a short period, and keep engine loads very light, you likely would not have any problems. However, if you run regular fuel all the time, it's not reduced horsepower that would be your biggest concern, it would be severe engine damage, such as blown head gaskets, burned valves, and potentially worse.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

back to the discussion of the MM&FF 1/4 times, they got a best of 12.25 with a 0-60' of 2.11. There is now a credible claim that a stock shelby has achieved a 0-60' of around 1.85. That translates into a much lower 1/4 time if the rest of the run goes well. Possibly 11.8 - 11.9. Fans, give it some time, good track, good driving, practice and decent conditions (also using something other than a press car getting beat to death for the day). If no one gets a stock shelby into the 11's by Christmas, beers for all are on me (you just have to come to my place to collect). I actually have room behind my house to park a couple of hundred shelbies. Hell, just come by for beers next Spring for a gathering even after the shelby does make it into the 11's. Could you imagine the face to face discussions we could end up having; just no group hugs please. Plus, I bet that with the abnormal tire wear occurances in front of the house, I wouldn't have to repave for years because of all the extra coating.

 

:beerchug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The aug issue of muscle mustangs & fast fords drag tested the GT500 at englishtown new jersey. Experienced mustang drag racer Evan Smith powershifted his way to a best of 12.25 at 117.18 the(60 foot was 2.11). Keep in mind this was testing with a hot car, stock tires, a stock tune, and 3.31 gears. Smith quoted this as an 11 second car with gears he also said, with minor bolt-ons,slicks should be a 10second car. So to all you non believers and you know who you are, there you have it, the numbers dont lie read the mag pgs 76 -84 :rockon:

 

 

I'm so glad to see that because I've been saying ever since that C&D article that a the production car with a good driver with seat time will get to 11.90/12flat and 100 high-teens. That's what the car is capable of. I wonder if that was a production flash or one of the original testers or ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Finally, the coup de gras, how is he running a slower 60 foot and barely a higher mph in the 1/4 and getting over a 1/2 second quicker. Something isn't right. At 12.25, he should be nearer 125 with a supercharged heavy car.

 

 

 

That just indicates to me that the weight distribution makes it hard to launch hard.

 

Ford GT500 rep told me ithese motors dyno at a solid 525HP. The only real diff with the Ford GT is the blower and the headers (and the headers are fairly similar). He also said 475rwHP. Once you figure how to get this baby to launch, dead stock but with an optimized flash and the right tires, it will go 12 flat -- remember you heard it here ;-)

 

Also, is the 3850 lbs the fastback and 3930 the vert? Or is 3850 and eqarly number and 3930 a later number. And is it 56/44 or 57/33 (I've seen both). The weight and w/d diffs could make me back off a tenth, but no more. But no one should be suprised at 12.25. Really now.

 

 

back to the discussion of the MM&FF 1/4 times, they got a best of 12.25 with a 0-60' of 2.11. There is now a credible claim that a stock shelby has achieved a 0-60' of around 1.85. That translates into a much lower 1/4 time if the rest of the run goes well. Possibly 11.8 - 11.9. Fans, give it some time, good track, good driving, practice and decent conditions (also using something other than a press car getting beat to death for the day). If no one gets a stock shelby into the 11's by Christmas, beers for all are on me (you just have to come to my place to collect). I actually have room behind my house to park a couple of hundred shelbies. Hell, just come by for beers next Spring for a gathering even after the shelby does make it into the 11's. Could you imagine the face to face discussions we could end up having; just no group hugs please. Plus, I bet that with the abnormal tire wear occurances in front of the house, I wouldn't have to repave for years because of all the extra coating.

 

:beerchug:

 

 

I'm with ya KCMO -- I posted similar comments further down without seeing your post.... This motor is conservatively rated ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should always run premium in your ride. If there was a mechanical issue and they find regular in your tank your screwed. Magnonson act or not. As far as the knock is concerned. You shouldn't get knock because of the knock sensor but the added heat in the explosion pushing the piston down will be detrimental to all the pieces in the rotating assembly and eventually destroying them. Remember octane is a combustion inhibitor so that your engine can stand the stresses it is put under in a high hp application.

 

Roger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

chrisoehrle - The 60 foot times indicate traction limitations.

The reduced ET is a result of POWER-SHIFTING - less time spent shifting is a direct reduction in ET (and the correct launch technique).

The MPH is a direct relation of torque/weight for this car and exactly what many have been expecting.

 

Most owners (future owners) of the GT500 in stock form will not be able to duplicate Evan Smith's MM&FF times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not one much for magazine racing. I've seen 1/4 mile times posted anywhere from 12.25 to high 12s for this car now and what that tells me is if you slap some drag radials on this car and are a half way decent driver you should be able to get times under 12 seconds. That's pretty damn awesome IMO! :happy feet:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it possible to make some suspention changes to increase rear traction???

 

Right now, my main concern and upgrade interest is all about increasing the rear wheel traction.

 

I know the Shelby and the Vette are apples and oranges, but when a 400hp car can turn out

 

better 0-60s and 1/4 miles than a 500hp car (20% more power), WTF???

 

We need to find a way to get that weight transfer to the drive wheels, before we look at

 

increasing hp do we not???

 

 

KingCobra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point - it's called weight transfer.

 

I haven't drag raced for years - but we used to call them 90/10 shocks - they allow the front end to come up quickly on launch and settle back down slowly. Not good for the street - but helped transfer some of the weight where it's needed on launch.

 

Sorry - I'm an old guy. :happy feet: :baby:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it possible to make some suspention changes to increase rear traction???

 

Right now, my main concern and upgrade interest is all about increasing the rear wheel traction.

 

I know the Shelby and the Vette are apples and oranges, but when a 400hp car can turn out

 

better 0-60s and 1/4 miles than a 500hp car (20% more power), WTF???

 

We need to find a way to get that weight transfer to the drive wheels, before we look at

 

increasing hp do we not???

KingCobra.

 

 

Just throw a few sand bags in the trunk. That'll keep them rear wheels from spinning. :hysterical:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advise guys :fan:

 

:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:

 

Any good ideas???

 

Is this possible to do, without replacing the block with alumunum$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

Anything cost effective???

KingCobra.

 

Not sure if anyone makes a ladder bar/traction bar setup for the new Mustangs...might be worth looking into. Also, relocating the battery to the trunk is a minor (but cost effective) improvement. However, I always worry on new cars about putting batteries in the trunk. They are supposed to be sealed, but if gases get out...not sure what they would do to a "sealed" trunk. In the old days (the '60s), trunks weren't sealed that tightly, didn't contain carpeting usually, etc....so it wasn't as big of a deal.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: Also, relocating the battery to the trunk is a minor (but cost effective) improvement. However, I always worry on new cars about putting batteries in the trunk. They are supposed to be sealed, but if gases get out...not sure what they would do to a "sealed" trunk.

 

Yeah, if Bat is moved to trunk it has to go in one of those tube-vented poly boxes made for batteries. Even the sealed automotive batteries aren't really sealed unless they are a true gel-type. A hydrogen explosion in your trunk would definately ruin your day (maybe all of them!)

 

Re: Any good ideas??? Is this possible to do, without replacing the block with alumunum$$$$$$$$$$$$ Anything cost effective???

 

I expect there'll be a lot of goodies coming depending upon what you want the car to be. Carbon fiber fenders would help, bat in trunk, lightweight wheels, and street slicks :) would help a whole lot. And it's just a matter of time before someone offers a stout adjustable 4-link setup for tuneable track performance. It depends what you're looking for your ride to be.

 

Realize that virtually all of the weight adders (aside from the Shaker 1000 :) ) are performance stuff: the iron block is stronger (though the alum modular, properly equipped, is damn strong), the huge 14" rotors and 4-piston calipers weigh (you could swap for carbon fiber rotors and ceramic pads, when/if available from the aftermarket, at about $2500 a wheel! ;) ) the blower weighs, and the water-based intercooler weighs (but it's the most effective, trouble free, kind of intercooler). Cha-ching, 3900lbs! And when you look at how it performs on the skidpad/slalom, it's pretty damn good!

 

But I'd also like to see a NA GT350 or Boss302 that uses the alum block, 450HP, alum hood like GT50 but also alum fenders and trunk lid, Batt in back, interior de-opt (or at least a min molded-foam rear seat and eliminate a lot of the sound-proofing, cup holders, console, etc.). With attention to detail, 3350-3400lbs and 52/48 is very doable, and that little puppy can use the rotors/calipers from the Cobras just fine. That's the kind of nicely balanced road-car I'd like to see coming at us (but, as usual, I digress...)

 

Don't get me wrong, I hunger for a GT500 (at MSRP :) ) and it's such a steal considering all that you get -- the total package -- and how comfortable and roomy it is. It is an amazingly well engineered muscle car and a sweet road Tourer/hot-rod with manners and power. But doing that adds up when building off an existing base. In a funny sort of way it's true to the original GT500 except this one is hugely better in every way, in spite of the weight.

 

edit:> Oh, and that 6060 triple-synchroTremec is no lightweight either, but it will take 650HP with slicks ;-)

 

 

 

Production car, the right tires and shocks, flash tune, launch controll off, power shifts, ...best runs will be 11.95/12 flat Have faith!

 

King - all the traction issues we've been reading about have come up because they've been using stock tires. Throw on some true slicks - and see what happens.

 

 

Amen, bro!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple thoughts. 1st. Nobody has mentioned the benefits of lowering the car. By lowering the center of gravity we might decrease the "shock" to the tall rear sidewalls. I can see tire pressure being critical at the strip on stock tires. 2nd. The computer reflash is going to be a major thing to this engine. If one could walk the car out of the hole, and trust to revs at the top, we might avoid blowing the tires off. But another 2-400 revs might come in handy here. 3rd. Folks like Kaylan will get better numbers because of the speed of their shifts. This car does not need to recover as much as the smaller engine so the big torque will do the job if we find the right shift point. So before everybody has at these thoughts, to sum up... Springs, a shifter with positive stops, and a cold air kit with a quality flash tune should be cheap and easy way to a super impressive street launch. Of course drag radials will help, but I hate the thought of compromising safety. And yes, we can spend cubic $ to unlock a lot of the hidden potential in the car, however I think that most of us just want to shrug off the occasional POS and not break the bank or our backs. I suspect these mods will cost less than 500 bucks. :closedeyes: Fire away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't imagine that minor weight of a battery would make a noticeable difference in traction.

 

What is a ladder/traction bar???

KingCobra.

 

Battery weighs about 15 lbs I think...so by moving it from front to back, it's a difference of 30 lbs (15 less in front, 15 more in back). A ladder bar or traction bar is a device that prevents the rear end from "winding up" during hard acceleration, instead turning that twisting motion into forward motion by transferring it to the chassis. I know a lot about types for '60s Chevys, but don't know about modern cars. They may have disadvantages, such as making a car ride harder, noise due to binding parts (depends on what type you use), and they may decrease handling on corners. They are made for straight line acceleration. One end attaches to the axle, the other end to some part of the subframe or frame.

 

Look here for some undercar pics of ladder bars.

 

http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103711

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know.

 

I just don't have the gonads or the pockets to trust my ability to power shift consistently. :baby:

 

I told you Bryan i will teach you to powershift without breaking anything for $200. a lesson.I have to make those GT500 payments somehow. :hysterical:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ve-ry funny!

 

If you're talking about keeping the right pedal on the floor while you yank the shifter and stab at the clutch - and we'll do this IN YOUR CAR, it's a deal!

 

I don't intend on drag racing the car competitively.

 

If I can't beat someone stoplight - to - stoplight - withought powershifting - so be it. I'm not risking the cost of a new transmission. I'm not John Force. :bandance:

 

(I'm not worried about the 1-2 - I'm worried about the 2-3)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple thoughts. 1st. Nobody has mentioned the benefits of lowering the car. By lowering the center of gravity we might decrease the "shock" to the tall rear sidewalls. I can see tire pressure being critical at the strip on stock tires. 2nd. The computer reflash is going to be a major thing to this engine. If one could walk the car out of the hole, and trust to revs at the top, we might avoid blowing the tires off. But another 2-400 revs might come in handy here. 3rd. Folks like Kaylan will get better numbers because of the speed of their shifts. This car does not need to recover as much as the smaller engine so the big torque will do the job if we find the right shift point. So before everybody has at these thoughts, to sum up... Springs, a shifter with positive stops, and a cold air kit with a quality flash tune should be cheap and easy way to a super impressive street launch. Of course drag radials will help, but I hate the thought of compromising safety. And yes, we can spend cubic $ to unlock a lot of the hidden potential in the car, however I think that most of us just want to shrug off the occasional POS and not break the bank or our backs. I suspect these mods will cost less than 500 bucks. :closedeyes: Fire away.

 

 

 

Jetsolver, you're the only guy out there that metions a suspention solution to increase traction.

1. Would lowering the ride height really affect the rear wheel weight transfer?

Or

2. Is the only way to remove weight from the front end???

 

 

KingCobra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jetsolver, you're the only guy out there that metions a suspention solution to increase traction.

1. Would lowering the ride height really affect the rear wheel weight transfer?

Or

2. Is the only way to remove weight from the front end???

KingCobra.

 

All cars react differently to suspension changes on launch. This is a huge subject with lots of variables(and debate :read:) so a dedicated technical thread is probably the best answer. With cubic$ anything is possible but I am a Q ship kind of driver who doesn't like big tradeoffs for little gain. So my style is to retain as much of the daily driver/factory atributes as possible. I believe we have a few very good drivers/thoughtful technical types here so lets move this and try for a good, reasoned debate. Without the trolls who can screw a thread beyond use. I hope to learn a lot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking that lowering the rear suspension might be good because it will help weight transfer for launch, but also is amenable to road fun. Unfortunately, 90/10 shocks might help launch, but I'd want down locks on the road.

 

That battery move makes a bigger diff than it may seem.. it's closer to 30lbs, I believe (not 15) and that shift is near a half % statically, but even more dynamically...

 

I don't like to make a lot of raidical changes so I'll likely limit changes to the following candidates: battery move, tires/pressure (no street slicks for me), shocks, flash changes. A taller sidewall on smaller diameter rims might help launch by adding give in the sidewall, but it will also impact responsiveness in the twisties, so I'm resigned to keeping the same size/profile.

 

Someone pointed out that the broad power band on these motors makes max rpm less critical and I fully agree with that. A flash that pushes off low end torque for a higher band in the 4800-6000 range would be a good tradeoff, I think.

 

I also don;t see why the launch control couldn't be flashed to better match the above changes -- there's likely a lot of parametric tuning that can be done to complement 'chassis' tuning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a technical guy, when it comes to auto mechanics, but it just

 

seems to me that we are losing over 100hp (made up #) to loss of drive

 

wheel traction. That's alot of waisted power, that I would like to have

 

available to me. It's the only explaination I can come up with to explain

 

why the Shelby's times are virtually identical to the '03 Cobra, which had

 

much less hp.

 

 

KingCobra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...
...