73-87 Chevy _ GMC Trucks > Performance
1/4 mile times:
Stewart G Griffin:
(i can't believe we're discussing this with $4 a gallon gas prices but)i finally opened it up to see what the crate motor could do:
16.8 just as i suspected it would probably do. i understand that this is not a blazing e.t., however we must remember that i a) have 2.56 rear gears, b) have stock, off-brand tires which actually spun ever so slightly on take off, c) weigh at least 3800 lbs give or take and d) am not running headers.
Additional notes:
Test was conducted at approx 8:30 this evening with 3/4 tank. Temperature about 77 degrees.
Approx speed at the end of the 1/4 was around 79mph, i think?
i feel with additional carb tuning, ignition tuning (neither of which i have time to learn/do right now) headers, slicks and 4.56 gear, we can get into the 16.5 range easily.
i could not get the 0-60 timer to work for some reason.
HAULIN IT:
Stewart, Plug away at it & the time will come down. The 4.56's will be too much gear for your engine. You'll run out of rpm in high gear & still have a quarter of the track to go, unless you put some BIG tires on it. 3.40-3.73 with something near a 28" tire should split the track up better. Are you doing these times from a in-car device (G-tech or something)? Have Fun, Lorne
Stewart G Griffin:
Yes, this is being measured with the Cyberdyne digital tach/speedo combo gauge. See other post:
http://forum.73-87chevytrucks.com/smforum/index.php?topic=8374.0
i didn't know that the gauge had 0-60 and 1/4 timer capabilities until i recieved the gauge----i bought the gauge to accurately track mpg.
It reads off the transmission output gear not through g-forces, so my 1/4 time is actually a little slower---because i spun the wheels a little bit on take off which in a way is good considering i have 2.56 gears. i guess this means the engine has some power.
The gauge measures 0-60 and 1/4 everytime starting from when the vehicle is at a standstill. So i'm not sure why the 0-60 time didn't show up.
i'm not really interested in going any faster right now---i mainly tested it just to see what it would do. i probably won't be doing any further testing anytime soon as the other car is back in service.
lowriderbowtie:
I ran an 11.27 @ 131mph in my S10 with a lousy lousy 60 foot time due to street tires. it was an 87 s10 with a 355ci, scat forged crank, forged h beam rods, keith black flat tops, ported and polished vortecs, bigger valves, 1.6 roller rockers, ported intake mani, and a holley 750 double pumper. OH and a small fogger 8)
street truck driven daily.
eventhorizon66:
There's definitely something wrong with my combo if you can scratch a little rubber off the line with 2.56's and a 2.53 1st and I can barely get a peep with 3.73's and a 3.06 1st (just 235/75-15 all season tires before you ask). I'd say it feels about like my sister's Toyota Avalon which is a mid-17 second car, but definitely much slower than my mother's Acura TL-S (a mid-15 second car). >:(
We've got the same engine, but I'm running headers and single 3" exhaust, MSD HEI dist, edelbrock performer, edelbrock 1406 carb (.073 x .042 rods in .098 jets, orange springs, .095 secondaries), 14* initial and 35* total in by 2800 (full vacuum on the advance canister), rock solid 5.5 psi fuel pressure. The only thing I haven't checked is possible bad cam lobe, but the initial break-in was definitely botched (had leaks galore on initial startup and had to back it up into the garage under its own power).
Oh well, sorry to hijack, I'd say 16.8 is just dandy for a stock crate with no go-fast goodies and 2.56's in the rear. If you are looking to get the best combination of power and economy you might consider a 700R4 and 3.42's or 3.73's in the rear. I never thought I'd recommend a 700, but there you have it. I guess thanks to Vile, Capt, and Haulin' It, I'm now considering the 700R4 as a potential performance trans.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version