10.92 @ 131 mph

10.92 @ 131 mph

Author
Discussion

jschwartz

Original Poster:

836 posts

259 months

Monday 12th May 2003
quotequote all
I called the track and it wasn't raining there so at the last minute I hit the road with the Ultima. Despite light rain all the way to Byron IL USA, it never rained. It was 85 deg, humid, low and falling barometer, not ideal conditions. The good news is no one showed up so I could make laps. I had the usual first time out problems too numerous to mention. Many 11 sec passes. My last pass was best, let the car cool, filled up both gas tanks. Got the uncorrected time above with a 1.90 60 ft. I never thought I'd bitch about a ten sec pass, but after weighing the car with the tanks topped off it weighed 2010 lbs. So that means I'm missing about 125 hp or so. I've reserved the chassis dyno (rolling road?) at AMS in Arlington Hts on May 20th, gotta find it.
The throttle stuck WOT this morning on the way to work, saved it, barely, another thing to fix.
Looks like the cotter pin that hold the cable to the pedal caught the paint on the chassis tube ahead of the pedal.
Jeff Schwartz
www.worksstand.com/jeffs.htm

ultimasimon

9,641 posts

259 months

Monday 12th May 2003
quotequote all
Still impressive times though Jeff. IRRC Ted has the fastest quarter times @ 10.8 (as far as I know) so it would be good to see the car around the low 10's, which is where is should be.

You would think that you would notice 125 horses down. I wonder where your power was lost??

YIIHAA

338 posts

253 months

Monday 12th May 2003
quotequote all
Mine jammed at WOT as well after driving it for only 100 miles (must have been the first time I reached WOT!).

Lead to me flat spotting both front tyres. Impressive skid marks on the road and in my pants.

Tracked mine down to a similar problem, since then I have also been running a throttle return setup with two beefy springs.

JCof T.O.

98 posts

258 months

Monday 12th May 2003
quotequote all
10.9 @ 131mph is still a very respectable run. You have to consider you do not have the car setup ideally for drag racing. Try to soften up the rear a bit and put on some drag radials if you want to drop your et's. Drag however is not my cup of tea. For a road car with good handling you did well.

P.S. Any idea what your 0-100mph was?

jschwartz

Original Poster:

836 posts

259 months

Monday 12th May 2003
quotequote all
The intake manifold I have is designed for a 427 stroker, so I'd guess the plenum may be too large. I'm fabricating an insert that'll reduce the volume some. The car's so light it still feels like a rocket, the efi seems to work fine, I experimented with fuel pressure from 46 psi to 56 psi (spec is 52), not much difference. I'll check it with the wideband O2. Try different exhaust as well as open. Try the plenum insert and a number of other things. Last year I picked up 70 rwhp and 100 lbs ft of torque by dyno tuning my 8.2 litre Cadillac. I'd guess my 0-100 was high 6's based on my 1/8 mile of 103 mph.

doc_fudge

243 posts

253 months

Monday 12th May 2003
quotequote all
Jeff,

You may be disappointed with your ET's, but 0-100 mph in the high 6's, thats awesome!!

Im really, really desperate now to finalize my order!

Any idea/estimate on a 0-60 time?

Im sure youll sort the Ultima and post the quickest time set by an Ultima VERY soon ( if what youve done with the Cady is any indication!)

Jeff, Ive just done some calcs at Prestage.com

Based on you weight (2010 lbs) and ET (10.92) you rwhp would be (roughly) 305 hp
Based on you weight and MPH (131) your rwhp would be (again, roughly) 352 hp

Usual disclaimers apply, especially in this case the one about accuracy of these figures!

Andy

>> Edited by doc_fudge on Monday 12th May 23:17

ULTIMALOVER

96 posts

261 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
10.92 in the 1/4 mile is awesome! Not even the Mac F1 can do that. The Mac F1 does 11.6 and you beat that by more than 1/2 second. I think you should consider your car to be a rocket with a steering wheel.

GTRCLIVE

4,186 posts

284 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
Sorry bud but if you look at this Months AUTOCAR mag The Maca did a 11.1 Quarter when they tested it, with there gear. But that's still slower than our American friend...

Well done mate. If your car only wieghs 2010lbs then that must be the lightest GTR I know of. How much does that engine wiegh ??

PS come on Andy the gautlet has been though down now I think !!! Can we get the old girl in the tens.

>> Edited by GTRCLIVE on Tuesday 13th May 10:38

GTRCLIVE

4,186 posts

284 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
Couple more Question if you don't mind.
I see you have a PowerhouseII Modified Gear box, Is it a 5 or 6 Speed if so what ratios have you got, are they standard or have they altered them.
Secondly have you got any photo's of your Exhaust system, and how did you fitt the Cats in etc.

Cheers bud, this would help us in the UK understand more about Gears Ratios that suit our cars, and might convince some of us to go for the new LS Motors.

PS did you remove the Rear Wing when you did that time ?
Keep up the good work.

>> Edited by GTRCLIVE on Tuesday 13th May 10:51

jschwartz

Original Poster:

836 posts

259 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
The LS1 or LS6 according to GM weigh 390# complete with all accessories (AC compr, PS Pump, Exh manifolds, 8 ignition coils) The only other non standard weight reduction items could be only one EFI fuel pump, mufflers, and Carbon Interior Tub. A production GM Gen 1 SBC weighs about 575# without accessories, aftermarket blocks are heavier.
I did remove the wing. My 1st gear ratio is non standard 2.615 :1 All other ratios are standard G50/50 or G50/52. This puts the gear ratios 1st -5th nearly identical to a C5 vette's 1st-5th and more properly spaced. The maximum RPM drop when shifting at 6500 is 2000, which puts me right at peak torque. I don't know my 0-60 time yet, my goal is 2.9 sec.

GTR-TT

442 posts

259 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all

jschwartz said: I don't know my 0-60 time yet, my goal is 2.9 sec.



2.9??? you can't be serious! That's slower then 4000 pound stock "sports cars"... 1.8 would be more like a goal IMHO.

domster

8,431 posts

271 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
Not on road tyres...

mkoch1

486 posts

260 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
I think you may be confusing 0-60mph times and sixty foot times. 0-60 in 2.9 seconds is fast.

GTR-TT

442 posts

259 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
I'M SOOO SORRY!!
I read to fast... I thought you said that your 60 foot goal was 2.9 not your 0-60. Again, sorry! 0-60 in 2.9 is QUICK!

Did I mention that I'm blond *LOL*


>> Edited by GTR-TT on Tuesday 13th May 14:09

jschwartz

Original Poster:

836 posts

259 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
Keep in mind we have real soft compound DOT (Department of Transportation) approved tires available over here. On Nitto NT555R Drag Radials i think 2.9 0-60 MPH is possible with 500 Hp. I'm going to optimize my combination with the existing BFG tires, if I can't achieve 2.9, I'll try different tires. I aim to prove it and video it by the end of summer. I'm happy with the 0-60 ft of 1.9 I think 9 second 1/4 mile times are achievable when I find my missing 125 HP. I found a fault in my engine computer last night which point to a faulty Mass Airflow Sensor. (My EFI is not a speed density system.)

james

1,362 posts

285 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
If he did the first 60 feet in 2.9, and then the rest of the 1/4 mile in the remaining 8.02 seconds, I'd be seriously impressed

kzrd

35 posts

254 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
Jeff for the record my Ultima American Speed iron block (ali heads and inlet manifold) Chevy engine complete with all ancillaries weighs 430#
It would be lighter still if supplied with an aluminium block as offered as an option by Am.Speed. You could even go for lightweight crank etc etc.
The point is whatever the weight of the engine is its in exactly the right place in an Ultima for maximum traction.

ULTIMALOVER

96 posts

261 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all

GTRCLIVE said: Sorry bud but if you look at this Months AUTOCAR mag The Maca did a 11.1 Quarter when they tested it, with there gear. But that's still slower than our American friend...



>> Edited by GTRCLIVE on Tuesday 13th May 10:38


Although that may be true it can pull an 11.1 in the 1/4 mile, I was getting my stats from Road & Track and Car & Driver magazines.

doc_fudge

243 posts

253 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
Jeff,

Im also looking to install an ls6 and the best(?) weight figure I can find is fully dressed at 497#.

This info comes from the GM Performance Parts catalogue for a ls6 crate engine with all acc execpt computer.

390# would be much nicer, I just cant seem to find that figure anywhere. Where did you source your info from?

TIA

Andy

jschwartz

Original Poster:

836 posts

259 months

Tuesday 13th May 2003
quotequote all
It's listed in the GM LS1 Installation guide as 390 lbs. The shipping crate is about 100 lbs, huge blocks of wood, are you sure you're not getting the shipping weight?