Modded GT2 w/ slow quarter mile times: Elevation/Air quality adjustment factor?
#31
03-10-2006 | 05:12 AM
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 710
From: Finland, Luxembourg, Nürburgring
Rep Power: 61
I think many wonder why it seems the 1/4 mile trap speeds don't go that much up unless you have like huge hp increase (differences between stage 2 and the popular gt700 kit...?)
By the way, German magazine called AutoBild tested back in 2002 Manthey's seriously tuned "550hp" Turbo. I'm quite sure Manthey gave them a 700hp version because it did a 0-125 mph (0-200 km/h) run in 9.3 seconds with normal Pilot Sports. What kind of competition would that be for these high hp packages the people here at 6speedonline are having in their cars? (not talking about the monster cars like Craig etc.
)
By the way, German magazine called AutoBild tested back in 2002 Manthey's seriously tuned "550hp" Turbo. I'm quite sure Manthey gave them a 700hp version because it did a 0-125 mph (0-200 km/h) run in 9.3 seconds with normal Pilot Sports. What kind of competition would that be for these high hp packages the people here at 6speedonline are having in their cars? (not talking about the monster cars like Craig etc.
)
#32
03-10-2006 | 07:31 AM
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 6,325
From: Michigan
Rep Power: 333
Originally Posted by GeorgeJ
I think I now agree with my buddy that elevation conditions affects performance.
I just remembered last year when I drove up to Incline Village (Lake Tahoe) in the GT2 that my car actually felt a lot slower accelerating up the grade versus in the Sacramento valley. I don't know the elevation difference between Sacramento and Incline, but it is substantial.
I think I may give him a benefit of a doubt that if he pulled 126 or 127 at approximately 5500' that at sea level over 130 is possible.
What should a stock GT2 trap at the dragstrip? 118? 119?
BTW, I found out he has a GT640 kit on his GT2.
I just remembered last year when I drove up to Incline Village (Lake Tahoe) in the GT2 that my car actually felt a lot slower accelerating up the grade versus in the Sacramento valley. I don't know the elevation difference between Sacramento and Incline, but it is substantial.
I think I may give him a benefit of a doubt that if he pulled 126 or 127 at approximately 5500' that at sea level over 130 is possible.
What should a stock GT2 trap at the dragstrip? 118? 119?
BTW, I found out he has a GT640 kit on his GT2.
#34
03-10-2006 | 12:50 PM
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 145
From: California
Rep Power: 25
Originally Posted by buddyg
There is absolutely no doubt that high altitude=thin air=lower hp. The denser the air the more fuel you can mix which results in more hp. There are actually programs that will take a quarter mile time at altitude and convert it to a sea level run.
Thanks
#35
03-10-2006 | 01:14 PM
Registered User
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 307
Rep Power: 32
Originally Posted by 1999Porsche911
Yeah, I have heard all the excuses as to why a car doesn't run faster. Calculations, assumptions, missed shifts, fat *** in driver's seat and "what ifs" are very abundant but are meaningless. If his car did 11.6, that's all it did, regardless of conditions. If he wants to lower his time, tell him to improve the conditions and then he can claim a better speed (maybe). If you the right adjustments a few other assumptions, you can get your car to do any speed you want on paper.
The guy with the GT2 is correct. Motors at high elevation make less power. Cars with forced induction motors tend to deal with this better then n/a motors. It is known, that say, a z06 that runs 11 flat in CA probably wouldnt be able to do better then 12 flat in CO.
#36
03-10-2006 | 01:38 PM
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,134
From: Chicagoland
Rep Power: 122
Originally Posted by AJN334
Sorry but thats not true, ever been to colorado? The guy with the GT2 is correct. Motors at high elevation make less power. Cars with forced induction motors tend to deal with this better then n/a motors. It is known, that say, a z06 that runs 11 flat in CA probably wouldnt be able to do better then 12 flat in CO.
The guy with the GT2 is correct. Motors at high elevation make less power. Cars with forced induction motors tend to deal with this better then n/a motors. It is known, that say, a z06 that runs 11 flat in CA probably wouldnt be able to do better then 12 flat in CO.What is it about what I said that is not true? I made no claim that higher elevations reduce the power available to the engine. Don't read something into my post that is not there.
#37
03-10-2006 | 05:44 PM
Registered User
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 307
Rep Power: 32
Originally Posted by 1999Porsche911
What is it about what I said that is not true? I made no claim that higher elevations reduce the power available to the engine. Don't read something into my post that is not there.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
r_matt_6
Automobiles For Sale
11
10-08-2015 06:07 PM
