WOW!That is a serious accomplishment.There are a lot of 1000rwhp cars that can't run that time.Congrats!Would love to see it make a 1/4 mile pass.

 

hossa!

sub 5 is insane, and no doubt it has this claimed amount of power.
But how do you manage to get it last longer than a few weeks (gearbox, rods, diff etc.).

 

I was able to rescue the camera footage after a good deal of work and 6 different software solutions, lol. I spent way too much time recovering the data, but I just couldn't let it go.

My apologies for the wind noise, but you get the idea.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5OMJgMKBqE

 

The stock gearbox is strong enough for well over 1,000 HP. All of us that are making in the 1,000 HP range are all running the stock gearboxes.

The stock diff is strong enough as well. My only drivetrain upgrade is an EVOMS rear axle set. Of course an aftermarket clutch is needed as well.

As far as internals, we're only just beginning to see how strong the stock internals really are in these cars with the proper tune.

 

Scott,

You are absolutely correct !!
Early on, there was one "tuner/kit seller" that was running too much timing, boost,
with not enough fuel on pump gas and were bending rods right and left. As a result
everybody thought that this kit was the threshold for stock internals...which was true
for a poorly tuned car, running pump gas (or one step better than pump), and improper fuel system as this kit was.
Protomotive and Switzer have seen some huge numbers on stock internals with Switzer
obviously setting new standards amoungst every tuner.

 

That's insane. Now convert that to RWD and slap on some wrinklies so we can see some mid-9's at the strip.

 

I agree that poor tune can damage internals way earlier than a good one, but regardless which NASA-proved race fuel you take, if you reach torturing 900-1000 NM* most parts of the engine and power/drive train will suffer frome these forces. So it is a matter of (short) time when one of these parts in the chain will quit.
what do you expect how long would it last on an unlimited high way or 2-3 track days?

*you surely do, when doing sub 5 sec times 60-130.

 

as i mentioned from the beginning, i will turn everything down to about 700 -750 rwhp and run on 93 octane, depending on what tym feels would be reasonably safe limits for the car. 850 rwhp on race gas will be used occasionally. i fully understand that sooner or later, something will let go, but i am willing to see when and what those limits are and enjoy it in the meantime.

 

Guys,

For the purpose of comparison, I broke down Tym's (DK's) Slegehammer run and my 60-130 run in 10 mph increments so we can see what each car was doing during the run.

The numbers in parenthesis are the differences in time from the previous 10 mph increment.

Divexxtreme's run:
60.00 - 70.00: 0.45
70.00 - 80.00: 0.89 (.44)
80.00 - 90.00: 1.65 (.76)
90.00 - 100.00: 2.22 (.57)
100.00-110.00: 2.83 (.61)
110.00-120.00: 3.86 (1.03)
120.00-130.00: 4.67 (.81)

Sledgehammer run:
60.00 - 70.00: 0.67
70.00 - 80.00: 1.21 (.54)
80.00 - 90.00: 1.76 (.55)
90.00 - 100.00: 2.35 (.59)
100.00-110.00: 3.28 (.93)
110.00-120.00: 4.04 (.76)
120.00-130.00: 4.86 (.82)

My two biggest delays are between 80-90 mph and 110-120 mph, since my shift points were at 83 mph and at 116 mph. Tym’s biggest delay was in between 100-110 mph, since his shift point was at 106 mph.

Here's a overlay of the two runs (I'm green, Tym is red):

 

Nice comparison Scott, thanks.

Aaron

 

Great comparo Scott!

 

i guess if i could get it to spool alittle quicker in 3rd gear, i would have a quicker time. i guess there is not much i can do as starting in 2nd gear would accelerate it quicker from 60 - 90 mph, but i would lose time for another shift. maybe i can get tym to anti-lag it from 3rd gear...LOL

 

David... now you're just getting greedy, lol!! Why do you keep challenging me? You see... this is the problem with a crack habit... first it's a little rock, then a bigger rock, and then...


Great comparison Scott! I'm very happy that the car is even as close as it is given the weight of this car... I'd say approximately 3700-3750 with me in it, but I really need to scale it to be sure. I'll try to do that and see what our power to weight truly is.

Like I said Scott... your car is a monster and I'm sure that you will hit that 4.49 you're looking for!

 

Thanks Tym,

Unfortunately, my turbo setup simply is not optimized for 60-130 runs. I have outstanding top end power, so I think I’d do better in a 0-200 than 60-130 (relatively speaking). Having to shift twice during a 60-130 really makes it difficult to get a fast time.

I may swap my .82 A/R's for a set of .63's that I have in my garage…so that I can do a 1-shift 3rd to 4th gear run. I think I'll gain 3/10's by doing that alone, but that's a lot of work just to improve my 60-130 time.

 

I know what you mean... that's exactly why I've been through so many turbos (including the 35's) in testing to find what would be the best balance for how David would use the car. That's why we ended up building a set of custom turbos for the car... it was about making the "best power" for the application... which is how I approach every project we do.

You may want to try those .63's... unless you spend a lot of time running 0-200.