Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
The Terminator
Driveline
Soo happy!! 3.90's are on!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="jtfx6552" data-source="post: 1792154" data-attributes="member: 3823"><p>Couple of things to consider. First, that 11.41 was when I was still in my halfshaft paranoia days, on soft clutch slip, 60 ft wasn't good, If I had launched harder, the ET would have been even better.</p><p></p><p>But, beyond that, you would rather trap 116, that 122?</p><p></p><p>That is what hapened at BG when 4.10 cars and 3.55 cars ran side by side, the 4.10 cars were all in the teens, the 3.55 cars in the 120's. So the 4.10 car you mention put up a good et on a prepped track, what happens on the street when you line up a car that traps 122 next to a car that traps 116? </p><p></p><p>Happened with my friends car, he had 4.10's we busted balls to get an 11.99 @ 119 on Dr's when my car, the same night went 11.70 on F1's, <em>with less mods</em>.</p><p></p><p>As for the car you are describing, what does it have done to it? You said "stock weight", does that mean IRS? Even if it has IRS, it only has 420 ft lbs of torque. Fits with what I am saying, that a typical pullied chiped Cobra with 500 ft lbs and 3.55's has all the rear wheel torque the stock suspension can handle. 500*2.66*3.55=4721 lb ft, which is actually more than the car you describe, 420*2.66*4.10 is 4580 lb ft. This matches well with what I have said, 3.55's with 500 lb ft is plenty of torque, more than the car you mentioned that pulled the 1.6 60 ft. You didn't take it out to the next decimal point, but I have many 1.6x 60 fts.</p><p></p><p>Heed the words of Bob Cosby, with traction, which he believes means a straight axle, the "right" shock valving and control arms, which he has figured out after years of racing experience, and shifting like a trained mongoose, he figures to get .15 improvement. Is that a good gain for the $? When racing in a heads up class where the whole field may be seperated by a tenth or two, of course. However, to the average racer, even if they managed to figure out the right control arms, shock valving and suspension set-up, they probably still wouldn't even be consistent enough to tell the difference.</p><p></p><p>Then consider the typical '03-04 Cobra, the guy with all stock suspension that likes the car to handle well. Will he be able to get enough traction to get any improvement in ET? I doubt it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jtfx6552, post: 1792154, member: 3823"] Couple of things to consider. First, that 11.41 was when I was still in my halfshaft paranoia days, on soft clutch slip, 60 ft wasn't good, If I had launched harder, the ET would have been even better. But, beyond that, you would rather trap 116, that 122? That is what hapened at BG when 4.10 cars and 3.55 cars ran side by side, the 4.10 cars were all in the teens, the 3.55 cars in the 120's. So the 4.10 car you mention put up a good et on a prepped track, what happens on the street when you line up a car that traps 122 next to a car that traps 116? Happened with my friends car, he had 4.10's we busted balls to get an 11.99 @ 119 on Dr's when my car, the same night went 11.70 on F1's, [i]with less mods[/i]. As for the car you are describing, what does it have done to it? You said "stock weight", does that mean IRS? Even if it has IRS, it only has 420 ft lbs of torque. Fits with what I am saying, that a typical pullied chiped Cobra with 500 ft lbs and 3.55's has all the rear wheel torque the stock suspension can handle. 500*2.66*3.55=4721 lb ft, which is actually more than the car you describe, 420*2.66*4.10 is 4580 lb ft. This matches well with what I have said, 3.55's with 500 lb ft is plenty of torque, more than the car you mentioned that pulled the 1.6 60 ft. You didn't take it out to the next decimal point, but I have many 1.6x 60 fts. Heed the words of Bob Cosby, with traction, which he believes means a straight axle, the "right" shock valving and control arms, which he has figured out after years of racing experience, and shifting like a trained mongoose, he figures to get .15 improvement. Is that a good gain for the $? When racing in a heads up class where the whole field may be seperated by a tenth or two, of course. However, to the average racer, even if they managed to figure out the right control arms, shock valving and suspension set-up, they probably still wouldn't even be consistent enough to tell the difference. Then consider the typical '03-04 Cobra, the guy with all stock suspension that likes the car to handle well. Will he be able to get enough traction to get any improvement in ET? I doubt it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
The Terminator
Driveline
Soo happy!! 3.90's are on!
Top