| ![]() | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
|
|||||||
Discussing Does this look right? in the V6 Mustangs Forum. I decided to run a test and tune at the 1/8th strip on Friday ... Modded Mustangs is the premier Ford Mustang Forum on the internet. We discuss all aspects of the Ford Mustang on the forum. Registered Users do not see the above ads. Please Register - It's Free! |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Regular
2004 Mustang V6 Convert.
Under Construction
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Homestead, FL
Posts: 71
|
Does this look right?
I decided to run a test and tune at the 1/8th strip on Friday so I could compare how I run now versus when I get all my performance parts put on in October (overtime). I went up against a 2003 V6 Auto with only intake. I run a 2004 V6 Auto with only intake. How could there be this much of a difference? Does this look like a normal speed for my car and maybe he lied and had more done to it than he said?
|
| Sponsored Links | Remove Advertisements |
| Forums at Modded Mustangs Advertisement |
|
|
#2 |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
'00 3.8L
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Odessa, FL
Posts: 1,154
|
I believe a .5 second difference in the 60ft will translate to about the time difference recorded for the 1/8th.
__________________
![]() "Fast she goes...in the city of Overdose" |
|
|
#3 |
|
Regular
2004 Mustang V6 Convert.
Under Construction
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Homestead, FL
Posts: 71
|
I'm not doubting the software, the guy beat me hands down. I'm just trying to find out how this guy blew me out of the water. Is my car slower than what should have been expected, or did this guy have more done to his car than he said he did?
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
2004 Mustang V6
14.4@ 96
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Zips driveway doll house shanty town
Posts: 1,705
|
was his car a convertible like yours? Cause if not, you have quite a bit of weight on him.
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Regular
2004 Mustang V6 Convert.
Under Construction
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Homestead, FL
Posts: 71
|
Could have been a factor. He had a hard top.
I ran into this calculator...estimated I'm only running 133.64 HP at the Fly. Making me worried something is wrong with the car. Estimate 1/8-Mile Horsepower Requirements from MPH Enter Vehicle Weight with Driver: 3479 Enter Vehicle MPH: 64.19 Estimated - HP @ Flywheel: 133.64 Last edited by d3f4c3d : September 21st, 2009 at 12:35 PM. |
|
|
#6 |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
01 V6 convertible
too slow to try
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toledo
Posts: 1,143
|
I think verts are 200-300 lbs heavier than coupes... and every 100lbs is a tenth in the quarter mile...
so that along with the bad 60ft seems about right... get that 60ft down and you'll be doing a lot better |
|
|
#7 |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
2004 Mustang V6
14.4@ 96
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Zips driveway doll house shanty town
Posts: 1,705
|
yeah, he seems to be a better driver
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Regular
2004 Mustang V6 Convert.
Under Construction
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Homestead, FL
Posts: 71
|
Lol, it's an auto. Aside from taking off the overdrive and flooring it what else could I have done? My reaction time wasn't bad...had a little big of a problem hooking up at the very beginning, but that was it.
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
'00 3.8L
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Odessa, FL
Posts: 1,154
|
Yeah I think that's all it is. Just get that launch down, lower the 60ft, and you'll see improvement. 250lbs doesn't help with bein a vert... and I wouldn't trust those hp calculators... who knows ya know? Get it on a dyno to know for sure. Or maybe someone here can use that calc to see what it says their hp is to compare it to actual dyno #'s they already have. Annnndd of course there's some mods you could do, to start some DR's and a shift kit, maybe 4.10s?
__________________
![]() "Fast she goes...in the city of Overdose" |
|
|
#10 | |
|
Hardcore Enthusiast
2004 Mustang V6
14.4@ 96
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Zips driveway doll house shanty town
Posts: 1,705
|
But, you could try torque braking. Thats what i do and my sixty ft times are sub 2.3s |
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Sonic Blue FTGDMFW!!!
2004 Mustang v6
10.73 1/8th mile
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Portland, TN
Posts: 3,560
|
which stock v6 rims do you have...good tires can help here too...
__________________
2004 Mustang 3.9 v6 K&N - True Dual Thrush Welded Exhaust - 5k HIDs - Show car shine 24/7 Fuckers
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Regular
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 455
|
Hmm... a 12.180 in the 1/8th is TYPICALLY going to translate to high 18's in the 1/4. I don't care WHAT your 60' is (within reason), you shouldn't be running way into the 18's.
More concerning to me than the ET is the trap speed. Being that your cars are quite similar other than the fact yours is a vert and you had a worse launch, trapping 10mph less than him is a LOT. Because trap speeds don't fluctuate quite as much as ETs based on the launch and such, I'd take a look at what some other stock-ish auto 99-04s (specifically verts, if you can find them) have trapped. That is a much better indication of whether it was just a bad run, or if your car is not making the power it should.
__________________
1993 2.3L Coupe [Motortopia] : Open-Track Project... 216k miles 2000 V6 (Black,5-speed) [Motortopia] : Heads/Cam (EXHAUST CLIP) 2001 Harley Davidson F-150 Acts 16:31 |
|
|
#13 |
|
V-SICKS
00 V6 & 09 GT
13.37@104.4mph--BONE stock GT
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: south florida
Posts: 15,657
|
well a 2.8 60ft is just horrible horrible horrible. something went completely wrong
__________________
![]() The Devil & The Daily Daily-13.37@104.4mph V6- Stock bottom-439rwhp & 402rwtq 12psi 100oct built motor-497rwhp & 508rwtq 15psi pump |