 |
   |
|
| |
|
|
| Subject |
There is alot there power wise, and the power plant is |
|
| |
|
|
| Posted by |
SirpriZ on November 05, 2005 at 2:27 AM |
|
| |
This message has been viewed 48 times. |
|
| |
|
|
| In Reply To |
Some opinions please no flaming posted by 1QuickNa on November 05, 2005 at 02:03 AM |
|
| |
|
|
| Message |
capable of 11 second ETs. You're going to get a range of suggestions of what to run boost wise....I'll let your tuner give you feedback there. The main "deficit" that I see is a lack of stall in your torque converter (unless you've had it raised) and necessary traction to optimize your 60' times. If you look at Arnel's list, you will find that the quickest cars have excellent 60' times, (many with lower gearing). This is what really determines a good ET, unless you have a shit load of power to overcome a mediocre 60'. With an AT TT you need at least a 3,500 RPM stall (which allows you to make boost and have the car leave in an effecient manner (RPM cabable of moving air quickly, moderate boost, and torque) and traction. There are a few AT cars doing 11s, but I think they are either running an NA diff. (4.08s) or the 4.10s. But low 12s is definately a reasonable goal. The difference between the A/R of the AT (.54) and the manual (.63) is not that great a difference. There is a guy in SoCal that ran 117 on stock AT turbos, his A/F ratio was 11.5 all the way to redline. You DO NOT need to upgrade injectors, even though you may get close to maximizing them with the boost up. Again, you will hear different opinions on this as well. For what it's worth and good luck, Mark
|
|
| |
|
|
| Follow Ups |
|
|
| |
|
|
Post a
Followup |
You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
