topless94style Posted February 22, 2005 Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 Im looking for LQ1 car times with est car weight at time of run. I am trying to use a few equations found online and some learned in physics to estimate the hp of my car before and after the headgasket blew. (If you have dyno numbers include those too) Also, anyone with 3800 GP GT times with atleast exhaust work done and possibly a few more minor mods under the hood done. Reason, because i beat a GP GT last summer, 2 door, from 0-90 i lead with his bumper at the middle of my door. Also up a very slight incline. Anyone know the aprox time difference in the way are cars were at the end of the race stated above? Ill share what I come up with once I get a few accurate 1/4 times and making sure these equations are pretty close to real life numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z34_nut Posted February 22, 2005 Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 i've seen monte 3.4's run solid 16.1's 16.2's bone stock. that was in about 50 degree weather at night. weight would be about 3550? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannymik Posted February 22, 2005 Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 i've seen monte 3.4's run solid 16.1's 16.2's bone stock. that was in about 50 degree weather at night. weight would be about 3550? thats interesting since my bone stock "GT" runs 15.9ish in the 1/4 and the Monte is a few 100 pounds lighter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TurboSedan Posted February 22, 2005 Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 i've seen monte 3.4's run solid 16.1's 16.2's bone stock. i thought both the LQ1/auto & L36 W-bodies ran mid/high 15s stock? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbtk2 Posted February 22, 2005 Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 i've seen monte 3.4's run solid 16.1's 16.2's bone stock. i thought both the LQ1/auto & L36 W-bodies ran mid/high 15s stock? Me too. I would think high 15's for both. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z34_nut Posted February 22, 2005 Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 it definatly ran a 16.1xx and a 16.2xx several times that night. mabey the track conditions sucked and what not, i dunno, my car had a blown tranny at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfewtrail Posted February 22, 2005 Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 I've got a magazine article w/ a 95 Monte Z34 running a 15.5@83.2mph...... Also at my local track, I witnessed consistent low 16's out of a Lumina 3.4 Euro a few years back, the temp was ~40-45*. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay3800 Posted February 22, 2005 Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 i've seen monte 3.4's run solid 16.1's 16.2's bone stock. i thought both the LQ1/auto & L36 W-bodies ran mid/high 15s stock? I know a lot of you discredit magazine reports, but I have a report in Motor Trend on a '91 STE 3.4 auto that ran a 16.5 @ 86.1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topless94style Posted February 22, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 Would a good guess on the 1/4 time of a GP GT 2000+ with exhaust and a few other mods be a 15.5 1/4? And at the length i beat him by be a good guess for 15.3 for me? Or is that too generous? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R1UrDone Posted February 22, 2005 Report Share Posted February 22, 2005 I put a bone stock (down to the paper filter) '91 Z34 to 15.6 @90 then in my '92 5spd with dog-bone and UnderDrivin pully to 14.9@92 Now i run times in the low 13s... but that in a Ws6 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 I ran a 15.22 at 6,000ft The car will run high 13s at sea level, and I'm looking for 240fwhp, and it is about 3400lbs without me (185) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sl3196 Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 The car will run high 13s at sea level, and I'm looking for 240fwhp, and it is about 3400lbs without me (185) All we want is proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfewtrail Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 The car will run high 13s at sea level, and I'm looking for 240fwhp, and it is about 3400lbs without me (185) All we want is proof. 8) I still want to know how 4800ft = 6,000ft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john99gtp Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 The car will run high 13s at sea level, and I'm looking for 240fwhp, and it is about 3400lbs without me (185) All we want is proof. niiiice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topless94style Posted February 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 YA sweet guys aaron stay out of my thread im trying to figure out something usefull for my car anyone who wants to help please do, if you want to bitch to or about aaron about his stupid claims on his car take it someplace else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 Im looking for LQ1 car times with est car weight at time of run. aaron stay out of my thread Why? I have a LQ1, I have track times, I have alittudes they wre run at, and II have an estimated weight. 14.78 @ 92.68, 3400lbs, 1200ft 15.22 @ 91-92, 3400lbs, 6014.7ft (I wrote it down on one of my timeslips, and this was taken form a GPS tracker that a friend of mine with his 96 Z28 had). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbtk2 Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 How do we have any clue your friends GPS tracker was accurate? I know it was discovered before that the track you ran that time at, claims to be at something like 4800ft. on their website IIRC, if they were really at over 6k feet, wouldnt' you think they would know it? And, how, even then, does that make it a 13 second car??? It says it went 14.78 at 1200 ft., you aren't gonna get too much lower than that. The track I race at is ~750ft. or so, and nobody uses any correction there, its basically considered a sea level track. Its not THAT much lower than your 1200 ft. Like we've said in the past, we'll believe it when we see it. And, this discussion is, as far as I can tell, about stock 1/4 mile times, so what does your car have to do with it at all. Now, back to the original topic about stock 1/4 mile times. I honestly think most would agree that a mid-high 15 is about right for both. It really would be drivers race. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfewtrail Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 Im looking for LQ1 car times with est car weight at time of run. aaron stay out of my thread Why? I have a LQ1, I have track times, I have alittudes they wre run at, and II have an estimated weight. 14.78 @ 92.68, 3400lbs, 1200ft 15.22 @ 91-92, 3400lbs, 6014.7ft (I wrote it down on one of my timeslips, and this was taken form a GPS tracker that a friend of mine with his 96 Z28 had). This is what your wrote in the thread when you "got a new 1/4 time" "1/4_________________15.257 MPH_________________90.85 " NHRA lists Pueblo as 4900ft, you think I would believe YOU over them? Tell your friend to get his GPS checked, it's obviously wrong unless it takes into account weather conditions,etc., etc. and then gives a reading of what the corrected altitude would be like. Even so, 4900' is 4900'. I say you have a low 14 second car at best(at sea level). EDIT: Topless, sorry bout the useless chatter.......BTW, if you want the article w/ the Z34 running 15.5(auto of course being a 95), I can email it to you. It also did 0-60 in 7.0 seconds. Times are going to vary all over the place from car to car, but in general DOHC cars with autos should do mid-high 15's in good shape and the 5spds are probably more like low-mid 15's depending on driving. Higher altitude is going to yield slower times, as well as certain weather conditions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topless94style Posted February 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 thanks for the help, the only reason i said aaron to stay out, is because of the controversy of your times, and i would not use them anyway, considering your car is a manual, it has more mods than mine, it was run above sea level, and well.....nevermind i guess ill leave it at that. my email is blazer03@hotmail.com Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 The fastest times I have seen, and the most popular, were 15.4 for a Lumina Z34 auto, and 15.6 for a MCZ34. The times for a 5-speed Z34 are 15.1 and a 7.1 0-60. One last thing, the 14.78, was without headers, and it was on my old motor... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biff85ta Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 Aaron what are you 60' times?? Unless they are decent like 1.90-2.0 your times do not add up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastSE2DR Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 Now i run times in the low 13s... but that in a Ws6 8) hey yeah thats so fast!! yeah i have seen GP GTs run 16.6 at our track but then again it was about 100degrees outside and the track was prolly closer to 120 or so...everyone ran about .6-.7 slower than what they were used to...it was gay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 I have 60's of 2.3 on both runs. The CO 2.3 was a tad higher, like .05, but pretty much 2.3s across the board. Remember, 3.4L DOHC, spinning through first and second, equals all high end. Lemme see if Luke still has the pick up of my 14.7 run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 Keep adding: Oh all the great memories... :bawl: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sl3196 Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 Damn Aaron work on those 60's they suck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.