Wow, was really interested in this until I saw the times.
"Best e.t. of 11.25 @ 121mph." seems to be a gross underperformer to me! This car should easily be running low 10's, high 9's with the parts described and the weight. Typical magazine underperformer.
Back in the day (early '80's), Larry Shepard over at Direct Connection figured that for the 9.90 class you needed to make 600 hp in a 2800 pound car. I bet quite a few guys here remember Mopar doing the work up on the 9.90 car. Duster with a tunnel rammed 440 with twin dominators as I recall. Should be better today with the new technology. So with 650 HP you'd hope 9.90 would be a baseline.
I did the exact exact times they did with way more weight and way less cam and head! It's almost like it had a dead cylinder?!
The mph says different. 121mph no matter lack of traction not.Looking at the car my guess is lack of traction = the bad times. Its not the engine build.
Any idea why I'm not able to view the link? Only the Hot Rod articles are a problem
The mph says different. 121mph no matter lack of traction not.
Pretty much.I think the write up is mainly a really long Indy advertisement.
600 rpm/sec is still common in places. But.......there are some sissy-cake engines that just might blow up at 300 rpm/sec.......I read the drag test, time slips are from 2015.
One thing though, the dyno rate was 600 rpm/sec.. isn't it usually 300?
Wow, was really interested in this until I saw the times.
"Best e.t. of 11.25 @ 121mph." seems to be a gross underperformer to me! This car should easily be running low 10's, high 9's with the parts described and the weight. Typical magazine underperformer.