hey, my car will be out this week! YAY! we have done some lil 'upgrades' to the motor, but it will have the same turbo setup...can't wait to try it out! I will post my best slip soon....time to join that 11 second club
cheers!
------------------
IP: Logged
11:10 AM
Jul 7th, 2004
Darth Fiero Member
Posts: 5921 From: Waterloo, Indiana Registered: Oct 2002
ATTENTION! ATTENTION! The list has been updated, if I missed anyone let me know. MAn, seeing Darth and HER86GT getting closer and closer to the 11's has really got my arse in gear. Just ordered my "GO FAST GOODIES". OH, Darth get ready to burn a new chip shortly, we will probably be starting all over. I'll let you know when I am reday via email!
------------------ USED to be NOS3800 1988 Purple Fiero GTw/SC3800 conversion Best ET with 3.0 pulley and 1.9 rockers: 12.74@105mph Best 60 Foot: 1.735
[This message has been edited by SOULCRUSHER (edited 07-07-2004).]
IP: Logged
08:38 PM
LoW_KeY Member
Posts: 8081 From: Hastings, MI Registered: Oct 2001
ATTENTION! ATTENTION! The list has been updated, if I missed anyone let me know. MAn, seeing Darth and HER86GT getting closer and closer to the 11's has really got my arse in gear. Just ordered my "GO FAST GOODIES". OH, Darth get ready to burn a new chip shortly, we will probably be starting all over. I'll let you know when I am reday via email!
Are you implying that we are a bad influence?
IP: Logged
09:05 PM
Jul 8th, 2004
SOULCRUSHER Member
Posts: 1012 From: Waldorf, MD Registered: May 2004
hey, my car will be out this week! YAY! we have done some lil 'upgrades' to the motor, but it will have the same turbo setup...can't wait to try it out! I will post my best slip soon....time to join that 11 second club
cheers!
If you take that beast to Toronto Motorsports Park, I wanna know about it. Seriously, I live 15 minutes from the track and wouldn't mind a few runs in my GT. Fast and Furious fridays are always fun!. Let me know...
Anybody remember slammedfiero? Well I believe he now has his Northstar mounted in his GT, mated to a fresh Getrag. With wet N20, this car is gonna be a monster. He was there last weekend but didn't make any runs He knows as well as I do, that traction will not be a problem
------------------ 5 car lengths in front of you and still pulling...
[This message has been edited by banditbalz (edited 07-08-2004).]
Hey Darth, I see that you are making great results, I bet you will be in 11's if you upgrade your turbo. In our GN community one of the first thing we do is up grade the turbo, the stock turbo flattens out on the top end and we have the same cubes. I don't know what stall your converter is but a nice P trim 63 if you can spool it up will do the job. Since you know very well what the hell your doing, the fuel and things like that needs to be tweaked will be no problem for you.
Prasad
------------------ "Turbo Cars are like hot women. A little edgy, every guy wants one, some guys can't handle them, and if you throw a little alchohol in the mix they'll rock your world" 1986 GT (waiting for Buick GN setup trasplant) 1984SE 5 Speed W/SBC V8 1987 Buick GN(10.70@124MPH) 1987 Trans Am SBC 355cid Twin Turbo(no track times yet) 1992 GMC Typhoon(13.20@ 99mph) Other cars; JaguarXJ6 & Mercedes AMG 500SEC
Good to see a few guys with Iron Dukes running the quarter mile. Curious as to 60' times with the 4:10 Muncie 4 speed. Would guess in the 2.3 - 2.5sec range. Those engines have lots of torque for a 4 cylinder. Had one when I was in college and I could do a better burn out in my 2.5 than in my current GT!
Also wondering what an auto, pre tech4 2.5L was good for.
------------------ 5 car lengths in front of you and still pulling...
IP: Logged
09:05 PM
PFF
System Bot
Jul 10th, 2004
spearce Member
Posts: 257 From: Delaware, Ontario,Canada Registered: Nov 2002
I thought I had listed my time, but who knows? With the dial-up connection I'm at right now, it just takes too long to search this thread.
Anyways, I ran a PB in the convertible at Wheatstock a few weeks ago. Engine is a stock 300 HP N* from a '95 El Dorado with teh stock 4T80-e tranny and I ran it in street trim (no slicks, 18" wheels, etc.)
My time was 13.69 @ 101.54 MPH. I don't have the slip in front of me, so I don't remember the 60' time (I believe it was 2.2xx).
Next year I plan on being in the low 12's (engine work is coming!!)
------------------
IP: Logged
09:21 PM
Kento Member
Posts: 4218 From: Beautifull Winston Salem NC Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by mrfiero: One could spin like crazy at the start and then pull hard once it gets traction (this would give a slower ET, but higher trap speed). Traction is usually the main difference when you have two identical times and different trap speeds. Another thought is you could pull hard and lift the throttle at the end, which would lower the speed as well.
SO by looking at those #'s, Her86GT has traction problems and MasterTunerA does not??? OK Was this due to make-up on the tires???? (sorry could not resit)
I know Put up or shut up. OK Beat this : 87 Duke 5spd with Empty Wallet Light On MOD!!!!, 18.45 at 71 mph!!! LOL!!!
KENTO, No, the other way around. MasterTuner had traction problems more. With that mile per hour he should have run a high 11, low 12. MPH is not affected as much by tire spin then the ET. In other words, if you spin, your ET will REALLY hurt and your MPH will be only hurt a little bit. Simply because the MPH is the speed you are going over the last (I think) 100 ft? So if you spin then hook up, you will still get close to your best mph. Maybe 2-3 mph off.
[This message has been edited by SOULCRUSHER (edited 07-13-2004).]
IP: Logged
10:27 PM
Jul 14th, 2004
mrfiero Member
Posts: 9002 From: Colorful Colorado Registered: Mar 99
MPH is not affected as much by tire spin then the ET.
At least I got it mostly right! I knew that the ET was affected quite a bit by traction issues and just assumed that the trap speed was as well. Thanks for clarifying that for me/us.
IP: Logged
12:07 AM
Master Tuner Akimoto Member
Posts: 2267 From: South Florida,USA Registered: Jul 2003
There was several reasons that we were having such inconsistent times at the track which have since been corrected:
The tires we ran was a hard street compound at 38-40 psi and broke loose easily so I had to back out to get traction and go again then the nitrous kicked in a WOT that made up the trap speed at the lights.
If I drop the clutch in 1st speed it it is very short and have to shift to 2nd not good so at the last run we made changes to a new 4.5 motor also to the car's suspension (TRD adjustable coilovers)for a better weight transfer,lower rear tire pressure 30 psi and started off the line in 2 nd speed and that resulted in a 11.97 run @119mph and the motor has not been broken in and has since had more improvement done to it . Unfortunately with that time we were told that a roll bar has to be installed in order to run again so it will be awhile if ever that is done ,reliability is more essential than speed ot the track so I am doing a complete make over to drive on the street and have fun now I know what the car is capable of doing.
IP: Logged
12:25 AM
Darth Fiero Member
Posts: 5921 From: Waterloo, Indiana Registered: Oct 2002
There was several reasons that we were having such inconsistent times at the track which have since been corrected:
The tires we ran was a hard street compound at 38-40 psi and broke loose easily so I had to back out to get traction and go again then the nitrous kicked in a WOT that made up the trap speed at the lights.
If I drop the clutch in 1st speed it it is very short and have to shift to 2nd not good so at the last run we made changes to a new 4.5 motor also to the car's suspension (TRD adjustable coilovers)for a better weight transfer,lower rear tire pressure 30 psi and started off the line in 2 nd speed and that resulted in a 11.97 run @119mph and the motor has not been broken in and has since had more improvement done to it . Unfortunately with that time we were told that a roll bar has to be installed in order to run again so it will be awhile if ever that is done ,reliability is more essential than speed ot the track so I am doing a complete make over to drive on the street and have fun now I know what the car is capable of doing.
Yea the good old roll-cage nazi's are great aren't they? Lets take a perfectly safe car, according to the NTSB which has been crash test certified 5 star safety rating, cut it up, and install a roll cage which will negate many of the crumple zones that were designed into the Fiero's space frame. That way when you do get in an accident, all the energy can be transferred directly to you, the driver, instead of being absorbed by the body. But hey, who am I to argue with hillbilly race tech. I will put a cage in my car when I see the crash test data that says it makes my Fiero safer. Speaking of which, has anyone ever rolled a Fiero?
IP: Logged
03:34 AM
PFF
System Bot
mrfiero Member
Posts: 9002 From: Colorful Colorado Registered: Mar 99
Speaking of which, has anyone ever rolled a Fiero?
I have never rolled one, but back in high school, a kid had a brand new '87 GT and rolled it. The body shop took lots of pictures of the car and its eventual rebuild. The same car today would be hauled off to the junkyard, but back when it was new, it was worth the $$ for the insurance company to fix it. They essentially replaced about 1/3 of the space frame stampings!
At any rate, even though the Fiero has a low center of gravity, if you get it sideways and overcorrect, you can roll it. The kid in '87 fell asleep at the wheel and drove it off the side of the road. He woke up cranked the wheel and overcorrected, went airbborne and rolled it twice. The car was a mess.
If I drop the clutch in 1st speed it it is very short and have to shift to 2nd not good
and started off the line in 2 nd speed and that resulted in a 11.97 run @119mph
I'm glad to see a 4-speed make it into the 11s. I'm intrigued by the 2nd gear start because it does make sense. First gear is very short, and will break the tires loose with anything more than half throttle (I run a SC3800). Starting in second should help to manage wheel spin, and eliminates a shift very early in the 1/4 mile. Apparently 2nd gear start works well for you, and I may just give it a try next time I'm at the track. The thing that scares me the most on this is the gearwidth of 2nd being much smaller than first gear, and I've stripped 2nd gear out at the track before.
-Tim
IP: Logged
11:25 AM
Jul 24th, 2004
PBJ Member
Posts: 4167 From: London, On., Canada Registered: Jan 2001
Yea the good old roll-cage nazi's are great aren't they? Lets take a perfectly safe car, according to the NTSB which has been crash test certified 5 star safety rating, cut it up, and install a roll cage which will negate many of the crumple zones that were designed into the Fiero's space frame. That way when you do get in an accident, all the energy can be transferred directly to you, the driver, instead of being absorbed by the body. But hey, who am I to argue with hillbilly race tech. I will put a cage in my car when I see the crash test data that says it makes my Fiero safer. Speaking of which, has anyone ever rolled a Fiero?
While I agree that NHRA rules aren't what's best for a Fiero, I do think that it needs a cage, or at least a well braced roll bar.
I understand what you are saying and don't disagree that in a roll-over, a bar would probably be better than not to have a bar. But that is not what I am talking about. What I am talking about are the implecations of a roll bar in a car that has a steel safety frame that is designed to "give" at the proper time during a crash. The thing that worries me about a roll bar would be an impact that would sheer the bar away from the spaceframe and into the passenger or driver. Sure I know the arguement is going to be blah blah blah if the accident is that bad then it wouldn't make a difference. Again, the problem I have is there has been NO ACTUAL TESTING done crashing cars that have roll bars installed in real-world street crash situations. I am not willing to base my life on a assumption that some hard steel tubing welded to a sheet metal spaceframe is not going to have the potential to hurt me more than it helps me. Now as far as the rolling issue I was under the impression the reason why they want you to have a roll bar at the track is in case you break a driveshaft and that causes the car to roll due to the forces involved. Here the Fiero is not an issue because there is no driveshaft that runs the length of the car that can have a "pole vaulting" effect in the case of failure.
Again, I am not arguing that installing a roll cage could help in a roll-over crash to some small degree. What I am arguing is all the other crash instances where a roll bar or cage could serve to do more harm than good. The problem is THERE HAS BEEN NO REAL-WORLD TESTING of this in controlled labratory conditions. Furthermore, it is my life and my car and ultimately it should be MY DECISION whether or not I install a cage in my car, UNLESS there is indesputible evidence from crash testing that shows it will save my life. Besides, when was the last time you saw a Fiero roll at the dragstrip? In addition, how many people have died from Fiero roll-over crashes where a roll cage would have saved their lives?
I am not trying to be a jerk about this because it is serious stuff. I have been to the junk yard many times and seen other cars that were in accidients where people would have gotten hurt by objects installed that were not factory equipment. I drive my Fiero on the street about 100 miles a week so this is a real concern of mine. Again I am not willing to put my life or body in danger based on an assumption of what worked in a 60's era car.
Originally posted by Darth Fiero: Now as far as the rolling issue I was under the impression the reason why they want you to have a roll bar at the track is in case you break a driveshaft and that causes the car to roll due to the forces involved. Here the Fiero is not an issue because there is no driveshaft that runs the length of the car that can have a "pole vaulting" effect in the case of failure.
No, that's why they want you to install a driveshaft hoop, which is required for 12.99 and quicker, I think. Roll cages aren't required until you get into the 11's, and are installed because "sh!t happens".
quote
Again, I am not arguing that installing a roll cage could help in a roll-over crash to some small degree. What I am arguing is all the other crash instances where a roll bar or cage could serve to do more harm than good. The problem is THERE HAS BEEN NO REAL-WORLD TESTING of this in controlled labratory conditions. Furthermore, it is my life and my car and ultimately it should be MY DECISION whether or not I install a cage in my car, UNLESS there is indesputible evidence from crash testing that shows it will save my life.
I've done crash testing. If I hadn't had the presence of mind to pull my self down/forward on the steering wheel, I'd have died in that crash. Doug Chase tells me that one of his cages probably wouldn't have moved in that impact.
quote
Besides, when was the last time you saw a Fiero roll at the dragstrip? In addition, how many people have died from Fiero roll-over crashes where a roll cage would have saved their lives?
I've never seen a Fiero roll at a dragstrip, but then again I've only ever seen one besides my own. I don't know the answer to your second question, but then again, neither do you.
quote
Again I am not willing to put my life or body in danger based on an assumption of what worked in a 60's era car.
You're making the assumption that what worked on a '60's muscle car isn't remotely close to what would work in a Fiero. Which car do you think has more crush space? A '74 Monte Carlo or an '84 Fiero? Nothing in a Fiero from the rear strut towers to the front of the footwells is designed as a crumple zone. This area of the car is the passenger compartment and must remain intact with minimal intrusion. This is what a Fiero cage seeks to reinforce. All the rear crash structure of a Fiero is aft of the rear wheels, and all the front crash structure is ahead of the front of the footwells. You talk like installing a roll cage is welding giant cast iron bumpers in place of the crumple zones. It's not. Installing a roll cage is reinforcing the area of the car into which there should be minimal intrusion. And the overhead structure HAD BETTER NOT be a crumpe zone.
------------------ '87 Fiero GT: Low, Sleek, Fast, and Loud '90 Pontiac 6000 SE AWD: None of the Above
Luck, Fate and Destiny are words used by those who lack the courage to define their own future
IP: Logged
10:40 AM
Jul 27th, 2004
Scott-Wa Member
Posts: 5392 From: Tacoma, WA, USA Registered: Mar 2002
I agreed with the last one... a crumple zone designed to work in a 35mph-75 mph wreck isn't going to help much in the 120mph + range. If you notice, indy/F1 cars are designed to breakup in a wreck to dump the energy away from the driver... but the driver is in a structure that is designed to stay together to keep them from being crumpled or ripped to shreds. Same thing goes for a cage in a drag car, designed to keep driver intact at speeds in multiples of what our cars were designed to handle in a wreck.
IP: Logged
04:53 PM
Jul 28th, 2004
Kento Member
Posts: 4218 From: Beautifull Winston Salem NC Registered: Jun 2003
Well its not the best time but looking at the trap speed there is alot of room for improvment. My best run had about 35 ft of 2 black stripes. I did 5 runs with a New Gtech Pro best run 13.83 with speed 119.20. It felt good. I waited until the road I live on was desserted it is a straight flat stretch for 6 miles. I left fairly easy for this motor because I am unsure of trans. But any harder would of been even more sideways. at the end of run I looked down and saw the speedo buried back around at the otherside. And this car is hell to stop. The power brakes suck with this big as cam sucking all the vac. I even have a canister on it. But I figure if I can get my carb dialed in and change my powervalve. Work on my timing and advance in distributor. And most of all get a stickier tire. since I have 215/65/14 radials. I am going to run a hoosier street slick on it. and hopefully grab more traction. I figure with that trap and still alot of tuning and adj. to go this car can easily be a low 12 sec car. Oh well thats enough rambles. -Dan
------------------ 355 SBC .220 Dome TRW Forged Pistons 215cc Dart Iron Eagle Heads 2.05/1.60 Valves Victor Jr Intake Barry Grant Mighty Demon 650cfm Solid 306 Duration 558 Lift Cam All Comp Valvetrain All MSD Igntion All transfered through a 4 speed Manual Trans Estimated BHP 445 hp 1/4 mile SOON as spec clutch broke in
IP: Logged
09:39 PM
Aug 9th, 2004
Rare87GT Member
Posts: 5068 From: Wichita, KS USA Registered: Oct 2001
Originally posted by FIERO1985: And this car is hell to stop. The power brakes suck with this big as cam sucking all the vac. I even have a canister on it.
Early '90's high end GM cars like the Pontiac 6000 STE, Cadillacs and some Buicks had the Teves II ABS which uses an electric pump to pressurize an accumulator for brake boost. If you got one of these and removed the ABS electronics to leave juse the pump, accumulator, reservoir and master cylinder, you could have electric power brakes.
------------------ '87 Fiero GT: Low, Sleek, Fast, and Loud '90 Pontiac 6000 SE AWD: None of the Above
Luck, Fate and Destiny are words used by those who lack the courage to define their own future
IP: Logged
09:42 AM
Aug 15th, 2004
Her86GT Member
Posts: 1173 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: May 2001
Are you running a pro stock car because some thing dosen't add up with that run . Was it 1/8 of a mile ? Was it a 1/4 of a mile? Did you do a "Hop" and shut down?
the reason is a Fiero will never do that ...period no matter if you have a 454 because it will not fit unless you are also running a mountain motor 512 ci and that will not fit so I am skeptic as to what your time slip indicates.My car which is cadillac powered does the 1/4 in 11.97 at 119 mph so how comes yours does it in 7.8 sec at only 91.5 mph ............inquiring minds want to know or is it
[This message has been edited by Master Tuner Akimoto (edited 08-22-2004).]
IP: Logged
08:50 AM
Oreif Member
Posts: 16460 From: Schaumburg, IL Registered: Jan 2000
Are you running a pro stock car because some thing dosen't add up with that run . Was it 1/8 of a mile ? Was it a 1/4 of a mile? Did you do a "Hop" and shut down?
the reason is a Fiero will never do that ...period no matter if you have a 454 because it will not fit unless you are also running a mountain motor 512 ci and that will not fit so I am skeptic as to what your time slip indicates.My car which is cadillac powered does the 1/4 in 11.97 at 119 mph so how comes yours does it in 7.8 sec at only 91.5 mph ............inquiring minds want to know or is it
My guess is that it is a 1/8th mile. If you convert the above to a 1/4 mile time he would be running about 12.38@110mph. There is no way he could do the 1/4 mile in 7.8 seconds and only have a trap speed of 91mph.
He knows as well as I do, that traction will not be a problem 
5 car lengths in front of you and still pulling...
(sorry could not resit) 
