I was kinda worried about lower gears and converter ganging up and destroying axle parts with good traction. Any breakage so far? Also, I was thinking too of playing with nitrous next year (almost winter in MN). From the research I have done, it seems like 75hp shot on top of our fairly maxed out M-90 setups is about it - so I am not sure if DH was kidding about the 200hp shot or not. I did think that if the basically stock l67 can handle 600 hp turbocharged, why would it not be able to handle a 200 nitrrous shot on top of the 370 hp (estimated) we currently have so long as you retard the timing and keep the AFR in check. I just have not heard of anyone doing more than 75 on the L67 - have you?
My old setup was 3.29 gears and a 3K stall pulling 1.6 60' on every run...Never had any axle issues and highest trap was 111 with a setup similiar to Amirs. I pulled my setup and am now on stock convertor and gears as I didn't see a big enough benefit from the gears and stall plus I was having lo king issues with that trans after 6 years.
Originally posted by darkhorizon: Converters are huge trap speed bandits. To really gain in the converter side of things you need to go WAY faster at the line, which is tough to do considering you have peak power at most any RPM on a 3800.
I've corresponded with a guy on www.speedtalk.com who claims to have made significant gains in trap speed by forcing converter lockup on the back half of the strip. Of course the TCC has to be built pretty tough to take that abuse. I don't remember if he was running a TH350, 700 or 4L80E.
Nitrous is really quite harsh on a motor.. the nitrous turning on and off is a very binary thing which is not easy on anything... but yes the only thing you have to be worried about is breaking something... A piston is going to break from detonation or overheating (nitrous is pretty cold if your afr is right). The rods will only handle so much power vs rpm, but we have proven those in ideal and less than ideal conditions are very healthy still.
I did a little fiddling around with a 50 shot for awhile and I basically couldnt screw it up.... And I never bothered doing any tuning work on it.
I had a custom converter built for my setup and he looked at all my logs, etc instead of me just buying a ZZP style converter or something, I had it custom per my setup and how my logs looked. It trapped only like 113 but with the new converter it's going almost 115. Not a huge gain by any means and it's still on the slow end for trap speeds, but it did help make my car not be so violent on downshifts and kept the power in the powerband. I think 115-117mph trap speeds are about it for a supercharged setup without nitrous no matter what heads, cam you run. On the next build when I go turbo, it will be nice to run some mid to high 10's at like 130+mph. I'll probably enjoy this setup for another year or so before I start acquiring parts for a turbo build if I go that way.
I ran 118 mph a few times with the XPZ, with a bad igition miss, mid 117s was my best with xp. Wish I could have made a clean run with the XPZ, I'm sure there was some more in that setup, but I never made a pass quicker than my best XP run. Figured out the wires were bad after I went turbo. Got rid of the Zzp and went back to MSD wires, no issues since. There are a few GTP guys that have run into the 10s and mid 120s with the M90. It takes a lot of perfectly matched parts and lots of $ to get there though, turbo is definately a lot easier to get the HP out of.
Originally posted by Rare87GT: I had a custom converter built for my setup and he looked at all my logs, etc instead of me just buying a ZZP style converter or something, I had it custom per my setup and how my logs looked. It trapped only like 113 but with the new converter it's going almost 115. Not a huge gain by any means and it's still on the slow end for trap speeds, but it did help make my car not be so violent on downshifts and kept the power in the powerband. I think 115-117mph trap speeds are about it for a supercharged setup without nitrous no matter what heads, cam you run. On the next build when I go turbo, it will be nice to run some mid to high 10's at like 130+mph. I'll probably enjoy this setup for another year or so before I start acquiring parts for a turbo build if I go that way.
I too am on the fence about turbo because- 1. It means I will run well below 11.50 and then you might have to deal with cage to run at track - I do not want to lose the interior space as I am 6'-1" 2. Turbo will do very little for me on the street. I only race 0-60 with unsuspecting victims at the stop lights. I cannot imagine how much a 120mph ticket would cost when you include the ticket and insurance costs that result. 3. The M-90 setup just runs so well.
[This message has been edited by DimeMachine (edited 10-08-2013).]
Originally posted by DimeMachine: Originally posted by LFiero67: Old M90 XP Cam time - 11.425 @115.60 1.543 60' What was your nitrous shot - 75?
No nitrous. Never used the stuff, never will. 94 octane pump gas with a bottle of NOS brand octane boost. Best non-Intercooled was an 11.806 @ 115. The other GTP times are no nitrous either.
We really need another quarter mile list for retired setups/cars. Even a top 5 for each setup would provide a lot of useful information for people. I might look at starting something like that, I've got a lot of old times recorded for some members cars that have upgraded, could start there, and have people submit stuff that isn't on the current list anymore. Or the retired setups could be put on the current list in a different color.
I too am on the fence about turbo because- 1. It means I will run well below 11.50 and then you might have to deal with cage to run at track - I do not want to lose the interior space as I am 6'-1" 2. Turbo will do very little for me on the street. I only race 0-60 with unsuspecting victims at the stop lights. I cannot imagine how much a 120mph ticket would cost when you include the ticket and insurance costs that result. 3. The M-90 setup just runs so well.
If youve seen any of our videos youll notice the turbo has no disadvantages 0 to 60.
DH and Formula, I have seen all the m-90 and turbo videos.
To more clearly articulate what I was thinking, the M-90 and turbo cars 60' times on the street are quite close. That is about where I let off in many of the impromptu short races on the STREET and usually the other guy is way behind by that time. Again, I do not race on the street much over 10 mph over the speed limit because I don't want to risk the consequences of the man. After the first 60 feet or so, I clearly acknowledge a good turbo car will destroy the M-90.
No nitrous. Never used the stuff, never will. 94 octane pump gas with a bottle of NOS brand octane boost. Best non-Intercooled was an 11.806 @ 115. The other GTP times are no nitrous either.
Something about your 11.8 @ 115 time on 94.5 octane (NOS octane boost raises octane a tiny bit) with no intercooler is not adding up. Rare 87GT and me have similar setups to you when you ran this time but he has an intercooler and I am using E-85. What are we missing? My setup is 1. Series 2 L67 2. unported SC 3. unported heads 4. VS cam 5. power log, stock crossover & rear manifold 6. E85 7. 60# injectors 8. 2.8 pulley 9. MT ET street tires 10 AFR 11.5 drops to 10.8 during 1/4 mile as measured by wideband 11. 23 degrees timing advance with a 1 degree KR blip or so in third gear.
Just trying to figure out what it is about your setup that allows you to run so fast with M90, 94.5 octane, no intercooler.
Thank you!
[This message has been edited by DimeMachine (edited 10-08-2013).]
Something about your 11.8 @ 115 time on 94.5 octane (NOS octane boost raises octane a tiny bit) with no intercooler is not adding up. Rare 87GT and me have similar setups to you when you ran this time but he has an intercooler and I am using E-85. What are we missing? My setup is 1. Series 2 L67 2. unported SC 3. unported heads 4. VS cam 5. power log, stock crossover & rear manifold 6. E85 7. 60# injectors 8. 2.8 pulley 9. MT ET street tires 10 AFR 11.5 drops to 10.8 during 1/4 mile as measured by wideband 11. 23 degrees timing advance with a 1 degree KR blip or so in third gear.
Just trying to figure out what it is about your setup that allows you to run so fast with M90, 94.5 octane, no intercooler.
Thank you!
Lots of difference between our setups. I could be wrong on the gas. I might not have been using the octane boost back then, and it might have been 91 octane. I can't watch this video at work, but I think I listed the fuel at the end of it : http://www.streetfire.net/v...mphl67-non_92735.htm
Don't discount the NOS brand octane boost. The other ones don't do much, but the NOS stuff allowed me to up the timing from 15 degrees to 21 degrees with the M90, it does work. They claim 60 octane points or 6 octane numbers so 94 would become 100 octane. Other stuff claims 10 or so octane points or one octane number so 94 would be 95 octane, big difference.
I'll put your list beside mine for comparison, bit foggy on the details this was 6 years ago now, but the video has alot of the details listed at the end.
1. Series 2 L67 ------------------------------ Same 2. unported SC ------------------------------ Inlet ported GenV with Northstar throttle body 3. unported heads ------------------------------ Custom ported heads with stock valves 4. VS cam ------------------------------- XP - Cam 5. power log, stock crossover & rear manifold ---------------------------- ZZP or TOG headers - cant remember which ones I had at that time 6. E85 ------------------------------- 91 octane I believe - can confirm in video 7. 60# injectors ------------------------------- 42.5 lb injectors at 100% duty cycle 8. 2.8 pulley ------------------------------- 2.6" pulley 9. MT ET street tires ------------------------------ 235/60R15 MT drag radials 10 AFR 11.5 drops to 10.8 during ----------------------------- 12.0 AFR throughout run 11. 23 degrees timing advance ----------------------------- Have to look at video for ignition timing.
3 years of tweeking the tune to make it run like it did 1.5x 60`times
The next year I added the intercooler and immediately ran 11.42 and followed up with a 11.48 the next day. After that I slowed the car down as I was asked to not come back with out a roll bar. After I put the turbo on, I realized there was no way the car was not going to run into the 10s, and put a bar in it. First trip to the track ran the 10.26. Nothing but transmission issues ever since lol.
[This message has been edited by LFiero67 (edited 10-08-2013).]
Lots of difference between our setups. I could be wrong on the gas. I might not have been using the octane boost back then, and it might have been 91 octane. I can't watch this video at work, but I think I listed the fuel at the end of it : http://www.streetfire.net/v...mphl67-non_92735.htm
Don't discount the NOS brand octane boost. The other ones don't do much, but the NOS stuff allowed me to up the timing from 15 degrees to 21 degrees with the M90, it does work. They claim 60 octane points or 6 octane numbers so 94 would become 100 octane. Other stuff claims 10 or so octane points or one octane number so 94 would be 95 octane, big difference.
I'll put your list beside mine for comparison, bit foggy on the details this was 6 years ago now, but the video has alot of the details listed at the end.
1. Series 2 L67
Thanks for taking the time for the detailed response. First off, way to spank that dart!. Next the video did not list fuel but did say 17 degrees advance. Maybe the ported SC & heads, headers, and 2.6 pulley (vs 2.8) are the difference (XP vs VS I believe is a small diff). Makes me wonder if you could have run 11.4 with E85 and ditched the IC?
No E85 available around here, would have been fun to try, even with the intercooler. I believe I was running the same basic setup, with a SFI balancer and 2.8" pulley for the Intercooled run, and I believe I was up to 21 degrees then. Might have been able to run a bit more pulley, with e85, my engine was out flowing the m90 before I switched to turbo. It would have 15 lbs at 4800 rpm and be down to 11-12 lbs at the shift (6700 rpm).
If we can't share experiences nobody learns, it costs too much to try everything yourself lol.
No E85 available around here, would have been fun to try, even with the intercooler. I believe I was running the same basic setup, with a SFI balancer and 2.8" pulley for the Intercooled run, and I believe I was up to 21 degrees then. Might have been able to run a bit more pulley, with e85, my engine was out flowing the m90 before I switched to turbo. It would have 15 lbs at 4800 rpm and be down to 11-12 lbs at the shift (6700 rpm).
If we can't share experiences nobody learns, it costs too much to try everything yourself lol.
100% agree! Appreciate you outlining your setup. We need more combo threads where everyone posts up exact mods and times per motor to see how each engine is fairing. It really makes a lot of sense and helps the entire forum out for engine swaps, transmissions to run, 60fts, etc. Not a lot of people drag race as much as some of us, but it still gives a really good baseline for people performing engine swaps to see the pros and cons.
Here's my set up in my first build back in 1998 with the Aldino body kit.With that kit the car weighed 3100 pounds without me in it because of the metal extensions in front and back.It had the stock block ,and the pan was never off it,ported heads and M90 supercharger,innercooler,my own grind cam by Comp Cams,they didn't have cams back then for 3800's, 1.7 roller rocker arms, 2.75 pulley.Dyno'd 376 HP at the wheels.The transmission had a posi unit we made,3:69 gears,stock chain and an extra clutch in each clutch pack.Shift kit and raised trans pressure.I ran 8.5 inch wide slicks 24.5 inchs tall and a 3500 RPM stall convertor. It still holds the record for fastest time in a quarter mile with an M90 supercharger after all these years,it ran 1.49 60 ft times in 11.323 sec's at 116 mph.I did runs as fast as 118 miles an hour but not faster than 11.323.
Hope this helps,good running, Don ------------------ IMSA 34 60' - 1.555 1/4 mi - 10.519 mph - 130.29
TOO FAR 60' - 1.491 1/4 mi - 11.323 mph - 116.4
[This message has been edited by Don Kraus (edited 10-08-2013).]
Something about your 11.8 @ 115 time on 94.5 octane (NOS octane boost raises octane a tiny bit) with no intercooler is not adding up. Rare 87GT and me have similar setups to you when you ran this time but he has an intercooler and I am using E-85. What are we missing? My setup is 1. Series 2 L67 2. unported SC 3. unported heads 4. VS cam 5. power log, stock crossover & rear manifold 6. E85 7. 60# injectors 8. 2.8 pulley 9. MT ET street tires 10 AFR 11.5 drops to 10.8 during 1/4 mile as measured by wideband 11. 23 degrees timing advance with a 1 degree KR blip or so in third gear.
Just trying to figure out what it is about your setup that allows you to run so fast with M90, 94.5 octane, no intercooler.
Thank you!
Cam is a huge deal in trap speed world. The XP and XPZ are both very serious upgrades over the VS in terms of "top of 3rd gear" power. Heads and gen5 blower are also big upgrades.
On E85, you may want to try running less timing and leaner AFRs.
Cam is a huge deal in trap speed world. The XP and XPZ are both very serious upgrades over the VS in terms of "top of 3rd gear" power. Heads and gen5 blower are also big upgrades.
On E85, you may want to try running less timing and leaner AFRs.
I missed the Gen V part the first time I read his email. The advantages of the Gen V SC, XP cam, Ported heads and headers do indeed fill in the gap in performance. As usual lots of great info provided on this forum! I would try leaner AFR's but running out of time for this season. Now I have to figure out what to do the the fiero over the long MN winter.....
Then during the summer of 2007 I tried 3.69 gears and zzp 3000 stall, lost MPH but no better 60', then put in zzp 3500 stall and got back 60' into 1.5x range I had with the 4t60. Then put in 3.29 gears and kept the 60' and gained back the mph. Finally at end of summer I swapped on the GenV, but never bested the 11.806. That winter I put on intercooler, and in 2008 ran the 11.42. Details of that setup here : https://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...090907-1-071609.html
Man looking back, I spent a lot of money chasing tenths with the m90.
[This message has been edited by LFiero67 (edited 10-09-2013).]
I actually saw no performance gain from my home ported gen 3 to my inlet ported genV.
going from a stock gen3 to a gen5 is a good upgrade.. its also a pretty big one at moderate pulley size. A gen3 and a gen5 max out around a 2.8 pulley, while a 3.0 on a gen5 will make more power than a 3.0 on a gen3.
Just stating my personal experience. I never ran quicker with the genV non-Intercooled than I dd with my ported gen3. Your results may vary. Going from stock gen3 would likely see an improvement to a genV.
[This message has been edited by LFiero67 (edited 10-09-2013).]
Just stating my personal experience. I never ran quicker with the genV non-Intercooled than I dd with my ported gen3. Your results may vary. Going from stock gen3 would likely see an improvement to a genV.
Lfiero67, DH, JB, Is there much to gain from a 2.8 down to 2.6 pulley? Is the snout machining a big deal, does belt slippage become an issue. I am leaning towards not going to a 2.6 but I would very much like to hear what you guys (or anyone else that has run a 2.6 pulley) has to say. I clearly have room to drop down my ignition advance a little from the low 20's if needed with the E85.
Just about everyone has pretty good belt slip even at 2.8.. I typically suggest some form of non slip protection at the 2.8 level for anyone serious about it.
quote
I clearly have room to drop down my ignition advance a little from the low 20's if needed with E85
Technically you could gain power dropping the timing down. I noticed small butt dyno improvements with the turbo going from 21-24 to 16-19.
[This message has been edited by darkhorizon (edited 10-10-2013).]
Snout machining isn't a big deal with the correct tool. Takes 10-20 minutes if you have a zzp hub and use their tool.
Definitely need a way to help with the belt slip. I had a kit that put another pulley beside the blower pulley to increase the belt wrap. I'm sure I still had some slip even with that.
Without dyno and/or track testing you won't know where your engine is at it's optimum. I found more power running the smaller pulleys, but your results may vary based on engine flow, fuel, timing etc. I have a laptop in the car pretty much all the time I'm driving, and am always trying different things looking for more air/fuel flow, I also log and graph MPH vs time. Usually look at a range like 40-100, and try and make pulls on the same road. Can see if changes increase the acceleration rate of the car.
I want to know more detail on how 1FST2M6 got a 12.91. That is quite impressive!
I can only imagine what's been done. But I want to know for sure, if its possible. This is the fastest 2.8 V6 with an A/T setup that I've found anywhere in the hours of searching here. AND comparable to a ZZ4 with a 5spd, and a slightly modified S/C 3800 w/ Auto.
IIRC, he claimed a 125 shot and engine mods. For the time it was impressive. He did extensive dyno tuning and experimentation with it. He also helped the *previous* owner of engineered performance develop an advanced piggy-back ECU.
I wonder what the engine mods were... there is still no 2.8 within seconds of him.
I did some calculations based on what my stock 86 gt auto ran at the track with a 16.77 time and 2990 assumed weight (the car (at 2790) me (at 175lbs) and gas (1/3rd full (4 gallons) at 6.25lbs a gallon) and figured I'm getting about 125.3 to the wheels.
assuming I put another 20 to the pavement with all my engine modifications (252 cam, ported intake, heads, exhaust) I might run about a 15.96.
But I did a wider ratio trans swap with taller tires. time to go to the track and see what I run now...
I'm not positive he ever ran the 12.9, does anyone have the slip or video? I only recall him posting proof of 1/8 mi runs. They were consistent with that et, however.
My car is almost back on the road with new MODs...Ready to run it and see if I can run better then my old PB. Looking for an 11.7 or so in the cold weather....
