[quote=Franc Rauscher][quote=onehundred80]

I'm 62 year s old. 180MPH is still on my list of things I could probably do. So is cancer and getting shot by a jealous lover.

We all die of something. Some of us get to chose.

roadster with a stick.

Love it: Way to close to the truth and much to close to my thoughts.

 

First, they make these high tech devices called measuring tapes. You have heard of this? A failed industrial park has some unused wide concrete streets. Cops are never ther and neither are other people. Not perfect but close enough for my purposes which is to practice shifting and handling before I go to the track.

Second, crank HP was determined using math, extrapolated from at the wheel measurements on a dyno. It is a calculation, done all the time. Removal of the engine is silly, unneccesary and represents two dimensional thinking.

$3,500.00 Was spent at Eurocharged on my NA. I have receipts.

$10,000 was what I and Bike Cop likely spent given the parts on the car and the extra wheels, tires and box of parts, pulleys, performance chips, and such that he handed me when I bought his SRT. Erik spent tons of dough at the track developing his car's performance. I have no documentation for some of it. So sue me.

You spend far to much time testing my facts, my spelling and logic. Of Teck9's $100K claim, you said nothing.

I'm currently in an existing relationship with someone else so ................

get a life.


roadster with a stick

 

OWNED hahaha

UFC100-HendersonBisping1.gif

 

I don't yet know my top speed. I have as yet not found a place to find out.

I am 192.5 HP at the rear wheels at 5800 RPM Up from 154 baseline before mods.

That calculates to 268HP at the crank based on the published 215 HP.

I have seen the Base HP at the crank published at 219 HP
If you use the Mercedes SLK base HP of 229 it gets better. We can likely asume they down graded the Crossfire published output for marketing. We can assume these numbers would further amplify the calculated Crank HP.

So I suspect my calculations are conservative. But not perfect.


roadster with a stick

 

You are getting me wrong again, I was wondering how you spent that money on "go faster gear" not tires,wheels, track time costs etc. Now I know you included these as well.
As to the crank versus wheel hp, I would think you would need quite a calculation to determine the crank hp using the wheel hp, losses are not linear as they compound as the hp increases. Well they did when I was studying mechanics. On the road or track there are a lot more losses to add to the equation.
The 100 k figure is BS and I did not bother to answer that one as everyone seemed to dismiss it as well.

 

hey, you will not know until you go out and do it...weather conditions, road conditions, tires, the seat of your pants can all affect a top speed run...and I didn't mention birds, dogs, rabbits, deer either. So, just do it in a safe place...there are a lot of factors to cut down your top end, but it needs to breath, and needs HP to get up there to begin with. Mine was beginning to slow at 160...so the next 20 could take awhile....I still think you will need at least 3 miles to get there and good brakes to bring down before you run out of road...so be safe...would've could've doesn't count here...**** was fllying by at 160...good luck to all...

 

Serious "Go Faster" gear includes such silliness as tires, wheels and the stuff you bought that didn't work when you spent money and time at the track. Otherwise it is just "off the shelf"
In other words you won't get 60 HP and 30% better fuel milage simply from a chip found on Ebay. Not for our cars.

If one were to be selling/adverstising a car, perhaps the actual engine wattage would need to be precise. If you were publishing it as an attribute of the car to enthusiasts that insist on perfection.
SWAG is not enough for braggin' rights as I recently discovered in a previous post. But, extrapolation is enough to exhibit a translation of known facts for the purpose of discussion.

As to accuracy, even the Dyno has slippage and friction issues so it is all suspect if you want perfection to the tenth decimal point. However, for the sake of discussion, quite relavent enough.

Am I wrong here?


roadster with a stick

 

760 MPH the plane is safe, level and smooth. Change the speed upward by a mere 2.5% and it will fly apart.

My car is fine at 140 MPH. 160 MPH could be dicey, but it could be fine until I hit 161. Or a deer.

You end up in life based on your choices. I sure hope I can choose wisely.
Road rash on the windshield frame is not a good place to end up.

roadser with a stick

 

 

OK, I'll bite,

Who's?

When?

Where?

Auto or stick?

Coupe or Convertible?

Don't make me hurt you Gary. Give it up!

franc

 

Ok this is an automatic, is the stick any faster since it has 6 gears? And at a speed like that why is the traction control off? Seriously thats dangerous

 

I would hope the traction control is off, because if that is active at that speed, I'm surprised the camera survived the crash.

Why would you want TC active at high speed? 160 MPH, one had better be on a dry surface, flat with lots of visibilty, room and no turns.

Besides, TC would not engage at those RPMS anyway.


roadster with a stick

 

Yep, that was me, and I still believe it's possible, (and without the use of laughing gas). I just didn't know you were modding your NA car Franc. After all, I'm sure you would agree that it's not something many SRT owners would bother doing.
Even though I'm not interested in drag racing anymore, I always enjoy hearing how other Crossfire owners are spending their money.
I sort of just overlooked the $100k comment. But I never thought the fact that my Viper (being capable of) breaking the tires loose in a curve at over 100 mph was necessarily a bad thing, just something I made sure I didn't do.

 

yeah, owner's manual says ESP cuts off at 50 mph so it shouldn't make a difference except to maybe get up to speed a little quicker

I admit I'm kind of surprised that a ~215 hp car with our supposedly poor aerodynamics can hit 155 mph

 

I was not aware that the ESP cut off at 50.

 

The manual says the traction control system switches off, not the ESP.
In the photo of the speedo and rev. counter the ESP warning light is off, mine looks just like that, an orange color, when it comes on it is really bright.

 

Supposedly poor aerodynamics.

 

According to Eric Stoddard, the rear begins to lift on the coupe at about 120MPH. Hence the articulating wing.

I was often chided for the little toy wing. I asked one of my tormentors, since his Corola didn't have a wing, didn't it come off the ground at 130 MPH?

"Huh?" he said.
"Oh, that's right" I replied, your ricer won't do 130 MPH."

You can pull a couple of fuses and drive without the wing. It's fine until about 90, then the rear gets a bit loose. I didn't go beyond 100MPH.

Amazing little wing.

roadster with a stick

 

The SRT is Cathy's. Period.

I can race against it but I can't take it to the track. When she is in CT we park it in her dad's garage. I'm surprised she lets me have a key.
She warns that if I race it I will lose my key, and get no newKey.

So, I race in my little NA roadster.

I am curious to try something but wonder the consequences. If I put my spare set of 18" wheels on the back, would it not improve my launch and 1/4 times?
What would it do to normal driving? Ground speed to engine RPMs would be different. Would the TC come on?

roadster with a stick

 

The aerodynamics are good for stability,and I'd like to hear more about the back end coming because i never had that issue on turns through the highway going much faster. also I wonder if some of the components under the hood could be mounted in the back to even out our weight. I was also told that a thorough weight reduction would push the coupe close to 200. I would also like to know what our Nuremberg lap time is.