K24/18g vs Tial GT28 "alpha," what i'v learned.

[Dr_jitsu]

Originally Posted by BlackHorseTurbo Guys, running your best 60-130 time doesn't happen over night. It really depends on practice to hit 60 mph at the sweet spot. Keep trying, nothing fishy. You're box is fine.. However I have run into some boxes that looked fine but where very fishy up close

This ad is not displayed to registered and logged-in members. Register your free account today and become a member on 6SpeedOnline!

[vbmw335]

Originally Posted by BlackHorseTurbo

Guys, running your best 60-130 time doesn't happen over night. It really depends on practice to hit 60 mph at the sweet spot. Keep trying, nothing fishy. You're box is fine..

what more can be done on the tip car ? i understand on the 6 speed car, there is shifting etc..

[jasonfreed]

I guess what I'm getting at is that the 60-130 time is sort of useless if there is some special technique to get a "good time".

I find it hard to believe that a k24/18g car with injectors and tuning from EPL is going to get walked by, ok, let's say 10 car lengths, compared to a different tuner's tune with the same or very similar hardware.

The 60-130 time is useless to compare cars if it is technique dependent.

[vbmw335]

Originally Posted by MBailey

Like I said I dont have my data in front of me now.

But my statement is made regarding cars that run 6-8s in 60-130 like most of ours do. As you progressively get faster (like 4s example you use) the distances will be greater than I stated. IOW 2 sec difference at the 4s 60-130 level is a greater distance between the cars than 2s differnce between cars at a 10s 60-130 level.

Not knocking your observation. I am curious to understand and learn the differences and put things in perspective here.

[MARKSKI@911tuning]

Originally Posted by 007-911

Im going to have to try this on another box

LOl then you might be slower J/K

[vbmw335]

Originally Posted by MARKSKI

LOl then you might be slower J/K

lol.. then we would be about as fast as a stock boxter.

Kidding aside , wish there were some 6 sec 996tt to run and compare in chicago. Houston is just too far

[jasonfreed]

If running your "best" 60-130 time is the goal and there is that much variability in technique, I say it is a pretty useless measurement of performance car to car.

Now, if everybody started with cruise control on at say, 3000rpm in 3rd gear and floored it up to 7000rpm (no driver involvment), then we all started comparing #'s, it might be useful.

I could really care less what my 60-130 time is except that if someone can pull 10 cars on me from 60-130 with the same hardware, then I'd like to know who can do that aqnd find out who can tune my car to do that

Pulling 10 cars at those speeds requires HUGE HP increases. I find it hard to believe there are people with such varying degrees of HP on the same hardware set-ups.

That's why i think there is too much variability in comparing 60-130 times.

[MBailey]

Originally Posted by jasonfreed

The 60-130 time is useless to compare cars if it is technique dependent.

The 60-130 time is inversely proportional to the average power(area under curve) the car delivers to the tire during the run. Your time may not be reflective of the cars best performance if you dont know how to wring the performance out of the car.
Possible causes of unexpectedly poor 60-130 performance include
1. Starting the run too near 60 mph thus not giving turbo enough time to make max power - probably very common problem.
2. Poor shifting in 6 sp cars. I could use help here.
3. Bad conditions for run ie high temp, high humidity, low barometric pressure, high altittude.
4. Traction problems.
5. Low tire pressure.
6. Other unknown car problems ie boost leak ect...
And there are undoubtably others but still 60-130 is much more reproduceable than quarter ets since these cars are very hard to launch consistently. Dynos are nearly worthless without before and after measurements.

[jasonfreed]

OK, I agree with you that there are things that can make the 60-130 "off".

My point is: If I am a ****ty shifter and do 60-130s wrong, then according to the numbers, my car is slow.

BUT, if I meet up with someone who does an optimal 60-130 time (that could be 2 full seconds better than mine) and we do a pull and the cars are equal, it would seem we are making similar power that day and the previous 60-130 times are useless.

[VividRacingTX]

Well put Mike. I wished I still lived in Chicago. Yes, if you drive your car to an 8.8 60-130, I would put at least 8 cars on you.

[jasonfreed]

The thing is, I know lots of street racer types who can drive really, really well who can beat lots of cars they shouldn't be able to beat because of driver skill.

I thought the purpose of the 60-130 time was have a bench mark to compare cars without using dynos, drag strips, etc.

If there is a lot of driver skill involved in getting a fast 60-130 time, I will still say, it doesn't tell you a ton about a car's performance vs. another car's performance.

It tells you more about the driver's skill.

[bmoores]

Originally Posted by jasonfreed

OK, I agree with you that there are things that can make the 60-130 "off".

My point is: If I am a ****ty shifter and do 60-130s wrong, then according to the numbers, my car is slow.

BUT, if I meet up with someone who does an optimal 60-130 time (that could be 2 full seconds better than mine) and we do a pull and the cars are equal, it would seem we are making similar power that day and the previous 60-130 times are useless.

It should just provide a benchmark so you know what your car is truly capable of. If you are a ****ty driver ....... well that is something only you can improve on.

[VividRacingTX]

I totally disagree, the point of the 60-130 time is to judge these cars in a "roll on" race. Developed so we don't break axles from a launch.

Originally Posted by jasonfreed

The thing is, I know lots of street racer types who can drive really, really well who can beat lots of cars they shouldn't be able to beat because of driver skill.

I thought the purpose of the 60-130 time was have a bench mark to compare cars without using dynos, drag strips, etc.

If there is a lot of driver skill involved in getting a fast 60-130 time, I will still say, it doesn't tell you a ton about a car's performance vs. another car's performance.

It tells you more about the driver's skill.

[MBailey]

Originally Posted by jasonfreed

OK, I agree with you that there are things that can make the 60-130 "off".

My point is: If I am a ****ty shifter and do 60-130s wrong, then according to the numbers, my car is slow.

BUT, if I meet up with someone who does an optimal 60-130 time (that could be 2 full seconds better than mine) and we do a pull and the cars are equal, it would seem we are making similar power that day and the previous 60-130 times are useless.

I doubt your car is slow. Many of these "trophy" 60-130 times were done under optimal conditions. Where I live the difference between optimal and horrible (ie right now = summer) is 10-12% in horsepower. In a 600hp TT that is 60-72 HP!! That's roughly the difference between a 7.9s 60-130 and a 7.1s!
So I wouldnt sweat it unless you find your car cant perform under optimal conditions

[jasonfreed]

bmoores - I agree.

BUT, people cannot be comparing car to car using 60-130 times if there is a different driver of each car because there is so much variability in driver.

I think it's a valid measurement using the same driver.

People here seem to think it's a good way to measure a cars power. I say, it's a better way to find out who is a ****ty driver