Dave B

iTrader: (2)

It's a sea level track and it's pretty damn fast in the fall. You should try to get out there. I'd bet you'll get a 12.9-13.0 out there.

TheCajunStyle

iTrader: (6)

Interesting! I've seen instances when trap speed was higher or lower by a substantial amount--but it was random. I think the timing system at my local track reported 126mph (I wish) on one of my runs...interesting because I had just shifted into 5th gear before I crossed the finish (~112mph). So how does a timing system, such as Portatree measure trap speed?

3hree5ive0ero

iTrader: (95)

The night I ran my 13.212@104.75, I could've lowered it to 13.1 with a low 1.8 60'. I regret for following the others out of the track to leave early. I did well considering it was my 2nd or 3rd run ever on slicks.

As much as I want to run 12s with my current state (same as the 13.212), I also don't want to drive 5+ hours just to race/set a new PB. I'm no drag racer (just a hobby for me), so that would be a waste of time, efforts, gas, etc for me.

Given that the conditions yield a great DA at my regular track, I should be able to dip into the 12s though. Too bad that'll never happen.

davidv

iTrader: (2)

Trap speed is standardised at all NHRA sanctioned tracks. Its the average speed over the last 66 feet. You can see the buckets for the trap timer and ET above. The distance between the two is 66 feet.

Alberto

iTrader: (14)

Most people that leisurly drag race dont know what the hell DA is or how to get it. $hit I didnt even start calculating it till the last time I ran my car. To ask most of these guys to add that in their posts is silly. Makes you guys with bad tracks sound like haters "well he runs good times cuz his DA is XXX", "his track is fast-blah blah"-well even at our fast tracks people run 14.5's in mod'd Z's so what!?! Let the times speak for themselves, obviously some poor guy at 5000ft altitude wont be running crazy fast times. Track times are like dyno numbers, all different. Any of the top 5 drag racers on the forums could likely jump in each others cars and run within .1 of each other boo hoo...

WalkerT

iTrader: (13)

Great rant Chris. The drag strip is not the place to be trying out bad advice. You can get hurt and should always play it safe. Experience is the best tool to use when going after anything and in this case you just need to spend time PRATICING.

PS: Chris cool temps when are we going back to the track?

3hree5ive0ero

iTrader: (95)

Our regular track is closed for the year, it seems. Last Saturday was the last day to race, which I went to and the best was 13.421@102.84 (2nd run of the day and the rest of the runs were slower due to temp rising). Last Saturday was the perfect day to practice, though, as there was probably 30 racers max for the 7 hrs it was open. I got bored and the day got hotter so I left early.

coachk

iTrader: (21)

I'm with you on this one.....

3hree5ive0ero

iTrader: (95)

I didn't specifically state that only DA was acceptable. I also mentioned that conditions are also good, as that'll help others take into consideration that they may not be doing as bad as some people make it out to be. If they really wanted their times analyzed and wanted in-depth responses, the least they could do is look up their local climate conditions. Plus, it was merely a suggestion, not a command.

BTW, times can't really speak for themselves, if the conditions sucked *** (i.e., 4000 DA). Thus, the addition of the climate factors helps out when analyzing time slips.

Peak350

iTrader: (6)

I agree and disagree. I've gained about .25 from conditions changing to be more in my favor. I gained the other .25 from learning how to get not only my 60' down, but my 330' down. I stopped watching my 60' so closely and figured out what the car wanted on the whole 1-2 range and my times improved a lot. Most people struggle on launch and once they get down not spinning they still have more bog than they expect. Even in terrible conditions I doubt I'd be running 14's ALL night, although I don't expect I'd better a 13.7/1.8, I still think I could get there because I've run in 2800 DA's and gotten a 13.6, in 400-500 DA's I got a 13.3, and I never pulled the DA for my 13.2, but I imagine it was ~100.

SergEK

But without DA factored the top 5 will always be from sea level tracks in good air with negative DA numbers....especially the naturally aspirated lists

Peak350

iTrader: (6)

Just ran my DA on 3 calculators. Got 603, 651, and 675. I don't think I've gotten the most of my car yet after seeing that

3hree5ive0ero

iTrader: (95)

I'm not sure what you're agreeing and disagreeing about.
What I meant was that people like the ones in MD won't have such bad times no matter what the DA, but people in AZ or CO are different. Their times often do not get recognized or even stand out when compared to some of the low 13 sec runs. For those folks, I was just saying that the addition of conditions or even DA, if possible, may help them get more recognition that they deserve for a 14 sec run. Even the most experienced racers sometimes forget about the conditions when analyzing time slips. Again, it was merely a suggestion.
I think he meant the best drivers, not necessarily those with the best times.

Peak350

iTrader: (6)

I don't think its necessary because (and I say this with a caveat) - I almost always look at a slip. Note the trap speed, which has little to do with the driver, note the 1/8th mile trap speed, which has to do with whether the car bogged the launch or not, and then look at the 60' to see if they spun or not. If the 60' sucks then its not a fault of DA, possibly track prep, but 99% of the time its honestly just an issue with the guy (or gal) behind the wheel. I've encountered bad track prep and still mustered good 60' times by trying a difference launch. You CAN'T work around bad air, but a common trend I've seen in the NA times is that slow times also include either a slower than expected 1/8th mile trap speed, or a higher than "good" 60' time. Either of those makes me less sympathetic based on conditions, and makes me say "ok thats a mid 13's run at a perfect track." I don't have to see conditions to understand where the car should be - the 1/4 trap speed tells you all about the conditions and how the car is running.

Fluid1

iTrader: (19)

Just to put it in perspective, you're just pointing and shooting anyway.
hehe

Peak350

iTrader: (6)

??

Dave B

iTrader: (2)

DA has a huge influence over the performane of the car. The first time I ran my G35, the DA was in the 1,700' range which isn't bad for Kansas City which is situated at about 1,100'. The G ran a best of a 14.49@97.6mph with a mid 2.1 60'. I ran the car again in the fall in near sea level DA and the car went 14.32@98.5mph with a mid 2.1 60'. Same track, no changes to the car.

Now if I were to have run in the negative DA (-1,000 to -2,000) like many of the coastal northeastern tracks experience in the fall and spring, my stock G35 could have gone 14.1s@100mph with no changes in driving or 60'. A 14.1@100mph in a stock 03 G35 5AT would be freakishly fast, but it would be entirely possible when the power content of the air is about 110%.

Also, negative DA is the reason for all these "freak" cars. No one has a freak car these days. It's the conditions and track. The build tolerances are just way too tight these days. In the 60's and 70's it was true, but not with later model cars.

Alberto

iTrader: (14)

With my TN I ran 11.98 in 45 degree temps, and then 11.99 back to back in dead summer with 100 degree temps w/humid conditions I ran right after they dried the track after a rain storm! All of my friends that can drive always run within .1-.2 of their best regardless of the weather/humidity/etc...but you guys wouldnt beleive me. Tons of local Z owners have seen me though. I think weather is an overused excuse for most people. They dont know how to launch in different conditions, cold, hot, humid, and the runs go to $hit....

3hree5ive0ero

iTrader: (95)

Ah, now I see what you were agreeing/disagreeing about and I concur.
I'll provide my slips from when I had a low DA (same mods as now) vs a high DA (same mods + Fuji Super Ti) later this week and you tell me.

Dave B

iTrader: (2)

Apples to oranges. Turbo cars generate thier own atmosphere and aren't remotely as effected by conditions like baro pressure and temp. Turbo cars generate a crap load of intake heat so a change of 50 degrees in ambient air isn't a huge deal when the intake air is already scalding hot. Why do you think turbo cars are so great in higher altitude areas? Hell, read mags like Car & Driver and Motor Trend and take note about comparision tests between NA and forced induced cars testing in higher altitudes and they'll mention how the turbo wasn't influenced by the altitude. A factory turbo car at higher altitudes will actually see higher boost levels because the air is thinner. The additional boost allows the engine to gather more O2 and keep power levels basically the same. An NA car can't compensate for this. If I lived at a higher altitude, there's no doubt in my mind I'd have a turbo car.

My friend's EVO and STI are simply not effected by poor DAs. They run mid 12s whether it's 90 out or 50 just like you. However, my friends with NA cars see wild swings between running poor and good DA.

I'm really surprised you don't know this stuff seeing that you're an avid drag racer.