SSThunder Posted July 14, 2007 Report Share Posted July 14, 2007 (edited) I got a total of 7 runs in. 3 with the 22" and 4 with the 20". It was around 85 degrees when I got to the track and the sun was still up. It possible this has some effect on my first 3 runs with the 22". I plan to run the 22" again to see but I don't expect to gain over 0.1 if that. I brake stalled to 1500 on each run but the logs seem to say I flashed higher before take off. I logged 5 out of 7 runs. I was seeing max KR in the 5's. Sometimes more KR than others. I think my trap speeds are low. I was seeing the KR mostly in the last 1/8 of my runs. 22" Rim/tire runs. Run1 & Run2 where from the right lane. Run3 was from left lane. Right lane was preferred by the fast cars doing testing. -------Run1---------Run2---------Run3 Time 8:13----------8:21----------8:34 60' 1.923-----------1.940---------1.940 T2 5.635-----------5.660----------5.665 1/8 8.779----------8.802----------8.826 MPH 77.301-------77.652---------77.294 1/4 13.982--------13.973---------14.058 MPH 92.669-------93.501---------91.577 20" Rim/tire runs. Run1 from left lane and Run2 from right lane. I removed my spare for Run3 and Run4. I tried to take the tail gate off but didn't bring the right tools. -------Run1----Run2-----------Run3----------Run4 Time 9:50-----9:54-----------10:27----------10:32 60' 1.936------1.893----------1.985----------1.919 T2 5.589-------5.531----------5.633----------5.587 1/8 8.691------8.611----------8.719----------8.679 MPH 78.620----78.957--------78.529---------78.830 1/4 13.810-----13.696--------13.869---------13.760 MPH 93.585----95.015--------93.615---------95.013 Run2 was the best run by far. The truck ran better the entire run. I'll get pics of runs2 time slip and post. I still think my trap speed is a little slow when compared to other SSs who have ran 13.6 & 13.7. I'll try and get the logs of my runs posted if anybody with EFILive wants to view them. Edited July 14, 2007 by SSThunder (see edit history) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolBlueSS Posted July 14, 2007 Report Share Posted July 14, 2007 Wow, that's pretty interesting. I wouldn't have thought that 2" in diameter would have made 2 tenths difference. I guess it changes the final drive ratio that much, or they're just that mjuch heavier. Good stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krambo Posted July 14, 2007 Report Share Posted July 14, 2007 I'd love to look at your logs... Can you export the data to Excel and then shoot it to me since I do not have EFILive anymore? [email protected] Interesting comparison. You are correct, your trap is hurting somewhere. Being that you said you hit up to 5* of KR in the final 1/8, I would expect that. Could be that your IAT's were steadily climbing through your run and by the end of the 1/8 you were at the level in the tune where your IAT adder started pulling spark. That combined with some KR and ouch. Mid 80s for track temp isn't that great eigher CoolblueSS - I believe he stated that his overall tire diameter was about the same so the wheel size doesn't "really" matter except for weight and sidewall flex (mostly for slicks and DRs). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrAzYMoPaRGuY Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 What's the difference in the 20" rim and tire and the 22" rim and tire as far as weight goes, have you tossed a wheel of each on a scale? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelleyperformance Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 wow sounds like you need an in person tune and throw that 3" pulley on there already with all that money you have in her, your so close to getting it running better. but that is interesting that you lost .2 secs form teh same diameter tires that are just a few pounds heavier..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSThunder Posted July 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 What's the difference in the 20" rim and tire and the 22" rim and tire as far as weight goes, have you tossed a wheel of each on a scale? Some threads have the stock chrome SS wheels at 81 and 84 lbs each. The 22" wheels UPS had at 90 lbs. each. Difference could be 24 - 36 lbs based on those figures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSThunder Posted July 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 I'd love to look at your logs... Can you export the data to Excel and then shoot it to me since I do not have EFILive anymore? [email protected] Interesting comparison. You are correct, your trap is hurting somewhere. Being that you said you hit up to 5* of KR in the final 1/8, I would expect that. Could be that your IAT's were steadily climbing through your run and by the end of the 1/8 you were at the level in the tune where your IAT adder started pulling spark. That combined with some KR and ouch. Mid 80s for track temp isn't that great eigher CoolblueSS - I believe he stated that his overall tire diameter was about the same so the wheel size doesn't "really" matter except for weight and sidewall flex (mostly for slicks and DRs). Sent the logs. Lord knows I might not have logged all the important PIDs. wow sounds like you need an in person tune and throw that 3" pulley on there already with all that money you have in her, your so close to getting it running better. but that is interesting that you lost .2 secs form teh same diameter tires that are just a few pounds heavier..... I just need to get some logs to my tuner. I think the truck runs pretty strong for the bolt ons and stock pulley. If I can get the KR down and cooler temps maybe a 13.5? is possible. how much gain should I expect from a drop to a 3.0 pulley from a 3.3? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelleyperformance Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 IMO, your a little lean, which would cause KR and higher IATs on the maggie trucks especially. you wouldnt happen to know what your WOT timing is would you? and if you already ran a 13.6, with a dead-on tune and the 3" you will definatly shave a few tenths, id say you could run something in the low 13s. now if you got a 2.8..... and a vig or yank of say maybe 3000, now we might even see some 12s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSThunder Posted July 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 IMO, your a little lean, which would cause KR and higher IATs on the maggie trucks especially. you wouldnt happen to know what your WOT timing is would you? and if you already ran a 13.6, with a dead-on tune and the 3" you will definatly shave a few tenths, id say you could run something in the low 13s. now if you got a 2.8..... and a vig or yank of say maybe 3000, now we might even see some 12s I'll have to stick with the 3.0 till I get a built trans and a vig. I probably should have got that instead of the wheels, hood and drop but I was getting tired of the stock look I don't know what the WOT timing is. I did sent Krambo the logs from most of the runs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black2003SS Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 I thought you need bigger injectors to run a 2.8" pulley? If you dont need them, I'll order a 2.8" for my truck right now...lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krambo Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 I thought you need bigger injectors to run a 2.8" pulley? If you dont need them, I'll order a 2.8" for my truck right now...lol. With the 03 return style fuel system and the vac/boost referenced FPR, you can squeeze a bit more out of the injectors. I ran a 2.8 up to 475RWHP and a 12.5 1/4 mile with the 42# injectors and started to go slightly lean if I run in the cold weather with anything over 16* of timing. I did the meth to compensate for the fueling. Go for the 2.9 with conservative advance and you "should" be O.K. Can'r wait to see those logs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSThunder Posted July 16, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 With the 03 return style fuel system and the vac/boost referenced FPR, you can squeeze a bit more out of the injectors. I ran a 2.8 up to 475RWHP and a 12.5 1/4 mile with the 42# injectors and started to go slightly lean if I run in the cold weather with anything over 16* of timing. I did the meth to compensate for the fueling. Go for the 2.9 with conservative advance and you "should" be O.K. Can'r wait to see those logs! I sent them to your hotmail address. Let me know if you didn't get them. I exported them to excel. I haven't been online too much today. Wife and baby girl are both sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krambo Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 I sent them to your hotmail address. Let me know if you didn't get them. I exported them to excel. I haven't been online too much today. Wife and baby girl are both sick. I know what you mean with two ill family members,... I took a brief look at some of the logs and did notice one quick improvement on the logging side. If you cut down on the amount of parameters you log, you will have better resolution (i.e. 3 data points per second rather than 1). This will allow a more detailed look into the events as you go down the track. I would cut out some of the parameters like ECT and engine misfire counts (per cylinder). Maybe just scan english instead of english and metric as well. I will look at them tonight a little more in-depth. I did notice your IAT's were a little high to start with (prior to the run). I would also like to look deeper into your narrow band O'2s. I did notice right away that your IDC's were nice and low (didn't see higher than 64)...plenty of room to pulley down. Be sure to send send these logs to your tuner for a good going over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 Considering how hot it was and the amount of cooldown time you must have had, 13.6@95 isn't too bad. In 60º weather with a complete cooldown you could have been around a 13.3. That's not bad considering your mods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misterp Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 (edited) Wow, that's pretty interesting. I wouldn't have thought that 2" in diameter would have made 2 tenths difference. I guess it changes the final drive ratio that much, or they're just that mjuch heavier. Good stuff. Oh yeah I can believe it; think about it, even though the wheels are nearly the same weight, that weight is further from the center of the wheel so you are fighting polar moment of inertia. To make matters worse, a 22" tire carcass weighs more than a 20" so not only is the rim weight further from the spindle but the tires are "denser" too. Bottom-line those wheels are costing about 1.5 to 2-tenths. And, FYI - the factory cast rims weigh 48-lbs apiece; I weighed them myself. SSThunder - thanks man for taking the time to really keep good notes on your runs; very informative. And I totally agree with Zippy and Krambo, sounds like the wheels are the least of the performance problems but sounds like now you are on the right track. Mr. P. Edited July 16, 2007 by Mr. P. (see edit history) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.