Pontiac GTO Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Well I finally got the car to the track. I'm ok with the results, the car has more to it, I just didn't drive it well.

Bradenton Florida. The DA was positive 180 feet. It was overcast with a high of 55 and there was high humidity.

First run

2.11 60' and a 13.052 at 112.51. The car moves real well. I was getting the same times with my 02 Z28 with 107 mph. The issue was traction.

Second run

2.08 60' and a 12.970 at 112.85 mph. It spun way too much through first. It needs a good driver mod.

Third run

2.16 60' and a 13.101 at 113.12 mph. This was my fastest run speed wise, just couldn't get traction.

Fourth and final run

2.01 60' and a 12.787 at 112.85 mph. I went real easy into the throttle and got some traction.


My first three runs I was taking the car to 1100-1300 rpms and sliding my foot off the brake and rolling into the throttle. I think what occured was the car would feel like it wasn't taking off that quick, almost bogging. I would then add power too quickly to compensate and the tires would light off. This would happen 30 or so feet into the run and near the top of first.

The last run I added power slower and more consistantly allowing the car to feel like it was bogging. It hooked better, wheelspin was still a bit of an issue.

I think if I got some sticky DR's it would take at least 3 tenths off my best run. That's bench racing though so take it for what it's worth.

I'm also sure that the cold weather with no sun and dubious track prep made traction a challenge.

I only ran two interesting cars, a 2005 C6 that was bone stock with 70,000 miles on it. He ran a 13.210 at 110 mph.

The other one was a BMW 135i with a Dinan tune and DR's. He ran a 12.816 at 110.45. He had a 1.81 60'. It was a good see saw race. He came out of the hole real strong. I caught him midway. He stopped my pull for half of what was left then I started pulling again.

There was a guy there with a 2011 6.4L Challeneger. He made two passes and quit. He couldn't get any traction and ran two mid 13's. I think his mph was in the mid 111's. It was an automatic, I think those are slower than the sticks.

Another guy had a old Ford Festiva from the early 90's with a turbo on it. He was running low 14's. He got a turbo off of a Mitsubishi car and rear mounted it. It was ugly, but he said he had less than $3000 in it. That would be tons of fun for 3 grand.

Biggest issue with the Mustang is the headrests. They angle at 45 degrees to improve whiplash protection and they make a helmet miserable. I took them out and turned them around.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Not bad Ferg. Finally got some real numbers here instead of those mag numbers that some people like to quote all the time:rolleyes: I'll be shure and let Nick know what you got I think that will pump him up. What gears you got again? I didn't know those 6.4 Challangers were out allready, wow, got to keep a look out for them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Not bad Ferg. Finally got some real numbers here instead of those mag numbers that some people like to quote all the time:rolleyes: I'll be shure and let Nick know what you got I think that will pump him up. What gears you got again? I didn't know those 6.4 Challangers were out allready, wow, got to keep a look out for them.
It's an A6 so the transmission is geared different than the stick. I have 3.15 rear gears. If you do the math with the trans ratios, it comes out right between the stick with the 3.55 gears and the 3.73's like Nick has.

I didn't know the 2011 Challengers were out either. This one was white, which is a real nice color for those cars. Everyone was talking about it being a Hemi 392, so that's the 6.4L right??? I didn't get a close up look at it. Just saw it make it's passes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Unreal that you busted a 12 traction limited!! Congrats. I just watched a show all about the 5.0 with VVT, interesting, and sounds like it really works.
I haven't reset the trip computer for fuel mileage and its's just under 25 mpg. I drive about 75-80 percent highway, so I'm happy with that. It's at 24.8, the trip to the strip dropped it from 24.9. I'm heading to Charlotte NC this week so maybe I'll get my .1 mpg back. LOL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Unreal that you busted a 12 traction limited!! Congrats. I just watched a show all about the 5.0 with VVT, interesting, and sounds like it really works.
I just thought about it, the VVT is like a VTEC. I guess that means I can hang with the Honda crowd now. LOL

So what your telling me is this Civic has a 1.8L. Ok, cool. I have a 2 liter bottle of Mountain Dew in my fridge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,376 Posts
They did a whole show on it on Two Guys garage. They said it was 2 four cylinders on a common crank due to the VVT. And the accentrics on the cam ratchet up and back based on torque in the valvetrain, varying the timing. Looks like something else to break, but they said Ford picked up 100 HP in one year adding it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
It's an A6 so the transmission is geared different than the stick. I have 3.15 rear gears. If you do the math with the trans ratios, it comes out right between the stick with the 3.55 gears and the 3.73's like Nick has.

I didn't know the 2011 Challengers were out either. This one was white, which is a real nice color for those cars. Everyone was talking about it being a Hemi 392, so that's the 6.4L right??? I didn't get a close up look at it. Just saw it make it's passes.
Yes, its 61ci=1L. 61ci x 6.4L= 390ci.
They did a whole show on it on Two Guys garage. They said it was 2 four cylinders on a common crank due to the VVT. And the accentrics on the cam ratchet up and back based on torque in the valvetrain, varying the timing. Looks like something else to break, but they said Ford picked up 100 HP in one year adding it.
I saw that ep about the 5.0 I didn't pay much attention too it. GM has been using cam phasing for sometime and it seems like its doing well. GM cam phasers use oil pressure to phase the cam(s). I'm curious to see how Ford went about it with this ratcheting action.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
377 Posts
Nice write-up and runs. That is stock, correct? Very strong.

Much like the new 5.0 seems to be, the autos tend to be quicker and trap higher than the manual SRT-8s.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,777 Posts
Nice runs, glad you weren't disappointed.

I'm waiting for the Ecoboost Mustang to come out. I might DD one of those... so far I'm looking hard at the twin turbo F150, it makes it's numbers on 87 (and solidly in the 14s), so some high test and a tune might make for a wicked truck that still gets ~24ish highway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Nice write-up and runs. That is stock, correct? Very strong.

Much like the new 5.0 seems to be, the autos tend to be quicker and trap higher than the manual SRT-8s.
Thanks!!!

Paper air filter. Not great weather, but not bad weather. Cool air, high humidity and no sun to warm the track. Air pressure was 29.96 I think I saw when I looked at weather.com. Not great but could have been worse like summer here with 82% humidity and 85 degrees. LOL

I'm not convinced the Challenger was a 2011. I watched him run and he was having traction issues too. They didn't prep the track real well. So those runs were definately not indicitive of what the car can or should run.

I always thought the manuals were faster on the Challenger. They seem to play it that way in the road tests at least.

It seems more and more cars are faster as auto's than manuals. I know the C6 with the LS2 is about equal with the A6 and M6 and the LS3 is faster with the A6. Porsches seem to be faster with the PDK and BMW's are definately faster with the auto. Now you're telling me the SRT8 cars are faster with an auto.

The only exception is the Camaro. Seems GM decided to put a castrated L99 in it with the auto and those things are high 13's at best. I can't figure that out.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
From your post and knowing that you owned a LS2 GTO. Is it safe to say its easier to coax the 5.0 into the 12's than it was the GTO?

I would say if the AFM in the L99 worked in manually shifted car GM would have put it in the manual too. The L99 was put in the Camaro for fuel economy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
377 Posts
Finally got some real numbers here instead of those mag numbers that some people like to quote all the time:rolleyes:.
Can you refer me to any instrumented tests of the A6? I haven't seen one yet.

I always thought the manuals were faster on the Challenger. They seem to play it that way in the road tests at least.
Nah, slower. I think the "older" tests show it.

Porsches seem to be faster with the PDK and BMW's are definately faster with the auto. Now you're telling me the SRT8 cars are faster with an auto.
The PDK is a dual clutch with very aggressive gearing so that goes without saying. As far as the Tiptronic, not sure but more consistent no doubt.

BMW SMG definitely quicker in the M5/6, an expert would be needed in the M3 and with the 335i the auto allows the boost to stay up so that is probably why. The SRT8s are definitely quicker with the autos than the Chally M6.

The only exception is the Camaro. Seems GM decided to put a castrated L99 in it with the auto and those things are high 13's at best. I can't figure that out.
400hp rating vs. 426 in the 6m and some very aggressive torque management I've read. A little tuning helps I'm sure.

BTW, how bad were the SRT-8s running that night? :cheers

From your post and knowing that you owned a LS2 GTO. Is it safe to say its easier to coax the 5.0 into the 12's than it was the GTO?
Those trap speeds to speak volumes, that's for sure.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Can you refer me to any instrumented tests of the A6? I haven't seen one yet.
I would say the Camaro5 forum would be your best source for real world info. I don't go there too often. As far as mag test, no I haven't seen any.
EDIT:Found something :http://www.gtoforum.com/f15/5th-gen-camaro-fast-list-30487/#post251783


BTW: Deuuuce I was not directing that toward you. It just annoying when people quote mag times for gold. I don't mind bench racing but comparing real world to mag numbers is ridiculous.
Those trap speeds to speak volumes, that's for sure.
True.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Can you refer me to any instrumented tests of the A6? I haven't seen one yet.



Nah, slower. I think the "older" tests show it.



The PDK is a dual clutch with very aggressive gearing so that goes without saying. As far as the Tiptronic, not sure but more consistent no doubt.

BMW SMG definitely quicker in the M5/6, an expert would be needed in the M3 and with the 335i the auto allows the boost to stay up so that is probably why. The SRT8s are definitely quicker with the autos than the Chally M6.

400hp rating vs. 426 in the 6m and some very aggressive torque management I've read. A little tuning helps I'm sure.

BTW, how bad were the SRT-8s running that night? :cheers

Those trap speeds to speak volumes, that's for sure.
There weren't any SRT8 cars there except for the one white Challenger. Everyone said he was a 392 Hemi, so that would be the new one. I didn't get close enough to verify that before he left.

I saw him run twice and both were mid 13's with a ton of wheelspin. I think from the way it was driven it was an automatic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
377 Posts
BTW: Deuuuce I was not directing that toward you. It just annoying when people quote mag times for gold. I don't mind bench racing but comparing real world to mag numbers is ridiculous.
Sometimes, depends. What I was asking was the 6A times for the new 5.0. That would be interesting to compare.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Check the ford forums for real world numbers.
For a change, I'm on the slow side. People in similar conditions to my runs are getting 12.4's and 12.5's. One guy claims to have gotten an 11.9 with just DR's. His speed was 115mph and I don't think these things have that kind of speed stock.

I was really suprised to see on the Camaro fast list, A6's getting into the 12's stock with 106 mph trap speeds. My 02 Z28 trapped around 105-107 and it would make it into the 12's with DR's. Without them it was a 13.3 car all the time. I have a hard time with people getting low 1.9 and high 1.8 60's without DR's and for people to trap 106 and hit the 12's without a low 1.9 60'.

Also my 02 Camaro's put high 320 to low 330 hp in a 3400 lb car. The L99 is putting about the same numbers down, maybe 10 hp higher, and the car weighs 500 lbs more than my 4th gen did. I know it has a 6 speed and better gearing, but it still seems to be a stretch to me.

I ran 12.895 with a 2.01 60' in my GTO. It also ran a real high 109 mph trap. That was a best ever run and I never duplicated it again. 13.1 at 108-109 was the usual and 2.05 for a 60'. I just can't see 12's stock without DR's on a car that traps what the A6 Camaro's trap.
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top