I just ran the Quarter mile last friday. They don't give time slips, but I had my wife write down my times and this is what I got.

I ran a 15.67 @ 98 mph. This same race was against my buddy who has a street port, same mods that I have and I beat him by almost 2 car lenghts.

Now my question is, if I am getting 98 mph, I assume I should be in the very low 14's if not high 13s. But the problem is I am spinning very badly at take off and second gear, Do you guys think 13's would happen with some slicks? Being the speed was 98.

 

Turbo or N/A. If it's an N/A 13's aren't going to happen unless you have loooooots of mods and N20. Turbo yes, slick would help and the 13's could be very possible.

 

I ran a 13.8@98mph and right after that a 13.8@101. I agree with matlock if it is turbo yeah you should be in the low 14's high 13's. Now when I put in the Ram power grip 6 puuck clutch I would have the same times and mph as you because the tires sucked and I couldn't get traction for hell still was pulling around 99 at the end but was turnin 15's. Hope I have helped you out some way

 

MPH is a factor of HP, ET is a factor of how well you launch.

You obviously have the power, you just need to get it to the ground effectively.

 

thanks!

So I have enough power to pull 98 mph, but the traction sucks.

So it is feasible with better traction to pull a very high 13 in the quarter.

I was curious.

I am going to pull another 100lbs out of the car and get some slicks. This should get me right around 100 or higher MPH.

This is crazy, cause I still have a 91 intake, I can put on the car and that alone should give me another 10 hp at least.

BTW: this 98 mph was in a N/A. So it really doesn't matter if it turbo or not, its already gotten to the magic 100 mph number.

 

it s going to be low 14's

 

I personally feel it going to be quicker than that.

I take off in first gear right around 2500 and once it starts to roll, I smash it and it smokes both tires to the point where I have to let off the gas a bit to keep it moving forward. Then when I shift to second, I have to let the RPM drop to right around 3500, cause anything higher, just liquifies the rear tires and the car doesn't move forward.

Now I assume with slicks I can dump it right around 7000 and have twice the amount of power through first gear, and thus allowing me to hit second at a much higher RPM, right 4500 is what I am guessing.

See I could actually get it much faster, but I always shift right around 6000 RPM, on occasion while running third out, I will hit 8000 and from 6500 to 8000, its like hitting light speed and takes off like a turbo car.

But I only do this, if I am racing a V-8 or someone is starting to pull me in hard.

 

Sorry bud but an N/A running low 14s is hard to believe, what modifications? Internals? ports? When I had my 89 GTU the fastes I got that sucker was 86 in the quarter

 

You have one badass n/a!
I hope mine's gonna be as good!

 

I've only seen one N/A do low 14's and it was carb'd and ported, and of course exhaust and little stuff. It was a 14.20 I almost wet myself, damm quick N/A.

 

I hit 92mph@16.4 with my 90 GXL with massive wheel hop in first

 

Yeah, this guy is full of *hit. You're really throwing off your mph by spinning the tires like that. Hell, some turbo guys are having trouble pulling that kind of MPH. Unless the NA was more powerful than the turbo and Mazda was just trying to rip all of us turbo guys off....hmmmm

 

I see you turbo guys problems with this post. To bad for alot of you guys who don't understand this style of racing. The none turbo RX-7's have taller gears than a TII does. This makes the car get faster mph in the 1/4 than the TII but slower on the times. I know this stuff is true for a couple reasons. My brother in law is a NHRA drag racer, I know his pit crew and I will be on it as soon as we get the car back up and running. The shorter the gears the quicker in the 1/4 but lower high end. the taller the gear the slower the 1/4 but the faster speed. It sounds wierd but its true. I've been in this **** since I was in kindergarten. If you would like to know more about your gear ratios to get the car quicker in the 1/4 the pm me and I'll have him come and have a talk with the forum.
regards.
charles

 

Please explain how wheelspin will make MPH go UP in relation to a good run.

98mph indicates HP in the 200's....

I have a feeling the wife wrote down the wrong number 88 or 89 is a bit more realistic (but still impressive) for an N/A that isn't bridge/peripheral port or running a hefty dose of nitrous up the snoot.

 

I have run in my T2 14.6x at 102MPH, and also run in the same car a 14.6x at 86MPH. Beats me??

 

sometimes I wonder about some of you people.

My wife didn't write down the wrong time. The same time was confirmed by 8 other people from our car club.
I was running over 90 plus mph all night and the 98 mph run was after a long cool down and pushing it up the lanes.

I currently run 72 , almost 73 mph in the 1/8 and the car is just starting to run good, when the race is over.

I am surprised that no on has asked about how much weight I have gotten rid of.

I will try to get the car weighted, but I am assuming it weight right around 2600 with me in the car. I only weight 203 lbs.

The week before, my best run was 15.4 and since that run I removed very close to 100lbs.

 

so what are you mods?

 

I guess I'd explain the MPH being thrown off like this: I'd be like holding the back end of the car off the ground, getting the wheels up to speed and drop it back down. You're spinning and getting the motor/wheels up to speed...not going to give you an accurate mph. If your car actually hooked up you'd probably only run in the high 80's. Yes, the car is crossing the traps at 98 at a sacrifice to the 60 ft time and 1/4mile. But if you were to hook up you wouldn't have as much time to get the wheels up to speed and hence a quicker 1/4 mile but much much much lower MPH. Gears, do however play a role in all of this. My 82 Olds delta 88 with a 2.42 rear-end ran a 17.2 @84.5 MPH. That was without spinning the tires. In this case the MPH would be accurate for estimated HP and the 1/4 is off because of the lame *** gears. Sooo, based of my MPH I should be running in the mid-low 16's...will it happen? Not with that rearend. To see that improvement however, I'd have to switch to something like a 3.23 or 3.42...a HUGE difference, not like the difference between the Turbo and NA rears. ****, you don't even have LSD. My T2 went 14.7 @98.5(stock)..BOGGING off the line...again, accurate mph but the 1/4 is off cuz of the poor 2.4 60 ft. Try going to the track and next time don't fry the *tire* (God love the one wheel peel)...see what happens. I said u're full of it, cuz unless this is the lightest most modified (street) NA on the planet there is noooooo way that car is capable of 13's. Again, there is a bunch of turbo guys that can't run into the 13's. And quit giving all the NA guys hopes and dreams of running 13's or low 14's on the cheap. It's like me going out with Brooke Burke....just not gonna happen.

 

No, no, no.


Accelerating more slowly in the first part of the 1/4mi will not make you magically accelerate quicker in the second half. If you get a bad launch, your MPH will drop slightly, since you accelerate slower in the first half.

I have a feeling our friend was not at a dragstrip, but was on an airfield with a set of timing lights set up, and the distance was somewhat longer than 1320 feet.
Which would not only explain the super-high MPH but also the unrealistically high elapsed time - if your car could run 98mph in the quarter, and only ran a 16.4, then you'd have to be spinning the tires through first, second, and third to get a time that bad.

 

I was at the track with my buddy Nick, AKA GLHS. He did get 15.67 @ 98 mph, I was watching his times. His car is fast and loud as hell . He blew past the other RX7 that had lots of mods done to it.

I'm getting a 1987 Mazda RX7 Trubo II in about 2 weeks!!

 

I don't understand why some of you people say things the way you do.

The track is a legal track, check it out. http://www.bradentonmotorsports.com/

I really don't understand the big fuss over me doing 98 MPH, in a N/A.

I have noticed some people want to see the mods to the car, so I will list them now.

1988 SE with posi rear end.
Custom solid mounts welded to the sub frame diff housing
New Koni race shocks in rear.
Cobra XST AA traction tires
Full synthetics in trans and rear end.
T2 drive line
T2 radiator
T2 electric fan, on manual switch
Lightweight hood
Ram air 4" piping to custom cold air box, with 1500 CFM K&N filter.
Custom 3.5" intake
RB full length race headers to 3" SS straight pipe, with Magnaflow straight through muffler.
Ports have been removed.
Timing advanced 22 degrees.
Premix in gas
9mm Accel race wires
Battery moved to passenger side rear.

Things I have removed.

A/C, and all related parts to the A/C. PS, AP, all emission hardware.
Tons of brackets, cold start assit. every tow hook is gone.
Front bumper and supports
entire inside of car has been removed.
Only drivers seat.
1/3 of the dash removed.

 

Ok peejay....I must be full of *hit. A few more examples for you...now work with me here...this might be beyond you. This probably isn't anyone's bag on here but here goes: NHRA/IHRA Super Stock Class, classes designated by weight, factory horsepower rating, and type of transmission (auto/stick). All the stick shift guys set their 4-links up to spin...why you ask? Because by spinning the slicks, this gets the RPM's up quicker than if the car hooked and wheelstanded like an automatic car. This is the different between a clutch and a torque converter. The automatic cars set their 4-links up to hook (and hook hard) to get the torque converter to work...(get a higher stall rpm stall) which is why these car do awesome wheelstands! Stick cars were always faster than the automatics in the 70's and early 80's until the transbrake came about (electrical device in the valve body of an automatic transmission which locks first and reverse, activated by a electrical break in the wire by a button, so car can be brought to a higher RPM than leaving it in first and loading the torque converter on the footbrake). Now they are about even as far as national records go.
Example: (the A after the E stands for automatic)
SS/E 9.58 158.98 03/23/02 Mike Cates - Milan, TN
'68 Chev Camaro Memphis, TN
SS/EA 9.55 137.50 03/23/02 Blair Patrick - JASPER, TN
'68 Ford Mustang Memphis, TN

Little displacement engines don't have as much torque as big displacement. Both of these have small displacement v-8's (302 Z-28 and 289 Mustang) and needed rev'ed up! The automatic car was .03 sec faster but 21 mph slower....hmmmmmm. These are NHRA Super Stock national records. If you don't believe me www.nhra.com will help you out. This is the same class...different cars but same class. Point proved!!!!!

I was not explaining why he wasn't running in the 14's or what not. A bad launch with a bog will throw the mph off a touch but will really screw with the ET. Now lossing traction and revving the motor up will result in a poor 60ft, just like the bog launch. The only difference here is that in case A. the motor is at very low rpm and the tires aren't spinning. In case B, the motor is wing-zinging and you're blownin the rubber off the thing. Once it catches traction you'll be going faster (mph)and RPM's will be higher than you would have with a clean, perfect launch. However the car with the perfect launch will be out ahead of you cuz his 60ft was way better.

Another thing to consider is this...the bulb on the scoreboard my have been burnt out. This would make a 8 look like a 9. Trust me, this happens a lot. I know Bradenton is an IHRA track with a Compu-Link timing system, but tracks aren't gonna replace a bulb in the middle of test-n-tune.

Try this out buddy...go on a regular saturday or sunday...run street legal class...get a time slip...scan it in...and prove us wrong.

Again, please read that I must be an idiot and I don't know anything. I've only been racing/a crew member for 21 years!

 

21 years.

I guess you have been changing tires before your pants? Cause your only 21 years old now.

Don't bother with it anymore and hopefully, I can get some real input and not your opinoin.

I am sure I can drop 1 full second with slicks, maybe even 1.5 seconds.

I still have a 91 intake I can put on the car, so I am very sure I can hit a 13 and over 100 mph in a N/A.

 

The light buld was not out as we were only 20 feet from the time board and we could see it clearly. It said he got 15.67 seconds @ 98 mph.

Racing also depends on how you drive your car and if you're a good driver...Nick drive great and since he got 15.67 @ 98 mph, says so. His car is really light as he's stripped it out and took a lot out of the engine. The hood and front bumper are lighter too...that's my 2 cents.

 

Now it's me that is replying, that was my drag racing buddy. So if he's such a good driver, why is he blowin the tires off the car?!?!?! What's your reaction time??...oh wait you don't have a time slip. At first this was just a comment on drag racing...I could care less about a 15 sec *drag* car.

As for an N/A, you have removed a lot of **** say what, 400-500lbs??? Question for the forum: Whats the lightest you can get an FC?? So you take a stock car that runs 16.5's and lose, lets help ya out here and take 500lbs. Ok so now you're runnin 16.0. (100 lbs= about .1 sec). Then you add an exhaust and intake (stock ported motor???) You'd have to have over a 50hp increase to the wheels to run that kind of mph. Seems kinda hard to do with just and intake and exhaust on an N/A motor.

You already have sticky tires on the car, running a slick isn't going to drop you 1.5 seconds, unless you can fit an amazing sized slick under that car. You do that though and you'll probably bog really good.

But again, you don't seem to care, everybody is right, I'm wrong....but do us all a favor and post a timeslip before you knock me or anyone else that is saying this is hard to believe. Oh wait...I just got back from the strip(went on lunch break)..I ran a 13.5@140mph...****, better get some slicks and I'm in the 9's