Naturally Aspirated 1/4 mile time

[Magnus]

All I have is LCA's. You could count the poly torque arm bushing and trans mount but you don't NEED them like you do LCA's. I also have my front sway bar gone but so do most other drag racers.

Also, an Auto puts more power out of the hole with a high stall verter than a manual. A manual will bog where as a vertere'd A4 will just want to spin into the power band and into other gears.

Auto's are less effecient true, but the 4L60E is a very effecient transmission, a lot more effecient than your typical auto tranny.

There's a reason why all the top cars are Auto's. It's no coincidence.

[Slow-N-ugly]

Autos also have a lower gear than a manual why is that you may ask? They are less efficient.

What gears do you have Magnus?

Do you think John Force runs an auto no, there is a reason for that.

Don't you run DRs' Magnus?

Yeah a manual will bog or spin if you just dump it, but not if you drive it.

I do agree that the fastest times posted on this board come from autos, with modified transmissions at the least.

If I had the money that some of the converters cost, I could have at least 2nd, and 3rd "proshifted", and have an air shifter for the 1-2.
Fastest cars or the cars with the most work done to them are the fastest? There is you coincidence.

NA a manual is 3, with street tires, the top 2....drag.

[Magnus]

Now I have a 4.10 gear, just like Zach.

He cut a 1.9 on a GOOD PREPPED track when we ran the 14.3. On a drag radial it wouldn't have gotten him much more.. probably a 14.2.

Throw my transmission and converter in his car and it would have been a 13 second pass no doubt about that.

John force doesn't race 3800 series II with 4L60E's. I'm not sure about all the cars but a lot of those cars run 2 speed glide trannies.

The third fastest car is a manual, my good friend Zach.. and he has come to the realization that an auto just makes for a better DRAG car.

There is no way in HELL a manual in my car would have gone 13.6.. no WAY. At least not with the T5.

MAYBE if you had a jericho tranny.. MAYBE.. but still highly doubtful.

[Slow-N-ugly]

For the record the 3.4 NA is held by a manual with street tires VS an auto with slicks in 2nd .2 behind

[Magnus]

I know this. I admin the timeslips page. [img]smile.gif[/img]

The 3.4 doesn't do well in the upper RPM's.. The effeciency of the manual may be a better combo than a slippign high stalled A4 that keeps it up in the higher RPM's.

A well built race engine will breeth well in the upper RPM's and make most of its power there. If MustangEater made his engine more effecient (is it even possible to do this with a 3.4) in the upper rpm's I bet a A4 would do very well.

My car makes more and more power the higher I spin it, especially when I run open y-pipe. THIS is the reason why a convertered A4 would work better than a clutch.

If your power band peaks around 5K or so, you wouldn't notice much of a difference between the two, however if your power band peaks near 6K the converter will just help so much more.

[MustangEater8251]

As for upper RPMS, not too high but I don't dip below 4200 on shifts, and I keep the rpms up to about 4500 when I launch...

if I had it lower the way my exahsut is set up I would lose alot of time.

Sorry but I am going to have to say a 5-spee dis more efficient, harder work to get it right but still mroe efficient.

[HAZ-Matt]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Magnus:
John force doesn't race 3800 series II with 4L60E's. I'm not sure about all the cars but a lot of those cars run 2 speed glide trannies.
<hr></blockquote>

I was under the impression that automatics were illegal in the top classes because they made the cars too fast... I think they run CO2 assisted manual transmissions.

It's all about the torque converter, and the reduced time in between the shifts.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the transmission that John Force runs has little to do with this discussion.

[ March 03, 2003: Message edited by: HAZ-Matt ]</p>

[Magnus]

Eric, there is no debate regarding which one is more effecient. It's fact that the manual is.

C02 assisted manual tranny, that sounds nuts! :eek:

[Slow-N-ugly]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> because they made the cars too fast <hr></blockquote>
How the heck do you make a sub 7sec car too fast?

[67-03 RIP]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Magnus:
John force doesn't race 3800 series II with 4L60E's. I'm not sure about all the cars but a lot of those cars run 2 speed glide trannies.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was under the impression that automatics were illegal in the top classes because they made the cars too fast... I think they run CO2 assisted manual transmissions.

<hr></blockquote>

Technically, Top Fuel and Funny Car (Nitro only, not the alcohol classes) don't have a transmission at all... [img]smile.gif[/img] It's a direct drive from the motor to the rear with a series of clutch disks and floaters. The clutches are set up on air timers to engage - no shifting at all. When you see them smoke the tires it's usually because the clutches came in too soon for the track conditions. Would love to have their 60' times though ---- .890 or so! Are 13's possible with the V6? You betcha, but I agree with MustangEater - You're gonna start losing streetability. I guy we see at the drags had a third gen firebird V6(Full tube race car) with dual 4's on a sheet metal intake that ran about 9.20's [img]graemlins/omg.gif[/img] But yeah, his motor cost more than our cars.. :D

Ron

[HAZ-Matt]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 67-03 RIP:
Technically, Top Fuel and Funny Car (Nitro only, not the alcohol classes) don't have a transmission at all... [img]smile.gif[/img] <hr></blockquote>
Ok, someone who knew what they were talking about set us straight...

I'm not into professional drag racing, so I was only going by what I had heard from someone... guess I got the classes mixed up or something [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Pro Stock John]

A4 cars have two things going for them, they are more consistent and two auto trannies don't shock the back tires as hard...

As far as what the rpms look like after each shift for an M5 that depends on the driving and how how you shift the car... the recoveryafter each shift might be high or low. If you shift slow it will be low.

The shift recovery for a stall'd up auto depends on how loose the converter is...

Low 13's is definitely possible, Keith's car is pretty fast and there is still so much more that could be done to it...

-swap out his shorty headers for true long tubes
-bigger converter
-1.7 rockers
-bigger cam

I have no idea how good his heads are, but if it were me and I were him I'd swap in a bigger cam and get his converter loosened up another 400 rpms or so.

If custom pc programming was widely available I'd be buggin Keith again about dynoing his car and see what timing works best with 92 octane gas.

For example for Keith to run say a 12.99 NA he would need about 4 more mph and to 60ft in the low low 1.5's... I think a 12.9@102mph is doable at 3100 raceweight but he'd probably need a 4500 stall.