285...you need to get that down, it's unhealthy.

 

Here is an idea:
If you don't want anyone to question your claims, don't go showing off on the internets without any proof.

FWIW, There's nobody on the entire list at the SVT forum to break into the 11s with just slicks.

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums...ack-times.html

On the other hand, this list may lend some credibility to Slostang's claims since there are a couple of similarly modded cars to his that are cracking 11.9. They're making excellent power...and yeah, slicks help.

 

Really? I had no idea. Guess I was to busy eating bacon to read about it.

 

Exactly what was I showing off? I was talking about someone else's car. Hell EVO performance ran a 11.82@118 with just a reflash and slicks. Let me find the video. Ohh and only 404rwhp. And tuned by Jon Lund. So unless you think he is a liar too.

 

I couldn't care less about this thread but that last video, the car had at least axle backs or cat back, and it sounded like an o/r pipe too...

 

i think it has the frpp axle backs. deffianty has cats though. you can easily tell it is not a off road exhaust. my main reason for posting it was the rear wheel hp number more than about it being stock. Jon lund could easily get 35rwhp from super agressive tune.

 

I brought the whole thing up cause I didnt believe a car with just slicks no tune ran an 11.90...still dont. if it was a boss maybe. I seen that 11.80 vid of a boss still not buying it didnt have a tune either.

my best stock was 12.22@112
there was more in it just had to shift really slow cause I kept finding 5th instead of 3rd with the stock shifter.

 

Last time, for the cheap seats here....READ THE ORIGINAL POST BEFORE YOU KEEP SAYING IT'S A STOCK CAR.

 

it wasnt you it was someone that posted to this said their car ran 11.90's with just slicks

 

i said "guy at my local track is running 11.96 at 115. completely stock. (He is a pro driver). Just 15" race stars and m/t slicks."

not me my and his cars are the same color and everything my best is a 12.2 at 115.8 on 17" with 265 M\t ez streets drag radials. He ran a best of 11.96 and a couple 11.98 and 11.99s. on 15" aluminum race stars with 26"/10" bias radials. in 60 degree weather at sea level. and again HE IS A PRO DRIVER. he makes a living from drag racing 4 second ADRL( 1/8th mile, cant remember the class name) cars. and yes his car is stock save for the rims and tires.

 

sounds like he needs to build a coyote stock car and knock my buddy off of his pedestal lol

 

They made changes between the runs..Running 12.6 with 404rwhp on stock tires... That sounds about right. The later runs probably had other changes and I think this because they posted the following on the SVT forums

Evolution (Grabber Blue)----1.53 - 11.35 @ 118.54----ACEFGHKSX------09/13/10 Raceway Park, Englishtown, NJ

Intake, headers/exhaust, gears, driveshaft, suspension and slicks...and that's only worth .5 over the other run? There was more going on than slicks and 404rwhp in that 11.8 run.

What you were watching was an advertisement...and not realistic based on what others have recorded.

This thread got confusing with Kris Warwick making claims about his pro driver friend whose car is supposedly stock except for the slicks and running 11.9s.

 

You seriously don't know jack **** about racing. Or what slicks and soft side walls do far a launch and ets.

 

and i said "a guy" not "my buddy" or "my friend"

 

Let me get this straight: you say that I dont know jack **** about racing, yet you believe what "a guy" (whom you dont even know!) tells you about the state of tune of his car?

It's called sandbagging.

 

I've seen dozens of bone stock coyotes run high 12.6s and I know that slicks can easily trim off 4-5 tenths at the 60" and stops wheel hop and spinning on full throttle ***** out 2nd and 3rd shifts. Saving at least aanother tenth or two. But if you ever took your car to the track you would know how bad the wheel hop is with stock suspensions. You would how much time is lost to pedaling on stock tires. Go to the track. You'll learn more in one day under the tree than you will in 10 years of reading motortrend.

 

+1 billon

 

This thread has been quite entertaining but this comment is the best.I seem to recall MT and C&D testing a certain car a few years back and the best they could muster was a 13.8 out of it. Evan Smith (Pro Driver) drove the same car and managed a 12.98 @ 109.
Magazine Editors and staff may be enthusiasts but they are far from Pro drivers. Can they drive yes but they dont make their living on cutting a good light or making the perfect powershift.
Also please dont formulate a dyno number into a track time as there are way to many variables to factor in.

 

exactly! Some people just won't give up

 

Actually, facts are knowable!
It takes a certain amount of power to accelerate a certain mass to cover a certain distance in a certain amount of time.

You can't just keep adding more traction or more gear and keep going faster. You can't just keep shifting better and keep going faster. Eventually, the system is maxed out.

I'm disappointed at how superstitous this forum is. Maybe if you guys pray really hard or burn an effigy of a Camaro before you run, you can knock of another .1!

Anyway, I'd never claim that you can look at the peak hp of a car and the weight and know EXACTLY what kind of 1/4 mile it would run...but you can predict the best case scenario and therefore the calculator is a valid sanity check and fairly consistent. One problem is that dynos are inconsistent and temps/airpressure/humidity vary its tough to know exactly how much Power you're making...but it will get you consistently in the ballpark.

I was done. You guys brought the thread back.

So somebody tell me how fast a 400hp, 3800lb car could run the quarter mile... What's the best possible time that could possibly be run in ideal conditions? What are you basing this answer on?