The 14b Drag Race Discussion Thread

[Gooberlog]

Ha ha, great story. I didn't get the connection between you and dsmotorsports, didn't know that was your company.

 

[Armandotech]

hey guys just wanted to give you a quick update on my friends 92 eclipse gsx that i've been working at, we took it to the track last wednesday and it ran 12.80@106mph on pump gas and full weight (even has abs) with no tune, I really think that it is a descent time taking in consideration that the tires are kinda bald and that the car is not holding boost it make a 19psi spike and goes back to 14psi I really think that the problem lies in the boost controller (greddy profec b type s) I might put a manual boost controller on it, shim the wastegate, swap in a 7cm housing and some race gas. any other recomendations?

p.s. we also finally found out what was the intermitent sputtering problem all I have to say is that I hate chasing electrical problems the mechanic who put the car together left all the grounds loose

 

[SBstar]

hey guys just wanted to give you a quick update on my friends 92 eclipse gsx that i've been working at, we took it to the track last wednesday and it ran 12.80@106mph on pump gas and full weight (even has abs) with no tune, I really think that it is a descent time taking in consideration that the tires are kinda bald and that the car is not holding boost it make a 19psi spike and goes back to 14psi I really think that the problem lies in the boost controller (greddy profec b type s) I might put a manual boost controller on it, shim the wastegate, swap in a 7cm housing and some race gas. any other recomendations?

p.s. we also finally found out what was the intermitent sputtering problem all I have to say is that I hate chasing electrical problems the mechanic who put the car together left all the grounds loose

Ideas? Just read through this thread, Any of Phil's threads, Joe bucci's site, etc.

Also 12.8 is great for a first track time. What are the details of the timeslip?

 

[Armandotech]

gotta pick up the timeslip from my friend but i know the 60ft was 1.82 and it made 84mph in the 1/8

 

[Phil1320]

Just wanted to throw up some things:

-my driveshaft is DSS aluminum, no carbon fiber 1 piece which I'd love to have.
not sure of the weight savings here, never weighed it against the two pieces it replaced.

-my factory seat went back in only because my harness was more than two years out, so I had throw the stocker back in to run again without spending any $. I will get a lighter race seat back in with new harness.

-there is definitely more weight I can remove, but most of that now will only be countering the weight added by the rollbar, so if I'm lucky, I'll break even on weight. No I haven't gone full bore on weight reduction though. I could get WELD wheels, but, for the $800 what's the gain going to be? .02....who knows.
I've basically done just about everything I can do without spending tons of money. I actually added weight by removing my C/F hood and going back to my fiberglass hood converted like Nate's to be one unit without flip-ups, however Nate's has much less bracing so must be a tad lighter. But, I was able to remove all of the headlight assemblies so it still was a decent bit of weight that came out. So, what's left as far as weight reduction:

-carbon fiber driveshaft
-carbon fiber doors
-tubular front and rear subframes
-Fidanza flywheel rather than my ACT -OR- Twin Disc Set-up
-Lexan windshield
-aluminum dash
-lighter wheels
-Brake Man or Wilwood brakes
-full fiberglass front end like Kiggly Racing car
-small fuel cell

The problem for me with the above list is that you could spend $10,000 trying to put all that on the car in the blink of an eye. So, therefore, most likely nothing on that list, with the exception of maybe Wilwoods(as I can use them to roadrace) and lighter wheels will ever see my car. I tried to get the C/F doors and work out a deal with the shop that sells them but they were still very expensive so I tossed that idea in the garbage.

I do already have a light crank pulley set on the car including alternator.

I know I can pull my rear swaybar off and drop there.

I have the Polk control arms to go on.

I have rear 1/4 lexan in house and door lexan on the way.

I have no plans to pull the dash.

I have no plans to install a smaller fuel cell.

So, with that, I'm just about to my end of weight reduction with the car. I don't want to spend the crazy $ to go any further with it. I'm all about going quicker and pushing the envelope, but I have to draw the line somewhere. Hell, I'm lucky I ran in 2009 and did what I did.

I will start to play the other end of things in the "make more horsepower" category a little bit this year I think. But, just a little.

Wherever this leaves me on the overall 14B ET list will be fine. So, what I'm saying is that I will not be able to get to the 100% effort Nate speaks of in order to run better than 10.84. At least not any time soon. It damn sure felt like it took 150% effort for me to finally surpass that damn 12.0 wall I hit years back.

But, at some point in 2010, it looks like I'll be able to hit the track for some passes anyway.

Nate, glad you got the car back, it's going to be awesome to see it back on the 14b!

 

[Nate Crisman]

Phil, I completely agree with you. All of us are going to struggle with what NEEDS to be done to break the record vs what is within our means to actually accomplish. Be it ability, money, logistics, or multi purpose car causing the limitation. Obviously most of us have a limitation on all of those things.

Even though I can rattle off a big list of "how to" beat Joe's 10.84, that doesn't necessarily mean Im going to actually be able to do it. I'm going to TRY, but I may run into limitations just like everyone else. Frankly, Im in the same boat as you with not having the money to get to 100% in the weight department. I'm doing everything that's cheap and reasonable, but Im sure you guys will be hearing about my car running with 18lb wheels for a while unless something cheap falls in my lap. Ill be running stock brakes & driveshaft too. Can't afford the lightweight parts.

I really think your car is going to benefit most from engine parts, In my opinion, that's where you have the most to gain for the least money & effort. I still think cams, intake, and a better intercooler...an appropriate retune and you will pick up a few mph and lose a few tenths. You might be able to pick up a tick of power via converting to speed density and ditching the maf?

Weight loss that Im going to plan for:
doing the lexan/aluminum hatch.
ditching most of my interior (maybe 25lb total in plastic/carpet/dash, door panels. I'll learn to work alum sheetmetal and make a dash and door panels)
hunting for a cost effective light 16" wheel (something that costs me less than $200 out of pocket after selling my current wheels)
1gal fuel cell for least fuel load possible
Might have Brent @ JMF fab me up a tube front crossmember and front engine mount and weld tabs to the frame for front suspension limiting straps.

Im not doing any lexan side windows. running stock driveshaft. Ill most likely be running on 18.5lb wheels for a while, and might keep some interior in it for a while since it still looks somewhat "street" inside.


But frankly, I'm not going to sweat it if I can't get the no nitrous record. Im fairly sure I can reach the nitrous record, and after that I might just move onto the e316g right away.

 

[Gooberlog]

Phil, I completely agree with you. All of us are going to struggle with what NEEDS to be done to break the record vs what is within our means to actually accomplish. Be it ability, money, logistics, or multi purpose car causing the limitation. Obviously most of us have a limitation on all of those things.

Even though I can rattle off a big list of "how to" beat Joe's 10.84, that doesn't necessarily mean Im going to actually be able to do it. I'm going to TRY, but I may run into limitations just like everyone else. Frankly, Im in the same boat as you with not having the money to get to 100% in the weight department. I'm doing everything that's cheap and reasonable, but Im sure you guys will be hearing about my car running with 18lb wheels for a while unless something cheap falls in my lap. Ill be running stock brakes & driveshaft too. Can't afford the lightweight parts.

I really think your car is going to benefit most from engine parts, In my opinion, that's where you have the most to gain for the least money & effort. I still think cams, intake, and a better intercooler...an appropriate retune and you will pick up a few mph and lose a few tenths. You might be able to pick up a tick of power via converting to speed density and ditching the maf?

Weight loss that Im going to plan for:
doing the lexan/aluminum hatch.
ditching most of my interior (maybe 25lb total in plastic/carpet/dash, door panels. I'll learn to work alum sheetmetal and make a dash and door panels)
hunting for a cost effective light 16" wheel (something that costs me less than $200 out of pocket after selling my current wheels)
1gal fuel cell for least fuel load possible
Might have Brent @ JMF fab me up a tube front crossmember and front engine mount and weld tabs to the frame for front suspension limiting straps.

Im not doing any lexan side windows. running stock driveshaft. Ill most likely be running on 18.5lb wheels for a while, and might keep some interior in it for a while since it still looks somewhat "street" inside.


But frankly, I'm not going to sweat it if I can't get the no nitrous record. Im fairly sure I can reach the nitrous record, and after that I might just move onto the e316g right away.

FD RX-7 wheels for the win But i forget how much lighter they are

 

[pneumo]

Reality is that we have to consider the cost/benefit for each mod. Rotating weight counts for more, and removing weight on the outside diameter counts for more than removing weight at the hub. This page really opened my eyes to the subject Puma Race Engines Technical Guide - Lightening Flywheels Be sure to check out the chart halfway down the page.

Nate, have you looked at the Rota Slipstream wheels? They're 11 pounds in a 15x7 size and typically cost around $500 a set. That's why I chose them. It may not be the absolute lightest wheel, but they're a great bang-for-the-buck wheel. Hopefully you can sell your old wheels to make up the difference. Lighter tires will also help a lot. Slicks are lightest. In my searches the lightest drag radial I could find is the Hoosier in either the Quick Time Pro DOT or Drag Radial. Just pick your favorite size and cough up some bucks, simple (right!)

I also felt that a crankscraper was a cheap way to add power, and it's easy to install. I still have one in the car. Since it isn't well known, check here Mitsubishi

I sent an email to check on lightweight brake rotors and they'll cost around $1100 for all 4 rotors.
Yes, it gets expensive to push the limits.

 

[ReYnd]

FD RX-7 wheels for the win But i forget how much lighter they are

They're 15 pounds, versus 28 pounds steel or 19 pound alloy stockers for the 1G. I like 'em.

 

[Black_Bullet]

Rx7 rims came in two versions, the original which were around 11lbs , and then the later revision which they made a little sturdier that weighs in at 13lbs. They arent as heavy as 15. I run them on my car.

 

[Gooberlog]

Yeah i have the later version i believe and i think i do remember them being in the 13-15 lbs range so, lightest wheel for the money i found.

 

[Nate Crisman]

Nate, have you looked at the Rota Slipstream wheels? They're 11 pounds in a 15x7 size and typically cost around $500 a set. That's why I chose them. It may not be the absolute lightest wheel, but they're a great bang-for-the-buck wheel. Hopefully you can sell your old wheels to make up the difference. Lighter tires will also help a lot. Slicks are lightest. In my searches the lightest drag radial I could find is the Hoosier in either the Quick Time Pro DOT or Drag Radial. Just pick your favorite size and cough up some bucks, simple (right!)

I also felt that a crankscraper was a cheap way to add power, and it's easy to install. I still have one in the car. Since it isn't well known, check here Mitsubishi

I sent an email to check on lightweight brake rotors and they'll cost around $1100 for all 4 rotors.
Yes, it gets expensive to push the limits.

I'm going to check out that crankscraper before my oil pan goes on.

Slipstreams look to be about 14.5 to 15lb per wheel depending on who's website you believe in 16" dia. (I already have hoosier bias ply QTP's in 28x8.5 16). The wheel comes in 16x7 and 16x8, obviously the extra width makes it heavier and the few sources for the listed weights don't reference width. The Prime brand 16x7's I have the hoosiers on right now were 18.5lb each, the hoosiers were 17.5lb each. (I don't run tubes either).

I could sell my existing wheels for maybe $200, making a set of new wheels ~$300 to save about 13 to 16lb of rotating weight. I suppose one could rought guestimate calculate what the effective weight loss would be if it were static weight to see the benefit of the wheels.

I really have to balance that with what $300 could do for engine power:
adjustable cam gears and some dyno time?
electric water pump?
adjustable control arms and $ for a race alignment
$300 also buys me a used E3 16g..which I can use the 7cm housing on the 14b then only have to cartridge swap to go a few tenths faster when Im done with the 14b.

Obviously budget is my biggest restriction. If I had all the money to buy anything i'd need, the time to install it and test it I have no question the record could be broken. But I don't see a money tree growing yet just like everyone else.

I had RX7 wheels on my first GVR4 back in 2003, I remember them being in the 14-15lb range. But they seem to be damn near as expensive as Rota's and they don't fit right. You need rear spacers and longer studs adding to the cost, or need to do some grinding/cutting/welding on the control arm to make them fit.

 

[Gooberlog]

I'm going to check out that crankscraper before my oil pan goes on.

Slipstreams look to be about 14.5 to 15lb per wheel depending on who's website you believe in 16" dia. (I already have hoosier bias ply QTP's in 28x8.5 16). The wheel comes in 16x7 and 16x8, obviously the extra width makes it heavier and the few sources for the listed weights don't reference width. The Prime brand 16x7's I have the hoosiers on right now were 18.5lb each, the hoosiers were 17.5lb each. (I don't run tubes either).

I could sell my existing wheels for maybe $200, making a set of new wheels ~$300 to save about 13 to 16lb of rotating weight. I suppose one could rought guestimate calculate what the effective weight loss would be if it were static weight to see the benefit of the wheels.

I really have to balance that with what $300 could do for engine power:
adjustable cam gears and some dyno time?
electric water pump?
adjustable control arms and $ for a race alignment
$300 also buys me a used E3 16g..which I can use the 7cm housing on the 14b then only have to cartridge swap to go a few tenths faster when Im done with the 14b.

Obviously budget is my biggest restriction. If I had all the money to buy anything i'd need, the time to install it and test it I have no question the record could be broken. But I don't see a money tree growing yet just like everyone else.

I had RX7 wheels on my first GVR4 back in 2003, I remember them being in the 14-15lb range. But they seem to be damn near as expensive as Rota's and they don't fit right. You need rear spacers and longer studs adding to the cost, or need to do some grinding/cutting/welding on the control arm to make them fit.

On my laser awd, i run rear spacers (10mm i believe-non hub eccentric),and had to trim just the welds on the side of ther rear control arms. For the front i have no spacers (this does not allow me to install the Mazda center caps on the wheels though), and only had to trim off the ABS wheel speed sensor bracket off of the OEM strut from what i remember in order to clear my 225/50/16 BFGs. I have the orriginal wheel studs w/o any issues and i use a set of black lug nuts (Gorilla i think?) from Autozone to match the gun metal paint a little better. I think the worst thing about the FD wheels is finding them used not all rashed up. I think i picked up my set local for $200 maybe less, i can't remember

 

[SBstar]

The other thing to remember with the RX-7 wheels is they're made for a much lighter car, the early ones are known to crack when paired with the heavier dsm. Of course for 99% of the people in this thread, the car is going to be light enough anyways But throwing it out there.

The Centerline Storms are a lightweight wheel that isn't too expensive, not a real fan of the chrome look though. Of course there are a couple different Weld wheels that work well. Personally I think I'll be trying to go with Slipstreams as I think out of the inexpensive light wheels they're probably the best looking. Of course by the time I get there I'll have changed my mind a couple more times haha.

 

[Gooberlog]

This is true, and as i was reading the first sentence i was also thinking most 14b guys have cars on a strict diet.

 

[Black_Bullet]

1/8th spacers, grinded rear control arm, and ingall fast cam camber bolts to dial in my front camber is all I run with my rx7 rims with 225/50 tires. I have the earlier version of these rims, thus mines are around 12lbs. My total car weight is down to 2800lbs with me sitting in it, I weigh 155lbs. Yes they are a little weaker than heavy stock rims, but Ive never had an issue. Just dont go hitting curbs with them while your driving, and to further add to this thread, my car has seen 12.3 and 12.1 at 111mph with a 14b on race gas in its past.

 

[pneumo]

1/8th spacers, grinded rear control arm, and ingall fast cam camber bolts to dial in my front camber is all I run with my rx7 rims with 225/50 tires. I have the earlier version of these rims, thus mines are around 12lbs. My total car weight is down to 2800lbs with me sitting in it, I weigh 155lbs. Yes they are a little weaker than heavy stock rims, but Ive never had an issue. Just dont go hitting curbs with them while your driving,

A track-only car doesn't have to worry about potholes. At least I hope your tracks don't have potholes!

Nate, that's a good point about adding in the cost of an alignment. I've been doing my own alignments for several years. It's not hard, and you can do good alignments with basic tools. To measure camber I use an angle finder that I bought from the hardware store. It's good enough to see 1/2 degree difference. I think Jegs or Sumitt sells a basic toe gauge that can be very accurate if it's used carefully.

 

[Hubbell91Tsi]

Well after a few new changes my car should be running again in a few hours. Im going to start looking for a nice set or rota slipstreams now.

 

[Nate Crisman]

A track-only car doesn't have to worry about potholes. At least I hope your tracks don't have potholes!

Nate, that's a good point about adding in the cost of an alignment. I've been doing my own alignments for several years. It's not hard, and you can do good alignments with basic tools. To measure camber I use an angle finder that I bought from the hardware store. It's good enough to see 1/2 degree difference. I think Jegs or Sumitt sells a basic toe gauge that can be very accurate if it's used carefully.

I assume your car is still a street car so you use a street alignment setting, care to share your "ideals"?

Im planning to limit strap my front suspension so it is in preload going down the track and cannot lift unless the strap breaks. One of the fast automatic awd guys was running high 1.4's consistently and first pass with the locked down front suspension went 1.33. If the front end cannot raise up and mess the alignment, the tires stay straight and flat.

Set camber and toe to 0 at this position, which should give optimal traction.

In the rear, I need to get adjustable uppers for camber and again attempt to get 0 camber 0 toe. I'm not sure 0 toe is actually attainable with the stock adjusters even with the control arms welded solid.

The rear might actually be best with some static positive camber so than when it squats in the rear on launch the lowest squat position is 0 camber.

obviously this alignment would suck for handling and be real annoying on the street since it won't auto center the steering well and will follow all kinds of road edges.

 

[pneumo]

I assume your car is still a street car so you use a street alignment setting, care to share your "ideals"?

Im planning to limit strap my front suspension so it is in preload going down the track and cannot lift unless the strap breaks. One of the fast automatic awd guys was running high 1.4's consistently and first pass with the locked down front suspension went 1.33. If the front end cannot raise up and mess the alignment, the tires stay straight and flat.

Set camber and toe to 0 at this position, which should give optimal traction.

In the rear, I need to get adjustable uppers for camber and again attempt to get 0 camber 0 toe. I'm not sure 0 toe is actually attainable with the stock adjusters even with the control arms welded solid.

The rear might actually be best with some static positive camber so than when it squats in the rear on launch the lowest squat position is 0 camber.

obviously this alignment would suck for handling and be real annoying on the street since it won't auto center the steering well and will follow all kinds of road edges.

Yes I drive it on the street. My alignment settings are zero toe and camber up front, out back I use 3mm toe-in and 1/2* camber. I still have the stock rubber toe adjust links in the rear trailing arms, that's why I use some toe-in. Those links will toe-out under power, so it should be close to zero toe during a launch. I have no way to check it, so this is just an educated guess. It drives nice on the street, I've driven with some toe out at both ends and it was still OK for freeway cruising, although the tires wore down on the inside edges.

There is very little alignment change when the front struts extend during a hard launch with stiff suspension. I checked alignment with the car at stock height and again when I raised it with a jack by a few inches to simulate the ammount of extension it might see during a hard launch. Since the stock front alignment has 1/8* positive camber, just slot the upper strut mount ( the one where the upper hat bolts to the body) inward by .3" and that will be very close to zero.

Yes, the back end has a large ammount of camber change when it squats. My recomendation is to get close to zero camber and use moderately stiff rear springs so it doesn't squat too much. Keep the back end high enough so it doesn't hit the bumpstops when it squats. A tire with a soft sidewall will soak up some of the camber change and stay flat on the ground.

 

[Phil1320]

I've never had my car aligned on a machine, ever, since I've owned it. When the coilovers went in, I also put in the Ingalls rear upper arms and toe eliminator kit. Ingalls arms are adjusted all the way positive. Most likely, there's some toe adjusting needed to be optimal, as it seems the rear tires toe-in just a bit and with the eliminator in, there's no movement on the launch. Front camber plates are at 0 adjustment in the center. Seems to be working for me. Once the Polk A-arms go on, there is even more adjustment there, but I will most likely just mimic the stock arm with adjustment and throw them on like that to start. As you can see in my pictures elsewhere, my car does not squat that much at all with it's weight and the coilovers, so I'm not experiencing much change on the launches.

I still have my Racing Hart CP-035 16 X 7 wheels that weigh in at 10.6 lbs. each. This wheel over the stock alloys loses about 64 lbs. of rotating weight. As I remember the stock 16 X 6 wheels were 26 lbs. apiece. The Weld wheel may be lighter in that size, but, to my knowledge, this is the lightest wheel out there in 16" for the DSM. They are lighter than the 15" Drag DR wheel that's on the car now by a considerable amount, but, the slick is alot lighter than the Drag radial, so overall my combination is lighter.

Just some trivia: Sean Glazar's 15" Volk TE-37 with slicks weighed in at 24.8 lbs. each corner. This was on the shipping scale at the shop. So, if you can be under 100 lbs. total for all 4 wheels/slicks, that's as good as it gets for AWD I think. Again, an area where Joe B.'s car takes advantage as I think his wider front wheel combined with the thinnie wheel out back probably beats the 100 lb. total weight with ease. I bet his total for all four wheels might be in the 70-80 lb. range.



Also, someone mentioned balance shaft removal......I swear I weighed DSM balance shafts at 7.5 lbs. each. For a total loss of about 15 lbs. rotational? I know EVO b-shafts weight only about 1.5 lbs.

Im planning to limit strap my front suspension so it is in preload going down the track and cannot lift unless the strap breaks. One of the fast automatic awd guys was running high 1.4's consistently and first pass with the locked down front suspension went 1.33. If the front end cannot raise up and mess the alignment, the tires stay straight and flat.

.

I'd be interested in the other suspension components on this car, I'm not sure that my set-up would benefit from strapping..........although would be nice!

I guess the DSMTIMES.ORG guy is MIA or doesn't give a #### anymore so for the thread I'm gonna post the top 5 overall on 14b and the top 5 14b NO NOS runs:

14B OVERALL

Joe B.
[email protected] [email protected]

Nate C.
[email protected] [email protected]

Phil B.
[email protected] [email protected]

Dave W.
[email protected] [email protected]

Leon R.
[email protected] [email protected] - gonna say his 1/8 ET is incorrect--I'd guess 7.44?


14B NO NOS

Joe B.
[email protected]

Phil B.
[email protected]

Dave W.
[email protected]

Leon R.
[email protected]

Nick C.
[email protected]

Phil, I completely agree with you. All of us are going to struggle with what NEEDS to be done to break the record vs what is within our means to actually accomplish.
Even though I can rattle off a big list of "how to" beat Joe's 10.84, that doesn't necessarily mean Im going to actually be able to do it. I'm going to TRY, but I may run into limitations just like everyone else.

I really think your car is going to benefit most from engine parts, In my opinion, that's where you have the most to gain for the least money & effort. I still think cams, intake, and a better intercooler...an appropriate retune and you will pick up a few mph and lose a few tenths. You might be able to pick up a tick of power via converting to speed density and ditching the maf?

But frankly, I'm not going to sweat it if I can't get the no nitrous record. Im fairly sure I can reach the nitrous record, and after that I might just move onto the e316g right away.

Yeah, I know what you mean about mapping it out vs. actually making the journey. It's just about drawing the line somewhere for me. I mean, my turbo has never been off the car, all I've ever run is the 14b. Not complaining at all, but I've become uninterested in the past and let it sit for awhile, and made a comback last year, and it generated some new excitement for me with the 14b effort as I was able to finally see "the better side of 12.0." It's also about how long I want to chase that ball of yarn. Let's say someone comes out this year and runs 10.58, am I now looking to make that my new goal to beat? I think not. As much as it's been a long great run for me, I'm looking to close the chapter soon. I thought I might after 2009's accomplishments, but, I'll stand in one more race season anyway for now. I agree that the engine mods will do the most dollar for dollar. And, there is a guy up here on the forum that does want to work with me on a speed density set up at some point, which may really help. What type of intake are you suggesting? My cams are meant to make power under 6500 so, I'm not sure an SMIM will help my cause.

I hear you about not sweating beating the record. It's not really a realistic goal for me and isn't really in my line of vision. Someday, if I ever have to build an engine, maybe I can shoot for it. My claim to it all is going as quick as possible with the least amount of modification done. That' why I've held so long on putting cams in and other mods such as DSMlink. I always knew there was more left without all that, but it's a toss up now wether there is another tenth or two in the car as it sits. I think it's good for 11.30's with a better prepped track and warmer temps. The car actually "ran" better in July in the 70's than it did in October in the cooler weather. I too, would really like to run the EVO 3 16g at some point. And, while I do plan to run roadcourse trackdays, I'm not opposed to certain mods, but, I don't want to have to spend serious amounts of time or money to convert the car back to how it should be for those events. I'd like to take advantage of the weight loss going to a 1 gallon fuel cell, but, lots of work to convert back. I do have another car to do track days with, but, the idea was to get the talon out there and represent for DSM's. Well, we'll see what it all brings this year.

 

[pneumo]

I just weighed a balance shaft, it's 3 pounds 3 ounces each. That's not a huge savings, but it also removes a little bit of bearing drag, plus the rear shaft spins faster than the crank so it adds up.

It's nice having a game plan when modding the car. It helps to see what can be done and how much money/effort each mod will take. You can also compare the relative speed/power each mod should give so you can set priorities. Should you spend more on wheels and skip the lightweight driveshaft? What's worth more? These are tough questions. Whoever comes up with the best answer gets the record. There is no 'right' or 'wrong', just give it your best shot and see what you can do.

 

[Black_Bullet]

Thats what it comes down to, how much effort and time do you want to put into this. I think building the motor with insanely high compression, better cams, and intake manifold will give you the biggest gains in your attempts, but thats big money too. Have you ever looked at the Hawver cast intake manifold? They say its more of a midrange intake manifold. The Hawver is what I run, it was a sick match with my Kelford 272 cams when I had a e316g on the car. Not to bench race as I blew my 16g at 40+psi but, with my cars weight on ethanol with the aggressive tune I was running, I believe mines couldve did low 11s and mid/high 120mph traps all day with that setup, and even better if I had better tires, and a built bottom end with very high compression ( Like say 12:1 like my friend runs.) That is were big power gains are found.

Chasing the 14b times are interesting as your prepping your car to have a LOT of potential when you upgrade the turbo, due to the amount of attention to detail it takes to go fast with stock turbo, but I think it would be more entertaining for yourself and most people to see what you can do with this type of effort put into a e316g setup. Anyways here was some results on another guys car Ive spoken with running Hawver and E316g- I dont know how this will perform on a 14b car nor whether Bucci was running it during his 14b runs but just for piece of mind...
http://www.hawvermotorsports.com/images/dyno/hawver_dynosheet.jpg

p.s The Hawver, along with any aftermarket IM, weighs less than the stock manifolds by a few lbs!

 

[Phil1320]

I just weighed a balance shaft, it's 3 pounds 3 ounces each. That's not a huge savings, but it also removes a little bit of bearing drag, plus the rear shaft spins faster than the crank so it adds up.

It's nice having a game plan when modding the car. It helps to see what can be done and how much money/effort each mod will take. You can also compare the relative speed/power each mod should give so you can set priorities. Should you spend more on wheels and skip the lightweight driveshaft? What's worth more? These are tough questions. Whoever comes up with the best answer gets the record. There is no 'right' or 'wrong', just give it your best shot and see what you can do.

Ok, don't know why I thought 7.5 lbs. So, anyway, 6.5 lbs. total, maybe I weighed both together and still got it wrong
I definitely always have a game plan for sure, but my plans are looking pretty slim at this point. I'm gonna give one last shot this year if I can and most likely turn in my 14b drag race gloves.

It will be interesting to see what everyone can accomplish this year and what seems to be the most important ingredient for 14b speed.

Thats what it comes down to, how much effort and time do you want to put into this. I think building the motor with insanely high compression, better cams, and intake manifold will give you the biggest gains in your attempts, but thats big money too. Have you ever looked at the Hawver cast intake manifold? They say its more of a midrange intake manifold. The Hawver is what I run, it was a sick match with my Kelford 272 cams when I had a e316g on the car. Not to bench race as I blew my 16g at 40+psi but, with my cars weight on ethanol with the aggressive tune I was running, I believe mines couldve did low 11s and mid/high 120mph traps all day with that setup, and even better if I had better tires, and a built bottom end with very high compression ( Like say 12:1 like my friend runs.) That is were big power gains are found.

Chasing the 14b times are interesting as your prepping your car to have a LOT of potential when you upgrade the turbo, due to the amount of attention to detail it takes to go fast with stock turbo, but I think it would be more entertaining for yourself and most people to see what you can do with this type of effort put into a e316g setup. Anyways here was some results on another guys car Ive spoken with running Hawver and E316g- I dont know how this will perform on a 14b car nor whether Bucci was running it during his 14b runs but just for piece of mind...
http://www.hawvermotorsports.com/images/dyno/hawver_dynosheet.jpg

I have actually thought about the Hawver piece. It is sweet. But, those runners still look pretty short to me, which won't help on my set up I don't think, although in a drag racing situation where I'm wide open throttle from being staged until through the traps, it may produce gains in the only areas I see for rpm.... I'm not sure if the Hawver was on Bucci's Laser for the 14b passes, might have only been 16g.

 

[Black_Bullet]

Ok, don't know why I thought 7.5 lbs. So, anyway, 6.5 lbs. total, maybe I weighed both together and still got it wrong
I definitely always have a game plan for sure, but my plans are looking pretty slim at this point. I'm gonna give one last shot this year if I can and most likely turn in my 14b drag race gloves.

It will be interesting to see what everyone can accomplish this year and what seems to be the most important ingredient for 14b speed.



I have actually thought about the Hawver piece. It is sweet. But, those runners still look pretty short to me, which won't help on my set up I don't think, although in a drag racing situation where I'm wide open throttle from being staged until through the traps, it may produce gains in the only areas I see for rpm.... I'm not sure if the Hawver was on Bucci's Laser for the 14b passes, might have only been 16g.

Would be a good thing to find out, and also those plenum spacer gaskets that reduce heat to the intake manifold also slightly act as 'longer runners'. Just a thought...