Who would win in 60'?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Aug 16, 2005 | 11:20 PM

#11

Patrick

Administrator

Joined: Mar 2005

Posts: 1,228

RE: Who would win in 60'?

vince, are you using a Gtech for these times? my car has 5 less hp than yours, stock and with a full inteior on a SLOW track, completely stock, with a full tank of gas i ran 17.1

i hate to argue but ive been racing for a long time...as long as ive been driving...and while my RT only runs low 16s, my other car ran mid 12s last year and is being revamped for later this season...so i know my stuff..and that is unreasonable..i would truly need video or a timeslip.

ive had 12 second runs with traction problems where i had a 1.9-2.0 60; times...it just isnt feasible

Aug 17, 2005 | 01:36 AM

#12

vinceaton

Thread Starter

Joined: May 2005

Posts: 89

From:

RE: Who would win in 60'?

No, I was on a timed track. And I'll try to dig up a timeslip for you. This was last September so it might be a little difficult.

Aug 17, 2005 | 09:32 PM

#13

vinceaton

Thread Starter

Joined: May 2005

Posts: 89

From:

RE: Who would win in 60'?

Another factor could be the weight of the cars couldn't it?

Eclipse 4100 lbs.
ZX2 2600 lbs.

Aug 17, 2005 | 10:46 PM

#14

wicked_outlander

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2004

Posts: 1,390

RE: Who would win in 60'?

yeah....power to weight ratio.

Aug 18, 2005 | 03:38 PM

#15

Patrick

Administrator

Joined: Mar 2005

Posts: 1,228

RE: Who would win in 60'?

ok..here is a review of the ZX2... http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/u...x.cfm/id/2261/
notice this line:

Quote:

Only one engine was offered: a new 110-horsepower, 2.0-liter 4-cylinder. A 5-speed manual transmission was standard, with 4-speed automatic optional.

with 110 hp there is NO WAY..absolutely no way, that an automatic with 110hp could run anywhere near a 1.9 60' time. it is physically impossible. with an assumed driveline loss of 0, which is also literally impossible, that car at 2600 lbs, is only good for a 16.72 QM with all perfect conditions. Automatic trannies have far more weight than to manual trannies, and the auto trans also accounts for a great deal more loss to the wheels than does the manual tranny. the more that i read this the sillier it seems...youre insisting that a 110hp car can keep up with my 466hp car which has steep gears for the dragstrip.

this guy has a 99, with the same drivetrain and all, with nitrous, and hes only pulling a 2.598 60..http://www.dragtimes.com/Ford-ZX2-Es...slip-5208.html

here is a link to ALL of the ZX2s on dragtimes...
http://www.dragtimes.com/Ford--ZX2-E...ag-Racing.html

also, the eclipse doesnt weigh anywhere near 4100lbs...unless the trunk is full of lead bricks.

Aug 18, 2005 | 06:44 PM

#16

talskinyguy

Joined: Aug 2005

Posts: 10

RE: Who would win in 60'?

Just because you have one timeslip that says you did it doesnt mean you actually did. I know someone who pulled off a .8 second 60' time according to his timeslip. Reality was more along the line of 1.6-1.8, which is what he was running every other time he went down the track.

Now, if you could repeat this over and over again I would believe you.

Aug 18, 2005 | 08:41 PM

#17

Patrick

Administrator

Joined: Mar 2005

Posts: 1,228

RE: Who would win in 60'?

ive also seen a dodge diesel run a 18.22 @ 750mph...

Aug 18, 2005 | 10:42 PM

#18

vinceaton

Thread Starter

Joined: May 2005

Posts: 89

From:

RE: Who would win in 60'?

You don't think they might have changed engines in 2003? I don't know. But i do know it ran 1.98 in 60' and consistently around 2.02 60'

P.S. I'm still looking for timeslip