Real world data...

2007 Mullis 1910 lbs going down track
Alum Sunset 9* 632
Made 1280 with the 2.125 Bore 1250 that was on it then
30* timing (max 32) leaving at 4000 in Huntsville, AL last Oct.
DA was 1750

I have changed to a 2.350 carb that made 40 more HP and 13 more TQ so we will see what it does this year.

quote:

Originally posted by TonyB6255:
Real world data...

2007 Mullis 1910 lbs going down track
Alum Sunset 9* 632
Made 1280 with the 2.125 Bore 1250 that was on it then
30* timing (max 32) leaving at 4000 in Huntsville, AL last Oct.
DA was 1750

I have changed to a 2.350 carb that made 40 more HP and 13 more TQ so we will see what it does this year.

Id be very disappointed

unfortunately I have to agree. I have a friend with the same engine from the same builder that too has run low 4.40s but at 2050lbs. His engine is there right now being freshened and updated.

I went a 4.43 @ 15x (I think it was 156, have to find the timeslip) with my stuff still tuning. Yeah, slightly bigger engine (665"), with a lot more in it. 1965ish lbs. I'd think a well tuned 632 with the 9* heads would be a lot faster than that.

quote:

Originally posted by TonyB6255:
Real world data...

2007 Mullis 1910 lbs going down track
Alum Sunset 9* 632
Made 1280 with the 2.125 Bore 1250 that was on it then
30* timing (max 32) leaving at 4000 in Huntsville, AL last Oct.
DA was 1750

I have changed to a 2.350 carb that made 40 more HP and 13 more TQ so we will see what it does this year.

A 9 degree headed 632, profiler tunnel ram, two carbs (no Q16) will make an honest 1360 plus HP and go 4.10's in a 1900lbs dragster and 6.40's in the quarter in good air. A friend has this combo with heads from Sunset that runs these numbers.

SO
Take about 50HP away from the TR to single cast intake and it should run about a tenth slower in the 1/4 and .06 - .07 slower in the 1/8. Conservatively, using a CF of 2.5 % to adjust from good air to 1750 DA it would run 6.60's in the quarter and 4.20's in the 1/8. Add another tenth just because, that's 6.70's and 4.30's.

4.55 @ 155 is well short of that, something is wrong in the combo and or tune up. 60' looks OK though.

Honestly a lot of engine builders can build SR20 engines that make really good power. What is not in their control is the application it is put in and what weight, converter, trans, etc. Having an engine that can make great numbers on a dyno doesn't translate to what it will do on the track. Everyone sets their cars up for the type of racing they will be doing. Some want to big money race, some class race, and some local race. How your car is setup will dictate how light or heavy your chassis maybe which will then affect the ET it can produce. I set my car up so that I can double it whenever and I wanted it to have all the safety items I could. I knew when I selected my motor combo that I would need a motor large enough to go what I wanted with how I setup my car.

the way I tune stuff I need a 706 to run super street and still wont go 140 @ 10.90

ep-d@mmit man. whomper would you please help me

ep if he won't I will.

I knew you would be there for me 1290.

ep-whomper is a friend in name only

quote:

Originally posted by CManuel:
Everyone sets their cars up for the type of racing they will be doing. I knew when I selected my motor combo that I would need a motor large enough to go what I wanted with how I setup my car.

Cameron this thread has nothing to do with setup. It's all about who all is running what with 20 degree heads with how many cubic inches and at what weight. You chose the fastest if not the quickest too 20 degree headed engine in a bracket/super comp in the country

quote:

Originally posted by CManuel:
Honestly a lot of engine builders can build SR20 engines that make really good power. What is not in their control is the application it is put in and what weight, converter, trans, etc. Having an engine that can make great numbers on a dyno doesn't translate to what it will do on the track. Everyone sets their cars up for the type of racing they will be doing. Some want to big money race, some class race, and some local race. How your car is setup will dictate how light or heavy your chassis maybe which will then affect the ET it can produce. I set my car up so that I can double it whenever and I wanted it to have all the safety items I could. I knew when I selected my motor combo that I would need a motor large enough to go what I wanted with how I setup my car.

I agree with what you stated above with regards to ET. MPH has a direct relationship to HP once the weight is fixed. So unless there are issues outside the motor itself, it should still run dam close MPH wise in the quarter no matter what the ET is within reason 1/4 mile racing! 1/8 racing is a bit different than 1/4 however and MPH can be impacted by the 1 to 2 shift point vs peak HP where as it's not in the quarter. Shifting early can easily knock 2 MPH off on full run.
Under normal racing conditions, MPH is HP and ET is how well you use it.

Am I disappointed? No. I got the engine back on a Thurs, put it in and was loaded and headed to Alabama on Monday. I made a stop in Boise and had to swap converters. There was no time for any tuning. The converter I had to put in is a little tight. Top38. It's not 4.55.. The 4.42 was literally the 4th pass on that engine and out of the trailer at Huntsville. I know that I needed to pull some jet as well but it was tracking to weather so I left it alone.

Realistically, it should go low 4.30's at 158-160 at 1318 hp. My 11* went 4.40 @ 156 in the same car with 70hp less on the same dyno. If after some tuning and converter changes, it doesn't go low 4.30's then I will be disappointed.

But please, post your time slips with weight/combo. I would love to see a 1900# car with single carb 632 (not 665) going 4.20's and 6.70's in Huntsville humidity.

quote:

Originally posted by TOP38:

quote:

Originally posted by imakehp:
"So the weight of the driver means zero..."

I have to dispute that..weight is weight...I won't even get into sprung and unsprung weight.

Are you applying for a job with the media? Seams so since you have taken one sentence in my post to use it for your own purpose!
So to be clear, my point regarding those who state that there cars are heavy because of a larger driver is false with regards to overall weight of one car vs another! Bottom line is total weight, period! If this is not what you took away from reading my post it is because you were looking for something else, sprung or unsprung.

Here's a question from you since your a weight expert, if a car hit you here on earth at 100 MPH vs floating in space, would it hurt the same? You weigh zero in space!

I took one sentence out of you post because I didn't care about the rest of the post. As written, I didn't understand the context of it apparently. I still don't understand how that sentence doesn't mean exactly what it says. I'm certain it's my shortcoming, not yours.
So, don't let my misunderstanding of verbage stop all the offseason "what-if'n"

quote:

Originally posted by imakehp:

quote:

Originally posted by TOP38:

quote:

Originally posted by imakehp:
"So the weight of the driver means zero..."

I have to dispute that..weight is weight...I won't even get into sprung and unsprung weight.

Are you applying for a job with the media? Seams so since you have taken one sentence in my post to use it for your own purpose!
So to be clear, my point regarding those who state that there cars are heavy because of a larger driver is false with regards to overall weight of one car vs another! Bottom line is total weight, period! If this is not what you took away from reading my post it is because you were looking for something else, sprung or unsprung.

Here's a question from you since your a weight expert, if a car hit you here on earth at 100 MPH vs floating in space, would it hurt the same? You weigh zero in space!

I took one sentence out of you post because I didn't care about the rest of the post. As written, I didn't understand the context of it apparently. I still don't understand how that sentence doesn't mean exactly what it says. I'm certain it's my shortcoming, not yours.
So, don't let my misunderstanding of verbage stop all the offseason "what-if'n"

Oh and BTW...Newton's laws rule - everywhere!

QUOTE]


Oh and BTW...Newton's laws rule - everywhere![/QUOTE]

Yes they do!

So, everything ok? Just a misunderstanding? Everything is in the shytter now days, don't want it here lol

quote:

Originally posted by imakehp:
So, everything ok? Just a misunderstanding? Everything is in the shytter now days, don't want it here lol

Well that depends, did you vote for Trump or the Evil Empire? LOL

quote:

Huntsville humidity.

Them there's the key words right their..."grains"

I've watched Whomp go 4.3X at Huntsville many of times. Ran that number so many times he thru the center section right out of her!

quote:

Originally posted by WHOMPWHOMP:
]

Id be very disappointed[/QUOTE]

Whomp, what is your combo and how fast at Huntsville? You can PM me if you want. I am genuinely curious.

quote:

Originally posted by TonyB6255:
Real world data...

2007 Mullis 1910 lbs going down track
Alum Sunset 9* 632
Made 1280 with the 2.125 Bore 1250 that was on it then
30* timing (max 32) leaving at 4000 in Huntsville, AL last Oct.
DA was 1750

I have changed to a 2.350 carb that made 40 more HP and 13 more TQ so we will see what it does this year.

More Real World Data...

2007 Undercover 1930 lbs going down track
Alum Stinnett 11* 615
Made 1250 with 1150 Stinnett Carb
32* timing leaving at 4500 in Topeka, KS in September
DA was around 1500.
4.10 gear, 34.5 Hoosiers, 1.80 planetary, Super Comp Style converter.

1.032
2.872
4.448
155.49
5.822
6.997
190.83

https://imgur.com/a/I9pUTNM