converting 1/4 mile time into horsepower,are the converter close?
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: vermont
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 84Z28
Engine: 305,s/r torquer heads,cam,headers
Transmission: 700 r4
converting 1/4 mile time into horsepower,are the converter close?
Car ran 14.68 at sea level, stock 15"radial ta tires ,transmission and 3.23 gears. car with me 3600 lbs. Has a eaton posi, subframe conectors,banks cat back , hedman headers and y pipe coated and modified to 3 inch outlet. edelbrock carb and intake ,s/r torquer heads and 420/440 lift cam with comp roller tip rockers. stock bottom lg4.best time before was 14.96. no posi and some leaner rods . hp converter says 225 to wheels ,270 flywheel. think this is close?
#2
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 51°N 114°W, 3500'
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 0
Received 123 Likes
on
104 Posts
Car: 87 IROC L98
Engine: 588 Alcohol BBC
Transmission: Powerglide
Axle/Gears: Ford 9"/31 spline spool/4.86
Without knowing temperature, humidity and barometric pressure, "at sea level" doesn't mean much.
14.68 and 3600 pounds works out to the 210 - 230 hp range but without knowing weather conditions, it's only a guess.
Flywheel hp doesn't mean much. It's the power that gets to the wheels that has to move the weight. You can increase the power to the wheels without touching the engine by reducing power losses in the driveline.
14.68 and 3600 pounds works out to the 210 - 230 hp range but without knowing weather conditions, it's only a guess.
Flywheel hp doesn't mean much. It's the power that gets to the wheels that has to move the weight. You can increase the power to the wheels without touching the engine by reducing power losses in the driveline.
#3
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: vermont
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 84Z28
Engine: 305,s/r torquer heads,cam,headers
Transmission: 700 r4
Originally posted by Stephen 87 IROC
Without knowing temperature, humidity and barometric pressure, "at sea level" doesn't mean much.
14.68 and 3600 pounds works out to the 210 - 230 hp range but without knowing weather conditions, it's only a guess.
Flywheel hp doesn't mean much. It's the power that gets to the wheels that has to move the weight. You can increase the power to the wheels without touching the engine by reducing power losses in the driveline.
Without knowing temperature, humidity and barometric pressure, "at sea level" doesn't mean much.
14.68 and 3600 pounds works out to the 210 - 230 hp range but without knowing weather conditions, it's only a guess.
Flywheel hp doesn't mean much. It's the power that gets to the wheels that has to move the weight. You can increase the power to the wheels without touching the engine by reducing power losses in the driveline.
#4
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 51°N 114°W, 3500'
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 0
Received 123 Likes
on
104 Posts
Car: 87 IROC L98
Engine: 588 Alcohol BBC
Transmission: Powerglide
Axle/Gears: Ford 9"/31 spline spool/4.86
That gives you a corrected HP number from ET of 214.11.
ET depends too much on traction. It can change a lot from run to run all by itself. MPH is a better indicator of HP and should change very little from run to run. If MPH and ET HP numbers are very close then you know you have good traction.
ET depends too much on traction. It can change a lot from run to run all by itself. MPH is a better indicator of HP and should change very little from run to run. If MPH and ET HP numbers are very close then you know you have good traction.
#5
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: vermont
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 84Z28
Engine: 305,s/r torquer heads,cam,headers
Transmission: 700 r4
I did four runs first one was how i drove it in last 3 lower tires down to 24 lbs, and i know that i am spining a little of the line maybe first 10 to 15 ft .i am sure some drag radial would help. but i only go once in awhile maybe if i can find some used ones.
60ft 2.294
1/8 9.583
1/4 14.823
mph 96.258
60ft 2.212
1/8 9.521
1/4 14.782
mph 95.358
60ft 2.172
1/8 9.448
1/4 14.709
mph 95.385
60ft 2.157
1/8 9.431
1/4 14.68
mph 95.275
60ft 2.294
1/8 9.583
1/4 14.823
mph 96.258
60ft 2.212
1/8 9.521
1/4 14.782
mph 95.358
60ft 2.172
1/8 9.448
1/4 14.709
mph 95.385
60ft 2.157
1/8 9.431
1/4 14.68
mph 95.275
#6
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 51°N 114°W, 3500'
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 0
Received 123 Likes
on
104 Posts
Car: 87 IROC L98
Engine: 588 Alcohol BBC
Transmission: Powerglide
Axle/Gears: Ford 9"/31 spline spool/4.86
The car probably got a little slower as it got hotter. The MPH is still pretty close. Ranging from 95.275 to 96.258 is only 1 mph difference.
Best ET = 214.11
Best MPH = 238.55
Worst MPH = 231.32
It's close but you're losing a bit of traction. Some sticky tires should bring the ET down into the 14.3 range. According to the mph, you're getting a corrected 230-240 hp to the wheels.
Those weather conditions actually put you 160 feet below sea level so the engine is making more power than normal. To run that MPH at that weight, you were actually creating 250 HP. If the weather conditions got worse or you went to a higher altitude, the car will slow down but the corrected HP will stay the same.
Best ET = 214.11
Best MPH = 238.55
Worst MPH = 231.32
It's close but you're losing a bit of traction. Some sticky tires should bring the ET down into the 14.3 range. According to the mph, you're getting a corrected 230-240 hp to the wheels.
Those weather conditions actually put you 160 feet below sea level so the engine is making more power than normal. To run that MPH at that weight, you were actually creating 250 HP. If the weather conditions got worse or you went to a higher altitude, the car will slow down but the corrected HP will stay the same.
#7
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: shawnee, ks
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 87 Firebird
Engine: 5.3 76mm
Transmission: Rossler TH400, PTC converter
Axle/Gears: Strange 12bolt, 3.08s
What were you using to find the corrected numbers, ive been looking for some good formulas or programs to make predictions for myself and others. NvM I checked your site Stephen
I second the sticky tire part, get those 60's under control, and it will run a much better time.
I second the sticky tire part, get those 60's under control, and it will run a much better time.
Last edited by MaxxMitchell; 09-26-2005 at 11:29 AM.
Trending Topics
#8
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 51°N 114°W, 3500'
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 0
Received 123 Likes
on
104 Posts
Car: 87 IROC L98
Engine: 588 Alcohol BBC
Transmission: Powerglide
Axle/Gears: Ford 9"/31 spline spool/4.86
I have ET calculation formulas in a spreadsheet. I'm sure there are similar formulas on the web since I spent many years tracking down every formula I needed from the web. Some from racing sites, others from aviation sites. It's all based on power over weight but an engine will make different power when at different altitudes. Weather conditions change the density altitude which also changes the amount of power the engine makes.
To really know how much power you put to the rear wheels, the car should be put on a chassis dyno. All chassis dynos are calibrated to sea level performance so dyno results in Florida will be the same in Denver. Problem is, you'll never see a dyno hp number from a 1/4 run because the dyno can't calculate friction and wind resistance and you'll never race at a perfect standard day, sea level condition.
To really know how much power you put to the rear wheels, the car should be put on a chassis dyno. All chassis dynos are calibrated to sea level performance so dyno results in Florida will be the same in Denver. Problem is, you'll never see a dyno hp number from a 1/4 run because the dyno can't calculate friction and wind resistance and you'll never race at a perfect standard day, sea level condition.
#9
Supreme Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1987 IROC-Z Camaro
Engine: 5.7 350 TPI - SLP Runners, AFPR, MSD Goodies
Transmission: 700R4 - Shift Kit, Corvette Servo
Axle/Gears: BW 9 bolt, 3.27s
TPI cars would be off a little bit on those conversions. It's all in the 60 ft vs trap vs et. Some may get high 13's, ect, but thats only because of a good launch and tq.
#10
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: vermont
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 84Z28
Engine: 305,s/r torquer heads,cam,headers
Transmission: 700 r4
Originally posted by Stephen 87 IROC
The car probably got a little slower as it got hotter. The MPH is still pretty close. Ranging from 95.275 to 96.258 is only 1 mph difference.
Best ET = 214.11
Best MPH = 238.55
Worst MPH = 231.32
It's close but you're losing a bit of traction. Some sticky tires should bring the ET down into the 14.3 range. According to the mph, you're getting a corrected 230-240 hp to the wheels.
Those weather conditions actually put you 160 feet below sea level so the engine is making more power than normal. To run that MPH at that weight, you were actually creating 250 HP. If the weather conditions got worse or you went to a higher altitude, the car will slow down but the corrected HP will stay the same.
The car probably got a little slower as it got hotter. The MPH is still pretty close. Ranging from 95.275 to 96.258 is only 1 mph difference.
Best ET = 214.11
Best MPH = 238.55
Worst MPH = 231.32
It's close but you're losing a bit of traction. Some sticky tires should bring the ET down into the 14.3 range. According to the mph, you're getting a corrected 230-240 hp to the wheels.
Those weather conditions actually put you 160 feet below sea level so the engine is making more power than normal. To run that MPH at that weight, you were actually creating 250 HP. If the weather conditions got worse or you went to a higher altitude, the car will slow down but the corrected HP will stay the same.
Last edited by onebad84z28; 09-27-2005 at 03:24 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
1992 Trans Am
History / Originality
27
05-10-2023 07:19 PM