![]() |
Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Ok, so i'm penny pinching here and having a huge debate with myself on whether I absolutely need a Magnus or like to acheive my goals. My goals are not Horsepower, they are et's at the track. I would like to acheive at least 11.99.
I have a brand new PTE 50trim, 780cc injectors, Griffin FMIC 2 1/2" piping, Dsmlink v2, Fidanza flywheel, ACT2600, 3" exhaust, 1g throttle body, stock 2g head, stock 2g intake, and all the other little mods.... Will have HKS 272's by spring. BTW- Car is a '99 GSX. Do you mandate a need for the over-pricey Magnus to achieve my goal? I'd like to save the $700 if my goals can be acheived without it. Bottom line- Can i make the power out of my 50trim and stock 2g head/intake? Thank you... I soon hope to end my debate. |
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Good driver, Good Track, Good Tuning, and a Good Run...... sure.
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
I would say consistent low 12's with that setup. Unless all the above criteria are met with a little luck.
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
It would be close on that set-up.
I would say before spending $700 on the Magnus SMIM, spend a couple hundred on a 1g head and intake. That would get you there, if the tuning is right. |
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Thanks guys! I actually have a 1g intake but no 1g head(YET). I've been looking for one for a few days now.
I ran a best of 14.05@102. with my old '97GST(sm16g) and now i wanna jump to 11.99 with my GSX. Something is wrong with that ;-) I'll keep looking. I hate to buy a head off ebay. Maybe i'll find one locally. |
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
That 102 trap should net you mid to low 13s with a good lauch. Probably better than that since a 101 trap speed had me in the 13.4 range with just a T25 turbo. Put the power to the ground with a good clutch, tire setup, and good track conditions.
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Yes, and that 102 trap was on a small 16g setup. Probably was the FWD! Wheel hopped like a bastard. The year after that 14.05, I pumped it up even more with alcohol injection, more boost and actually went slower et's because i simply wheel hopped even more. MPH stayed about the same 102ish. FWD's are simply for the highway and that's it. I'm a pretty good tuner i think. I have yet to learn all about dsmlink. I only tested it once before putting car away for winter.
I just wanna pound on my brothers back door is all. He's got a domestic car that runs 11.20's and for me to hit 11.99 would sorta make a statement. |
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Well I know that Jeremy Brandt ran a 12.28 @ ???? with his '99 GSX a couple years back. From what I can recall his mods were stock 7 bolt, FP T28, AFC, 660s, and a ACT 2600. I'm not sure what he was running for exhaust at the time but I believe it was a 2.5" turbo -back. I also believe that run was made at Tri-State Raceway at Earlville but Allan may correct me on that one. I'd say this all gives you a pretty good chance of breaking into the 11's.
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Quote:
ewwwww |
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Thanks Jakey for your input. That's sweet hope. Even 12.0's - 12.2's i think would make me very happy. I'd rather have a low 12 second car that's reliable than a 11 second car that goes thru tranny's, etc.. left/right.
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
With that setup you should into the 11's even without the intake manifold upgrade. If you can drive and are at a decent track.
CRAIG |
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Why would you use a 1g Head? If i recall the 2g head was better in a couple respects.
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Yes, i believe the 2g head is better in the long run because of the port angle or how the flow aims at the valves. I think if you're gonna get a sheet metal intake, the 2g head is better but if you're gonna stick with a stock intake, then the 1g stuff is better. That's not quoted by me, i read that on dsmtuner. What they say is that most of the hardcore people are starting to use 2g heads now.
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Quote:
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Quote:
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Quote:
I was thinking the same thing! LOL |
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Stock 1g head has easily ran 10s on many 1g AWDs. So has a 1g intake manifold. Heck, even the old 1g Al Blaha MAF ran mid 10s. Oh yeah....they were on the same car. Al Blaha (and a few others even) ran 10.5 at 132 with only 2g pistons in his block too. His block was never out of the car.
As for myself, I have personally ran many 14b cars to mid 12s on race gas and my own car ran mid 12s on pump with 11.98 as a best on race gas. So 11.99 should be fairly easy with a good setup like yours. Biggest factors.....driver and tuning. You have the equipment.....(BTW, Curt Brown ran 10.7 in his AWD on a FP Green....or 50-trim no NOS). Wiz |
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
My avenger ran 8.11 @87 mph on an 1/8th mile track. With alot less mods too... 560cc evo 8 injectors, stock engine/head, and a 20g with a cracked turbine housing.. (8.11 would come somewhere around a 12.6 1/4th) So, I would say you should hit that 11.99 for sure with your mods
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Quote:
|
Re: Is it possible to run 11.99 or better on my setup here.....
Sorry buddy, you can't publicly sell stuff yet. If you have something he might want send him a PM and ask him out of public view.
CRAIG |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.