That's "F**cked^3", isn't it?F=3200x268mph then F in this example actually will equal F**cked when you hit that immovable wall
My autometer speedo showed me doing 150 with my 347 stroker under the hood... dunno if it was accuret.
I know that was over 160 in their fox on a closed off track that told me it was rather stable...
about 135 is all a exhaust only aod car can get. with 2:88's
Figure 40 MPH per 1000 RPM using 2.73 gears and 225-60-15 tires. Turn 5000 RPM and that is 200 MPH. Of course, the car will go faster in 4th gear than 5th because the stock engine does not develop enough power to make the RPMs top out in 5th gear.
Believe it or not Shaolin schooled me on the aerodynamics of the stang. It has less coefficient drag that you would suspect. I think he said like .38 or something close to that.
I can remember an article 5.0 did where they built a 500 rwhp machine to do the race in Nevada and their goal was 200+mph and they hit it. Only thing they did for aerodynamics was front chin spoiler, lowering and a functional rear wing. I have heard of someone I know that was over 160 in their fox on a closed off track that told me it was rather stable...
Someone should have stayed awake in Algebra 101.Is there any way i could get these tailored to an aod's gear ratios? I'm trying to figure what my rpms would range on the highway (most of my driving is done there), mostly between the speeds of 55 to 75 mph. I know my aod with 2.73s cruises at about 2,000rpm at speeds of 75 - 80mph.
Nice grammar.I dont think that post about the cup car needing 860hp to go 220mph, remember those motors are meant to breath and more often than not they have VERY steep gear ratios, 4.10+ not only are they meant to haul ass they are also supposed to get there as fast as possible
Ok. We could sit here and argue semantics all day along with a theory thrown in for good measure. Reality is, that individual walked away to tell the story didnt heRather stable... that's a relative term... It must mean I would want my relatives to come visit me in the hospital when a gust of wind flipped my stang...
Whats that supposed to mean?
My fox is VERY stable at the 130mph+ speeds
I dont think that post about the cup car needing 860hp to go 220mph, remember those motors are meant to breath and more often than not they have VERY steep gear ratios, 4.10+ not only are they meant to haul ass they are also supposed to get there as fast as possible
Look at the lambo and ferrari cars, most of them make 500-600hp and they all go upwards of 200mpg with the same drag coefficient
If you want a stable top speed fox you need a few things
Front air splitter, a real one something that attatches the the base of the bumper
Vent reliefs in the hood, this does multiple things, but mostly removes air wash that gets trapped under the hood and causes the front end to lift
a GOOD rear spoiler, something laser cut and stainless or thick carbon, no mr body kit **** here
and IIRC the GT rear bumper is better for the low pressure area behind the bumper than any other bumper for our foxes, i BELIEVE i read that over on c-c
Nice grammar.What's your point? You "don't think" what? Of course, whatever it is you "think", you can back up with math and scientific data, right?
Let's not forget that race cars are designed to generate LOTS of downforce. That downforce also creates drag. The faster a race car goes, the more drag that is created by the production of the increased downforce. This drag compounds the drag already being produced just by the speed of the car.
And, seriously, are you saying that because a Ferrari can hit 200mph on 513hp (F50), a Fox Body could too?
I'm calculating you might get 185mph out of it, but it would take about 635hp to hit the double-century mark.
Extra points!!!! WOOHOO!!!Jeez i made the post late an night for ****s sake
And i never said it wouldnt take over 800hp to hit more than 200mph, im saying there is far more things going on than power to achieve those speeds. First off a standard body fox will NEVER reach 200mph even with 800hp+ the front end of the car will lift away from the ground far before that. Talk to cops who drove the SSP coupes back in the 80's and 90's during pursuits the could feel the steering move side to side and high speeds but the car wouldnt change course.
So if you're going to be a dick about it, did you factor in ALL the variables on how you'd achieve or wont achieve 185 mph? Including lowering the car, types of spoilers needed, air splitters, chassis modifications?
Also have to take in to account how the motor makes power, wheres its power band, is i geared for low end, was the motor engineered to make more torque or more horsepower, what rpms does it run to?
What about the tires?
What about brakes?
What about wheels?
BTW the 1995 F50 has a drag coefficient of .372 as well, wow now thats odd, must have more to do with just drag coefficients huh?
F50 generates 970lbs of downforce at 202mph
Not spectacular is it?
But extra points for being a tool
Extra points!!!! WOOHOO!!!
OK. We're basically on the same page. Since the topic is "theorectical speed", I did not factor all the practical things that would need to be done to actually achieve 200mph in a Fox Body. 635hp would be the power needed to do it, but that doesn't mean that it wouldn't achieve liftoff before then.
In practicality, you would have to make all kinds of aerodynamic changes to keep a Fox Body planted on the ground at those speeds. Those changes would also change the drag coefficient. A slick beast like the Ferrari F50 has a Cd that high because of all the ground effects it has to keep it from flying. It also has an engine/transmission combination that gets up into the power band fast and stays there. The problem with our cars is getting up the power curve before the drag curve overcomes it.
Back to theory... They say, "Speed costs. How fast do you want to go?" If you want to go 150mph in our 140mph cars, you're gonna need more oomph than some simple bolt-ons will provide. That little 10mph increase requires almost 25% more power to the rear wheels. 160mph would need 50% more.
Good stuff in here, its been a while since I have seen actual thought and math go into a 5.0 talk thread
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?