• Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-

Check out these great track times! (PI 96GT)

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheSalad
  • Start date Start date Apr 22, 2006
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

TheSalad

New Member
Aug 3, 2003
372
0
0
Utah
Apr 22, 2006
#1
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #1
Right, so went out to the track today, not really knowing that to expect, but here we go..

1st Run : 15.288@90.43 MPH 60'=2.346
2nd Run : 14.869@92.76 MPH 60'=2.165
3rd Run : 15.037@94.30 MPH 60'=2.345

The first run was rubbish...the second one my launch felt good..and the third one, I power shifted 3-4, so I guess that would account for a better MPH..I wish I could have gotten one more run in with powershifting, but the track is retarded..no underground land drain..track got wet.

All these times were at 4200ft, 11% humidity, 30.15in pressure, and 80F.

Corrected for the 2nd run.. Corrected 13.59 @ 100.76MPH


Not too bad? What do you all think?
 

COramprat

...I can take it. I think.
20+ Year Stangneter
Mar 2, 2003
8,474
1,463
223
Sea of Tranquility
Apr 22, 2006
#2
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #2
I thought I was slow...



Work on your 60's. I can get consistant 2.0's on street tires. Air pressure at 23-24.
 

hotmustang331

Active Member
Apr 29, 2004
2,967
3
48
Bastrop,TX
Apr 22, 2006
#3
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #3
Fast for 4500 FT....not bad at all IMO.

You guys way up there dont really know what real power feels like lol. A 99-04 GT up there is slower than the 99-04 V6s down here. Do your cars *feel* slow, or is that all you know and feels normal? Just curious...I never been way up there before, so im not trying to be rude or anything lol.
 

TheSalad

New Member
Aug 3, 2003
372
0
0
Utah
Apr 22, 2006
#4
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #4
hotmustang331 said:
Fast for 4500 FT....not bad at all IMO.

You guys way up there dont really know what real power feels like lol. A 99-04 GT up there is slower than the 99-04 V6s down here. Do your cars *feel* slow, or is that all you know and feels normal? Just curious...I never been way up there before, so im not trying to be rude or anything lol.
Click to expand...


Yeah, it's kinda weird..I wonder what my car would feel like at a lower elevation..but it is all we know here..it kind of sucks.
Stupid air. Anyway, it is weird to see a Z06 Corvette only pull off a mid 13..haha...sucks for them
 

Ruckus46Gt

Member
Nov 26, 2003
385
0
16
Long Island
Apr 22, 2006
#5
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #5
i'd say get a tire asap on that car. Not bad times for the alt. The high mph was because of the higher 60. Its wierd if your 60 is a litthe higher normally your mph is high also. Ex. My first run at the track the other day with my new clutch set up gave me a 1.6 60' and i went 12.7x@108.1. My run at 12.52 and 12.54 both had 1.6x 60's and they trapped 107.81
 

hotmustang331

Active Member
Apr 29, 2004
2,967
3
48
Bastrop,TX
Apr 22, 2006
#6
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #6
^That seems to work for most, but my car is just the opposite. My car trapps well when I hook...if I spin on the launch any I will trap 1-2MPH lower lol. Same goes for my windows...if my drivers side window was half down (90% of the runs) I would go 107s. The times I rolled it up, it went 108 lol. Its funny how easy a MPH is gained sometimes lol. The 108.8 run I hooked and had the window up.
 

four six

Member
Jan 19, 2006
506
2
18
Hobart, IN
Apr 22, 2006
#7
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #7
I thought he would run faster with the Pi head swap. Or does he just need practice? Not putting ya down (I need it too)
 

Ruckus46Gt

Member
Nov 26, 2003
385
0
16
Long Island
Apr 23, 2006
#8
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #8
four six said:
I thought he would run faster with the Pi head swap. Or does he just need practice? Not putting ya down (I need it too)
Click to expand...
alt and the 60 foot it is what is killing his times. With a 1.7 60' he will be running around .5-.6 faster. Corrected thats around a 12.9 car.
 

myponyrocks

I have more billet on the Stang than most women ha
Apr 18, 2004
1,219
0
37
Apr 23, 2006
#9
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #9
times are only .4 seconds slower than my best high alt. run. Not bad, just keep going. Everytime I think I figured out how to luanch or shift... things change Or I take too long a break and have to relearn
 

DropTopPony

Noob Slayer
Founding Member
Aug 13, 2002
2,570
3
48
south jersey
Apr 23, 2006
#10
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #10
those times are very good for 4200 ft elevation and so so 60' times. With some practice its a 13.0 (elev corrected) car.
 

TheSalad

New Member
Aug 3, 2003
372
0
0
Utah
Apr 23, 2006
#11
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #11
Just a funny note, the 2nd run, I left my window down..

And, if I could have gone once more, I would have powershifted all of my shifts, that made a difference on the trap on the last one.
But, all in all, I need to work on the 60' times/ My tires, although only have like 8,000 miles on them, are more than 2 years old..hard rubber? The Mach 1 springs helped a lot I think.

I ran a tenth faster this weekend then I did in Vegas(2000ft) more than two years ago, but then again, I was babying my car in Vegas (new tranny).

Anyway, I have my work cut out for me on the 60' times

Thanks for the replies guys..I want to see what you all run up here
 

four six

Member
Jan 19, 2006
506
2
18
Hobart, IN
Apr 23, 2006
#12
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #12
Ruckus46Gt said:
alt and the 60 foot it is what is killing his times. With a 1.7 60' he will be running around .5-.6 faster. Corrected thats around a 12.9 car.
Click to expand...

What do ya mean corrected?
 

DropTopPony

Noob Slayer
Founding Member
Aug 13, 2002
2,570
3
48
south jersey
Apr 23, 2006
#13
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #13
four six said:
What do ya mean corrected?
Click to expand...
He is at 4600 ft elevation....that air is thinner and zaps power and performance making it unfair to compare with someone who is racing at sea level. So the times are adjusted to what he would be at sea level so that its a more common comparrison.
 

TheSalad

New Member
Aug 3, 2003
372
0
0
Utah
Apr 24, 2006
#14
  • Apr 24, 2006
  • #14
Here is the video of my third run:

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/CD7C69AB-A176-4AFA-B317-857D485B65C6.htm
 

Mike97gt

it doe snot
Founding Member
Jan 26, 1999
10,633
7
89
the people's republic of massachusetts
Apr 24, 2006
#15
  • Apr 24, 2006
  • #15
four six said:
What do ya mean corrected?
Click to expand...


corrected times are the real times as far as I am concerned. if you don't correct the times then all you are comparing is the ALT. of the track and the weather. in fact i wish ttrack slips would include corrected and non corrected times

My sig time is not corrected, but I run at sea level I think the DA number for that run in my sig was 29 feet
 

GDawg

Founding Member
Mar 22, 2002
1,469
19
68
Nevada
Apr 24, 2006
#16
  • Apr 24, 2006
  • #16
Crap... I live at 6,300 ft above sea level. I'm going to hate my first time at Bandimere... I'm sure it's at least 5,000 if not higher since it's next to Denver.
 

TheSalad

New Member
Aug 3, 2003
372
0
0
Utah
Apr 24, 2006
#17
  • Apr 24, 2006
  • #17
I am sorry that you live that high up..good luck Maybe you'll pull off a 16
Let me know.
 

Mike97gt

it doe snot
Founding Member
Jan 26, 1999
10,633
7
89
the people's republic of massachusetts
Apr 25, 2006
#18
  • Apr 25, 2006
  • #18
GDawg said:
Crap... I live at 6,300 ft above sea level. I'm going to hate my first time at Bandimere... I'm sure it's at least 5,000 if not higher since it's next to Denver.
Click to expand...



thats why I would never live where you live. Me and my girlfriend are picking out a place to move to after she is done with school.. and one of the biggest prioritys is how close to a track the place is, and how high the track is above sea level... I run 90 feet above sea level now, I don't want to be higher than 300 ft.
 

GDawg

Founding Member
Mar 22, 2002
1,469
19
68
Nevada
Apr 25, 2006
#19
  • Apr 25, 2006
  • #19
svttech76 said:
thats why I would never live where you live. Me and my girlfriend are picking out a place to move to after she is done with school.. and one of the biggest prioritys is how close to a track the place is, and how high the track is above sea level... I run 90 feet above sea level now, I don't want to be higher than 300 ft.
Click to expand...

Hey... everyone I run is at the same elevation so it's all relative. I love the Rockies. The women are hot here and they love... nevermind. That's a different topic.
 

myponyrocks

I have more billet on the Stang than most women ha
Apr 18, 2004
1,219
0
37
Apr 26, 2006
#20
  • Apr 26, 2006
  • #20
what GDawg is trying to say, is that we're all members of the milehigh club here, and we don't have to risk getting caught in a plane lavatory that wasn't made for double occupancy... but thats its own kinda fun too.

Gary you should be running low 15's mid 14s when you get that blower on
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
2016 Mustang Gt Auto With 3:55 Rear Track Times...
  • jelsis
  • May 26, 2016
  • 2015 - 2023 (S550) Mustang -General/Talk
Replies
4
Views
2K
2015 - 2023 (S550) Mustang -General/Talk Jun 5, 2016
echo7
New Track Times!
  • Rickyll7
  • Jun 26, 2010
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
1K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Jun 29, 2010
cronin49
C
New Track Times
  • Venom351R
  • Aug 12, 2009
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 5 6 7
Replies
130
Views
8K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 28, 2009
Venom351R
H
Whipple in 100% Street Trim track results
  • Hoboattacker
  • Apr 21, 2008
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
723
2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk- Apr 21, 2008
BJ1000RR
Went to the crappy track with the new gears
  • HoustonGT
  • Nov 25, 2006
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
1K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Nov 26, 2006
BurningRubber
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?