• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-

Do I have a low 13 second car?? With traction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kdubslugga
  • Start date Start date Jun 27, 2006

Kdubslugga

Active Member
Jun 7, 2003
1,515
3
38
Akron, OH
Jun 27, 2006
#1
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #1
I just did a t5 swap and went to the track for the 1st time last week, now that said. Before with the Aod i ran a 13.8 at 101.10. That was with a 2.14 and bogging like crazy and falling on its face. With the t5 i launched at 2500 and spun all through first and part of 2nd with a 2.04 60ft time and my trap was 101.90s and even 1 102mph trap speed. My ETs where 14.3s and i attribute it all to my bad driving!! I was using my freinds BFG Drag radials because my ET streets where shot!! Also on my 102 trap speed run i hit the rev limiter before the 1-2 shift and 2-3 shift which im assuming really hurt my trap speed. Its gonna take alot to get used to this car, it revs a hell of alot faster now!! So anyway i just bought some new ET Streets and im heading back to the track, im told with a 102 trap speed i could hit a low 13, is that possible cause a 14.3 at 102 is kinda embarassing!
 

88 Fox GT

Active Member
Nov 18, 2002
1,674
0
36
Iowa
Jun 27, 2006
#2
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #2
I would say that mid 13s are easily reachable. I mean it ran 13.8 before with an AOD and you said it was falling on its face, so I think you could get better time with some good driving and traction.
 

brian15

New Member
Oct 16, 2003
81
0
0
Jun 27, 2006
#3
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #3
just need to sharpen them driving skills but sounds like you already know that ....

ive seen a few people bust a 12.9 with 102 mph ...

i personally went 13.11 @ 101.7 before
 

25thmustang

Mustang Master
Sep 5, 2003
2,021
85
99
Montgomery, NY
Jun 27, 2006
#4
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #4
I did 13.2s @ 101 all day with mid 1.7 60's. I have seen high 12s with 100 mph before, but Im sure a headwind had something to do with that. The right pass, 13.1-13.2.
 

mob

the guy who hits on his mom
20+ Year Stangneter
Oct 3, 2003
2,566
136
104
Dallas, TX
Jun 27, 2006
#5
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #5
low 13's will be easy with traction and 101mph, with some torque and light weight, youll could hit 12's at 102mph.
 

fidstang

New Member
Jul 19, 2005
307
0
0
South Lansing
Jun 27, 2006
#6
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #6
I see the trap speed and the 60ft. time but, missing the all important reaction time off of the tree.
 
P

Praetor

New Member
Jun 27, 2006
2
0
0
Jun 27, 2006
#7
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #7
fidstang said:
I see the trap speed and the 60ft. time but, missing the all important reaction time off of the tree.
Click to expand...


You know reaction time has nothing to do with ET, right?
 

fidstang

New Member
Jul 19, 2005
307
0
0
South Lansing
Jun 27, 2006
#8
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #8
Praetor said:
You know reaction time has nothing to do with ET, right?
Click to expand...

I disagree, it's what wins the race. If someone has a .4 reaction time and is running low 13's. He'll beat that person who is running low 14's that has a reaction time of 1.1 or .9. Just examples don't get stuck on the numbers. just trying to show that if your reaction time is .999 and your 60ft. is 2.2 you need to work on your launching and reaction to the lights.
 
9

90bronconate

New Member
Apr 24, 2005
124
0
0
Phoenix, AZ
Jun 27, 2006
#9
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #9
fidstang said:
I disagree, it's what wins the race. If someone has a .4 reaction time and is running low 13's. He'll beat that person who is running low 14's that has a reaction time of 1.1 or .9. Just examples don't get stuck on the numbers. just trying to show that if your reaction time is .999 and your 60ft. is 2.2 you need to work on your launching and reaction to the lights.
Click to expand...
ummmm ok.... but reaction time has nothing to do with ET....
 

25thmustang

Mustang Master
Sep 5, 2003
2,021
85
99
Montgomery, NY
Jun 27, 2006
#10
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #10
If a car runs 14.0 @ 99 with a .500 reaction time...

it will run a 14.0 @ 99 with a 50.000 reaction time. It doesnt matter unless your running brackets or racing heads up.

I still cant believe people dont know this.
 

Aliate X

Member
May 9, 2005
602
1
18
Rockland NY
Jun 27, 2006
#11
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #11
25thmustang said:
If a car runs 14.0 @ 99 with a .500 reaction time...

it will run a 14.0 @ 99 with a 50.000 reaction time. It doesnt matter unless your running brackets or racing heads up.

I still cant believe people dont know this.
Click to expand...

Yup, when ur just running for fun, R/T has nothing to do with ET. I have some timeslips with 6 second reaction times.
 

2000xp8

SN Certified Technician
Aug 8, 2003
8,019
1,615
194
NJ
Jun 27, 2006
#12
  • Jun 27, 2006
  • #12
Address the traction issue first, your car has very few mods, and spinning the tires on bfg drag radials that bad is your first issue, on the other hand bogging is another problem with 4.10's.

Sounds like you had the wrong tire pressure, or didn't heat the tires up properly.

You'll probably best somewhere around 13.50-13.70, when you get it right.
 

bubba-dough

Active Member
Dec 28, 2004
1,044
2
38
Indiana
Jun 28, 2006
#13
  • Jun 28, 2006
  • #13
fidstang said:
I disagree, it's what wins the race. If someone has a .4 reaction time and is running low 13's. He'll beat that person who is running low 14's that has a reaction time of 1.1 or .9. Just examples don't get stuck on the numbers. just trying to show that if your reaction time is .999 and your 60ft. is 2.2 you need to work on your launching and reaction to the lights.
Click to expand...
Your right on that part....to win the race, in heads up, its who crosses the finish line first. Thats where the reaction time comes in. A slower car could actually beat a faster car because of reaction time. But the question was not about winning a heads up race but rather lowering an e.t. In which case reaction time has no bearing what-so -ever.
 

87Mustang351

Member
Sep 12, 2005
220
1
16
Canada, Nova scotia, Cape Breton
Jun 28, 2006
#14
  • Jun 28, 2006
  • #14
i dont know why everyone launches there car at rpm if they dont have SLICKS i jsut dump my clutch at idel with street tires and it takes off in first no squeal when i hit second i burn but thats it with my own 1/4 mile and judging on my stero i ran in the 13's with my friend in with me and a LEAKY exhaust
 

just4bob50

Active Member
Apr 2, 2005
504
5
28
Pa.
Jun 28, 2006
#15
  • Jun 28, 2006
  • #15
I ran 13.50's in my vert (NA) at a little less than 102. That was with a 1.9 60ft.
 
P

Praetor

New Member
Jun 27, 2006
2
0
0
Jun 28, 2006
#16
  • Jun 28, 2006
  • #16
fidstang said:
I disagree, it's what wins the race. If someone has a .4 reaction time and is running low 13's. He'll beat that person who is running low 14's that has a reaction time of 1.1 or .9. Just examples don't get stuck on the numbers. just trying to show that if your reaction time is .999 and your 60ft. is 2.2 you need to work on your launching and reaction to the lights.
Click to expand...


It may decide who crosses the line first but it has no bearing on ET. To repeat, reaction time has no effect on ET.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Engine A few issues with my new 88 Foxbody that i couldnt find definitive answers to....
  • AydenTv
  • Mar 6, 2022
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
6
Views
2K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 23, 2022
7991LXnSHO
Updated: 1st Run In 86 Gt, Low Mph (in My Opinion) Any Ideas?
  • v8stang289
  • Sep 20, 2015
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
32
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 23, 2015
A5literMan
1992 5.0 Lx Auto Build Need Help/opinions!!!
  • Stonerboys
  • Aug 20, 2015
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 29, 2015
revhead347
Newbie
  • GalacticPonage
  • Jan 19, 2017
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
4
Views
2K
The Welcome Wagon Jan 22, 2017
Davedacarpainter
  • Locked
Just Some Suggestion's For Foxes
  • Detroiit
  • Jul 24, 2014
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 25, 2014
Noobz347
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -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?