took the K&N to the track.

fazm83 · Nov 12, 2005

Made my first visit to the track since installing my K&N aircharger intake. Was pretty impressed. Only modifying i did to the tune was +2% fuel at WOT just to be safe, dont know if it harmed it or helped it.
This time i left my tire pressure at 32psi, instead of lowering it to 22psi like i did last time (i got better 60' last time, but no intake).

ill attach the timeslip image, but it was a 14.73@ 93.64mph (corrected for sealevel 14.54@94.85mph). For comparison, 2 weeks ago, pre-intake my best was a 14.91 @ 92mph
ill type it out too

r/t .182
60' 2.150
330' 6.130
1/8 9.454
mph 73.81
1000' 12.318
1/4 14.735
mph 93.64

P.S. The car i ran against was an 05 mustang gt, blue with stripes, looked very nice.

Jimp · Nov 12, 2005

fazm83 said:
Made my first visit to the track since installing my K&N aircharger intake. Was pretty impressed. Only modifying i did to the tune was +2% fuel at WOT just to be safe, dont know if it harmed it or helped it.
This time i left my tire pressure at 32psi, instead of lowering it to 22psi like i did last time (i got better 60' last time, but no intake).

ill attach the timeslip image, but it was a 14.73@ 93.64mph (corrected for sealevel 14.54@94.85mph). For comparison, 2 weeks ago, pre-intake my best was a 14.91 @ 92mph
ill type it out too

r/t .182
60' 2.150
330' 6.130
1/8 9.454
mph 73.81
1000' 12.318
1/4 14.735
mph 93.64

P.S. The car i ran against was an 05 mustang gt, blue with stripes, looked very nice.

Very nice! :Teh-Win:

scrming · Nov 12, 2005

fazm83 said:
Made my first visit to the track since installing my K&N aircharger intake. Was pretty impressed. Only modifying i did to the tune was +2% fuel at WOT just to be safe, dont know if it harmed it or helped it.
This time i left my tire pressure at 32psi, instead of lowering it to 22psi like i did last time (i got better 60' last time, but no intake).

ill attach the timeslip image, but it was a 14.73@ 93.64mph (corrected for sealevel 14.54@94.85mph). For comparison, 2 weeks ago, pre-intake my best was a 14.91 @ 92mph
ill type it out too

r/t .182
60' 2.150
330' 6.130
1/8 9.454
mph 73.81
1000' 12.318
1/4 14.735
mph 93.64

P.S. The car i ran against was an 05 mustang gt, blue with stripes, looked very nice.

Very cool!!!

rygenstormlocke · Nov 12, 2005

fazm83 said:
Made my first visit to the track since installing my K&N aircharger intake. Was pretty impressed. Only modifying i did to the tune was +2% fuel at WOT just to be safe, dont know if it harmed it or helped it.
This time i left my tire pressure at 32psi, instead of lowering it to 22psi like i did last time (i got better 60' last time, but no intake).

ill attach the timeslip image, but it was a 14.73@ 93.64mph (corrected for sealevel 14.54@94.85mph). For comparison, 2 weeks ago, pre-intake my best was a 14.91 @ 92mph
ill type it out too

r/t .182
60' 2.150
330' 6.130
1/8 9.454
mph 73.81
1000' 12.318
1/4 14.735
mph 93.64

P.S. The car i ran against was an 05 mustang gt, blue with stripes, looked very nice.

cool!!! Just out of curorisity, what kind of car was racing against you?

Longhornd00d · Nov 12, 2005

That's awesome dude. What was the difference in the enivronment from your pre-intake run and this run (temperature, humidity, etc.)?

fazm83 · Nov 12, 2005

Temp was bout the same (within 2 degrees, but i went earlier in the day, so it might have been the exact same), so i would assume the humidity was bout the same too.

Like i said, the car i ran against was a 2005 mustang GT.

fazm83 · Nov 12, 2005

Another sidenote from last night. I lost to a jetta on nitrous, he hit it VERY late, and i dont know why. I had him at the 1/8 mile mark, he hit the nitrous just before that.

As you can see, even though he only won by a tenth, he was nearly 10mph faster lol. (i had him by over .2 in the 1/8, it was like out of fast and the furious how he flew by, he even put on his hazards like a lil queer lol)

steelwindmachin · Nov 16, 2005

some drag radials would help knock that ET down but cutting down your 60'.... could prolly get to a 14.5 or less.

bigcat · Nov 16, 2005

what did the GT run? when i click on the image, its all blurry.......

Jimp · Nov 16, 2005

bigcat said:
what did the GT run? when i click on the image, its all blurry.......

13.49

fazm83 · Nov 17, 2005

Ya the Gt had at least exhaust done to it, and it was a 5 speed.

bigcat · Nov 17, 2005

fazm83 said:
Ya the Gt had at least exhaust done to it, and it was a 5 speed.

well if it had axle backs, it didnt gain any power. good race though, i bet you suprised him!!

fazm83 · Nov 18, 2005

gains power, just none thats gonna ultimately help him., but it could have had more than just axle backs, it sounded nice as hell though. He had stripes and all that good stuff, lil body kit parts. since he ran a 13.49 then and i think he ran a 13.3 against another 05 mustang gt, ill assume hes done more than just exhaust work.

But ya, i had a better reaction time and a decent 60', im sure he didnt expect me to hang that close to him

took the K&N to the track.

fazm83

New Member

Jimp

New Member

scrming

New Member

rygenstormlocke

former 10 second badass

Longhornd00d

New Member

fazm83

New Member

fazm83

New Member

steelwindmachin

New Member

bigcat

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is

Jimp

New Member

fazm83

New Member

bigcat

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is

fazm83

New Member

took the K&N to the track.

New Member

New Member

New Member

former 10 second badass

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is

New Member

New Member

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is

New Member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency