What kind of G's (force) can a protouring firstgen put out?

THX 138 · Nov 20, 2005

What kind of G's (force) can a protouring firstgen put out? with stock but modified suspension. (shelby drop, big swaybars etc..) Is a '67 still a firstgen or 2nd? I'm more familiar with GM's thanks :SNSign:

HHStang · Nov 20, 2005

As many G's as you can afford to pay..

THX 138 · Nov 20, 2005

HHStang said:
As many G's as you can afford to pay..

Newton might disagree with you.

Edbert · Nov 20, 2005

Pure stock suspension on bia-ply tires I'd say around 0.65 or so. With a high dollar race setup on racing tires 1.1 should be about the practical limit.

What HH was saying is the same answer to the question of "what's the best 1/4 mile time" or "absolute top speed"...how much money do you have?

Mustangs don't have the strict "generation" thing like Camaros and Vettes do, but in general the 65-73 are the classics, the 74-78 is the Mustang-II, the 79-93 are Foxes, 94-2003 are SN95s and 2005+ are SN197s.

65up2d8 · Nov 21, 2005

Edbert said:
Pure stock suspension on bia-ply tires I'd say around 0.65 or so. With a high dollar race setup on racing tires 1.1 should be about the practical limit.

What HH was saying is the same answer to the question of "what's the best 1/4 mile time" or "absolute top speed"...how much money do you have?

Mustangs don't have the strict "generation" thing like Camaros and Vettes do, but in general the 65-73 are the classics, the 74-78 is the Mustang-II, the 79-93 are Foxes, 94-2003 are SN95s and 2005+ are SN197s.

I am dated in my knowledge on this subject, and I'm sure Edbert has done his homework on this subject, as he has on every subject I've seen him interject on. It may have been nothing more than marketing claims they couldn't back up, but Global West claimed in or around 1997 that a '65 Mustang with their full suspension would do better than 1.0. I certainly do not know the veracity of that statement, but I do know that there have been numerous innovations since that time.
Logic tells me that Edbert is correct, though, as 1.1 g's is unbelievable even for exotics. From what I've been able to ascertain, and although you will, undoubtedly, get some PR claims, I would contact Grigg's Racing with your question if it means that much to you. From what I can tell, they are pretty much the undisputed leader in this area. BTW, their prices reflect that opinion too. I will add, as others have already said, it is a matter of how much you want to spend.

65 fastback · Nov 21, 2005

Billgear posted on VMF that he ran a Race Technology Performance meter in his car on the track at Infineon Raceway. The meter evidently measures g-forces in all directions. In his post he has a link to the screen shot data from the RTP meter.
His best G-readings:
Right side G - 1.024
Left side G - 1.032
Breaking G - 0.877

Here's a link to his post - http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/f...ords=+Billgear&topic=&Search=true#Post1299964 - I hope I'm not stepping on his toes by posting this information here, but I found it very interesting and quite impressive.

Tim

Edbert · Nov 21, 2005

Stop that, I'm blushing here. I don't consider myself an expert on much, more like knowing a little about a lot.

Race cars often get past the 1.1 figure, but we're talking about purpose-made cars costing in excess of $250,000.00...LOL.

You can sink $5-7K into your classic's suspension and embarass many a ricer or Vette owner, particularly those who underestimate your car, which most ricers and Vette drivers do as a matter of routine.

bnickel · Nov 21, 2005

65 fastback said:
Billgear posted on VMF that he ran a Race Technology Performance meter in his car on the track at Infineon Raceway. The meter evidently measures g-forces in all directions. In his post he has a link to the screen shot data from the RTP meter.
His best G-readings:
Right side G - 1.024
Left side G - 1.032
Breaking G - 0.877

Here's a link to his post - http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/f...ords=+Billgear&topic=&Search=true#Post1299964 - I hope I'm not stepping on his toes by posting this information here, but I found it very interesting and quite impressive.

Tim

i believe that Billgear is also running a 275/40-17 tire in front and a 315/40-17 in the rear, or at least something close to that. i'm not 100% sure on the aspect ratio but i'm quite certain on the widths 275 front and 315 rear. that's a bunch of tire and he has the fender flares to prove it.

somehow i seem to remember that the boss 302 TA cars were capable of something like 1.2 G's in the cornering department

HistoricMustang · Nov 21, 2005

It depends on the track and especially the banking.

The most I felt in the seat of my pants was at Lowes.

HistoricMustang
www.historicmustang.com

krash kendall · Nov 21, 2005

If the car breaks free at 1.1 right G on the flat it will break loose at 1.1 right G in a bank. It will just be travelling alot faster when it reaches that limit. Banking moves the vector of the side force down towards the normal axis of the car converting them into positive vertical G's in relation to the car and occupants. Therefore in a theoretical enviroment, if the bank was increased to 90 degrees the car would not be exposed to any right of left G's.

HistoricMustang · Nov 21, 2005

krash kendall said:
If the car breaks free at 1.1 right G on the flat it will break loose at 1.1 right G in a bank. It will just be travelling alot faster when it reaches that limit. Banking moves the vector of the side force down towards the normal axis of the car converting them into positive vertical G's in relation to the car and occupants. Therefore in a theoretical enviroment, if the bank was increased to 90 degrees the car would not be exposed to any right of left G's.

OH yea? What about this:

Forgive a small amount of math, but if this turn is made at constant altitude and at constant forward speed we can calculate that the lift required to support the weight of the aircraft is:

L = W / Cos x , where W is the weight and x is the bank angle.

Also, the centripetal force, which is the horizontal component providing the turning force is:

T = W / Sin x , where W is the weight and x is the bank angle.

We could also express these relationships in terms of acceleration units, or "Gs". A "G" is simply the accleration due to gravity. Force is mass x acceleration, so if the mass of the aircraft is m, and the acceleration due to gravity is G, then we can restate the first relationship as:

m LA = mG / Cos x, where LA is the net acceleration perpendicular to the surface of the wing.

Note that the mass term may be divided out of both sides of the expression which leaves us with:

LA = G / Cos x

And this?

HistoricMustang
www.historicmustang.com

Just talkin' trash!

krash kendall · Nov 21, 2005

Now, now, we all know cars don't make coordinated banked turns and the driver isn't constantly being reminded to "Keep the ball in the centre!". Actually your cool IMG illustrates my earlier point as I'm sure you already know. I was going to edit in "Blah, blah, blah.." because I caught myself rambling on again. And, yes I am also a pilot. I think there are quite a few on the site here.

Bullitt · Nov 21, 2005

also depends a lot on tires, surface, etc etc.

tires will be the biggest determining factor in terms of equipment. i don't see any problem getting 1-1.1 on race tires with proper setup. i don't think you could hit 1.2, but i wouldn't rule it out (take a lot of money to get there though).

ForceFed70 · Nov 21, 2005

Keep in mind that he's talking about stock "but modified" suspenion.

With a shelby drop, upgraded swaybars, adjustable shocks, new wide tires...I think the best you'll do is somewhere close to 0.9g's

180 Out · Nov 21, 2005

bnickel said:
i believe that Billgear is also running a 275/40-17 tire in front and a 315/40-17 in the rear, or at least something close to that. i'm not 100% sure on the aspect ratio but i'm quite certain on the widths 275 front and 315 rear. that's a bunch of tire and he has the fender flares to prove it.

If you look at Bill Gear's sig pic, besides being huge those are racing tires too. Obviously you can't tell from a pic if they're D.O.T. legal, but if they are then they would last about 10,000 miles on the street, at best. In round figures that would come to about ten cents per mile in tire costs.

66StangFastback · Nov 21, 2005

Ok, all this talk, but what are the stock vette's these days putting down in the this department? What about the mustangs?

180 Out · Nov 22, 2005

66StangFastback said:
Ok, all this talk, but what are the stock vette's these days putting down in the this department? What about the mustangs?

The December 2005 Car & Driver has a comparison test of the Z06 Corvette and the Viper Coupe. Both registered 1.01 g on the 300' skidpad.

FYI, the Z06 weighs 3147 lbs and runs Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar EMT 275/35-18's and 325/30-19's. The Viper weighs 3470 lbs and runs Michelin Pilot Sport Zero Pressure 275/35-18's and 345/30-19's.

Kind of puts a 1.00 g claim in perspective, doesn't it? I think it's safe to say a standard Vette would be a little slower, and a Mustang -- '06 or '66 -- a lot slower.

What kind of G's (force) can a protouring firstgen put out?

THX 138

Member

HHStang

Member

THX 138

Member

Edbert

65up2d8

Member

65 fastback

Edbert

bnickel

HistoricMustang

Active Member

krash kendall

Active Member

HistoricMustang

Active Member

Attachments

krash kendall

Active Member

Bullitt

Packin' Heat

ForceFed70

That's why they call it "dope"

180 Out

Member

66StangFastback

New Member

180 Out

Member

Similar threads

What kind of G's (force) can a protouring firstgen put out?

Member

Member

Member

Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Attachments

Active Member

Packin' Heat

That's why they call it "dope"

Member

New Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency