137kw and only a 16.1sec quater

ebv8 · 25-09-2006, 10:50 AM

i got this time from a g-tech so its not exact but i would assume its close
terminal speed i got 90.1mph from a std weight 1991 fairmont
what can i go to get it into the mid 14's...i have 3.91 spooled diff waiting to go it as the car is a pig off the line.
i would assume that with a 90mph term speed i should be doing low 15's so is it just my rear end gears holding me back or is my car just slow

any ideas to get it faster let me know

0-100kmh is 7.8sec

XRQTR · 25-09-2006, 11:54 AM

Mate get it on the track, never used a g-tech so have no idea of accuracy, but ye with 137, if that is correct, you should be at least in the 15's.

347_XR8 · 25-09-2006, 05:16 PM

^^^^^ what he said!

ToddZC · 25-09-2006, 07:31 PM

In my experience, G-tech's are quite accurate. I'd believe it over what kw reading you get off a dyno. The best indication of a cars output is the mph at the end of the 1/4 mile. A dyno is good for a tuning tool, to get a before and after power reading.

jonbays · 25-09-2006, 08:05 PM

from evrything else quoted you woud think mid 15's would be closer to the mark.

i doubt this is a flattering gtech result

EF_Ghia · 25-09-2006, 08:34 PM

Im assuming its an auto? Did you stall it up..

You could'v been driving on a slight uphill? Does the G-tech compensate for that... i dunno how they work just an idea.

137kw 90.1 would give you 15.5, 15.4 i would guess.

To make it faster theres alot you can do... whats your budget. A manual, with good tyres & your 3.9 would easily get you 14s, not sure about mid 14s but quite possible.

xr8ute · 25-09-2006, 09:03 PM

I think they are OK for comparisons when using the same bit of road, but as far as outright accuracy....there are just too many variable IMO.

A 15.5 should be a no brainer with your car at the track. With decent conditions, and a bit of luck, I would think more like 15.2/15.3.

Its a pig off the line because first gear in the auto is super tall. Dont worry, it affects all us laz-o-matic Falcon drivers. A higher stall converter is the best way to sort it, but shorter diff gears like you suggested will also help.

What are your mods? Just extractors, and cat-back right?

A ported lower intake would help alot because the front two cylinders get seriously choked by the dogleg shape of their intake runners.

I'd like to think you'd be running mid-14's with your exhaust, the 3.9's, ported lower intake, and some tweaking with timing and fuel presure at the track.

ebv8 · 26-09-2006, 07:58 AM

thanks for the advice
i did 2 runs on the same road
first i stalled it up and let the brake go but it spun the wheels and dogged off the line and got a 16.2 @90.1 then i tried spiking the brake on take off and it didn't spin and got a 16.1 @90.1 i also tried leaving it in 'D' and i got 16.8@88 so i'll forget that one
also when changing gears i hit 2rd at about 15.5 seconds so i pretty much only used 2 gears for the quater test so i think i'll be doing diff gears sooner rahter than later

XRQTR · 26-09-2006, 08:50 AM

Did you do a run in each direction?

ebv8 · 26-09-2006, 09:05 AM

same direction both runs.

i'll be heading out to wsid this wed or the wed after and i might give my spare set of tyres a run (205/50 r15 dunlop semi slicks) they should make the car take off like its got a 3.55 diff