devonutopia
Top Post Dawg
Tspark's Ibiza is also as bare as the sahara desert, so is really light!
Shows how much I know about the strip lolshadowmaker said:Reaction time has nothing to do with ET.
Just noticed you had replied after I wrote the reply above!devonutopia said:Tspark's Ibiza is also as bare as the sahara desert, so is really light!
I wouldnt go that far, it has two seats, and a steering wheel, abit of the dash left, alot of the sound deadening left as need to heat it up to get it off.. still got the air con toodevonutopia said:Tspark's Ibiza is also as bare as the sahara desert, so is really light!
Nopedevonutopia said:Maybe the driver isn't 6 foot 2 and 14 stone?
Yeah id imagine so, if yours in around 1,600kg's or so.bencarr23 said:it weighs at least 1000 lbs less than my car.
As in some high powered motors running slower times mate? With pretty low terminals too? Your time is impressive for the power. I ran a 14.73 @ Santa Pod raceway with 165hp hitting 93mph years back in my Ibiza, I like your time with a few more hp!majesty78 said:This thread is usefull to make those people think about it what kind of numbers they believe to have.....
Even a blind and dumb kindergarten child should see this*g*
Better traction, lower 60' time? The trap speed is very indicative of HP, and it is lower than some of the slower ones with more power.borachris said:Shows how much I know about the strip lol
How come his time is so quick compared to some of the cars with over 50hp more, I know its a light car but it can't be that light?
Really good 60ft time for a fwd!T. Spark said:Also point out, it does have a A.T.B. Diff, and my PB 0-60ft time is 2.0secs dead. 330ft times are usual done in just a little over 5 and a half @ 5.7 seconds, all on street legal tyres.
A 0,1s out of 60' means 0,2s out of ET. At least this is what big boys have told me.turbo johan said:Really good 60ft time for a fwd!
I have 2.5 sec, (w/o LSD) when i can get my 60ft to 2.0 sec i would do about 12.8 ET or lower i guess
Johan
Thanks, this is why I know my times cant be any better. My 60ft and 330ft times are so low, I cant better them without more power IMHO. Even then, I doubt my 60ft time will ever be lower.turbo johan said:Really good 60ft time for a fwd!
I have 2.5 sec, (w/o LSD) when i can get my 60ft to 2.0 sec i would do about 12.8 ET or lower i guess
Johan
You're now propping up my version of the table. Can anyone beat this? (as in NOT beat it? )Diesel_Benz said:I did 18.912@71.78mph in my 1982 300D with 115RWHP.
Nice. I never went to the strip with my '78 300D, but a Gtech told me I ran 0-60 in 20 seconds. I think I might have hit the 1/4 about 5 seconds later. And that's in Colorado too, 5280 elevation, probably 40 or 50 RWHP.....Diesel_Benz said:I did 18.912@71.78mph in my 1982 300D with 115RWHP.
That's what the big boys told me to, but i said 12.8 to not get to optimisticshadowmaker said:A 0,1s out of 60' means 0,2s out of ET. At least this is what big boys have told me.
My 2,4s with drag tires (no LSD) really sucks too.
I'm loosing a second to a T1 van (made really lightweight) with 10kmh less terminal speed... I need more grip. and more power...turbo johan said:2.4s isn't bad with a van of that weight
Johan
Im not so sure, the 60ft time is good for FWD, and his terminal is low. Id say the car is pretty heavy so all the power is being used pushing the weight. I hit 93mph with a 14.7. Id say to hit REAL mid 14's terminals of 95mph would be needed.devonutopia said:You should be in mid 14s at the very least with the spec I see there.