CLASS RACER FORUM
Page 2 of 5 1 2 34 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

CLASS RACER FORUM (https://classracer.com/classforum/index.php)
-   Stock and Super Stock (https://classracer.com/classforum/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars (https://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=29802)

Stewart Way 11-21-2010 05:07 PM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
Don't know as these numbers really mean much but I'll share them anyway. I used these formulas. D=AxCdxVxV/410 and HP=((WxR)+D)xV/375. Used 3000 lb W,15 frontal A, .34 Cd. R was rolling resistance of .012. These work with Top Speed numbers and I realize we are not at the top speed capability of a drag car at the 1320 but anyway....
An 88 type lowered Camaro has about a 15 frontal area. A one sqft reduction in frontal area reduces the hp required to run 150 by around 6%. But that is steady state 150MPH. Since we start at zero I would think around 4% HP change per sqft would be right. A change in Cd (coef of drag) of .01 has about half the effect of a 1 sqft frontal reduction at there numbers.
So if a littler newer car has a 1 sqft smaller frontal area and a .01 lower diff in Cd it would require 6% hp less to reach the same speed.
Again, I'm not sure how these Top Speed formulas translate to an drag car but even if they were off 50% it would still mean a 3% reduction in HP can be seen with a 15 to 14 and .34 to .33 reductions in Cd and Area.

Chad Rhodes 11-21-2010 05:18 PM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stewart Way (Post 223612)
Don't know as these numbers really mean much but I'll share them anyway. I used these formulas. D=AxCdxVxV/410 and HP=((WxR)+D)xV/375. Used 3000 lb W,15 frontal A, .34 Cd. R was rolling resistance of .012. These work with Top Speed numbers and I realize we are not at the top speed capability of a drag car at the 1320 but anyway....
An 88 type lowered Camaro has about a 15 frontal area. A one sqft reduction in frontal area reduces the hp required to run 150 by around 6%. But that is steady state 150MPH. Since we start at zero I would think around 4% HP change per sqft would be right. A change in Cd (coef of drag) of .01 has about half the effect of a 1 sqft frontal reduction at there numbers.
So if a littler newer car has a 1 sqft smaller frontal area and a .01 lower diff in Cd it would require 6% hp less to reach the same speed.
Again, I'm not sure how these Top Speed formulas translate to an drag car but even if they were off 50% it would still mean a 3% reduction in HP can be seen with a 15 to 14 and .34 to .33 reductions in Cd and Area.
good point Stewart. I imagine the difference would be more apparent in GT/AA, than GT/FA. I'm sure Shaun Leblanc could go faster using a Mercury Cougar or an Escort........but it wouldn't near as cool

stefan callender 11-22-2010 01:12 PM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
Joe, you get to weigh 275 lbs lighter and only lose .25 of index, right? Couple that with extensive front and rear suspension and floor mods, engine/firewall and driver location, all if which RWD cars are not allowed, and 3-5 is all you get? I'm not saying your compleatly wrong, but maybe if you put in the same amount of time with this car as the last, you might see its worth more.

Joe, maybe youre not going fast enough....lol.

Hagen Gary 11-22-2010 06:04 PM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stefan callender (Post 223763)
Joe, maybe youre not going fast enough....lol.
Apparently you misintrpreted my point, which i guess is why you didn't quote the entire post. I didn't intend to imply that Joe was not fast, or was not trying to go faster. I think we all watch results online week in/week out. If thats how it came across, My apologies Joe.

What I did want to get across is that a FWD conversion has a clear advantage per the current rules. Ask any chassis builder. People arn't building them because they make the coolest looking drag car. They are building them because they are FAST! Although I think a Cavalier is a smooth looking Super Stocker(wouldn't mind one myself), I try telling anyone out of the know about one, and all I get is "A Cavalier? Yea, I seen one of them coming out of a trailer park" or "My Niece drives one of those". So It makes it kinda hard to describe what is clearly the pinnacle of perfomance in the GT class. I'm not asking for some help going fast. All I'm asking is that we fix a system that penalizes two groups of cars for one's actions. Does anyone really think a performance based person would run a big heavy wagon in GT now that it is allowed? Every hit a Cavalier/Colbalt takes doesn't nearly effect it as much as a wagon 6-8 classes down.

Mark Faul 11-22-2010 08:22 PM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
While I see a lot of merit in the FWD conversion cars having an advantage in some areas over the older cars, what about an older conversion car like mine? Without a tubular front end and control arms? It's kind of an in-betweener. Smaller and more aerodynamic, but has the engine further forward that the F bodies. Are we supposed to give different hp factors to any conversion cars or just the latest and greatest versions?

joe176 11-22-2010 08:23 PM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hagen Gary (Post 223820)
Apparently you misintrpreted my point, which i guess is why you didn't quote the entire post. I didn't intend to imply that Joe was not fast, or was not trying to go faster. I think we all watch results online week in/week out. If thats how it came across, My apologies Joe.

What I did want to get across is that a FWD conversion has a clear advantage per the current rules. Ask any chassis builder. People arn't building them because they make the coolest looking drag car. They are building them because they are FAST! Although I think a Cavalier is a smooth looking Super Stocker(wouldn't mind one myself), I try telling anyone out of the know about one, and all I get is "A Cavalier? Yea, I seen one of them coming out of a trailer park" or "My Niece drives one of those". So It makes it kinda hard to describe what is clearly the pinnacle of perfomance in the GT class. I'm not asking for some help going fast. All I'm asking is that we fix a system that penalizes two groups of cars for one's actions. Does anyone really think a performance based person would run a big heavy wagon in GT now that it is allowed? Every hit a Cavalier/Colbalt takes doesn't nearly effect it as much as a wagon 6-8 classes down.
Hagen....no apology necessary....I was just giving my honest opinion on what I've found with my particular combination.....the whole point of me putting the post up was that yes there is a performance advantage to having the FWD car....but it's nowhere near what racers have been thinking it was.

Sean Cour 11-22-2010 09:24 PM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
I've seen Joe's Cavalier leaving the trailer park on more than one occasion.

joe176 11-23-2010 12:41 AM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Cour (Post 223858)
I've seen Joe's Cavalier leaving the trailer park on more than one occasion.
Uh Oh....BUSTEDDDDD.....Sean....you were supposed to keep that on the downlo...

keith ohanesian 11-23-2010 02:20 AM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
With a mask on !

joe176 11-23-2010 08:30 AM
Re: HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by keith ohanesian (Post 223919)
With a mask on !
Too Funny Keith LoL


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:44 PM.
Page 2 of 5 1 2 34 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.