HP Rating....F Body vs FWD Conversion Cars

[joe176]

Originally Posted by Lee Valentine

Does Angelo know about this!

Yes he does Lee.

[Hagen Gary]

Thanks for your time to post and honesty about this situation.
Its my opinion that if NHRA is going to allow two totally different sets of rules for FWD Conversions and any RWD(not just f body) cars then why not add 2% of rated hp to the FWD conversion. That would equate to that 3-5 your talking about.

[stefan callender]

Joe, also remember that your Camaro was built in the 1990's also didnt have all the same technology that your 2000's Cavalier has. An unequal four link, vs a equal length four link. How much is that worth?

Has anyone ever took a 82-92 F-body and transform their entire drivetrain and put it into a next generation F-body?? How much was that worth??

[Hagen Gary]

Originally Posted by stefan callender

Has anyone ever took a 82-92 F-body and transform their entire drivetrain and put it into a next generation F-body?? How much was that worth??

Stefan, Are you talking about a 2010?

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.

I know what the rules are and I chose my car according to them. I'm just asking that if we are going to make adjustments, then lets fix the obvious inequalities, or let me move my firewall and floor so I can make suspension upgrades front and rear.

[Ed Wright]

275lbs out of my car wouldn't be worth any more than that.

[joe176]

Originally Posted by Hagen Gary

Stefan, Are you talking about a 2010?

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.

I know what the rules are and I chose my car according to them. I'm just asking that if we are going to make adjustments, then lets fix the obvious inequalities, or let me move my firewall and floor so I can make suspension upgrades front and rear.

Hagen.....I do not need anymore time sorting this out...it's not rocket science when you swap everything over to a new car and run the numbers this car runs....it is what it is...I've been doing this long enough to know a few minor tweaks here or there depending on air and track conditions is all you can do when you roll into a race. As far as the firewall setback.....my camaro had better weight ratio front to rear than this car does..........these cars are nose heavy....not sure what kind of car you run or if you've had experience with both like I have.

[Stewart Way]

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]

Originally Posted by Stewart Way

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

[tim worner]

Hey Joe put that stuff in an 88 Cutlass and see where you are.

[y2k_ta]

Originally Posted by stefan callender

Has anyone ever took a 82-92 F-body and transform their entire drivetrain and put it into a next generation F-body?? How much was that worth??

The fourth-gen '93-'02 platform was primarily a carryover from the '82-'92, so the advantages (if any) would be minimal.