|
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 409
Likes: 295
Liked 117 Times in 50 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
As far as your horsepower, weight, and potential ET, your numbers sound about right. My car was about 250 horsepower, about 2,300 pounds, and launching at 9,000 rpm resulted in high 11s at about 110 mph. With a modern clutch, a lighter flywheel, and a closer-ratio transmission with a taller first gear, I'm sure it would have gone faster. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 212
Likes: 13
Liked 68 Times in 26 Posts
|
![]()
watched vid on 289 mustang, ss/L 20.398 start ratio
|
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#3 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: from Vancouver BC Canada, now in Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 317
Liked 1,104 Times in 302 Posts
|
![]()
What is the intended combination, and combination? With my old M/S 85 5.0 Mustang, I ran a 3.19 low gear in the Jerico, and with 4.88 gears, that made for a 15.56 SLR, and with 5.13, a 16.36 SLR. That was with 29-29 1/2" tall tires. I would have liked to have tried a bit lower rear axle ratio, but for the Ford 8.8, there was nothing between 5.13 and 5.7. Unless it is a really lightweight car with lots of power, and borderline ability to hook up, I can`t imagine a 11.25 SLR would be anywhere close to ideal. My SB Ford 4 speed G Force bracket car also has a 16.36 SLR,albeit with 31" tall tires, plus an additional 25 MPH, but looking to add a bit more rear gear ratio, or shorter tires to give another 1 or 2 hundred RPM at the 1/4 mile finish line. Same with my old hot rod type cruiser, currently has a 2.78 low Toploader with 3.50 rear and 28" tall tires, a 9.73 SLR, and I am barely hitting 4th gear at the finish line. Plus at over 4000 pounds, the organic street style clutch isn`t very happy. Hopefully the 4.33 gears (12.03 SLR) will help performance, and clutch life, at the track. And if I was to decide to switch to a modern overdrive 5 speed, I would be looking for a low gear in the 2.8 to 3.1 range.
__________________
NHRA 6390 STK M/S 85 Mustang |
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Phila, PA
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Liked 734 Times in 385 Posts
|
![]()
This is what my software suggests.
Stan |
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#5 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes: 615
Liked 1,937 Times in 582 Posts
|
![]()
Back when I ran a stick in my car the SLR was about 19 to 1. With the same engine combo and a glide the SLR is 12 to 1. The engine is much better now and the car is about a second faster than it was with the stick.
__________________
Mike Pearson 2485 SS |
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green Creek (Tryon) North Carolina
Posts: 331
Likes: 69
Liked 99 Times in 21 Posts
|
![]()
For what it’s worth, my brother ran a 58 Chevy wagon back in the 80’s in IHRA Super Stock (basically a econo modified engine). It was a 283 that weighed 3839 and ran a turbo 350 with a 6:83 Dana and 29 and 30 inch tires for the 1/8 and 1/4. The torque converter was pretty a good piece back then but could likely have been ran on the street now. The car held the IHRA class record before he bought it and did until he sold it. I don’t remember any 60’ numbers but the car got quicker after putting In a 2:75 low gear. Don Jackson
|
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
#7 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
![]()
How does engine cubic inch and an engine's ability to RPM factor into the SLR?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|