View Full Version : full fuel load help 60ft or not ?


victtor
Jan 23rd, 08, 08:43 PM
HI last weekend i raced and could not reach my goal off 10.99 i was close its so close not funny,i need help i run 11.081 at 122.95 mph,60ft was 1.666 my 660ft was 7.076 secs
MY specs are 75 camaro 3.42 gears ,th400 3000stall footbrake,zz454 around 535hp +150 shot off spray 275/50/15 m/t drag radials ,battery in trunk use the nitrous in sec and top gear i want to improve me 60ft to flat 1.6 ,i run only half tank off fuel standard tank thinking off running full tank so more weight over rear wheels will this help traction ? or will i not gain anything because off extra weight off the fuel what your ideas on this theory?
Traction device is just simple traction bars which reach spring eye ,i have 50/50 shocks in rear 90/10 up front no sway bar 15-16 psi in drag radials hopefully givin you guys enough info ,or do i go buy nitrous progressive controler
thanks
VICTTOR
new zealand

Eric68
Jan 24th, 08, 06:07 AM
Weight is weight in the rear end whether it is fuel in the tank or some other ballast. Maybe you could put a weight bar in and do some testing to see what your car likes. When you fill the tank its hard to take that fuel out if you don't need it (or to test to see if you don;t need it)

77wolf10.85
Jan 24th, 08, 06:59 AM
Seems I've read drag radials are different, but I run 10 - 11 in my ET Streets. Have people telling me to run 8 but I don't like the way they look at 8.

I don't run juice YET, but my first thoughts on it was to do like you and get out of the hole before spraying. Everybody says that's a bad theory because you lose the benefit where it counts most... getting underway(60 ft).

JimM
Jan 24th, 08, 07:18 AM
My car's no where near that fast, but... last time out I played with bags (60lb each) of sand in the trunk to help traction, from a max of 6 bags down to 2.

It was a straight tradeoff... yes, 60ft dropped, but I lost MPH.

Eric68
Jan 24th, 08, 08:21 AM
Exactly Jim, that is where testing helps -- that way you use the least amount of ballast needed for traction (preferable none!)

By the way, I am confident your car WILL BE FAST when you get her all together again. Those heads are killer and it sounds like you have the right cam too :thumbsup:

JimM
Jan 24th, 08, 09:42 AM
Exactly Jim, that is where testing helps -- that way you use the least amount of ballast needed for traction (preferable none!)

By the way, I am confident your car WILL BE FAST when you get her all together again. Those heads are killer and it sounds like you have the right cam too :thumbsup:
Hoping for a 12.99 or better, a full second faster than last year. I'm gonna try to buy some traction by pulling lots of timing at low rpm using the c950 then going to full advance 60-100 feet out.

67RS502
Jan 24th, 08, 10:36 AM
I have to run almost a full 15gal cell for it to hook, if its less theres a good chance it wont hook, especially on street night. 1/2 cell ussually wont hook unless the track is good.