-65 Vette runs 193,4MPH on standing mile!
Go SIX-5 go
08-10-2013, 05:45 PM
#122
Drifting
I've loved reading this thread ..... it's a bit like if God exists; there are heated arguments for both sides ...... the difference here is Six5 is still with us and will either succeed or fail ..... why not just wait? But in the meantime I'll continue to read this and imagine some of the blue faces as they bash the keys in writing their reply to someone elses opinion.
I have learnt a few things on this thread though about drag and aerodynamics
Good luck on your next run.
P.S. It's a bit like a d#*@ measuring competition ..... it's all about the stretch and how much pain you can endure.
I have learnt a few things on this thread though about drag and aerodynamics
Good luck on your next run.
P.S. It's a bit like a d#*@ measuring competition ..... it's all about the stretch and how much pain you can endure.
08-10-2013, 10:12 PM
#123
The Earth is Flat Society looks at 200mph like it is the sound barrier. There is a 54 Studebaker that hit 225+ mph in the mile. I would think a C2 is more aerodynamic than an old Studebaker, lol.
The rear wing on this Mustang (not my car), adds stability for runs above 150mph. I would think this is a simple fix to add high speed stability for the standing mile. I have not been above 150 mph but Im getting very curious, lol.
The rear wing on this Mustang (not my car), adds stability for runs above 150mph. I would think this is a simple fix to add high speed stability for the standing mile. I have not been above 150 mph but Im getting very curious, lol.
Last edited by uxojerry; 08-11-2013 at 02:22 AM.
08-11-2013, 10:29 AM
#124
Safety Car
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: St. Clair Shores MI
Posts: 4,050
Received 132 Likes
on
74 Posts
C2 of Year Finalist (track prepared) 2019
2017 C2 of the Year Finalist
I agree:
I have seen a stock 2010 Cobalt SS (2.0 Ecotech turbo) run over 150......... the factory tune limits the car to 156 mph....
power requirements and drag are exponential as speed increases, but as they say in the air force "If you strap a big enough engine to it, a brick will fly"
I have seen a stock 2010 Cobalt SS (2.0 Ecotech turbo) run over 150......... the factory tune limits the car to 156 mph....
power requirements and drag are exponential as speed increases, but as they say in the air force "If you strap a big enough engine to it, a brick will fly"
08-11-2013, 11:44 AM
#125
Melting Slicks
Here's a picture of 53 two door shovel nose Coupe. Looks alot more aerodynamic than a C2....LOL
Here is a picture of Gary Hart's 1953 241-249 MPH Studebaker Shovel nose Bonneville Car. Wonder what it's speed would be in a standing mile Vs it's speed run at Bonneville... Notice it doesn't have a rear wing, but does have twin rear Vertical stablizers. My Guess is it wouldn't need them in a standing mile or the small ones across the top either, just on long high speed runs like Bonneville...
If you want to read up on Hart's trips to Bonneville with car, just search on " Gary Hart's Studebaker Bonneville Salt Flats Racer ".
08-11-2013, 01:04 PM
#126
Found this interesting tidbit regarding the 53-54 Studes on line --
"Actually, they're less aerodynamic than you might expect, with a drag coefficient of 0.40--the windshield is rather vertical, and the tail is too low--but given that nearly everything else available at the time was shaped like a streamlined brick with bumpers, the Loewys became the car of choice for stock-bodied salt flat speedsters and such."
The previously referenced Corvette Fever article implies that the Cd of a C-2 is around .43. The problem isn't so much the drag, but rather the lift the C-2 generates.
I like the Caveman approach -- kill the lift with whatever aero approach you need (some better than others with respect to drag), then overcome the resulting drag with HORSEPOWER. Reducing drag is beneficial, of course, but is often expensive and complicated. The old Studebakers made great Salt Flat cars, especially if you fixed the drag -- i.e., chop the top. Here is a picture I posted some time back of a retired Salt Flat Stude. It has a plaque on the dash showing 260-something mph at Bonneville in the 70s, I think. It still has the old hemi in it that it used to set that record.
I'm still betting SIX-5 breaks 200. I think he knows exactly what he is doing. Wish him luck.
"Actually, they're less aerodynamic than you might expect, with a drag coefficient of 0.40--the windshield is rather vertical, and the tail is too low--but given that nearly everything else available at the time was shaped like a streamlined brick with bumpers, the Loewys became the car of choice for stock-bodied salt flat speedsters and such."
The previously referenced Corvette Fever article implies that the Cd of a C-2 is around .43. The problem isn't so much the drag, but rather the lift the C-2 generates.
I like the Caveman approach -- kill the lift with whatever aero approach you need (some better than others with respect to drag), then overcome the resulting drag with HORSEPOWER. Reducing drag is beneficial, of course, but is often expensive and complicated. The old Studebakers made great Salt Flat cars, especially if you fixed the drag -- i.e., chop the top. Here is a picture I posted some time back of a retired Salt Flat Stude. It has a plaque on the dash showing 260-something mph at Bonneville in the 70s, I think. It still has the old hemi in it that it used to set that record.
I'm still betting SIX-5 breaks 200. I think he knows exactly what he is doing. Wish him luck.
08-11-2013, 06:15 PM
#127
Melting Slicks
OK, I have not researched this yet....but is there a fastest Bonneville speed for a C2?....worlds fastest....obviously there is...
Last edited by vjjack04; 08-11-2013 at 08:01 PM.
08-12-2013, 12:45 AM
#129
Race Director
0
Here is a picture of Gary Hart's 1953 241-249 MPH Studebaker Shovel nose Bonneville Car. Wonder what it's speed would be in a standing mile Vs it's speed run at Bonneville... Notice it doesn't have a rear wing, but does have twin rear Vertical stablizers. My Guess is it wouldn't need them in a standing mile or the small ones across the top either, just on long high speed runs like Bonneville...
.
Here is a picture of Gary Hart's 1953 241-249 MPH Studebaker Shovel nose Bonneville Car. Wonder what it's speed would be in a standing mile Vs it's speed run at Bonneville... Notice it doesn't have a rear wing, but does have twin rear Vertical stablizers. My Guess is it wouldn't need them in a standing mile or the small ones across the top either, just on long high speed runs like Bonneville...
.
All the louvers on the rear fenders are interesting, as is the front fender gaps from the body, to vent air from the sides.
Doug
08-13-2013, 01:34 AM
#132
Instructor
Last year 1 mile was 179.887 mph, power with NOS was 738 hp.
Last year N/A 157.828 mph 598 hp.
This year 1 mile N/A result was 174.978 mph ???hp.
Ram air gives also cool air, i think that it gives something extra also.
I will take data for the run on august 24 and then i know boost or no boost.
08-16-2013, 06:36 AM
#134
7th Gear
Member Since: Oct 2006
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One week untill 24th. Then We'll have more if Kimmo was able to go over 200mph.. Now lot's of testing and preparing that everything will go smooth. Today cruising night in Finland and just relaxing before next weekends attempt to make it go a little faster. 
08-20-2013, 08:19 AM
#135
7th Gear
Member Since: Oct 2006
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4 days left.. Made a little trailer. We'll be posting updates on our facebook page over the weekend. www.facebook.com/fttracing
08-25-2013, 03:02 AM
#137
Instructor
So it was no 200 mph for me, at this time.
1 N/A run 174.021 mph
3 NOS runs 193.287 mph 195.773 mph 196.395 mph.
This time there is pictures and videos also.
I or someone else will post them here.
1 N/A run 174.021 mph
3 NOS runs 193.287 mph 195.773 mph 196.395 mph.
This time there is pictures and videos also.
I or someone else will post them here.
08-25-2013, 07:40 AM
#139
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Mar 2001
Location: Watkinsville, GA and Glen Cove, NY
Posts: 5,788
Received 854 Likes
on
625 Posts
Sorry you didn't hit 200, but I don't believe that, in any way, diminishes the accomplishment of what you have already done. I am sure the naysayers will still find a way to tell you what you have already done is impossible to do, but here is a thumbs up to a great job and an awesome car.
Curious what you think kept you from hitting the mark. More power or aero changes? I am sure you will get there.
Bill
Curious what you think kept you from hitting the mark. More power or aero changes? I am sure you will get there.
Bill
08-26-2013, 12:31 AM
#140
Instructor
Sorry you didn't hit 200, but I don't believe that, in any way, diminishes the accomplishment of what you have already done. I am sure the naysayers will still find a way to tell you what you have already done is impossible to do, but here is a thumbs up to a great job and an awesome car.
Curious what you think kept you from hitting the mark. More power or aero changes? I am sure you will get there.
Bill
Curious what you think kept you from hitting the mark. More power or aero changes? I am sure you will get there.
Bill
Wind front left, a bit more hp, small aero change.
200 mph is possible, when it`s happening i don`t know.
Maby someone in the U.S hit it first.