'06 Quicksilver Z06

Some of these times are incredibly quick. And not everyone has submitted their times yet. There are a few more very quick drivers who have yet to post up.

atomicfusion

Ah, I understand... I didn't realize that was with the CAI. That was some time ago.

I just got done tuning the car tonight and I will have a new time on Friday to submit that is faster than the 11.37 for sure. It will be a bolt on pass with DR's and I predict at least 11.1X @ 127+ MPH.

Hopefuly I won't be opening my mouth and inserting my foot.

Sorry I posted that last one and see no reason to put that on the modified list. If it makes it then we have a whole other issue.

LPFSTheFett

I will post my offical stock time sometime this week.

Do have a recommendation, add DA to the list of times, so we don't have to pull up the details of each run to see it. It's everybit as important as the runs. I will give you credit that your runs are good, but look at your DA's. 200 and -900 or whatever they were. Even with those DA's I currently wouldn't have matched those times, only the MPH. Still trying to master the launch. But I think it would be nice to see them next to each run.

Also, I think it will be very interesting to see what the modified cars run. So far with my personal testing and nearly 50 1/4 mile passes, I've seen no increase in 1/4 mile time or trap speed with mods. Except, I did see 2-3 tenth gain with the addition of American Racing Headers.

Here is what I have as far as data for right now. Will add timeslips, Dates Times later....

The second day I owned the car with 200 miles, I ran 1.94 60' 11.70@121.99 DA of 1800 Hit rev limiter going across line. Other pass shifting, got me 11.77@123.89 but the 60' was slighly worse. 2.05 vs 1.94

Added a Vararam Intake, Ported Intake and TB, and Dyno Tune. Gained roughly 45rwhp. Have 25 Documented runs and countless runs on the Gtech(wont include these times, only used for 60' practice etc) and the best I've run with all of that....2.1 60' 11.66@123.62 with the same DA of 1800. My 1/8th MPH was up 1.7 on this pass vs my stock run, but same 1/4 MPH. Shifts look good on all comparable runs, but absolutely no improvement in the 1/4mph. Wasn't driver, because the entire last 1/8th mile is 3rd gear except the last 100' and my shifts were spot on.... How do you gain 45rwhp and gain nothing in your 1/4 MPH? Not sure either, but Atomic and I are trying to find out....

So.....After Adding Headers, 2.0 60', 2100 DA, I ran 11.52@122.XX missed 4th Gear, so who knows what could have happened. Only got 3 passes that day, and none of them went well. Working on tunes, that was the best and I missed 4th. Still a good result to share.

Working on my tune tomorrow. Atomic made 21 Dyno Pulls today to get his car dialed in. I hope I don't need that many but we are working on two different tunes. One of the things we will also be testing tomorrow is Stock Plugs vs. NGK TR6's(Much Colder Plug).

Special Thanks to Carlos at Vett Air for taking time to help us work on the tunes over the phone and getting these cars dialed in. Carlos's Tune w/o even being dialed in is giving me a full 1mph more in the 1/4 mile mph on the gtech vs my previous tune. Trapped 126.7 and .8 tonight w/ a DA of 2000 on the Gtech. MPH's are typically high by 1, so we'll just say 125.X which is 1.X over what I was getting.

Can't wait to get more information to share with you all. Could type a novel with all the testing we've done and have planned to do.......
Jason

dgdoc

I would expect you and Atomic to put that power to work and see improvements in E.T. and MPH. MPH is a better indicator of HP -- more specifically, HP DELIVERED during the run. As you know, the HP a car produces is not a constant, so your goal as driver is to maximize the power delivered "under the curve" throughout your run.

Your tune also plays into this. A peaky HP curve will produce slower performance than a a flatter HP curve - although both might report the same max HP. Very important to pay attention to this.

Since you are logging your runs with a G-tech and HPTuners you should be able to correlate this to the dyno charts that you generated tonight.

FYI - You can adjust the pitch correction angle on the G-tech to dial in the MPH to what you're seeing at the track. It defaults to 2 degrees per G which is close, but in my testing is not the correct factor for a stock C6Z.

Good luck to both of you and let us know how you do.

6Speeder

Does the top edge, which is cut off, have the name of the track and the date on it??[/QUOTE]
It has the date, I cropped it out on the scanner because it has my chickenscratch writing all over it, just my notes on the run: rpm of leave, tires psi, and DA calculation.

'06 Quicksilver Z06

I see.

6Speeder

BTW: Our track got cheap, they used to give you both lanes on the slip. Now just yours, so left lane gets the date, right lane gets the time. Neither shows the name of the track

'06 Quicksilver Z06

Thanks.


Its Albuquerque National Dragway, right?

http://www.abqdragway.com/id17.html

I put in a call to them this morning and spoke to one of the employees. I am to send a copy of the slip to the facility care of one of the track officials to authenticate that it is indeed one of theirs. If it is, then I will proceed.



Also, I want to call your attention to Rule #3.

"#3. Track times will not be corrected for weather or track altitude. Those elements can be noted in the comment portion of the submission to clarify the conditions under which the run was made. If interest merits, we can include a single category for fast times at tracks with altitudes, say, above 3000’ for the official track elevation. Please let us know if there is interest in such a category."

6Speeder

That's exactly what I did, actual time cut and pasted, just like the slip. Corrected was in the comments.

Ranger

Corrected times are excluded from submissions by Rule #3. You may note the track elevation and the DA elements in the comments.

If you wish to include corrected times in your original report, a link for which is provided in you submission, you are, of course, free to do so. But corrected times are specifically excluded from submissions.

Any member wishing the history on this issue is welcome to PM me. It's been extensively argued.

Ranger

6Speeder

Mine is in compliance with your rule3:


#3. Track times will not be corrected for weather or track altitude. Those elements can be noted in the comment portion of the submission to clarify the conditions under which the run was made. If interest merits, we can include a single category for fast times at tracks with altitudes, say, above 3000’ for the official track elevation. Please let us know if there is interest in such a category.

My actual track time was the one to be used. Only in the comments did I list any corrections. Seems to be in order to me.

Ranger

I wrote the rule and coordinated it with the thread's co-administrator, '06 Quicksilver Z06. We are in agreement that your submission is not in conformance with Rule #3 in that it contains corrected times in the comment field. Corrected times are specifically excluded from submissions.

You might want to consider starting your own fast list as a refuge for those needing a place to post drag strip performance claims that are
(1) weather-corrected
(2) undocumented
(3) fabricated

The rules enumerated in Post #1 of this thread are intended to foster a credible list free from those types of claims.

6Speeder, please cooperate in allowing the rest of us to preserve that intent.

Ranger

JWGJR

Ranger - Thanks for finding the link to my post.

Quicksilver - I'll email you my timeslip in various formats - hopefully one of them will work.

Thanks for your help.

C5 Frank

Year of the Z06: 2006.. 6/2/06 production date
Tires used on the pass: Stock
Performance Mods (if any): 100% Stock
Category submitted for: Stock on stock tires
60'............. 1.966
330'........... 5.099
660'........... 7.586
660’ mph... 99.44
1000'..........9.707
1320'..........11.502
1320’ mph… 126.08
Name of the track:Moroso Motorsports Park
Date of pass: 2/16/07
Weather conditions: Low 50s fairly humid as always in S.FL. I was told the DA was -122. Not sure how accurate that was.
Corvette Forum post containing report: There are several that make mention of it.
Here is the slip. My car number is 3567

Thanks guys!!!!

'06 Quicksilver Z06

Alright. I'll start digging and see what I can find. If dpracing wishes to comment, then he certainly can.

Stock dyno numbers for an '06 5/31/07

First mention of 11.50 stock 2/28/07

11.6 @126 7 full passes as of 2/13/07.

11.50 had to have come after 2/13/07 and before 2/28/07.

I am in the process of searching all of your posts between those dates for a description of the 11.50. Also checking all of your posts following 2/28/07 for mention and description of the 11.48.

11.53 on an 11.50 dial in

11.50 @126.33 as of 5/10/07.

Have you run 11.5 more than one time? Do you have the time slip for this one 11.50 @126.33? The trap speed would move you up a peg or two vs the slip you are showing.

'06 Quicksilver Z06

I was searching for something else when I found THIS thread of yours which includes a video.

The video is dated 5/12/07 and shows a 12.22 @ 117.6 mph. Do you have a time slip for this run? Can you post it? It should have the rest of the splits on it.

Would you prefer that I work from it or shall I continue to try and authenticate the 12.159 time slip? I mean we are only talking less than .07 seconds here.

I have to tell you, this time slip for the 12.159 is going to be a tough one for me to verify. But I have it ready to send out. The response may take a while.

But the video in the pre existing post makes it a bit easier for me if you have a time slip for it too.
You say that they were run at the same track I believe?

Let me know. If you have a slip for the run in the video and everything else is a go, then I could put you down for the 12.22 @117.6 until I can get some clarification on the 12.159 time slip.

On another note, I must admit, this track is indeed a far cry from Norwalk, Atco, or Englishtown.

6Speeder

As you wish. Our track does not include the name of the track on the slip, only the car number and either the date (left lane) or the time of day (right lane). I don't see such verification requirements for others here, just for me because of my issues with ranger. Include me, don't include me. Let's face it, when racing with a DA of 8,000 plus feet I will never be high up on the list anyway, can't happen.

C5 Frank

I have been going through my slips and as of right now this is the best combo of time and mph I have. So I guess 11.50 at 126.08 is it until I can find any others.

Ranger

Incorrect, 6Speeder. The reason for having a set of rules is clarity and fairness to all members. The rule call for a full slip; you didn't submit one. So far yours is the only submission without a full slip. Correcting that is easily under your control.

Ranger

LPFSTheFett

I say I have to agree with Ranger, you can't put a DA corrected run as an official time.

I also disagree with just correcting a number for altitude, because that would be incorrect.

I think the best thing would to just add the DA next to the times and call it a day. Someone seeing your low 12 second pass with a DA of 8k is going to understand, but nobody is going to agree to let you throw a 10 second corrected pass on there.

There is SOO Much more to our times then what the correction would account for. A Correction isn't going to make your 2.0 60' a 1.6. It's also not going to make a 1.7 60' a 1.6. Heck, it's not even going to make a 1.6 60' a 1.6, because your car is going to produce another 60rwhp and launching it at a DA of 0 is completely different then 8,000.

The only thing I use DA for is to correct my MPH for personal use. It lets me know how much power the car would have been making during a given pass. This way I can compare runs from different days and have an 'idea' of what the car is doing.

Jason