# My 1/4Mile Times



## cysco00 (Mar 25, 2004)

Hey guys, well my first time at the track with this car was pretty decent!! I only got beat by a Yamaha R1 and a Mustang Drag Car!! I put away a Mitsu 3000GT SL, Toyota Celica GT-S, Ford Focus SVT, and a Honda Civic (dont know if Si or not). My best times are as follows:

Reaction: .123
60FT: 2.477
660FT: 10.386
E.T.: 16.13
MPH: 84.6

Im sure my 60FT times will get better with better tires, and more practice at launching. I was launching at about 2500 RPM, not too much wheel hop or spin, but it was definetly hurting me!! Although these times may not seem to impressive to you all at sea level, keep in mind that I am at around 5700 feet above sea level. My current mods include a NISMO Cat Back Exhaust, and NISMO Cold Air Intake. All in all I got some mad props over there for having a commuter family car that can take on most street racers!!! LOL (as they put it)

Later 

Cisco C.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

.123 r/t? that's normally a foul, lol. do you mean .623? yeah your 60ft should be a lot better lol. It definitely takes practice. That 16.13 is good for that alt...but do they correct? anyways, this is goin to motorsports


----------



## cysco00 (Mar 25, 2004)

Actually no, my slip says .123 R/T. And no, unfortunetly they do not correct, so im sure i'll be pulling mid to low 15's anywhere else, and or maybe with some practice and some more mods.....i'll get in the the low 15's here!!

Cisco C.


----------



## Katana200sx (May 13, 2002)

depends on what type of tree you are running. my local strip uses a sportsman tree and a perfect tree is .000 there. thought that was a foul as well unless they are using l.e.d. bulbs


----------



## YELLOWV (Mar 4, 2004)

Regardless of elevation that is a bad run. A 2.4 60' is horrible. 2.2's are possible on Contis very easily.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

heh yeah, I did a 2.4 60ft in my QG


----------



## cysco00 (Mar 25, 2004)

Hey Yellow, I would guarantee that if you were to come up above a mile high instead of being at sea level you would see your times drop as well!! I agree I can do better at the track but my times will ALWAYS be slower than that of a car at sea level!! (ever hear of barometric pressure???) 

Anyway, I also noticed that when I got home my car was idling horribly. I checked under the hood and my intake got disconnected right at the poly coupler before the MAF, that couldn't have helped either!! 

I don't know what kind of "tree" it is here at my track, but my R/T times were pretty consistent, my best was actually a .009. Others were:

.269 - horrible
.135
.136
.575 - extremely horrible
.151
.158
.171
.240 - horrible

I still have these slips if anyone wants to see!! Im sure with practice i'll only get better!!

Cisco C.


----------



## YELLOWV (Mar 4, 2004)

Elevation has nothing to do w/ your horrible launch. I know you wont run as well as I can at sea level but w/ a decent launch you can cut maybe a good half second from your times.


----------



## cysco00 (Mar 25, 2004)

> Elevation has nothing to do w/ your horrible launch.


I agree with that statement; my launches can definetly be better with practice!! I just didn't agree that you said regardless of elevation I had a "bad" run. Sounded like you criticized my run cuz my times didn't compare to that of others at sea level or say even 1000ft lower than me, and like you meant Elevation is not a factor, which in fact it is a pretty big one when it comes to overall time!!  

Cisco C.


----------



## gliscameria (Apr 14, 2004)

cysco00 said:


> I agree with that statement; my launches can definetly be better with practice!! I just didn't agree that you said regardless of elevation I had a "bad" run. Sounded like you criticized my run cuz my times didn't compare to that of others at sea level or say even 1000ft lower than me, and like you meant Elevation is not a factor, which in fact it is a pretty big one when it comes to overall time!!
> 
> Cisco C.


Hell yeah, less air = less go. However, If O2 had the same inverse relationship with altitude that it would appear ego size does, you'd be in great shape.


----------



## YELLOWV (Mar 4, 2004)

No you took my statement totally wrong. I know full well the effects of elevation. I meant that you could have had a much better run with a decent launch. I by no means meant that elevation doesnt effect 1/4 mile times. I am VERY thankfull that I live at sea level.


----------



## cysco00 (Mar 25, 2004)

It's all good.....Hell....I wish I lived at sea level too!!!!!! Any advise on how to get a better launch other than practice, i.e what rpm's should I launch at etc etc.

Later

Cisco C

P.S. Gliscamera ain't nothun wrong wit my ego!!!!!!


----------



## 1Newmexneon (Mar 26, 2004)

Hey man good runs. I live in Rio Rancho and will be at the track with my neon for the first night race on the 30th. Try launching at around 5000 rpms that should give you about .2 off your 60ft as long as the wheel hop don't get to bad. If your at the track again sometime we should race. I have a white with blue stripes neon. http://www.nhra.com/2002/sportsman/news/February/021501.html
This link will give you correction factors for elevation. The elevation of our track is 5320 ft.


----------



## YELLOWV (Mar 4, 2004)

Yeah okay. First NEVER launch at 5000 rpms. We dont drive neons buddy. If we launched at 5 grand we would spin the tires HARD and bang the rev limiter in about a millisecond. The launch depends a lot on your tires. I have Azenis' so I can lauch pretty high. But on less sticky tires I did pretty well launching around 2200. Dont drop the clutch. Feather it. With the Azenis' I now bog on 2500rpm launches. i still havent gotten my launch right on those tires. I have only made 3 runs on them. I cut a couple of 2.2's bogging off the line at 2200 and 2500. Then I tried 3000 and spun like mad and got like a 2.7 60' LOL . I figure a perfect launch at around 2800 should be good for a 2.0.


----------



## 1Newmexneon (Mar 26, 2004)

Okay I guess I should just say that all he can do is experiment with different things. I haven't had the pleasure of driving a spec yet so I don't now how they react. I can't just dump the clutch at 5 grand it takes a little feathering and part throttle for a split second to get my best 60 ft. which was a 2.206 on my stock tires with 22 psi in the front. When I was launching at around 2500 I was cuttin 2.4s with a 16.1. What is the redline of the spec's? I guess it is propably a little lower than my 7500 so that should be taken into account.


----------



## YELLOWV (Mar 4, 2004)

Our redline is 6200. So obviously 5000rpm launches wouldnt be too smart. We also have MUCH torquier engines than yours. Honestly our engine behaves more like a V8 more than a 4. A very small, underpowered V8  The QR25 is torquey and low revving. Actually with the Specs torque it is every bit as tough to launch as the 12 second WS.6 I had before the Spec. My best 60' was a 2.1. I m shooting for a 2.0.


----------

