cadillac, cadillac cts, cadillac seville, cadillac forums, lincolns of distinction, forum, lincoln mark viii, Performance, parts, lincoln, mark viii, mark vii, lincoln ls, lincoln town car

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

Oct. 1/4 mile times

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: driller

Made it to Pittsburgh Raceway Park this weekend.

These are the best numbers I could muster...

R/T 0.012
60' 2.123*
330' 6.110
1/8 9.368*
MPH 75.52
1000' 12.187
1/4 14.561
MPH 95.14
*= new best

89 runs this season to date.

Posted by: driller

Aaaakkk... 10 minute time limit on edit posts

The 330' and 1000' numbers were best times as well. Apparently the 10-15 MPH headwinds took just enough off the top end to hold me back from new best 1/4 mile ETs?

Posted by: Sifrino3

Very nice, myself is trying to make it out there this month.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Driller,

If you had to do over again, would you trade the upper end speed for the lower gears. I do mostly highway miles but I am so tempted to do the gears for the significant gains off the line. (I hate getting smoked).

Any feedback is appreciated. I have a pumpkin I can drop in, just don't know if I want to give up my highway cruising capabilites. In fact, I much prefer the 3:08's in the '93 to the 3:27's in the '98 for that reason alone.

Posted by: Sifrino3

I feel with my 3.73. Its a give and take. I like it off the line and at 60 (w/ wrong speedo) Its at 2K. Which gives great throttle responce. No down shift! At 100 (w/ wrong speedo) Its at 3K or close to it. You can still get a M7 past the 120 mark and still keep going. So, that is my reason for keeping them. Is for that fact. I can still keep it going faster then I can see.

Posted by: driller

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

Driller,

If you had to do over again, would you trade the upper end speed for the lower gears. I do mostly highway miles but I am so tempted to do the gears for the significant gains off the line. (I hate getting smoked).

Any feedback is appreciated. I have a pumpkin I can drop in, just don't know if I want to give up my highway cruising capabilites. In fact, I much prefer the 3:08's in the '93 to the 3:27's in the '98 for that reason alone.

Personally, I would do the 4.10s again, only sooner.

Now mind you, my '93 is NOT a daily driver, but I do take it on short and long trips with no qualms. My highway 'cruise' speed is 75 mph, so no problems there. I also love the improved throttle response and engine braking in city driving.

Triple digit speeds where I live is almost non-existent due to the terrain, so I do not miss the 3.08s. In fact, I used to turn off OD for all except interstate driving. Now, about the only time I turn off OD is at the track.

Posted by: jdlmkviii

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

Driller,

If you had to do over again, would you trade the upper end speed for the lower gears. I do mostly highway miles but I am so tempted to do the gears for the significant gains off the line. (I hate getting smoked).

Any feedback is appreciated. I have a pumpkin I can drop in, just don't know if I want to give up my highway cruising capabilites. In fact, I much prefer the 3:08's in the '93 to the 3:27's in the '98 for that reason alone.

Upgrade your converter if you want some low end gains without hurting your mileage. When I got mine, I couldn't believe how much faster it came out of the hole, just from idle also. Instead of that slush at 1200 RPM or whatever that stock converter does, mine jumps right up to about 3000 RPM's and TAKES OFF!

P.S. I'll try to get a video up sometime to show everyone

Posted by: MonsterMark

I've never really understood the whole converter thing for a street car. Drag car. Yes.

Doesn't our car have a stock 2200 stall. I know at the track if I try to stall at all I get smoke on stock tires. I suppose if I ran some drag radials and changed the pumpkin over to trac-loc, it would make a big difference. I am looking for street gains. I only run once and a while at the track for fun and maybe record a time.

I like the downshift it sounds like the gears give plus the faster increase in revs. I just don't want to make the jump and then say, oops, too much.

Posted by: Sifrino3

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

I've never really understood the whole converter thing for a street car. Drag car. Yes.

Doesn't our car have a stock 2200 stall. I know at the track if I try to stall at all I get smoke on stock tires. I suppose if I ran some drag radials and changed the pumpkin over to trac-loc, it would make a big difference. I am looking for street gains. I only run once and a while at the track for fun and maybe record a time.

I like the downshift it sounds like the gears give plus the faster increase in revs. I just don't want to make the jump and then say, oops, too much.

Most people say, not enough. . .

Posted by: jdlmkviii

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

I've never really understood the whole converter thing for a street car. Drag car. Yes.

Doesn't our car have a stock 2200 stall. I know at the track if I try to stall at all I get smoke on stock tires. I suppose if I ran some drag radials and changed the pumpkin over to trac-loc, it would make a big difference. I am looking for street gains. I only run once and a while at the track for fun and maybe record a time.

I like the downshift it sounds like the gears give plus the faster increase in revs. I just don't want to make the jump and then say, oops, too much.

My car has never even seen the track yet. I kinda see what you're saying.... but I'm probably also doing 4:10's w/ posi in the near future. I think the new converter I have with gears will be a deadly mix. I was kinda worried about traction problems and all that, but it's really not as bad as I thought.... even with my bald tires. The car also has much better midrange response... and the converter I have is built for drag racing and all that, but not to negatively effect everyday driving also. All in all, I think the car is a lot more fun to drive, and I haven't been able to get out of the darn thing... I used a little more than a half a tank in 2 days right after I got the car back. I feel that the converter just "awakened" a lot of the potential power that these cars have.

Posted by: driller

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

I like the downshift it sounds like the gears give plus the faster increase in revs. I just don't want to make the jump and then say, oops, too much.

I've heard several who have went with 3.73s and wish that they had went 4.10s. I've heard a few who went 4.30s or higher and said ooops, too much. Very, very few have regretted putting 4.10s on the Mark VIII platform. Of course I know of one or two who is/was considering 3.55s?

As far as the converter, that is one of my upcoming winter projects(I hope).

I've heard a proper stall converter on the Mark VIII is worth .4 to .6 in the quarter mile!

Shoot, I'd settle for .3 to .5 off my ET.

My 2005 goals are the 8 second club in the eighth mile, and the 100 mph club and/or 13 second club in the quarter mile N/A - no power adders.

Posted by: Katshot

From what I've seen, the DOHC 4.6 NEEDS super low gears to get out of the hole (something that Mercury found out TOO late with the Marauder). That said, it seems like 4.10's are the hot ticket. Just don't bitch about the bad fuel mileage. My car is GREAT with 3.73 gears but that's also because the LT1 has great bottom-end torque. I think if I was going to do a car with a Ford DOHC 4.6 I'd HAVE to use a manual trans, the engine really deserves one.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2008 - Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser

Just Holden Commodores:Halloween:Credit Cards:Read this exciting weblog:Mortgages