Track Time

Staffamerica74 said:
I rode in his car and it seemed to be have adequate power for a mark, definately needs new meats tho.
Click to expand...

That's a problem, a Mark VIII with his mods should not feel like it has 'adequate' power it should feel like a rocket sled.
 
well i wasn't spraying at all at the track keep that in mind... i'm going to get some better tires, get a real dual exhaust. Dyno this thing and see whats up. With the chip off its been feeling a bit faster but theres no way to tell I guess. With the chip off its been barking the tires from 1-2 shifts with the tc off. I did tell them I was going to run two step colder plugs so maybe theres too much timing with the chip and the knock sensor is overriding it. I did write down that I was going to run two step colder, so I should give them a try. But highly doubt thats the problem. But its a possibility. I told them on the phone that I was going to run one step colder... But from talking to geno a while back he told met to run the 274's gapped at .048... so thats what I have in there now. A bad cat, mistuned, and bad tires could be plaguing me. I've ruled out any codes, the IRMC's. So i'll start from there.
 
Traction control on the gen 1 is a primitive system which doesn't hurt the times that match. On the gen 2 it actually retards the timing significantly. Personally I think something else is up with your car. My bone stock 96 ran 14.93 at 95.79mph with a 2.2 60 foot time on :q:q:q:qty old man touring tires. I would look into a possible clogged cat. Also with your current exhaust setup you maybe losing too much back pressure. I would run pipes all the way. I see you have a used 01 GT tranny, are you sure your chip is working properly along with the new tranny? Maybe the converter is not locking up. Aside from that check the basics. What is your fuel pressure at idle and more importantly at WOT? Since you have a nitrous setup you should have a fuel pressure gauge anyway. Do not spray until you know you have enough fuel!
 
Abe, the chip...has been an issue since you installed it... with the speed limiter and lack of performance.

what sucks is.. your "past" the 30 day return policy at LMS
{same thing happened to me back in 99 or 2000)

What I would do, is pull the chip as you have done.. then go back to the track and see IF your car improves.

important thing here is, you need to address one issue at a time, until you track down what is causing this problem.
Easiest thing to do at this point would be pull the chip and "re-run" the car.

Give that a shot and let us know how it goes... the weekend is "on its way" so ..give it a shot.

You may be suprised that your car MIGHT be quicker chipless, since you've had an ongoing issue with the chip since the day it was installed.

I wish you were closer to where I live..
I have my OLD tried and very well tested chip from my first gen.
I dont want to sell it, or get rid of it.. as I still use it on my second gen from time to time.. but it WOULD work as a test...too bad your so far away.
 
Abe I have a very cool "timeslip database".
It's very good for keeping track of your runs, the conditions and it automatically gives you the "correct ET" numbers as well, which tell you how well your car "would run" under optimum conditions.

There is a link to it in the "tracks and triumphs" section of www.mark8.org
it's called "timeslip database"
 
you know now that i think of it the fact that he does have half the exhaust off the car can really slow him down, my 93 felt like it lost a lot of low end torque when i drove it around like that.
 
Staffamerica74 said:
you know now that i think of it the fact that he does have half the exhaust off the car can really slow him down, my 93 felt like it lost a lot of low end torque when i drove it around like that.
Click to expand...


your probably right, the lack of exhaust cant be helping.

the "noise" created by the lack of exhaust probably made the "butt-0-meter" give a false reading..and he "felt" like it was faster.

very common to be fooled by the butt-0-meter
 
I don't see that a 2.2 60' time is bad. I have many slips in the 14's and 13's with 2.2 times. The top end is the problem. Maybe not enough fuel. Filter maybe. I thought lack of back pressure hurts the low end not high end. On 225's what more can you expect in 60'. With the mods you should be way faster mph.
 
htrdlincoln98 said:
I don't see that a 2.2 60' time is bad.
Click to expand...

he didn't get into the 2.2 60's though, his problems began from the start and like you said, the top end has issues as well with no MPH.

but..he was "a car length" behind a stock mark 8 at the 60 foot clock.:eek:
 
I thinks or more a matter of the wrong tune..... lol

Throwing a random blanket tune on any car just doesn't work, tuning has everything to do with each individual car, how its modded, and how you like it.
 
The first thing I would do is check fuel pressure. Second I would put some real exhaust on. If you want to run open exhaust get two exhaust cutouts right after the front cats but the piping should still be on the car. I gained 2-3mph over the stock LSC exhaust piping by running dual cutouts on my old 95 LSC.
 
I have a walboro 255, and I've replaced the fuel filter recently. My wet kit uses the portnwhere the schrader valve used to be so I need to find a guage that will tee fit in between the selenoid and the stainless fitting. I sprayed 150 shot and went through 5 bottles so I'm pretty sure I'm getting correct fuel pressure but I can't rule it out. The track is open tomorrow I may to if I have enough money.

If something is a miss with my motor or cat... How much wrong with my car will it take to throw codes? I only checked the codes with engine off... Is it likely I'll throw codes checking while it's running that won't stay showing up after the car is off?

As far as the trans it feels the same way as my last trans power wise... The shifts are faster and it barks the tires on the 1-2 shift at wot with tc off, more so with the chip off?

I got the rest of the exhaust that I can put back on that doesn't have the mufflers but glasspacks but stock diameter piping. I will also get the cats tested to be able to rule that out and hopefully run some better times tomorrow. Then I can also pop the chip on tomorrow and compare some more.
 
You cant just assume that because you have a certain fuel pump that your getting adequate pressure....

You need to work on actual factual data, not just assumptions and :q:q:q:q you hear on the internet lol....
 
The relatively new fuel pump and fuel filter gives me somewhere to go with. Also, i would assume that if I didn't have the correct fuel pressure somewhere 5 nitrous fills ago wtih the 150 shot i would have kaboomed it.

I agree, it is something i'll check out but I highly doubt that it's the problem. Again, how far does the computer go with throwing codes... so say if I wasn't getting enough fuel pressure, wouldn't I get some sort of code for that?

So far no codes what so ever doing the key on engine off test. None in the continous memory either... IMRC's look good, so I can rule them out.

Tires are a definite issue, the tune and the clogged cat are a close 2nd and have yet to be seen. Fuel pressure is a stretch but I can't rule it out. I'll try and see what a dyno and or going to the track tomorrow does for me. I only got three runs in... And all three wern't consistant
 
i found another time that I had from before while the tranny was slipping - i can't remember how much slippage but heres just another time slip to throw on here

I think it was the first time I ever ran. I had the autolite 103's gapped @ .038.
R/T .932
60' 2.295
330 6.515
1/8 9.922
MPH 73.73
1000 12.854
1/4 15.307
MPH 93.27

if I remember correctly my 2nd gear just held for a while then slipped cuz of the OWC.
 
ab i hope you figure out what the deal is
my 98 lsc with stock gears
r/t------ .2421
60------2.3217
330------6.5352
1/8------9.9713
mph-----72.16

and my 94 with no tune or gears just a tune up and 3rd cat removed at
r/t----- .7042 sleeping at the tree
60-----2.2404
330----6.3430
1/8----9.6779
mph----74.00

the 98 runs 10.0 consistent 9.9 was the best


goto youtube search tropicexpress
 
kustomizingkid said:
tuning has everything to do with each individual car
Click to expand...

that is why they call it "tuning" and not "PAINTING".

canned tunes work on 95% of the cars out there, and 95% of the people out there have no problem running "canned tunes".

But when you throw a 15 year old car into the equation that's when "canned mail order tunes" can be a problem.
 
AbrahamLincoln said:
How much wrong with my car will it take to throw codes?.
Click to expand...

ALOT...
EEC IV cars usually only chuck trouble codes for "emissions crap".. like the EGR.

I've seen failed mafs, and failed tps sensors NOT throw a code on eec 4 cars.
My car with a dead fuel pump NEVER chunked a "lean code" or a "fuel pressure" code..the pump died a horrible death and "the little light never came on".

Dont rely on a check engine light, or the lack of a code.. and definatley dont "assume" anything..assuming things is what got you into this haystack.

You "assumed" the mods you did worked perfectly with your combination.

and a "experienced Nitrous user" will "NEVER" assume they have "adequate fuel pressure".
 
kustomizingkid said:
I thinks or more a matter of the wrong tune..... lol.
Click to expand...

I agree, he's had issues with that tune since day 1.

The 105MPH speed limiter in itself says that "some where, someplace, SOMEONE overlooked something".

the speed limiter removal is by FAR the easiest thing to address in a tune.
how it could be "messed up" or overlooked is way WAY beyond my comprehension skills....

Bad thing is.. there is a 30 day return policy on that chip that is far FAR expired.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 1,416 (members: 0, guests: 1,416)
Back
Top