1100hp on a single 71.

Image1465776558.975657.jpg

Didn't make it to the track last Friday. But dyno'd these numbers on Saturday at my dyno day. Only change was I calibrated the load cell correction factor from a base of 1.0 to .85


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Finally made it to the track with this truck. Here's the slip. His times are the left lane. My time with my 06 is the right lane. Image1467435693.444469.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
10.71 at 130 mph, got that mid ten, nice! Looks like the 60ft could have a little more in it too. Also backs up 1,000rwhp. Great job. Weird seeing sudden and accurate success on Internet threads :hehe:
 
Is this an April fools joke in July



No joke. My truck is also used for towing too. Ran the 10.70 on Friday, dyno'd 1148 yesterday and then towed the dyno with my customers truck that ran the 10.96.
Image1467564554.503157.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BROKE.jpg
 
Here's a dyno graph from Saturday of a full built 6.7 and a Fleece 68/87 turbo. Image1467595726.592542.jpg
No track times for this truck yet, but I will post them when I get them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
10.71 at 130 mph, got that mid ten, nice! Looks like the 60ft could have a little more in it too. Also backs up 1,000rwhp. Great job. Weird seeing sudden and accurate success on Internet threads :hehe:

Do you have reading comprehension issues?

The 71mm truck being discussed went 10.96 @ 125.56, 6572#.

The all-knowing compD calcupotator says 882 rwhp on trap speed.

882 does not equal 1000 or 1100 unless we have switched over to hipster math.

:nail:
 
Do you have reading comprehension issues?



The 71mm truck being discussed went 10.96 @ 125.56, 6572#.



The all-knowing compD calcupotator says 882 rwhp on trap speed.



882 does not equal 1000 or 1100 unless we have switched over to hipster math.



:nail:


Seems that dyno is a little happy with numbers...truck in question made 995hp with a 1.1CF....so....yeah....
 
Seems that dyno is a little happy with numbers...truck in question made 995hp with a 1.1CF....so....yeah....

Some trucks did better that day, some did worse. No different then drag racing, every pass can be a different ET and MPH depending on conditions. Weather correction was 1.10 on the 995hp pull on July 2nd and was 1.08 on the 1042hp pull on June 11th. Since I run the weather station at every event the dyno automatically adjusts the weather correction throughout the day.
 
Some trucks did better that day, some did worse. No different then drag racing, every pass can be a different ET and MPH depending on conditions. Weather correction was 1.10 on the 995hp pull on July 2nd and was 1.08 on the 1042hp pull on June 11th. Since I run the weather station at every event the dyno automatically adjusts the weather correction throughout the day.


Why not just run uncorrected? That's the great equalizer. Can't correct your ET or MPH at the track (unless it's the few specific NHRA tracks that do offer a correction factor) so why offer a false number on a dyno?

And actually weather has very little to do with great/poor numbers at the track unless your racing on the moon. Having an engine creating it's own atmosphere negates any perceived needed correction. Especially when your spraying horsepower from a bottle.

Maybe the truck will run the number your dyno says this weekend at the Hat. Which should be minimum 133mph given 1060hp@67xx#
 
Last edited:
Is it just me, or does the HP/ET calculator assume a bunch of perfect scenarios. Track prep, soft launches, spinning, slipping lockup, incorrect torque etc etc all make for a slower MPH/ET when you are trying to achieve perfect. Would it not be better to refer to the calculator as a reference guide to what the equivalent power you put down on that pass versus "your only making this much according to 2 input variables..."

With that being said, i agree correction factors should not be used. its all about what you put down that day at that time to the tires.
 
Back
Top