Focus Fanatics Forum banner
1 - 20 of 112 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Weather was mild, good racing weather. Cooled down to sweathshirt weather in the evening. And even though we were there and ready to race when the track opened at 6 p.m., Murphy's Law was chasing us all night long.

Wind blew out a couple of timing lights - DELAY.

Then someone's car lost a tire and ... yup, took out some more timing lights -
DELAY.

Then the printer in the Time Slip Booth went on the fritz, so everyone had to search for our time slips near the Racing Tower where they all were pinned up onto a corkboard!

(not so much of a delay, but a little irritating)

And they also had to stop to clean up "excess rubber" that had accumulated on the track (this, after only the first round). You guessed it - DELAY.

So all in all, we only ended up getting 3 runs in. Now, onto the time slips ...

--------------------------------------

Auto0utcast's '03 lightly modded zx3:

R/T....... .269
60'........ 2.352
330'...... 6.642
1/8....... 10.178
MPH...... 70.02
1000'.... 13.222
1/4........ 15.813
MPH...... 87.00


focuszxt's turbo '02 silver zx3:

R/T....... .5
60'........ 2.353
330'...... 6.563
1/8....... 9.432
MPH...... 78.07
1000'.... 12.216
1/4........ 14.564
MPH...... 96.06


Best run with my '06 ST, my only mod being "Stealth" CAI:
(1/2 tank of gas and the spare still in the trunk - I'm car #345)



And here's my first run, which has to take the trophy for the WORST 60 ft. time in the entire History of Drag Racing (WHEELHOP!):



ROLF! It's been 10 years since I've been to the drags, and I felt like it was my first time there!

But we had lots of fun.[:)]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
WickedlyFastST said:
a 15.7 was ran in the ST stock.
Apparently, you are referring to Motor Trend's test of the ST.
Cobalt LS vs Focus ST vs Spectra SX vs Mazda3 S vs Corolla XRS

Motor Trend does not rank high with me as a reliable testing journal.

So ...

First off, I was experiencing alot of wheelhop, so that limited me to low RPM launches. As a result, my best 60 ft. times were only 2.5 seconds.

Secondly, Car and Driver Magazine (the only one that I really trust) ran a 16.1 @ 86 with an ST.
C&D - 2005 Ford Focus ZX4 ST

And I ran a 16.1 @ 85.7. Pretty damn close if you ask me.

Thirdly, magazines do not test on dragstrips where the measured "roll out" and etc., could be somewhat different.
The Importance of 'Rollout'

And another VERY important facor is that I only had a total of 3 runs with my car. And I was improving with every successive run that I made. It is logical to think that an automotive journal would have made literally DOZENS of launches to find the perfect technique.

So in light of those facts, I could probably have beat C&D's times with maybe a 15.8/15.9 @ 87 mph.

So, are you still surprised?[;)]
 

·
Retired Focus Addict
Joined
·
9,681 Posts
I see thats all I was looking for was that you could have done better cause I know you could... you raced Mustang's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
WickedlyFastST said:
I see thats all I was looking for was that you could have done better cause I know you could... you raced Mustang's.
Well, this is the world of front wheel drive ... which is a galaxy away from RWD's.

And as I said, I only had 3 runs in.

I got good at racing Mustangs because of the years and years of practice that I had racing them.

With the FWD ST, I have yet to have such practice.

Regardless, it seems that some of that experience did pay off nicely.

I went from a 16.8 on my first run, to a 16.1 on my 3rd (and final) run.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,999 Posts
Also, if you pull the spare out of the back, it really doesn't help make your car faster. I have ran with mine in and ran with it out and there was absoulutely no difference in time. The only thing it really does is lighten the rear end up a bit raising it so now the nose of the car has a little more weight transfer, hence ever so slightly better traction, but not enough to tell beacause the spare only weighs about 20lbs. I run pretty consistent times back to back at the track and there wasn't a difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
WickedlyFastST said:
Very cool... lets race!!
YOU LOSE!

WickedlyFastST--------ME
1/8 10.5-------------------1/8 10.471

And my only mod was the "Stealth" CAI. I believe you had exhaust (as well as a few other goodies) when you made your runs.

So yeah, I guess my past "racing experience" did help. [;)]

And this is how I compared to MightyMouse32287's ST (he had 7 runs):

MightyMouse32287----------ME
60' 2.435------------------------60' 2.544
330 6.805-----------------------330 6.88
1/8 10.431----------------------1/8 10.471
MPH 67.04----------------------MPH 68.90

He beat me by 3/100's of a second in the 1/8, and my trap was 1.86 mph higher.

So in light of the above info, I've excceeded all my expectations for just my 3rd run in 10 years (and my 1st time in a FWD car).[:)]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
kenpokid said:
Also, if you pull the spare out of the back, it really doesn't help make your car faster. The only thing it really does is lighten the rear end up a bit raising it so now the nose of the car has a little more weight transfer, hence ever so slightly better traction,
You mean "not as much weight transfer", right? Because in a FWD car, transferring weight to the rear wheels is a bad thing.

... but not enough to tell beacause the spare only weighs about 20lbs.
Probably, but racing is all about weight vs. hp vs. traction. And as a rule of thumb, every 100 lbs. taken off the car should be an E.T. reduction of .10 (1/10). So if the spare weighs 20 lbs., we should be looking to cut .02 off our E.T.

I kept my spare in because I wanted to mimic the type of conditions that auto mags use when they test their cars, and then compare my times to that.

I run pretty consistent times back to back at the track and there wasn't a difference.
True, but if someone is doing a lot of "little" things (i.e., tire pressure change, timing, seat removal, etc.) then every little bit will help if they're looking to get their fastest time.

Right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
you sir, are correct.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,999 Posts
firemanfrank said:
You mean "not as much weight transfer", right? Because in a FWD car, transferring weight to the rear wheels is a bad thing.


Probably, but racing is all about weight vs. hp vs. traction. And as a rule of thumb, every 100 lbs. taken off the car should be an E.T. reduction of .10 (1/10). So if the spare weighs 20 lbs., we should be looking to cut .02 off our E.T.

I kept my spare in because I wanted to mimic the type of conditions that auto mags use when they test their cars, and then compare my times to that.

True, but if someone is doing a lot of "little" things (i.e., tire pressure change, timing, seat removal, etc.) then every little bit will help if they're looking to get their fastest time.

Right?
Well, in a front wheel drive car you want to keep the weight up front, so that is basically what I meant, so yes basically less weight transfer to the rear.

And .02 off your ET is not going to be noticable unless you are really really really consistent. And yes, every little bit will help, but if you wanna pull your spare out because of weight then you need to pull a lot more out to really see a difference. If you are pulling it out to help reduce weight transfer to the rear, then you will need to some more rear suspension stuff like stiffer shocks etc. to really make it effective for better traction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
heh.. aint nuthin left in the hatch of my car. trust me the weight transfer was the least of my worries last night. traction out of the hole was pathetic... EVERYONE was getting horrendous wheel hop... there was a built smallblock s10 pickup there that when he launched he got wheelhop so bad it sheared off the left rear axle at the ring gear and sent it flying, axle and all, across the track. my main issue was when i got nasty wheelhop on my first run the bracket that holds the coolant lines above the radiator snapped the clips that hold it in place... im going to have to jerry rig something for the time being to keep it from dropping totally onto the header. i was pleased with my times for running only an 87 octane tune from mcnews. (rest of mods listed below)

mcnews svt header kit
random tech highflow cat (2.5")
fs zetec flex
trubendz 2.5" borla catback
AEM SRI
FR wires
VF dogbone
sct chip with 87 octane tune (93 tunes not fuctioning properly)
brembo rotors, hawk hp pads
spec stg 3 clutch
205/55/15 bfg g-force sport tires set to 30 psi (front)
195/60/15 kumho ecsta asx tires set to 44 psi (rear)
h&r race springs
interior gutted (rear seats, spare, jack, hatch floor cover, decklid cover)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Auto0utcast said:
heh.. aint nuthin left in the hatch of my car ... interior gutted (rear seats, spare, jack, hatch floor cover, decklid cover)
At the track last night, AutoOutcast told me he that is looking into a way to make the car remote controlled.

This way, he could remove the weight of the driver as well!

he he [;)] [:D]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
i only had one good run. my first run i screwed up after the 1000' (ran a [email protected]). the second i ran a 15.3(missed 3rd....twice). third and final run i was sure with my gears, very slow shifts to make sure i hit them. im sure i can do better than a 14.5, but by only .1 or .2. i figure if i can get out of the hole well, shift at the right RPM's and power-shift i would be 14.3/14.4. not bad for a car that is high 16's stock.

DAN

P.S. There was also a 5 door SVT there that ran a mighty 17.02
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
svt and 17.02 dont belong in the same sentence. lol

well guys i have a 2.0 l duratec and ran a 15.79. i was running the botton half of a mmcai, so it was about the same as your "stealth" intake. you should run 15.6's easy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
i just wanted to be a jerk and bump our lil thread back to the top...but in all seriousness...firemanfrank and focuszxt were cool to chill with at the track... i wouldnt mind going again sometime after i get my 93 tune and a few other goodies sorted out for the car. its maintenance time and shes in need of some new fluids all around..bumpsticks might be in the equation come late july/august as well. suspension is a necessity as the front wheels hop like the easter bunny commin out of the hole so... we will see the 1320 again before they wrap up shop on LVD this season.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,257 Posts
firemanfrank said:
And another VERY important facor is that I only had a total of 3 runs with my car. And I was improving with every successive run that I made. It is logical to think that an automotive journal would have made literally DOZENS of launches to find the perfect technique.
They never perfected the SVTF's launch....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
SpeedOften said:
They never perfected the SVTF's launch....
Really? Wow!

So what you're saying then, is that you were there when those journalists were testing the SVTF's.

Cool!

So please S/O, tell us more about how they launched their cars.

What?

You can't?

Oh.

Never mind ......
 
1 - 20 of 112 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top