Mathematics for 0-60, 330, 660, 1320 ft and top speed times

[xctasy]

Well, not really. Here you go. Gimme your huddled masses of HP figures, the diff ratio and body style and I'll tell you how long it takes to reach the top speed and what the 60, 330, 660 and 1320 foot times if it was raced with you, a buddy, and a tank of gas.

Somebody else can cross check me. Should be fun using these formulas.

Top Speed HP required:Following example. Soon I'll rework it to good ole MPH and hp, as it should. Here, some dude says my Falcon does 170 mph, or 274 km/h. You then cube that, multiply by the drag factor and frontal era, then divide by a contastant, and remove the drive train losses and tire drag.

Top speed HP at rear wheels equals (274*274*274*0.44*2.25) all divided by 76716. That gives 266 kW needed at the road wheels.
Then do an estimate on a 215 mm wide tire on a 1570 kg car at 274 km/h. Take that Honda CRX's 6kW at 240 km/h, a baseline for tire losses, and mutiply it by 1570/900...this gives 10.5 kW rolling resistance. Then multiply the 10.5 KW by the % increase in section width. That's about 11.5kW. Then work out the increase in speed from the 240 km/h CRX, and mutiply by the factor. That gives 13.2 km/h

266kW+13kW=279 kW needed on an engine dyno...374 rear wheel horsepower.

Then the drive train loss is around 1.29 for a Toploader , and a need for over 482 hp net at the flywheel. That's 360 Kw at 7000 rpm with a 39.2 km/h per 1000 rpm top.

Weight should be start line weight with driver, one passenger, and half a tank of gas. Many publications use this as stadard test method for getting quarter mile times. (I find that if you add 400 pounds to the curb mass of the vehicle, and add the weight of half a tank of gas, this formulae is bang on for accuracy)

Standing 1/8 Mile Formulae (0-660 feet):-

ET=([Weight/hp]*198 )^0.289

Standing 1/16 Mile Formulae (0-330 feet):-

ET=([Weight/hp]*198 )^0.240

Standing 1/88 Mile Formulae (0-60 feet):-

ET=([Weight/hp]*0.54 )^0.450

 

[Anonymous]

Jack's Locost7 except with a Vortex supercharger. Lets say 350hp and 4.11 gears.

John

 

[Anonymous]

ok mate heres one for ya


740hp in a 1540kg 4 door ea falcon

me -94 kg and a .5 tank of fuel (28lt)

final drive gear 3.7 to 1

cheers.joe.

 

[Anonymous]

sorry i was ment to say hp at wheels wasnt i?

so thats 584.6hp at the wheels

damn i wish i had the car re-assembled now.. i just wanna go for a strp on the quater! (mmmmm......low 10 sec pass...........mmmmm) roflmfao!

cheers.joe.

 

[xctasy]

Fordman75

450hp, 3.89 rear gears, 66 US Falcon 2dr.

Tires are P265/50V15, 450hp at 5500rpm, revs to 6000 rpm, C4 auto, drag factor is 0.44 cd, frontal area is 2.25 m2 or 24.22 square feet. Drive train loss with auto is 1.333. Weight is 3300 pounds unleaden, an I'm adding 450 pounds for the gas and two people. (Would be much lower at the drags, you'd have the collector unbolted, and throw out the passenger!)

Tire hp loss is 15.5 kw with 3300 pounds, or about 20.7 hp at 165mph. Two up, the tire drag would be enough to drop it to 162 mph.

*Top speed 165 mph @ 5800 rpm if it had an AOD gearbox with a 0.67 top gear. With 450 hp, the car could do it easily.

*19.03 mph @ 1000 rpm in top with C4

*Standing Quarter Mile 11.81 sec ( @ 115.4 mph from another formula I found)

*Rpm at end of I/4 mile(1320 ft) = 6064 rpm in top gear

*Standing 1/8 mile (660 ft) = 8.51 sec

*Standing 330 ft = 5.92 sec

*Standing 60 ft = 1.97 sec. These last two are pessimistic


Floridaphatman

Jack's Locost7 except with a Vortex supercharger. Lets say 350hp and 4.11 gears.

Tires are P215/50V16, 350hp at 5500rpm, revs to 6000 rpm, C4 auto, drag factor is 0.74 cd, frontal area is 1.52 m2 or 16.36 square feet. Drive train loss with auto is 1.333. Weight is 1500 pounds unleaden, an I'm adding 450 pounds for the gas and two people. (Would be much lower at the drags, you'd have the collector unbolted, and throw out the passenger!)

Tire hp loss is 6.5 kw with 1950 pounds, or about 8.7 hp at 146mph.

*Top speed 146 mph @ 8425 rpm. With a Chevy THM 200R4 AOD gearbox with a 0.67 top gear, it'd do 5645 rpm or so. Or a good ole 4-speed OD Granada manual gearbox.

*17.33 mph @ 1000 rpm in top with C4

*Standing Quarter Mile 10.33 sec ( @ 132.00 mph from another formula I found)

*Rpm at end of I/4 mile(1320 ft) = 7616 rpm in top gear of C4, 5100 rpm if it had an THM 200R4.

*Standing 1/8 mile (660 ft) = 7.57 sec

*Standing 330 ft = 5.37 sec

*Standing 60 ft = 1.64 sec. These last two are pessimistic


Still working on speeds at each 60, 330, 660 ft distance. I think the 60 and 330 ft times could do with a formula change.

gm dstroya wanted

ok mate heres one for ya


740hp in a 1540kg 4 door ea falcon

me -94 kg and a .5 tank of fuel (28lt)

final drive gear 3.7 to 1....586.4 rwhp

Tires I picked are P245/45V17, but I didn't check if that's what you have or not, 740hp at 5500rpm, revs to 6000 rpm, were you still running a BTR or BW T5 manual or the BTR auto? Drive train loss is 1.333 with an auto, not 1.264.

Drag factor is 0.36 cd, frontal area is 2.25 m2 or 24.21 square feet. Drive train loss with manual is 1.264. Weight is 3395 pounds unleaden, and 3643 with 41 pounds of fuel, and 207 lbs of you. (Would be much lower at the drags, you'd have the collector unbolted, and throw out the passenger!)

Tire hp loss is 18.5 kw with 3643 pounds at a theoretical top speed of 320 km/h, or about 24.75 hp at 199mph,

:arrow: if it had a tall enough diff ratio. It would have to be 2.77:1, and as long as that 740 hp was at 5400 rpm, you'd have an Aussie Salt Lake Flyer. Either an auto or a manual.

*I've done the calcs with an auto, sorry.

*Top speed with current gearing is limited to red line, not power. 166 mph @ 6000 rpm enough for you in 5th, or 181 mph in overdrive 4th if its an auto.

*20.20 mph @ 1000 rpm in top with BTR in 3RD, 30.16 mph @ 1000 rpm in o/d top.

*Standing Quarter Mile 9.91 sec ( @ 137.55 mph from another formula I found)

*Rpm at end of I/4 mile(1320 ft) = 6810 rpm in 3rd gear of an auto, or 4970 rpm in top with a T5. The ratio is too shallow for an engine that revs to 6000 rpm. If the engine can handle 6800 rpm, then its ok!

:arrow: The optimum gear for a quarter mile may be 3.27:1, which would be 6010 rpm.

*Standing 1/8 mile (660 ft) = 7.31 sec

*Standing 330 ft = 5.23 sec

*Standing 60 ft = 1.55 sec. As ever, these last two are pessimistic. I'm thinking that the formula will get a re-gig because the 60 and 330 ft times will suerly be better than this.

 

[Anonymous]

excute:

atm its a 246 ef 1996 block with the ef crank and rods with a set of acl ea pistons 40 thou oversized (so the block is bored 23 tho to accept the pistons) a set of arp rod bolts blocks been o-ringed as well.

the cylinder head is a 2002 au series 3 one that has been heavily modifeid

i have a billet cam shaft in it with 590 tho lift but it is running 1990 ea rockers and lifters so the total lift is 620tho

custom exhaust manifold and a 8 lt intake plenum with a 700x400 front mount intercooler

all being fed by a custom turbonetics (imported from states) t72 core with a 76 eshaust cover and wheel and a t78 comp cover and wheel (960hp turbo)

with peak power coming up at 5800 rpm and shifting at 5900 rpm

also the car is running a supra turbo 5 speed manual(soon to be relpaced with a supra 6 spd- i know i'll always run faster with an auto but i will NEVER EVER GO AN AUTO!!) and a b/w diff that has a detriot locker out back.

suspension work is a full competition set up from k-mac (custom 32 front and 29mm rear swaybars).

the rear tyres used at the drags are a set of 11 inch wide slicks on 15 inch rims with a 85mm profile to them

its all just about done (i just need to assemble it all now-fun-not!!)

and thank you so much for doing all them calcs for me

(its a good thing i did go out and buy that 320 km/ph speedo and that full aero body kit for then isnt it?? i can see a photo opperunity coming up soon *joe goes off to find the nearest salt flat in the atlas*)

cheers.joe.

 

[xctasy]

I'm impressed. Whats really good, asside from the boost, 6-speed plans, and the cool cammer under the hood, is the fact that it doesn't have the aerodynamics of a brick

( like my XE )

 

[Anonymous]

I'm impressed. Whats really good, asside from the boost, 6-speed plans, and the cool cammer under the hood, is the fact that it doesn't have the aerodynamics of a brick

roflmfao...... oh so tru

i am also currently looking for a ef/el falcon front end on to it.

i will be getting a digi camera shortly so i'll be able to post up pic's (i think???- i havent tried) for you all to drool over.

but for now have a look at this site of mine

http://fastfords.org/buildstory.html

cheers.joe.

 

[Anlushac11]

8)

OK I'll bite.

1980 Mustang Ghia hatchback

200hp, C4 automatic, 3.55:1 Traction lock rear, P215/60-15 tires, .39cd, 2650lbs

 

[xctasy]

Anlushac11

OK I'll bite.

1980 Mustang Ghia hatchback

200hp, C4 automatic, 3.55:1 Traction lock rear, P215/60-15 tires, .39cd, 2650lbs.

frontal area is 1.92 m2 or 20.66 square feet, from memory. Drive train loss with auto is 1.333. Weight is 3100 pounds all up, I'ved added 450 pounds for the gas and two people.

Tire hp loss is 9.35 kw with 3100 pounds, or about 12.53 hp at 134mph.

*Top speed 134 mph @ 6495 rpm if it had 200 hp at that rpm. As it will be, if power is at 5500 rpm, you'd only get about 123 mph or so at 5800 rpm as power would tail off past that point.

*20.63 mph @ 1000 rpm in top with C4

*Standing Quarter Mile 14.53 sec ( @ 93.86 mph from another formula I found)

*Rpm at end of I/4 mile(1320 ft) = 4550 rpm in top gear

*Standing 1/8 mile (660 ft) = 10.18 sec

*Standing 330 ft = 6.87 sec

*Standing 60 ft = 2.60 sec. These last two are pessimistic.

This would be a nicely geared car, with a good balance between 1/4 mile gearing, top speed, and open road cruisin'. Go to 3.08:1 gears, and it'll all be ruined. Go to a Ford Overdrive auto, and it'll be heavier too.

 

[Anlushac11]

Anlushac11

OK I'll bite.

1980 Mustang Ghia hatchback

200hp, C4 automatic, 3.55:1 Traction lock rear, P215/60-15 tires, .39cd, 2650lbs.

frontal area is 1.92 m2 or 20.66 square feet, from memory. Drive train loss with auto is 1.333. Weight is 3100 pounds all up, I'ved added 450 pounds for the gas and two people.

Tire hp loss is 9.35 kw with 3100 pounds, or about 12.53 hp at 134mph.

*Top speed 134 mph @ 6495 rpm if it had 200 hp at that rpm. As it will be, if power is at 5500 rpm, you'd only get about 123 mph or so at 5800 rpm as power would tail off past that point.

*20.63 mph @ 1000 rpm in top with C4

*Standing Quarter Mile 14.53 sec ( @ 93.86 mph from another formula I found)

*Rpm at end of I/4 mile(1320 ft) = 4550 rpm in top gear

*Standing 1/8 mile (660 ft) = 10.18 sec

*Standing 330 ft = 6.87 sec

*Standing 60 ft = 2.60 sec. These last two are pessimistic.

This would be a nicely geared car, with a good balance between 1/4 mile gearing, top speed, and open road cruisin'. Go to 3.08:1 gears, and it'll all be ruined. Go to a Ford Overdrive auto, and it'll be heavier too.

Ok now I have goosebumps and am giddy with excitement. I am going to try my hardest to hit 200 rwhp. Everyone says I cant do it but no one will be able to say I didnt give it a heck of a shot.

I have a C4 now and wouldnt want a AOD. Lots of guys are having problems with those in high performance use. If you have the time and money to go through it they can be made to hold up pretty well. But for me the C4 is a known commodity. I know they will hold up and I have a stack of articles on how to improve lubrication which is its main downfall.

 

[xctasy]

To get 267 hp at the flywheel, you need three carburettors which will pulse tune to improve mid and high speed torque (Weber IDA,IDF, DCOE, with 40 mm throats). Independent runner injection like Jacks 65 X-flow EFI 250 but with twin throttle bodies to gain air-flow could easily give this kind of power. Or triple Motec or Haltec Weber style injection throttle bodies. 267 HP @ 5700 rpm with a 250 EFI-like 245 lb-ft at 4200 rpm, using a wild 225 deg at 50 thou cam with around 294 degree duration and 510 thou lift. Rev limit about 6300 rpm. Rods may have to come to the 5 inch Pinto 2.0 with Subaru STI/WRX 2.0 pistons.


Tire hp loss is 10.33 kw at 241 km/h, with 3100 pounds, or about 12.53 hp at 150mph. The car is never going to do that without higher gears.

*20.63 mph @ 1000 rpm in top with C4

*Standing Quarter Mile 13.19 sec ( @ 103.34 mph from another formula I found)

*Rpm at end of I/4 mile(1320 ft) = 5010 rpm in top gear

*Standing 1/8 mile (660 ft) = 9.36 sec

*Standing 330 ft = 6.41 sec

*Standing 60 ft = 2.28 sec.

 

[Anonymous]

Had a guy swear he did 240 kph (speedo indicated) in his old TD Cortina at around 7000 to 7500 rpm I think. Yeh I know I find it hard to believe too. Especially because he said the only mods were a "mild cam", he removed the thermostat (which he seemed to think was very important) the car had the Iron head crossflow 250 (shaved) with a 350 Holley on it and extractors as well if I recall correctly.
He said he though he could have gone faster but he didnt have enough guts to do so.
Maybe he was mistaken and it was a 500 Holley (they look the same externally) and it was not a mild cam at all
Execute is this possible. The guy sounded very convincing

 

[Anonymous]

It was a TE not a TD not that it makes that much difference. Oh and he said it had a bit of a cam not a mild cam whatever he means by that.

 

[Anlushac11]

To get 267 hp at the flywheel, you need three carburettors which will pulse tune to improve mid and high speed torque (Weber IDA,IDF, DCOE, with 40 mm throats). Independent runner injection like Jacks 65 X-flow EFI 250 but with twin throttle bodies to gain air-flow could easily give this kind of power. Or triple Motec or Haltec Weber style injection throttle bodies. 267 HP @ 5700 rpm with a 250 EFI-like 245 lb-ft at 4200 rpm, using a wild 225 deg at 50 thou cam with around 294 degree duration and 510 thou lift. Rev limit about 6300 rpm. Rods may have to come to the 5 inch Pinto 2.0 with Subaru STI/WRX 2.0 pistons.


Tire hp loss is 10.33 kw at 241 km/h, with 3100 pounds, or about 12.53 hp at 150mph. The car is never going to do that without higher gears.

*20.63 mph @ 1000 rpm in top with C4

*Standing Quarter Mile 13.19 sec ( @ 103.34 mph from another formula I found)

*Rpm at end of I/4 mile(1320 ft) = 5010 rpm in top gear

*Standing 1/8 mile (660 ft) = 9.36 sec

*Standing 330 ft = 6.41 sec

*Standing 60 ft = 2.28 sec.

Not out of my technical ability but its out of my financial ability. IIRC the sidedrafts are close to $300 each, and I still need linkage and aircleaners, and a manifold.

For that kind of power level I would need Jacks crossflow 200 mod.

 

[Anonymous]

1982 Suzuki GS1100E
108hp at 8500 and 68 ft-lbs at 6500. Both crank figures...
549lbs wet

Gears are:
Primary: 1.775
Final: 2.800
1st: 2.500
2nd: 1.777
3rd: 1.380
4th: 1.250
5th: 0.961




-=Whittey=-

 

[xctasy]

Whittey's request

1982 Suzuki GS1100E
108hp at 8500 and 68 ft-lbs at 6500. Both crank figures...
549lbs wet

Gears are:
Primary: 1.775
Final: 2.800
1st: 2.500
2nd: 1.777
3rd: 1.380
4th: 1.250
5th: 0.961

Geeze, my first bike! I'll just use the formulas! Don't remember the tire size.

Just gotta drop my daughter off to the University's Early Learning Project, and then I'll post the results.

Ohhh goodie...bike...bike!

 

[Anonymous]

Stock tire is 4.50-17 67v. Replacement appears to be 160/70VB17. Soooooo, 25.8 inches.


-=Whittey=-

 

[xctasy]

Whittey, this is why you ride bikes, no?

Phil Irvings book Tuning For Speed has a formula for top speed of bikes with the rider. Despite the fact that BMW may have got a cd of 0.42 for there R100, this is a bit beyond me. A lower cd on bikes always goes with a frontal area increase.

I'd stick with a cd of 0.70, and a frontal area of 0.5 m2, or about 5.38 sq ft. I also assume a drive train loss which is greater than the 1.17 that a well oiled, efficient drive system would have. I guess the red line is about 9500 rpm? Added rider ballast is 200 pounds.

Tire hp loss is about 0.48 kw at 250 km/h, with 729 pounds, or about 0.647 hp at 155mph. This would need every one of those 108 hp to get it. The rpm at that is 9645 rpm, and that's too high. 137 mph is at 8500 rpm, so I'd say 100 hp at 9000 rpm, and somewhere over 145 mph.

*16.07 mph @ 1000 rpm with an effective final drive of 4.97:1, in a 0.961 top gear.

*Standing Quarter Mile 11.00 sec ( @ 123.82 mph from another formula I found)

*Rpm at end of I/4 mile(1320 ft) = 7705 rpm in top gear,

*Standing 1/8 mile (660 ft) = 8.00 sec

*Standing 330 ft = 5.63 sec

*Standing 60 ft = 1.79 sec.

How does it match?

 

[xctasy]

Whittey, this is why you ride bikes, no?

Phil Irvings book Tuning For Speed has a formula for top speed of bikes with the rider. Despite the fact that BMW may have got a cd of 0.42 for there R100, this is a bit beyond me. A lower cd on bikes always goes with a frontal area increase.

I'd stick with a cd of 0.70, and a frontal area of 0.5 m2, or about 5.38 sq ft. I also assume a drive train loss which is greater than the 1.17 that a well oiled, efficient drive system would have. I guess the red line is about 9500 rpm? Added rider ballast is 200 pounds.

Tire hp loss is about 0.48 kw at 250 km/h, with 729 pounds, or about 0.647 hp at 155mph. This would need every one of those 108 hp to get it. The rpm at that is 9645 rpm, and that's too high. 137 mph is at 8500 rpm, so I'd say 100 hp at 9000 rpm, and somewhere over 145 mph.

*16.07 mph @ 1000 rpm with an effective final drive of 4.97:1, in a 0.961 top gear.

*Standing Quarter Mile 11.00 sec ( @ 123.82 mph from another formula I found)

*Rpm at end of I/4 mile(1320 ft) = 7705 rpm in top gear,

*Standing 1/8 mile (660 ft) = 8.00 sec

*Standing 330 ft = 5.63 sec

*Standing 60 ft = 1.79 sec.

How does it match?


Hey Tim, good to see ya!

Had a guy swear he did 240 kph (speedo indicated) in his old TD Cortina at around 7000 to 7500 rpm I think.

The European Cortina TF had a cd of 0.42, a frontal area of 1.87 m2, and the TE Aussie Cortina was much worse cd wise with those nice big bumpers. The frontal area was greater too. So I've used 0.45 and 1.9 m2 for the aero figures.

Power for a given speed is dead easy.

240*240*240*0.45*1.90 all divided by 76716. Then that lot gets multiplied by 1.264 for a manual. That gives the flywheel horse power. Then you just add about 10 kw for tires loess. (The actual tires loses at 240 km/h are, witha set of 225's, is 9.39 kw, or 15.1 hp.). All this equals 204.13 kw.

So the guy needs 274 hp at 149 mph. Seeing as a 500 Holley 2-bbl flat lines to only 354 cfm in a high winding six (the Holley 500 is rated at 3" of mercury, not 1.5") it is limited to producing only 220 hp. (Take cfm at 1.5", and divide by 1.6 to get maximum hp)

Theres no way he could do 138 mph (222 km/h), let alone 240 km/h.

Give the man a beer, don't cross 'em. There is no truth in what he says. Of course, 253 Commodore Cup cars with 290 hp and just one 4-bbl 465 cfm Holley can do 245 km/h. With a cd of 0.42, frontal area 1.96 m2, and drive train loss of 1.264, tire loss of 10.27 kw. That only needs 281 hp or a measly 209.7 kw.

PS. Drag co-efficients and frontal areas come from the Eurpoean VB Opel Commodre. I have a bunch of 1980's Wheels magazine drag factors, plus stuff from a race car source book. This formulae is similar to this one. Americans use frontal area in square feet. Cd is dimensionless.