Turbo1dr
9 Sec Wanna-Be
- Joined
- May 25, 2001
Again Grumpy, nice times. You say you're lazy but the way your car runs is telling a different story! I done all those little "tricks" to mine back in the day so you're not fooling me!
I actually ran 107mph in the 8th mile with "eyeballed" home ported heads, intake, 214-210 roller cam, 2 and 1/2 stock intercoolers. This was with a stock crank, rods, pistons and a girdle on a 109 block. The headers were ATR stainless with a 3" downpipe. The turbo was a TE70 P trim I bought in 1998-99. I had to run 30psi of boost and 116 fuel to achieve those mph numbers. So given the fact you have a better intercooler, newest design Q trim turbo and your heads/intake most likely professionally ported and tuned by someone that does this kind of stuff all day I have little doubt that you car can't run the number on less boost. Apparently, my set-up was also pretty good for a " home-grown thrown-together" engine. It was back in 1999 when I ran those times. My focus today with my combination is to get more air in the engine without having to run excessive boost.
I actually ran 107mph in the 8th mile with "eyeballed" home ported heads, intake, 214-210 roller cam, 2 and 1/2 stock intercoolers. This was with a stock crank, rods, pistons and a girdle on a 109 block. The headers were ATR stainless with a 3" downpipe. The turbo was a TE70 P trim I bought in 1998-99. I had to run 30psi of boost and 116 fuel to achieve those mph numbers. So given the fact you have a better intercooler, newest design Q trim turbo and your heads/intake most likely professionally ported and tuned by someone that does this kind of stuff all day I have little doubt that you car can't run the number on less boost. Apparently, my set-up was also pretty good for a " home-grown thrown-together" engine. It was back in 1999 when I ran those times. My focus today with my combination is to get more air in the engine without having to run excessive boost.