My brother was talking to one of his friends about my Skylark and the big block I've recently installed. The friend owns a 2007 BMW 335i that he's been playing around with and was curious to know how the two cars compared from 0-100. His BMW is good for low 13's from the factory with the twin turbos at 8.5psi. But, among a few other things, he's added a JB3 controller that provides a setting for 15psi. The problem is, we live in different states about 700 miles apart. So, we came up with an idea. The first idea was to compare times generated on cell phone apps, such as Dynolicious, but I couldnt get it to run consistently on my iPhone and he has a Blackberry anyways. We couldnt find an app that both phones could run. So, we decided to just use a video camera to capture our dash boards and use the timer in the video to see how the two cars compare. Its not the same as being side-by-side at a drag strip, but its the best we could do with the distance. Here are the two videos. BMW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkQ45GEvZpU BUICK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCJB680Bcas I have a little bit of advantage with the lower altitude where I live and it was about 10 degrees cooler in my video. Still its not too difficult to see who won. :TU:
I agree. Although the Buick speedo looked like it was on a trampoline, as all these old speedo's seem to under hard acceleration, it appeared your car was quicker.
Yeah, the speedo sort of jumps off the line with the tire spin, but not sure why it's so hokey pokey on the upper end. My best guess from that video is about 9.5 seconds 0-100, which correlates to somewhere around mid 12s in the 1/4 mile, if looking at the cars on this page: http://www.torquestats.com/index.php?pid=mph100 Mid 12s was sort of my goal for my car on radials. I'll have to see if I can make it to an official track some time.
Your car seems to have just about the same performance as mine acceleration wise. I can't hook. Period. Even with 3:08's. I don't have a posi. One day when funds allow I'm upgrading to 3.36 or 3.42 and posi. Maybe even 3.08 and just install the posi. Even that would help me.
I dont know what the app is, but that test is pretty flawed. The speedo in the bmw is far more accurate. I beleive both phones can use some sort of GPS tracking device to gauge speed accurately, and print out a graph with time on the x-axis. That would be more accurate way to gauge the two cars. Very different acceleration characteristics but i think both cars are close when it comes to reaching 100.
Aside from the bouncy needle up near 100, the Buick's speedo is within 2-3 MPH of accuracy, according to our calculations based on RPM/gears/tires. The numbers we came up with for results are 11 seconds for the BMW (between 3 and 14 second marks in video) and 9.5 for the Buick (between 4 and 13/14 second marks in video). The iPhone app is called Dynolicious. It uses the phone's internal motion sensor, but I can't get it to work consistently. In fact, only about one out of dozen-or-so runs have realistic numbers, regardless of how I tried to calibrate the thing. It's a shame too, because it will gives a cool report. Check out this one from my F150: http://www.dynolicious.com/results/908cf122e1eba66f28663648a7e2f4ac.html That's pretty accurate for what mods are on that truck and it even accounts for the speed limiter at 95mph activating prior to the end of 1320 feet. The truck is probably closer to a mid 13 without the limiter. Unfortunately all the other runs I did with the app are WAY off. I'll keep working with it to see if I can figure it out.
Well I have nothing against BMW. If I could afford to have one as a daily driver, I'd be all over an M series, or an AMG Meredes. They are the European muscle cars with today's technologies and comforts.
Imagine if you spent the MSRP of a BMW on a Buick. You would have an insanely nice car. That's what I like. It would have been cool if you could race him in person. Get solid proof of spankin that :moonu:
Cason, not Jason. Sorry about that! :spank: I knew better, but my middle name is Jason and it just slipped out.
My freind uses the dynolicious software all the time, and i think its pretty accurate. We tested a brand new 2008 Bullitt mustang with it, which is rated for 330 crank hp with 94 octane. With the traction aid off, it registered 301hp at the rear wheels. (if you leave out the weight of the car you get whp). We also had his cutlass chassis dynoed showing 356 hp at the wheels, and at the drag strip it registered 355. I found though it has to be laying flat, and it absolutely cannot move. Its almost worth while to make a mount for it. Weve also done it with our other cars and its usually pretty consistent. It comes down to traction and shifting consistancy as that will vary the results a bit.
Since your speedometer went so batty at 90MPH, I looked at your tach only. And according to my math, your car needs to be at a little over 4300 RPM to be at 100 MPH. That is figuring 3.42 gears, 28" tall tire and 5% converter slip. It looks to me that it takes you a tic over 11 seconds to get to 4300 RPM. The converter slip I figured is probably a bit light at WOT even for a stock converter. I assumed the tire height based on the pics of your car.
Well, I don't really want to make a thing out of this. It's certainly not a perfect way to determine the exact second a car reaches 100 from a stand. We just did the best we could with video cameras to see how the two cars compared. But, to defend myself a little here, all the online calculators I've used show around 4,150rpms for 100mph with a 275/60 (27.99") tire and the TH400's 3rd gear of 1:1. And 4,300rpms in my video looks awful close to the 14 second timer mark anyways. Here are the numbers I came up with at this online calculator: http://www.csgnetwork.com/multirpmcalc.html 1st gear at 40mph, tach says 3900rpms and calculator says 4073 (1+mph off) 2nd gear at 70mph, tach says 4100rpms and calculator says 4253 (2mph off) 3rd gear at 90mph, tach says 3600rpms and calculator says 3695 (2mph off) But, again, this was just for fun and we both accept that there is a better way to compare the cars: side by side. I'll work a little more on the iPhone app. Laying it flat down may be the trick - thanks!
Hey, Steven, not to hi-jack my own thread, but that sounds like a sweet setup you have planned for your '65. I've got an LQ9 in my Escalade and that thing will down right get with the program, even in a heavy SUV. It's bullet proof too. It will be something to look forward to, to see your ride when it's finished.
I am pretty excited to get started on the swap myself! The last piece of the puzzle is the trans it is should be here mid next week. Probably going to do the swap in November.
