[enkeivette]

No its for people who had jobs when they built their motors, but now can't afford slick and a 12 bolt IRS upgrade.

[Shaolin Crane]

If you cant push it, then I guess we know who's car is faster

[enkeivette]

You're just mad that I beat a blown ford stroker NA :P

[Shaolin Crane]

Nah, like I said. He was probably only putting down in the 370-390 range. 90% of ford engine combos arent put together right and if I had my choice the blue car would have an ls3 instead of its whimpy little 308

[Vettezuki]

I'm actually curious about the aero difference of a C3 to a 94 Cobra. I'm not so sure the C3 is better. It's Fing huge up front with some styling curves, not so much aero curves.

enkeivette, you'd never get anywhere near your gear limitation, you'd need well over 1000WHP to push through the air at that speed, but you *might* be able to crack 200 in fith on a hard pack salt flats (not a soft lake bed of course).

Ron, if you're building up your engine and have any intention to do flying mile type stuff, I'm under the ipmression ring gaps are critical for blown applications. Basically they have to be kept much looser so they can expand at the much harsher long WOT period, otherwise they can actually melt. That's what I remember from the later cobras. Actually might been the piston heads themselves that started binding in the motor. The down side of course is that you'll have a "loose" motor for more normal driving.

[Ryridesmotox]

enkei... how much power are you pushing?

[Shaolin Crane]

Originally Posted by Vettezuki

I'm actually curious about the aero difference of a C3 to a 94 Cobra. I'm not so sure the C3 is better. It's Fing huge up front with some styling curves, not so much aero curves.

enkeivette, you'd never get anywhere near your gear limitation, you'd need well over 1000WHP to push through the air at that speed, but you *might* be able to crack 200 in fith on a hard pack salt flats (not a soft lake bed of course).

Ron, if you're building up your engine and have any intention to do flying mile type stuff, I'm under the ipmression ring gaps are critical for blown applications. Basically they have to be kept much looser so they can expand at the much harsher long WOT period, otherwise they can actually melt. That's what I remember from the later cobras. Actually might been the piston heads themselves that started binding in the motor. The down side of course is that you'll have a "loose" motor for more normal driving.

FWIW a fox GT has a drag coefficient of .34 to a c5's .38 and a cobra has a .37
And a later model cobra has a completely different engine.

[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by Shaolin Crane

FWIW a fox GT has a drag coefficient of .34 to a c5's .38 and a cobra has a .37
And a later model cobra has a completely different engine.

Thought so. No way a C5 is that low. And a C3 is terrible for real aero (which really only matters over 100mph or so, but starts to matter A LOT).





More charts and analysis. The C3 is not so good compared to modern vehicles.

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/auto...nd-tunnel.html

[Shaolin Crane]

That's a typo, it should have been .38, not .28, either way I was wrong, close, but wrong. Its been a while since I looked but I remembered mustang werent all that far off.
Mustangs are surprisingly aerodynamic

[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by Shaolin Crane

That's a typo, it should have been .38, not .28, either way I was wrong, close, but wrong. Its been a while since I looked but I remembered mustang werent all that far off.
Mustangs are surprisingly aerodynamic

You had a zero in there too. There's a lot of difference between .28 and .38, and an order of magnitude between .028 and .38. But I'm mostly just breaking your balls.

Here's the lowest cd car in the world, the Paccar at 0.075.



Here's apparently the lowest commercial car, the 2010 Mercedes E-class at 0.24. Even better than a Prius at 0.25!