L Body 1/4 Mile Times with Stock Turbo, Injectors, and Intercooler

[jckrieger]

I'm looking for some 1/4 mile times of mostly stock L bodies, utilizing a T2 turbo, T2 intercooler, and T2 injectors. Everything else can be modified. I'm expecting to see a bunch of 13's, so let's see them! I don't care if they're 2 or 4 door, but I'll be comparing them against my 86 GLHS once I get it back together. Right now it's in pieces ready for paint.

[minigts]

You could check the 1/4 mile times thread JT started. Just for the record, I've run 14.50 @ 97 mph with 15psi in my GLHS. The only change was an 89 CSX cal, but stock engine, injectors, IC and 2 1/4" exhaust with a catalytic on street tires.

[speedfreek500]

12.89 in my GLH, +20'S, 3" EXH,CAL,UDP,AFPR,CAL,ADJ CAM GEAR and with a built auto on street tires. Here is some info of it when it was in the 13"s http://www.tomak.net/ before i bought it and put a ton of goodies in to it.

Before paint.
http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx212/speedfreek500/Axial Trail stuff/beforepaint.jpg
http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx212/speedfreek500/Axial Trail stuff/DSCF0245.jpg

after paint
http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx212/speedfreek500/Axial Trail stuff/DSCF0241.jpg

[shmedley]

Tommy's GLHS clone would run 13.00 all day long and that car was stock with a exhaust cutout and just bled like a mofo. He was still using the 525 also

[2.216VTurbo]

I'd have so say it will be somewhat slower than a 98 Viper:lol:

[Vigo]

Dunno about the injectors but Pat got one into the high 12s on stock motor and turbo iirc.

Injector size doesnt mean all that much.. if you want to know how fast a car can go on X injector, just do the math and assume something slightly lower than that. If someone is trapping 110mph on a stock t2 garrett, knowing their injector size doesnt tell me jack ---- about how they did it.

[168glhs1986]

14.01 @ 101 mph. Stock Engine / Turbo @ 14lbs boost on a GLHS Stage II Computer with Street Tires. Dyno'd to the wheels @ 191 hp / 223ft lbs.

[jckrieger]

These are the kinds of times I was expecting. My old Daytona needed some serious fuel to get it up to 101 mph. My Shelby Charger ran 12.68 @108, but it had a Talon intercooler and a couple cold start injectors. I'll be doing/have done a custom cal, lightly ported head, lightly ported exhaust manifold, and nice mandrel 2.5" exhaust. The car has a high capacity clutch and an a520/OBX trans. I'd like to make it a solid mid 13 second car on street tires.

My only problem now is deciding whether to try and hunt down some std bore T2 pistons, or continue running the LW rods and see if I can window the block.

[forcedfedmopar]

I was running 8.2-8.3 consistantly on the stock turbo in my GLH. (converted to blow through). With the super 60 im now down in the 7.9 range.

[Vigo]

i vote LW rods..

[BadAssPerformance]

My only problem now is deciding whether to try and hunt down some std bore T2 pistons, or continue running the LW rods and see if I can window the block.

My T2 Shadow runs LW rods.. 12.89 @ 104.5 ... probably could ET better but its hard to shift with crossed fingers! LOL

[jckrieger]

My T2 Shadow runs LW rods.. 12.89 @ 104.5 ... probably could ET better but its hard to shift with crossed fingers! LOL

You also had a million passes on a stock A520! When I put the 2.5L in my CSX, the A520 lasted exactly 1 day! Of course, that car was a torque monster...

I might just run the LW rods, as the car *should* hold together and the bottom end only has 30K miles on it. I'm just a little worried since one of the local guys threw a rod in his 87 CSX. With that said, I also bought a bone stock 89 Daytona Shelby with a thrown heavy rod. I guess it really makes no difference in the end.

[Juggy]

im pretty sure the old "220whp???" rod limit on the lightweight rods has been well surpassed into the 300whp range. look at shadow who has pushed a TII block into the 500whp range. and they were said not to withstand more then 300...

when you think about, alot of our tech info is "old school" data. we now have much better combinations of parts, and the ability to get alot better calibrations for our setups. which in turn helps reduce alot of the stress that people were having back in the day when they seemed to be wingin it!

[Juggy]

My T2 Shadow runs LW rods.. 12.89 @ 104.5 ... probably could ET better but its hard to shift with crossed fingers! LOL

do the lightweight rod cars come with mahle pistons on floating pin????
trying to figure out some confusion here....same pistons at the TII 2.2 cars...right???

or is there a chryco designed piston that looks exactly like the mahle?

[BadAssPerformance]

You also had a million passes on a stock A520! When I put the 2.5L in my CSX, the A520 lasted exactly 1 day! Of course, that car was a torque monster...

Yeah, a 2.2L is a little easier ont eh torque...


im pretty sure the old "220whp???" rod limit on the lightweight rods has been well surpassed into the 300whp range.

The HP limit of components is also heavily dependant upon the weight of the car


do the lightweight rod cars come with mahle pistons on floating pin????
trying to figure out some confusion here....same pistons at the TII 2.2 cars...right???

or is there a chryco designed piston that looks exactly like the mahle?

Not sure if the pistons are the same or not, but the factory LW rods have pressed pins, not floaters like the TII rods.

[jckrieger]

Not sure if the pistons are the same or not, but the factory LW rods have pressed pins, not floaters like the TII rods.

That was my understanding. No LW rod motor came with true T2 Mahle pistons, since all T2 motors used floating pins and heavy rods.

[ShelbyZD]

My brother has a T2 setup in his 87 Charger. Car weight is around 2250ibs currently. Besides the T2 stuff he rebuilt the motor with .20 oversize pistons, has a cone style air filter, ported exhaust manifold and an opened up 2 1/4 exhaust. He's running 17psi on a stock t2 turbo with the 87 GLHS ECU and 20% injectors...oh yeah and an A-555.

We don't have an official quarter mile time but basing it on the car's he's raced we'd expect at least low 13's if not high 12's. He can edge out the new 425hp Camaro's and just barely lost to one last week running 480hp.

Also, your asking for trouble running a LW rod in a 200hp+ car. Better just to bite the bullet and get some T2 ones put in...not to mention the stock A-525.

Also, just for the record the A-555 and T3/T2 clutch combo is super tough. He's been running those parts since 2k3 and they're going strong.

[jckrieger]

Already have the a525 covered, as I've replaced it with an A520 with an OBX LSD. I know the LW rods are a gamble, but it really bothers me that if I want new pistons I have to buy forged. I have 3 good T2 pistons, so I'm sure I can find some 87-90 T2 pistons around somewhere to make a complete set.

I used to run a T3/T2 clutch. It worked fine at lower boost levels, but it didn't last long above 20psi. It held fine with the boost below ~22psi for years though.

[Vigo]

Also, your asking for trouble running a LW rod in a 200hp+ car.

Why? Based on what?


T3/T2 clutch combo is super tough

Holding a stockish 2.2 on 17 psi doesnt make it super tough. hehe. Im sure it's a great match for that engine at that boost but a stockish 2.2 doesnt really push the limits on torque. I dyno'd my 2.5 @17psi on a stock turbo at 320lb ft to the wheels. Most 2.2s on stock turbos and 17psi arent making 250 to the wheels. Not hating on the car/setup, just disagree with the 'super tough' thing unless you say 'in this particular context'.

[cordes]

Why? Based on what?



Holding a stockish 2.2 on 17 psi doesnt make it super tough. hehe. Im sure it's a great match for that engine at that boost but a stockish 2.2 doesnt really push the limits on torque. I dyno'd my 2.5 @17psi on a stock turbo at 320lb ft to the wheels. Most 2.2s on stock turbos and 17psi arent making 250 to the wheels. Not hating on the car/setup, just disagree with the 'super tough' thing unless you say 'in this particular context'.

I thought most 2.5s will only make about 20-30lbs more torque than the equivalent 2.2? I haven't seen a lot of dyno graphs on the subject though.

[Vigo]

Have you owned a 2.5? The difference is DRAMATIC, to put it mildly.

[Keito]

I've run 18 PSI on a stock 86 bottom end.
Ported +1 valve head, Spearco IC, +20's, stock T2 turbo, A413, and a Matt Wright
GLHS cal has gone 13.15's on race gas.

[jckrieger]

I'm pretty sure it's a percentage.



I thought most 2.5s will only make about 20-30lbs more torque than the equivalent 2.2? I haven't seen a lot of dyno graphs on the subject though.

[cordes]

Have you owned a 2.5? The difference is DRAMATIC, to put it mildly.

I have a 2.5. I never felt that much of a difference except when cruising.

[Vigo]

Ive had stock-ish 2.5 and 2.2 up to 17-18psi and the difference feels closer to 100lb ft than 30. I think that is because it is..

Numerous people have dyno'd ~300wtq on 2.5s at as little as 14psi.At 14psi a 2.2 is usually making like 220wtq.

GLHNSLHT2 got 280lb ft @12 psi. I got 320@16psi.


I have to put 12+ psi into my 2.2 car before it will even think about breaking loose in second. The 2.5 aries will spin 2nd @7psi with better tires. Ive had both of them up to 17-18 psi and only one of them would spin 3rd gear, wasnt the 2.2..

I swapped from a 2.5 to a 2.2 in the spirit and regret it. Im probably going back to 2.5. I did the swap to figure out how a 2.2 was different (never had a running one before), and now i know.. smoother, less touchy, pulls to higher rpm with same top end, but WAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYY less torque.

[cordes]

Thanks. I'll have to keep a better lookout for comparisons between the two.

[Vigo]

No prob.. try turning up the boost sometime.. 2.5 torque is fun. :)

[cordes]

No prob.. try turning up the boost sometime.. 2.5 torque is fun. :)

I ran my 2.5 shadow at 22PSI for a while back when. My Omni always felt faster at much less boost, but I know it weighs a couple hundred lbs. less.

[jckrieger]

A 2.5L in an L body is something to experience. Sarah's old Rampage has a 2.5L T1 motor with an auto trans and you could hardly touch the gas pedal without spinning the tires from a stop. You get 13% more torque from the increased displacement, plus another 10% or so from the faster turbo spool. In the end, I wouldn't be surprised to see 20-25% higher dyno torque numbers with a 2.5L over a 2.2L.

With all that said, I'm not sure peak power numbers are any better with a 2.5L. My old Daytona Shelby ran exactly 101 mph with the Garrett turbo and stock intercooler with both a 2.5L bottom end and calibration and a 2.2L bottom end and calibration. The 2.5L made more torque, but the air system ran out of steam at the same power level. I would never go from a 2.2L to a 2.5L to make more power. That should only be considered if you want to resolve drivability issues with a big turbo or a heavy car.

[roachjuice]

i love my 2.5 it feels like it has way more balls than the 2.2 lots more tq.

[Vigo]

Im starting to feel bad for hijacking..


With all that said, I'm not sure peak power numbers are any better with a 2.5L.

I think usually they are worse. The same top end flow on a bigger cylinder means peak power comes earlier, and the earlier the peak power, the lower it is mathematically. It is an uphill battle to make more power at lower rpm with higher torque, as opposed to making it at higher rpm with less torque. It makes sense that the 2.2 and 2.5 trapped the same on the same top end, because power comes from flow, and if the top end didnt change than the flow didnt change either.

Going from a 2.2 to a 2.5 usually wont make a car faster, but if it a low-power mild kind of setup, it can make it a lot more fun. Thats the conclusion ive come to.

[Juggy]

A 2.5L in an L body is something to experience. Sarah's old Rampage has a 2.5L T1 motor with an auto trans and you could hardly touch the gas pedal without spinning the tires from a stop. You get 13% more torque from the increased displacement, plus another 10% or so from the faster turbo spool. In the end, I wouldn't be surprised to see 20-25% higher dyno torque numbers with a 2.5L over a 2.2L.

With all that said, I'm not sure peak power numbers are any better with a 2.5L. My old Daytona Shelby ran exactly 101 mph with the Garrett turbo and stock intercooler with both a 2.5L bottom end and calibration and a 2.2L bottom end and calibration. The 2.5L made more torque, but the air system ran out of steam at the same power level. I would never go from a 2.2L to a 2.5L to make more power. That should only be considered if you want to resolve drivability issues with a big turbo or a heavy car.

dont forget the increased powerband. after my last engine setup, im def a fan of the 2.5 it spooled way faster, had more torque, and even matched the top end of the 2.2
no doubt in my mind it woulda ran noticeably faster at the track.

the only reason people are not big on the 2.5 is because a good portion of them have tried it with more stockish top ends, which is not allowing the 2.5 to reach its full breathing potential. an intake, port job, larger valves and camshaft does world of wonders.

[ShelbyZD]

Why? Based on what?

Based on the fact that's it was made for a normally aspired car making sub 100hp. I had one fail a stock T2 hp levels and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I'm not saying T2 rods won't fail, just that it isn't worth the chance to go with the weakest of the weakest parts.


Holding a stockish 2.2 on 17 psi doesnt make it super tough. hehe. Im sure it's a great match for that engine at that boost but a stockish 2.2 doesnt really push the limits on torque. I dyno'd my 2.5 @17psi on a stock turbo at 320lb ft to the wheels. Most 2.2s on stock turbos and 17psi arent making 250 to the wheels. Not hating on the car/setup, just disagree with the 'super tough' thing unless you say 'in this particular context'.

Considering it's been rated by our vendors to only handle around 250hp max ...but yeah 'in this particular context + the price. I also wouldn't recommend using that clutch and PP if one can afford better. I can't say for sure about his torque levels, but adding 50hp to a VW Vr6 wouldn't put it anywhere near high 12s..Opening up the exhaust and bleeding the boost tends to make a big difference...but then again he hasn't done anything to his A-555..it's bone stock with around 200,000kms on it.

---------- Post added at 09:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:39 PM ----------

Also, what good is increased torque levels if you can't get your car to hook up?

[jckrieger]

Also, what good is increased torque levels if you can't get your car to hook up?

Increased torque sure makes the car look a lot more dramatic, but it sure doesn't get you down the track any faster. My Viper seems slow and bland compared to my old CSX. The CSX would spin the tires in 1st through 4th. The Viper won't even spin them in 1st. It's all about how you want the car to drive.

[tryingbe]

How wide are those rear tires on Viper?

[jckrieger]

How wide are those rear tires on Viper?

OE size is 335 35 R17. The new ones use 345 35 19's.

[Vigo]

Based on the fact that's it was made for a normally aspired car making sub 100hp. I had one fail a stock T2 hp levels and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I'm not saying T2 rods won't fail, just that it isn't worth the chance to go with the weakest of the weakest parts.


Thats an interesting way to look at it, considering the early carb motors had heavier rods than the 86-87 turbo1 motors. What failed on your rod? Most rod failures have to do with rpm (and unless you owned that rod from day 1 you DONT KNOW what rpm the last guy mis-shifted it to) or physical damage from being run with excessive bearing clearance. Almost none of them have to do with power.

[Bear]

I'm not sure how many of you guys have really been running there cars at HIGH horsepower levels for a long period of time, but I have. And from my years of running and breaking these motors, the real issue with the LW rods isn't the rods....its the pistons that are attached to them. I never bothered to look into the pistons quality, but they are what break. The wrist pin commonly rips out of the piston and then all hell breaks loose. That is the issue that I have experienced in my time with these cars.

Nick A.
Proud Shelby owner since 93.

[jckrieger]

New username Nick? I agree, the non-Mahle pistons aren't terribly tough. Hell, I've broken the T2 Mahle pistons as well. I plan on running the LW rods with the stock turbo and intercooler and will see where it takes me.

-Clark


I'm not sure how many of you guys have really been running there cars at HIGH horsepower levels for a long period of time, but I have. And from my years of running and breaking these motors, the real issue with the LW rods isn't the rods....its the pistons that are attached to them. I never bothered to look into the pistons quality, but they are what break. The wrist pin commonly rips out of the piston and then all hell breaks loose. That is the issue that I have experienced in my time with these cars.

Nick A.
Proud Shelby owner since 93.

[Vigo]

Anyone know of a pictorial comparison between the t1 and t2 2.2 pistons?

[roachjuice]

I ran the crap out of my stock 86 2.2. 24psi on a stock Garret. Moved pretty good. Hell it still ran when I pulled it.

[Marcus86GLHS]

from reading all the posts it is clear a lot of L-bodies have made it into the 12's with just a few mods but i did not see a write up of one that fits the "stock turbo, injectors, and intercooler" requirement.

i never ran my 86S with the stock injectors either, but i made a lot of passes w/ the original turbo and the original intercooler. best pass was a 12.92. i bet you could get a 86S into the 12's by just installing a MBC, a good calibration, and a 3" exhaust, and retain the stock turbo, injectors, and intercooler. but, has anyone done that yet?[COLOR="Silver"]

[Vigo]

Injectors dont make power, they just support it, so injector size is a fairly useless thing to know. It is either POSSIBLE or IMPOSSIBLE to take X weight to X speed in X distance with given injectors, so you pretty much know what injectors can do without anyone telling you what they ran. The only thing it proves if someone tells you is that math..STILL WORKS.

The lowest MPH ive seen high 12s at was ~98mph. To accelerate a 2700lb (race weight) vehicle to 98mph in 1/4 mile takes ~200chp. 4 33lb/hr injectors at 80% duty cycle and 55psi pressure differential can flow that much. So it is technically possible, barely, to run 12s in a full weight S-car on stock injectors (and stock pressure). Lessen the weight or up the pressure differential or the duty cycle and it gets a little easier. Most people would rather just run bigger injectors than start taking apart their car or rescaling their cal for stock injectors @ higher pressure when they can just rescale for BIGGER injectors and not have to change injectors ANYWAY if they make 12 more hp...

I cant imagine most people doing run after run after run to eek out that last tenth of ET to run 12.9 on a full weight, barely modded, 200hp car when just making 230 or 240hp (with bigger injectors) is SO much easier.

[The Pope]

from reading all the posts it is clear a lot of L-bodies have made it into the 12's with just a few mods but i did not see a write up of one that fits the "stock turbo, injectors, and intercooler" requirement.

i never ran my 86S with the stock injectors either, but i made a lot of passes w/ the original turbo and the original intercooler. best pass was a 12.92. i bet you could get a 86S into the 12's by just installing a MBC, a good calibration, and a 3" exhaust, and retain the stock turbo, injectors, and intercooler. but, has anyone done that yet?[COLOR="Silver"]

considering that the 86S has been restored, poly bushings, new koni's and the right alignment they will run 12s on the stock parts if driven right. Straight through muffler, mandrel bent 2.5" exhaust without a cat. Then +20 or FFV injectors, 3 br map and FWDperformance stage 5 with or without a MBC will run 12s no problem. This combo with a 87 CSX and slicks will run 12s..... Keep also in mind the 525's life span can be clocked with an egg timer with a stage 5.

[Pat]

from reading all the posts it is clear a lot of L-bodies have made it into the 12's with just a few mods but i did not see a write up of one that fits the "stock turbo, injectors, and intercooler" requirement.

i never ran my 86S with the stock injectors either, but i made a lot of passes w/ the original turbo and the original intercooler. best pass was a 12.92. i bet you could get a 86S into the 12's by just installing a MBC, a good calibration, and a 3" exhaust, and retain the stock turbo, injectors, and intercooler. but, has anyone done that yet?[COLOR="Silver"]

At this point, stock injectors are 20 years old. They should be the first thing that get replaced anyway! Even so, I've never been comforable pushing more than 14 psi or so (200ish hp) with the stock injectors. Wasn't worth the rist to me to push it without adding fuel in a reliable way.

That being said, I've never run one of these cars too hard with stock injectors. I ran my '87 GLHS in the 14.5's (maybe 14.4) @ about 97-98 mph on street tires bone stock (including exhaust) with nothing but a K&N filter and an MP stage II computer (computer controlled 14 psi). I am sure that with slicks, that car would have run mid to high 13's in that set up.

The next step for the car at that point was +20's, an exhaust, more boost and slicks and got it down to 12.8 @ 106. Then it got a big intercooler and went 12.5 @ 110.

[jckrieger]

From all of the posts, it looks like I may need some slightly larger injectors for reliable 12's. This isn't too much of a problem, and I should be able to convert the car to use my 87 CSX computer so I can create a custom cal. I appreciate all of the feedback!

[anokabball24]

What did you end up doing jckrieger?

I'm in a similar boat. Not working with a big budget so it would be nice to keep the stock Garrett and see what she can do in the Omni.

I'm thinking about running the stock Garrett with +20's, large FMIC, AFPR, full 3" exhaust, a 3-bar MAP, and a FWDP Stage 5 cal @ 18 psi (87 electronics).

What are some ball park power/tq numbers one could expect on this setup? It sounds like high 12's are possible on this setup.

[jckrieger]

I'm not sure how I missed this post! I am just now getting the car back together, so I don't have any performance numbers. The car now has an a520 with an OBX diff, a 2.5" swingvalve with a large can wastegate, and 2.5" mandrel exhaust. Once I get a few miles on the car I'll be installing a set of +20's or +40's and will be cranking the boost up to around 16psi.

A lot of LW connecting rods have been thrown, so I'm probably never going to go much beyond that power level. If the engine comes apart, then it will be getting a full build when it goes back together. For some reason my daily driver R/T is getting all of the go-fast parts and the GLHS is keeping mostly stock parts. I'm not sure how I ended up with that logic.


What did you end up doing jckrieger?

I'm in a similar boat. Not working with a big budget so it would be nice to keep the stock Garrett and see what she can do in the Omni.

I'm thinking about running the stock Garrett with +20's, large FMIC, AFPR, full 3" exhaust, a 3-bar MAP, and a FWDP Stage 5 cal @ 18 psi (87 electronics).

What are some ball park power/tq numbers one could expect on this setup? It sounds like high 12's are possible on this setup.

[moparzrule]

T3/T2 clutch combo is super tough

Just wanted to say, no.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m216/87wagon/clutch1.jpg


^260 WTRQ on a 2.2L, 230 WHP. ~2000 miles. Never slipped, just one day on the highway WOT in 5th gear all the sudden it was like I was in neutral. Took me awhile to figure out what the hell happened because I sure wasn't expecting that.

[Vigo]

A t2/t3 clutch can handle a decently modded 2.2 unless it just breaks into pieces randomly. But on a 2.5 youll be pushing through it even with less WHP than a 2.2 setup that doesnt.

[tryingbe]

When it comes to clutch, peak torque matters, not peak hp.

[jckrieger]

When it comes to clutch, peak torque matters, not peak hp.

Exactly! The T3 clutch holds fine in my Spirit at about 250 whp, but that same clutch wouldn't last 10,000 miles on a 2.5L running a stock turbo at 25psi... at about the same peak power.

I should have the GLHS at SDAC this year, so we'll see what can be done with the stock turbo and intercooler. There's a good chance that this car will get my set of +40's and a 3 bar map before the event as well. If there's a good occasion, I'll make a trip to the 1/4 before swapping the injectors for a baseline. The car is finally "done" except for some cosmetics, so there should be many good times to be had this year.

[Vigo]

but that same clutch wouldn't last 10,000 miles on a 2.5L running a stock turbo at 25psi.

It wouldnt last one second. A 2.5 @25 psi should be making like ~440 tq. I made 320wtq @16 psi...

[moparzrule]

Not with a stock T2 turbo. Probably more in the 350 wtrq range, but of course that would still rip a T2/T3 clutch to shreds.

[Vigo]

Im pretty sure people have dyno'd 400wtq on a stock garrett. I dont think it makes sense that you would only gain 30wtq from adding almost 10 psi vs the dyno run i mentioned.

Turbos are more hp-limited than torque limited. It takes less airflow to make a huge torque number at a low rpm (my peak torque rpm was in the 3000s) than to make a smaller hp number at higher rpm. As long as the turbo can create the pressure, the peak torque will keep going up until something gives in the motor long before it tapers off to no gain purely from heat increase. Granted, you CAN build a setup that will survive running the turbo to the point that the charge is so hot that adding boost doesnt increase power, but most people with a stockish motor and a stock garrett will break pistons from detonation before they go that far into diminishing returns that they get 0 torque gain from adding boost. just my .02