67 mustang 347 stroker vs 98 integra stock
09-26-2007, 12:53 AM
#41
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,195
RE: 67 mustang 347 stroker vs 98 integra stock
ORIGINAL: Starfury
I didn't say top speed was drag limited, I said the car will not stay on the ground at those speeds. Not with the stock body, anyway. All of the air coming in the massive front grill goes through the engine bay and smacks right into the firewall and hood and gets forced out underneath the car, creating a lot of lift on the front end. Instead of creating downforce, it's creating upforce.
I talked to a guy once who had a brother that got killed driving his 68 Cougar at 120mph. Light gust of wind flipped the car right over, threw him right off the road.
ORIGINAL: 67mustang302
You'll kill him if it's even a half way decent 347. And I mean KILL him....BAD(if he's stock or close to stock that is). As far as top end, I doubt an Integra is gonna do 150mph even with it's aerodynamics. There's still drag, and the car has very little power. And as far as 67's falling off at 115-125? I'm at 115 in the top of 3rd and shifting into 4th it's still pulling like a mother. Even with the older 302 it had with crap E6 heads that was making less than 300hp still did over 130mph. Power WILL overcome aerodynamics, a lot of very fast race cars such as dragsters or Formula 1 and Indy cars produce a TREMENDOUS amount of drag because of the downforce they generate...their drag coefficients are anywhere from 5-10 times greater than something like a Corvette, yet they reach speeds of anywhere from 200-300+mph. With enough energy behind it even a brick can be made to go fast.
You'll kill him if it's even a half way decent 347. And I mean KILL him....BAD(if he's stock or close to stock that is). As far as top end, I doubt an Integra is gonna do 150mph even with it's aerodynamics. There's still drag, and the car has very little power. And as far as 67's falling off at 115-125? I'm at 115 in the top of 3rd and shifting into 4th it's still pulling like a mother. Even with the older 302 it had with crap E6 heads that was making less than 300hp still did over 130mph. Power WILL overcome aerodynamics, a lot of very fast race cars such as dragsters or Formula 1 and Indy cars produce a TREMENDOUS amount of drag because of the downforce they generate...their drag coefficients are anywhere from 5-10 times greater than something like a Corvette, yet they reach speeds of anywhere from 200-300+mph. With enough energy behind it even a brick can be made to go fast.
I talked to a guy once who had a brother that got killed driving his 68 Cougar at 120mph. Light gust of wind flipped the car right over, threw him right off the road.
*note to self: dont drive mustang over 120mph*
09-26-2007, 09:29 AM
#42
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 7,635
RE: 67 mustang 347 stroker vs 98 integra stock
ORIGINAL: Starfury
You can't fight aerodynamic lift with suspension upgrades.
You can't fight aerodynamic lift with suspension upgrades.
There's more - the lift coefficient is tied to the rake angleof the body, and there are more effects trying to make it go nose up/tail down than tail up. Meaning that even the amount of lift force at any given speed, front in particular,is almost always going to be less with a stiffer suspension. As a separate consideration, the stiffer suspension reduces the rate of change in rake with speed, which willwiden the difference in speed betweenany two given amounts of lift force. And that's not considering any reduction in ride height that may be part of the package.
On edit, perhaps the car in question had a lot of positive rake (nose up) just standing still. Maybe it crested a small hill just in time to meet a gusty headwind. There's still a lot that matters that we will never know.
Norm
09-26-2007, 03:35 PM
#45
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,166
RE: 67 mustang 347 stroker vs 98 integra stock
ORIGINAL: 67mustang302
You'll kill him if it's even a half way decent 347. And I mean KILL him....BAD(if he's stock or close to stock that is). As far as top end, I doubt an Integra is gonna do 150mph even with it's aerodynamics. There's still drag, and the car has very little power. And as far as 67's falling off at 115-125? I'm at 115 in the top of 3rd and shifting into 4th it's still pulling like a mother. Even with the older 302 it had with crap E6 heads that was making less than 300hp still did over 130mph. Power WILL overcome aerodynamics, a lot of very fast race cars such as dragsters or Formula 1 and Indy cars produce a TREMENDOUS amount of drag because of the downforce they generate...their drag coefficients are anywhere from 5-10 times greater than something like a Corvette, yet they reach speeds of anywhere from 200-300+mph. With enough energy behind it even a brick can be made to go fast.
You'll kill him if it's even a half way decent 347. And I mean KILL him....BAD(if he's stock or close to stock that is). As far as top end, I doubt an Integra is gonna do 150mph even with it's aerodynamics. There's still drag, and the car has very little power. And as far as 67's falling off at 115-125? I'm at 115 in the top of 3rd and shifting into 4th it's still pulling like a mother. Even with the older 302 it had with crap E6 heads that was making less than 300hp still did over 130mph. Power WILL overcome aerodynamics, a lot of very fast race cars such as dragsters or Formula 1 and Indy cars produce a TREMENDOUS amount of drag because of the downforce they generate...their drag coefficients are anywhere from 5-10 times greater than something like a Corvette, yet they reach speeds of anywhere from 200-300+mph. With enough energy behind it even a brick can be made to go fast.
[sm=patriot.gif]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
'stangdude
4.6L V8 Technical Discussions
5
08-12-2015 01:27 PM
