The Racers Bench Is the track just too much for you? Want to know what will beat what? Talk about it here!!

Altitude Correction

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 01:13 PM
  #61  
Riptide's Avatar
Riptide
Thread Starter
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,193
From: Montaner
Default

Keep in mind the NHRA doesn't count DA adjusted results against a record in any class. It's just their altitude only tables that count and only if run at NHRA sanctioned tracks.

http://www.nhra.net/tech_specs/altitude.html

60' doesn't seem to be part of the picture there.
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 01:30 PM
  #62  
AmericanSpeed's Avatar
AmericanSpeed
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,031
From: Orlando, FL
Default

Originally Posted by Riptide
Keep in mind the NHRA doesn't count DA adjusted results against a record in any class. It's just their altitude only tables that count and only if run at NHRA sanctioned tracks.

http://www.nhra.net/tech_specs/altitude.html

60' doesn't seem to be part of the picture there.
Off the bat it doesn't seem to, but I'd still like to hear how they got to those factors.

For the record, I am not arguing for or against the validity of corrections, I would just like to know how they come up with the formula (my engineering side coming out)
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 02:14 PM
  #63  
Stone629's Avatar
Stone629
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,302
From: North Carolina
Default

Originally Posted by Riptide
Absolutely identical? No. But close enough that it shouldn't be hard to reproduce a time within about a tenth of a second of what those corrections factors indicate if they are accurate. He believes in them obviously as does the NHRA to some degree anyway.

All he needs to do is head over to the west coast, probably seattle area, at the right time of year and find a track at low altitude with good prep similar to ours.

To make it a good test he needs to have the same setup, down to the tires, that he had when he made his "reference" run at the high altitude track here.

Short of some ridiculous weather that pushes the DA up high at the sea level track, or terrible prep, it should be a pretty close test.
I think we're on the same page, Rip. It'll be interesting to see how this all pans out once you guys get some runs in at a better DA. About Mishri, I wasn't trying to imply that he is a bad driver or incapable of anything, I was just using him as an example. The autos are quite a bit easier to run once you get your launch down. You and I have to contend with shift points, traction between shifts, all that good stuff.
Old Aug 14, 2009 | 05:17 PM
  #64  
Mishri's Avatar
Mishri
Mish-ogynist
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,784
From: Helena, MT
Default

I'm currently running M&H 275 DRs..


haven't taken them to the track yet but im planning on it as soon as I can.. maybe labor day weekend.. they are renting out the track for the international mustang meet here.
Old Aug 15, 2009 | 12:41 AM
  #65  
2000AZ5.0GT's Avatar
2000AZ5.0GT
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,731
Default

Originally Posted by Riptide
Oh for the love of CHRIST.

This is what I've been saying this entire thread.
Can is a hell of alot different than would

I don't think anyone here is disputing that DA shows what your car is capable on a best run basis in the best possible conditions, but to say that it WOULD run that time is just complete nonsense.

Think of it in terms of the Uncertainty Principle. There is always a probability that even the most unlikeliest of events will happen, like tunneling into a new universe.

Just because it's possible that you could run your corrected time, doesn't mean that the probability is any better than waking up in a new universe (okay it's alot more likely, but still not probable)
Old Aug 15, 2009 | 11:20 AM
  #66  
Riptide's Avatar
Riptide
Thread Starter
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,193
From: Montaner
Default

The point of the DA calculation is to take the ET a car got at x altitude and tell you what the ET would have been with the exact same run (driver input, etc.) under the exact same track conditions at sea level.

There might be a small margin for error built into this inherently but some of you are just nitpicky about it to the point of ridiculous.
Old Aug 15, 2009 | 11:23 AM
  #67  
99GTvert's Avatar
99GTvert
is my username.
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 13,808
From: Earth
Default

OK, thanks!


Old Aug 16, 2009 | 12:06 AM
  #68  
Mishri's Avatar
Mishri
Mish-ogynist
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,784
From: Helena, MT
Default

well.. altitude/elevation correction would show you the same run at sea level.. DA correction would be under good conditions (like 70 degrees and 30 pressure or whatever it is they use for 0 DA) as long as i dont get screwed on track condtions im positive i'll run a 12.9@108mph on a sea level track.. and considering my mods that isn't that fast.. but that is my altitude corrected time. I know it has more in it.. and thats why i got the M&H DRs
Old Aug 16, 2009 | 10:27 PM
  #69  
Stone629's Avatar
Stone629
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,302
From: North Carolina
Default

I just made it back home from a road trip with the wife up to the N.C Mountains. We drove up to Mt. Mitchell, which is about 6600 ft ASL. I noticed my power dropping off a lot the higher we went. My car was tuned at close to sea level if this matters (I'm sure it does). When we got near the summit, I decided to drop it into 2nd and stomp it. The pavement was soaking wet, and rain was still coming down. I turned the TC off and was just certain that my tires would break loose as soon as I bumped the gas. To my surprise, the car did nothing. No spin at all. I was traveling about 30 mph at 3k rpms going up hill on wet pavement with 4.10s and got nothing! My wife looked at me and said, "Wtf!" My point in posting this.... I have a whole new respect for you guys at high altitudes. I really don't know how you guys deal with it. After messing around up there trying to launch, etc, I am fairly positive that 60' times are affected by DA. I just don't see anyway around it. I had to go past 4k rpm and dump it to get loose. Maybe its more in my tune than the altitude, but still.
Old Aug 17, 2009 | 12:02 AM
  #70  
Darkcrime's Avatar
Darkcrime
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,231
From: Michigan
Default

how did I miss this thread????
I didn't even read the whole thing cause it's hilarious...

1. 2000AZ, I understand the "you run what you run" bit, but cmon, there's no forgiveness there? Man you guys are harsh
2. I assume these guys with high da's use the calculator because if someone came into this section of the forums with a 05gt running a 14.8, 9 out of 10 of you guys would rip on the guy. Sooooo should the guy just post the 14.8, or should he post the 14.8 with his da? or should he post the 14.8 with his da, with the corrected time so we all get the idea that "oh, ok, you don't really suck, where you live sucks for drag racing, and I understand that your car would be a lot faster where I live"...

I say post everything - 14.8 with da, with corrected times... If someone doesn't like it, oh well... as someone stated before... why do you care about what others think. It goes both ways, so post it up. lets see those high numbers



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:52 AM.