Brakes Rotor replacement question

Discussion in '2005 - 2009 Specific Tech' started by Bikerdrumr, Apr 2, 2013.

  1. I have heard that as well, they would use as much fuel as a Boeing 747 taking off! It costs over 25000$ to make one 1/4 mile run! You are correct it is called stoichiometric 14.7air to 1fuel, top fuel is up around .3air to 1fuel as it is on the verge of hydro lock! When staging some teams will wait until the last second when staging their light just hoping their opponent will overheat on the line! The tires are bolted to the axle and the axle will twist over 180degrees before the tire begins to turn. Unless you have a perfect run they never have the car a wide open throttle! Tell me more and also let me know if you think I'm wrong
  2. That sounds about right. This isn't so much a question as it is a random fact...EFI injectors are designed to maintain a specific fuel pressure inside the rail, to ensure proper fuel flow and prevent air from flowing inside the injector, so boosted engines have to increase fuel pressure as boost increases. Returnless fuel systems use pulse modulation, the same concept used in fuel injectors, to adjust voltage levels to the pump, flashing it on and off to increase or decrease fuel pressure. This eliminates the need for a return line, which helps the fuel, which has a boiling point of only 80 degrees, stay cool.
  3. Nice fact....I like that one! I'll throw some more up soon no time to write as I am at work but I can read yours!
  4. I always found the function of the EGR system to be absolutely ridiculous. It routes exhaust gas back into the intake, because the gas is inert and has no effect on combustion other than merely taking up space in the cylinder to allow less fuel and oxygen to be burned. Rather than simply build a smaller, more efficient engine, it creates a larger, inefficient engine. It's another byproduct of the automotive dark ages that are the late 1970s to late 1980s.
  5. I agree 100%.....the 70s and 80s were by far the worst years for engines, everything revolved around emission control! Although (and i know peoply will say there are other reasons to have one) exhaust gas is basically spent fuel and has no potential to creat power.....just take up space where unburnt fuel should be at most of the rpm band, there is actually some instances (very few) where in burnt fuel actually gets recirculated back into the combustion chamber. The timing of the valve was almost useless because engine vacuum was could not determine when that would occurr, it would just get close so they decide to open too early and close too late......thus the electronic egr. More effective but not enough to justify its existence in my opinion. It's good to see we're moving past the egr as in the new mustangs that use valve overlap to control exhaust gases! I've thought of this before and could only see the egr being effective if it was put further down stream and placing an air fuel ratio sensor (strictly to control egr) at the end of the exhaust manifold in order to have enough time to activate the valve only when enough fuel was detected to justify its existence entirely! If that makes sence to you...... That's only my opinion, I'm sure there are those who will disagree!
  6. That makes sense. I'm a big fan of the 4.6 mod engine's amazing efficiency and potential, but I've been blown away by the new Coyote. The power levels that are achieved with very simple upgrades are remarkable. Also, the factory blocks and rotating assemblies can manage over 700 HP. It's very convenient how Ford engineered the Mustang to be modification-friendly.
  7. I read somewhere (car and driver or motortrend in 2005) that these motors are detuned from the factory by 25%, basically saying that they can produce over 350hp with just changing a few perimeters in the VID block and without jeopardizing the the integrity of the motor. My guess ford did this to for emission and fuel economy reasons and to keep insurance and sales pricing down. I have seen a c5 corvette that gained over 200hp from just software adjustments in the VID block. This guy wrote his own software that was able to change fuel pressure, injector pulse width, timing, fuel trim, octane adjustment and also to ignore certain sensors. he spent years perfecting every aspect of engine performance sensors and modules with hundreds of dyno runs. It was the ultimate sleeper car, he could drive around with the stock factory setup or with 10 minutes and a laptop he gained over 200hp. It's like an over clocked performance parts just modified settings! It was impressive to say the least
  8. Performance shops and retailers like Brenspeed or American Muscle have tunes available, using the same parameters you listed, that see gains of 30 rwhp and rwt on a stock engine. Modified engines can see much more, depending on the specific build of an engine.
  9. The difference between them and what that guy did to the vette is that aftermarket shops or companies will still factor in the durability/reliability of the motor and drivetrain while still keeping emissions acceptable.....if they didn't care about the longevity of the engine or emissions they could get even more power by adjusting the permitters to their most extreme values for maximum EEC settings.
  10. You must have never built an engine with a tunnel ram intake manifold before, let alone a high rise single plane intake. It is common to get over 100% volumetric efficiency in a race engine. Granted the rpm band that this happens in is not very wide but it does happen and has been documented thousands of times. In fact quite a few high rpm motorcycle engines achieve over 100% volumetric efficiency. All F-1 engines achieve the same thing. Mind you they spin almost 20,000 rpm. If your statement was that pump gas stock production car engines do not achieve 100% volumetric efficiency, then you would be right. Chances are the instructor in class was referring to stock automobiles as that was the core subject that the class was dealing with and he did not need to reference race engines that would not apply to the course material.
  11. As I have done a little research you are correct..... The article I have does not say anything about race cars, DOHC, VVT and was printed in 1986....not to say that 100% VE was not possible without forced induction, DOHC, VVT it was just very uncommon to see without those characteristics. I'm guessing he was referencing modern production cars or was just unfamiliar with the concept of having over 100% VE in his era. Also I have not had the opportunity to build engines, just diagnose and repair with an occasional install of crate engines. Good to know this new info!
  12. I can understand why volumetric efficiency over 100% is possible .....basically due to my previous statement regarding "the gulp effect" .......air being pulled into the cylinder while the piston is moving past BDC. My question is this, for all this to be true air would have to be able to compress itself (slightly) correct? Kinda a dumb question seeing as volumetric efficiency over 100% is possible.
  13. I hope no one sees this as hijacking someone else's thread, but I am looking for advice to upgrade my OEM brakes. My eventual goal is to have a daily driver that I could autocross or take to track day once in a while. I have a 2011 GT with 19" wheels, but I opted not to get the Brembo brake package from the factory. I'm trying to do this methodical by making the car stop better before I upgrade the suspension or add a supercharger. I already understand that I need to replace the brake lines for a truer, more consistent pedal, now I'm trying to find that right rotor/caliper package that doesn't absolutely break the bank. I like what I am hearing/reading about the DBA 4000 T3 slotted rotors, but they do not make calipers. Any suggestions about a caliper package that would compliment these rotors or if I should just go with an entirely different manufacturer? Thanks in advance for any suggestions.