Most effective ways to make a "fast" NA car

[EZWood]

Originally Posted by StormTrooper

Pretty sure that guy was on 93oct with just exhaust and 225 Street tires....

I know we have a lot of bro dawg former neon and civic drivers but I doubt everyone is inept at driving.

I thought he was running r888's on thetrack and something else on the street.

[StormTrooper]

Yeah I went back and looked... His low 14 times were on street the 13.9 was with nitto555R drag radials.

Still on pump gas and a remote tune though

[fooddude]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

3+ cars? That's really surprising to me - shorter overall gearing will make it pull 'harder' and feel 'faster', but you have to shift sooner/more often. I guess if you're comparing something like a run in just 4th gear where the short geared car never shifts you might see something like that, but as soon as the short geared car shifts the stock geared car should start closing the gap.

A lot of nay sayers will say "it will only feel faster" ...it won't just "feel" faster..the reason it "feels" faster is because it IS faster and WILL BE faster (but with the expense of high rpm on highway; which some may not want to deal with). There's a reason why those older Type R Hondas have shorter FDs as one of their special/added features over non-R.

It's common physics - shorter gears will get you from point A to point B (or from gear A to gear B) in a shorter amount of time because it lets the powertrain/engine to rotate much faster/easily and in a shorter amount of time in the powerband and through the gears. As for shifting..yes you may need to shift more/sooner; but does a shift really take that long?? (no it doesn't).

As for the 3+ car lengths thing..I didn't make that up..it's in another thread (a Cusco user thread iirc).

[StormTrooper]

If you had a high torque low hp low rpm car that might be true....

[zooki]

Originally Posted by Boofneenee

have we forgotten the true nature and purpose of this car? It was not built for speed but for it being nimble, quick and amazing with turns. Being rear wheel drive, 6 speed and weight ratio makes it such a pleasure to drive.

If speed is what you want get an older WRX or something turbo.

This is why one shouldn't spend one single solitary dime on making any more power. That is NOT what this car is about. I think one should spend ALL of their money on suspension & brake & tire upgrades. To buy anything else perverts the true nature of this car....
NAH, I'm just kidding. Build it however you want. A front engine, rear wheel drive car makes for a good drag car too...just depends on what YOU want to do with YOUR car, right?

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by fooddude

A lot of nay sayers will say "it will only feel faster" ...it won't just "feel" faster..the reason it "feels" faster is because it IS faster and WILL BE faster (but with the expense of high rpm on highway; which some may not want to deal with). There's a reason why those older Type R Hondas have shorter FDs as one of their special/added features over non-R.

It's common physics - shorter gears will get you from point A to point B (or from gear A to gear B) in a shorter amount of time because it lets the powertrain/engine to rotate much faster/easily and in a shorter amount of time in the powerband and through the gears. As for shifting..yes you may need to shift more/sooner; but does a shift really take that long?? (no it doesn't).

As for the 3+ car lengths thing..I didn't make that up..it's in another thread (a Cusco user thread iirc).

Well actually, I'm not a 'naysayer', I'm a 'truthsayer'. If you want me to work the math out, it'll prove the opposite. It's not just about the time to take for a shift (although that is a factor), it's that the stock geared car will have a gearing advantage after the shorter geared car moves into the next gear... that is until the stock geared car has to shift. Then the cycle repeats. Don't feel like working it out for you tonight, but tomorrow I'll post the math. Stay tuned.

[Deathreaper]

Would it have been possible to put a shorter FD but creating an ultra tall gear only for 6th?

[CajunFRS]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

Well actually, I'm not a 'naysayer', I'm a 'truthsayer'. If you want me to work the math out, it'll prove the opposite. It's not just about the time to take for a shift (although that is a factor), it's that the stock geared car will have a gearing advantage after the shorter geared car moves into the next gear... that is until the stock geared car has to shift. Then the cycle repeats. Don't feel like working it out for you tonight, but tomorrow I'll post the math. Stay tuned.

So you're actually saying that shorter ratios don't help acceleration?

Your own logic about gears to me says if the car had 3.10 or a 4.10 it wouldn't matter.

[Captain Snooze]

Off Topic

Originally Posted by 1086

5's and 6's
http://www.carswatcher.com/Article/4...00hp-drag-race

I found that to be quite spectacular. Am I correct in saying that the traditional exhaust pipes with shooting flames are just for show? What's with the start up procedure where it takes a while to get a constant flame out the back?

[Captain Insano]

Originally Posted by Deathreaper

Would it have been possible to put a shorter FD but creating an ultra tall gear only for 6th?

Anything is possible. The AT is sorta geared that way. If you put a 4.88 in the AT it will have more aggressive gears 1-3 and similar 4th compared to the MT with OEM 4.10, but 5th & 6th will still be longer in the 4.88 AT. Crazy long gearing in the AT.
http://www.teammfactory.com/gearcalc...ission+1+%26+2

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by CajunFRS

So you're actually saying that shorter ratios don't help acceleration?

Your own logic about gears to me says if the car had 3.10 or a 4.10 it wouldn't matter.

No no, not saying that at all. Re-read my post - saying the car will FEEL quite a bit faster, but the difference won't be as much as you'd think. 4.10 to 4.56 is about 11% increase - and the shorter geared car will feel 11% more powerful, BUT in real world comparison it will have to shift sooner and at a lower speed. For a bit, the stock geared car will enjoy a shorter gear ratio as the short geared car upshifts... so it's a bit more complex than saying the car will be 11% faster in a multi-gear acceleration run. I have a very hard time believing 3+ car lengths unless it was a run at very illegal speeds. I promised math to back this, apologies, haven't had a spare moment today, will get to it soon.

[fooddude]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

I have a very hard time believing 3+ car lengths unless it was a run at very illegal speeds.

Don't tell me.. tell that to the guy that actually said/done it and actually has the 4.56. It's in one of the FD or Cusco threads. I would rather believe 1st hand experience over your math/opinion

Edit:
Here it is.
And by RCE no less ...whom is a very reputable company, and not just some joe-schmo, forum-troll, with biased opinions with zero real-world or first-hand experience:
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...&postcount=273

Faster than a Ford ST?? Not bad.. considering the ST is mid 14's stock.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by fooddude

Don't tell me.. tell that to the guy that actually said/done it and actually has the 4.56. It's in one of the FD or Cusco threads. I would rather believe 1st hand experience over your math/opinion

Edit:
Here it is.
And by RCE no less ...whom is a very reputable company, and not just some joe-schmo, forum-troll, with biased opinions with zero real-world or first-hand experience:
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...&postcount=273

Faster than a Ford ST?? Not bad.. considering the ST is mid 14's stock.

I hear you, and I know who RCE is, and that was a rolling start 1st through 4th gear. Any number of factors can affect a run like that. BTW I'd rather believe math over hearsay any day.

All that said, if I wanted to make the car more responsive and fun to drive, changing final drive ratios is a good way to do it... I'm not 'naysaying' at all.