What's the top speed on your car?

[K.C. 5.0]

I was wondering how fast your car will go top speed? 1/4mile not being a factor.

Top speed:

Gear ratio:

Tire heighth:

------------------
95gt 80k, MSD 6AL, MSD coil, pulleys, fpr, cold air kit, off road h-pipe, flowmasters, 3.73, fluidampener, 9mm wires, mega bite jr lowers, kennybrown subframe connectors, edelbrock performer intake, 70mm TB, Aluminum Driveshaft, Tri-Ax shifter.

[K.C. 5.0]

Also does anyone now if my car has a top speed regulator in my computer? If so, can I fix it with a chip?

------------------
95gt 80k, MSD 6AL, MSD coil, pulleys, fpr, cold air kit, off road h-pipe, flowmasters, 3.73, fluidampener, 9mm wires, mega bite jr lowers, kennybrown subframe connectors, edelbrock performer intake, 70mm TB, Aluminum Driveshaft, Tri-Ax shifter.

[K.C. 5.0]

Also does anyone now if my car has a top speed regulator in my computer? If so, can I fix it with a chip?

Top speed: 135

Gear ratio: 3.73

Tire height: 24

------------------
95gt 80k, MSD 6AL, MSD coil, pulleys, fpr, cold air kit, off road h-pipe, flowmasters, 3.73, fluidampener, 9mm wires, mega bite jr lowers, kennybrown subframe connectors, edelbrock performer intake, 70mm TB, Aluminum Driveshaft, Tri-Ax shifter.

[dinomite]

I'm not sure what your askin, for the theoretical top speed? i believe that the top speed on an 87-93 fox manual hardtop is about 135 (most people get it up to about there), and yours is a 94-95, a little heavier, so it'd probably be a little lower. your gears would affect that. now, the theoretical top speed is different:
say you go all the way to the redline (5800 rpm) in 5th gear (.68:1). ((5800/.68/3.73)
(24*pi)/12/5280)*60 == 163mph. that does *not* account for wind drag, though, so your actual top speed may be lower.

The only way to test and find actual top speed though, is with a long strip of road airstrip or highway. doing so will usually result in donut eaters being called, but you have to think (gonna take some more math...) if your going that fast (90mph, say), that in the time it takes the officer's (i use the term lightely) car to reach that speed (crown vic runs the quarter in 15.5 for sake of discussion at 85) is 16.5 seconds, and thats just to MATCH your speed, not to gain on you. by the time he gets to 90 (you will have continued to accelerate, right?) you will be another .4125 miles from him (probably more, given your still accelerating), and given you are driving a modified vehicle, he will never gain on you. so just get off at the next exit, make a bunch of turns and hide. have fun!

[This message has been edited by dinomite (edited 07-20-2001).]

[vande97]

i have had mine at 140 sp far but i have 4`10 gears so i am wound out pretty good but i get there in a hurry ...302 88lx some mods

[jeb]

With 2.73's at 5500RPM in 4th gear, I saw 139. The fastest I've had it with the 3.55's is 125, and it was in 5th somwhere around 3800RPM.

My suspension is mostly stock, and not stable enough for those kind of speeds. Though it's heavy, so it was'nt floating like some coupes and hb's I've ridden in, it still did'nt feel safe.

That's with 225/60/15's I think they're 24.25" tall.

------------------
90LX Ragtop.
14.7@95.3
Strut tower brace, K&N, 2.25'' Flowmasters, Hollow cats, Crank pulley, Crane 2031, Crane rockers, Holley FPR, 155lph, Heavy duty clutch, and alum quadrant.
Need Gears Bad!!!

[This message has been edited by jeb (edited 07-21-2001).]

[SHaFT7]

i've had mine up to 130 but then i ran outta road to go faster

------------------
SHaFTed

91GT, 2 chamber flows, dumps, 70MM BBK TB, K&N conical, Robert Shaw tstat, Hurst short throw, T5, 17" Lexani Roma wheels, 235/40/R17 on front, 255/45/R17 on back, mach1 hood, LX tail lights, bright red!

[Unit 5302]

At 5500rpm in 4th gear with 225/60 15's, you'd be running at 153mph.

Rated top speed for the Fox is 131mph, SN95 137mph. They will do a little more than that speed stock though.

With light it's light mods, my car will probably do about 140mph normally, and on a cold *** day in MN winter, it pulls way harder, probably good for another 5mph anyway.

[BilLster]

"173" but that was with 3.08 in the rear between Halifax and Moncton on a race schedualed event i have been thinking about the silver state classic though.

In my sales broucher for my 89 it say's top speed 230 Kmph about (144 mph) but who realy knows. it wasnt stock for long

------------------
89 with 395 single stage n2o .garret t3. 373's Suspention worked out finnaly . need cage .

[MiracleMax]

Originally posted by dinomite:
and yours is a 94-95, a little heavier, so it'd probably be a little lower.

Weight actually doesn't have anything to do with the top speed of a vehicle. Drag has everything to do with it. Frontal area is a biggie and afterwards how well turbulence is managed (minimizing aerodynamic drag) probably has the biggest effect.

Now run a car in a defined amount of space (ie; a drag strip) and thats where weight has an effect and aerodynamics come into play. Weight initially effects the rate at which the vehicle accelerates, then as aerodynamic forces build agaisnt the vehicle and create excessive drag also effecting acceleration.

Run two cars in an open space without any predetermined end to where they must accelerate with the same amount of power, but with differing aerodynamics and weight (the lighter car with poor areodynamics, and the heavier car with better aerodynamics) and eventually the car with better aerodynamics will catch up and pass the other car.

[This message has been edited by MiracleMax (edited 07-21-2001).]

[SaleenGTS]

I'm not stupid enough to find out....top speed on public riads??? Are you crazy? According to my dyno figures, and the car tester software on here, and my ratio, aerodynamics, and car height, it says I should hit 183, but I will never see it.



------------------
Dustin
Saleenized 89 GT,428 rwhp,TFS Street Heat Intake,TFS TW Heads,TFS #2 cam,BD-11A 9 psi,FRPP 1.6 rr's,BBK 70mm TB,Pro-M 75mm Bullet,MSD 6BTM, FMS 9mm wires,BBK longtubes,BBK Short H-pipe,American Thunder cat back,3.55's

12.3@119

http://www.mustangworks.com/rides/pictures/Listing1549-slot1.jpg

[MiracleMax]

I'm not a big fan of street racing in populated public areas, or making top speed runs down the same, but if its a long straight road and you can see for miles and nobody's around (and your in the car yourself) and the only bug you squash is yourself, then I don't see to much of a problem?

[dinomite]

Originally posted by MiracleMax:
[B] Weight actually doesn't have anything to do with the top speed of a vehicle. Drag has everything to do with it. Frontal area is a biggie and afterwards how well turbulence is managed (minimizing aerodynamic drag) probably has the biggest effect.[B]

Aerodynamics is a bigger factor than weight in top speed, but think of it this way: What is *your* top speed? now put on a 50 lb. backpack.....

[82 GT]

According to calculations, I have hit 145mph in my '88GT with 2:73's and stock tires.
I was doing 5200rpms in 4th
For some reason, I didn't experience any "floating" at that speed and my suspension is stock with 75K miles on the clock.


------------------
'82 GT 351W C-4,BBK headers,Carter 625 carb,Comp.Cam,Flowmaster exhaust.
1988 GT...T-5,bone stock

[Unit 5302]

Originally posted by dinomite:
Aerodynamics is a bigger factor than weight in top speed, but think of it this way: What is *your* top speed? now put on a 50 lb. backpack.....

dinomite, you are fighting a losing battle.

Let me illustrate.

1998 Panoz AIV Roadster. 305hp 2500lbs.
0-60 4.6sec, 1/4 mile 13.3@101.5, Standing mile 35.1sec@129.9, Top speed 134.0mph.

1998 Porsche 911 Carrera. 296hp 2900lbs.
0-60 4.9sec, 1/4 mile 13.4@105.2, Standing mile 33.0@150.3mph, Top speed 174.8mph.

1998 Aston Martin DB7. 335hp 3800lbs.
0-60 5.7sec, 1/4 mile 14.3@98.1mph, Standing mile 35.2@142.4mph, Top speed 163.5mph.

Breaking down those performance's on Ford's AZ 5mi Testing track you can see the trend. HP vs Weight vs Aerodynamics.

The Panoz, by far the lightest of the 3 managed to outaccelerate both the Porsche and the Aston Martin (which get's killed thanks to ta 3800lb curb weight) in both 0-60, and 1/4.

If you look at the 1/4 mile trap speeds though, you can see the Porsche is pulling on hard on the Panoz at the end of that stretch. The Aston Martin is still getting stomped.

At the end of the Standing mile, it's a totally different story though. The Panoz is now dead last amongst the three and the Aston Martin is overtaking the Porshe in accleration from the end of the 1/4 to the end of the standing mile with it's additional 40hp. Dispite being 900lbs heavier. That span is where the real transition from weight being the major factor to aerodynamic drag being the factor is the most noticeable.

Then as you can finally see, the Porsche's eventual terminal velocity beats the Aston Martin because of aerodynamics, and the Aston Martin dispite a 1300lb deficit, KILLS the Panoz, which hits a brick wall at about 130mph. You can argue that the Aston Martin has more top end because of more hp, but the Porsche has less hp than either, yet weighs 400lbs more than the Panoz, and it beats both.

From 0-60 power:weight is the most important feature, again for the 1/4 mile, but it begins to get tight at the end, between the 1/4 mile and the standing mile, drag becomes more important and weight goes out the window. By the end, drag wins the contest, even versus significant hp differences.

[Stang Runner]

That is hard to see that Unit 5302 because the all have different gears and That makes a Huge difference too. The 1998 Panoz AIV Roadster. 305hp is that a 4.6 in that.
weight does not matter Much at all
Infinti Q45 01 4050lb 340HP 150MPH and That is only because it has a limiter on that and it hits it in 4th&5th gear.

[Stang Runner]

82 GT Is that on your stock tach they are WAY off above 4000RPMS. I can get mine over 7,000+ And my Auto Meter is at 6,000 At 145 you WILL feel it!

[dinomite]

Originally posted by Unit 5302:
dinomite, you are fighting a losing battle.

From 0-60 power:weight is the most important feature, again for the 1/4 mile, but it begins to get tight at the end, between the 1/4 mile and the standing mile, drag becomes more important and weight goes out the window. By the end, drag wins the contest, even versus significant hp differences.

i wondered what you were talking about when you told phil i was gonna loose an argument....but i have to say that thos figures don't tell much because of the greatly different body styles (drag), different powerbands, and how the car's gearing works with the powerband. The only way to really show this would be to take 2 identical cars (or do to tests) and throw 200 lbs worth of weight into one of them. When you are testing final velocity, yes, drag is a much bigger factor, but weight still matters. the simplest portrayal of this is the backpack thing i said earlier. if you want something more accurate, do it on a bike.

[2FastLX]

I just had mine upwards of 130mph with 3.73 gears and it still had a bunch left to go I'd guess another 25-35mph faster with a bit longer stretch of road.

------------------
Gunning for 12's!

Buy your parts here
ICQ# 42269241

[Unit 5302]

You could argue the gearing theory, but since all 3 cars have similar powerbands, it's not as important for the powerband arguement.

I hate to get theoretical, but none of those cars is poorly designed, and none of them have poor gearing. There are only so many times you shift gears, and gearing makes a hell of a lot less difference after the 1/4 mile. This isn't a comparison between drag setups and street setups, these are all production cars. Now, I'm not saying these cars couldn't be toyed with to produce greater acceleration from one section of the results to another, but as much as you'd like to dismiss the numbers shown, I hardly think it's that easy to do.

I could have included other cars into the comparison, such as the 3200lb 345hp, 174mph C-5 Corvette tested, but I think the general rule has been shown.

As far as weight being a factor in top speed, you can apply physics. As long as there is ANY force being applied to an object, no matter how small that force eclipses the drag upon the object, it will accelerate. It will just accelerate slower. Using a human being in comparison to a car is a very poor example. Humans are not drag limited, we are gear limited, furthermore, do to the way our stride works, adding 50lbs throws off our center of balance, and our ability to run in stride.

If you'd like, I'd offer up the fact that the fastest my 88GT had ever gone was with 5 people in it. It took a long time to get there, but I think all the extra weight lowered the car and produced better aerodynamics.

Of course, ultimately, you may not have enough force to be able to accelerate a larger mass because of inconsistancies in the acceleration force, so weight can play a factor in a non controlled environment.

Of course, drag and hp are really the main factors, gearing plays into the hp part.