Track variances between CF and RF??

[KrisR]

Has anybody compared their timeslips from Rock Falls to Cedar Falls (or any other track for that matter)?

I was just looking at a couple of my slips from CF and my 1/8-mile speed was consistently 1mph slower than my last trip to Rock Falls, but the 1/4 speed was consistently 2mph faster. I thought this was a little peculiar. Maybe the 1/8 and 1/4 lights are not in exactly the same place on each track? Could it be the difference between an NHRA (RF) and IHRA (CF) -sanctioned track?

[ERStettin]

I don't think your variances have anything to do with the tracks unless you had about 30 to 40 slips from each track and could compare them with the same results.


Check your tune.

[Zinc]

However, all of my best times, mph, and 60's have been at CF. I've only been to CF 3 times, and RF 3 times...

[351capri]

The weather plays a big factor in that also Kris.

When i was at CF a year ago, it seemed like my times got a little slower as it got dark out, i dont know why.

[Emart]

The weather plays a big factor in that also Kris.

When i was at CF a year ago, it seemed like my times got a little slower as it got dark out, i dont know why.

Is your car solar powered?

[drag79stang]

Traction is a large player in the deal. Your 60;s are a HUGE diff in mph and et. (i.e. you hook BETTER anywhere than rf...........:>)

[PHRANQUY]

[TRDon]

Perhaps no one read the second paragraph of Kris's thread. This thread has nothing to do with traction or weather.

[PHRANQUY]

Perhaps no one read the second paragraph of Kris's thread. This thread has nothing to do with traction or weather.

Actually Don, it does have something to do with traction. If you spin more off the line, you will typically have a slightly higher trap than if you spun less the run before or after. If I compare some of my runs from from TriState last fall, one was a 14.43@96.05 with a 1.96 60', the next was a 14.45 @ 98.85 with a 2.08 60'...

[Mullet Tuner]

Perhaps no one read the second paragraph of Kris's thread. This thread has nothing to do with traction or weather.

Ever heard of density altitude?

[TRDon]

You both just completely missed what I said I understand density altitude and I get spinning can lead to better MPH, but this thread is looking for differences for why the 1/8 and 1/4 mile speeds between the 2 tracks are not proportional.

[TRDon]

Actually Don, it does have something to do with traction.

Actually Frank, it has nothing to do with traction. Re-read the second paragraph and think about what is says.

[PHRANQUY]

It could be the way the computer is averaging the time between the lights too...since there are 2 sets at the 1/8 and at the 1/4. I still think it has to do with how much traction your getting.

[KrisR]

It could be the way the computer is averaging the time between the lights too...since there are 2 sets at the 1/8 and at the 1/4. I still think it has to do with how much traction your getting.

Frank,

My run at CFR was a 1.85 60', and my run at RF was a 1.89 60'. The car hooked on both runs.

I don't think that would account for whats happening.

I think you are correct on the averaging thing.

[KrisR]

Ever heard of density altitude?

.....and that would account for going slower in the 1/8th and faster in the 1/4 at different tracks with the same time (12.47) how?

BTW, CFR was ~2300, RF was ~2700 DA.