Consistent times. Slow to the 1/8th line. Traction issues?

 

if there were traction issues i never felt it

 

your 60' times are slow. You should be around 2.0-2.1 for a good launch. That would put you around 15.0 or so if you get the launch down.

5AT shifts are slow Get the transgo kit...only $230 at SUMMIT right now

 

Your 60 foot is killing you. You need to experiment because getting a lower 2.2 60' is pretty easy once you figure it out. Mid to high 2.1 60 foots aren't out of the question. Shedding .2 seconds from you 60 will result in a .35 second drop in ET. The altitude of Vegas is doing you no favors.

 

Dayum people! Altitude here has little to no bearing. We're at 1870 above sea level. That's a bit over a quarter mile. You don't see problems until 3500-4000 above. The ECU on this car can adapt to such a small change in altitude with ease. We're probably more affected by the heavy *** in this car than the altitude.

 

The ECU cannot adjust power for air density. The more dense the air (ie more oxygen), the more power that will be available. The ECU will add more fuel when the air density is more oxygen rich and vice versa. It cannot magically add more oxygen

You will most definitely see significant changes in performance between density altitudes. Here's a great example:

1) My G ran a 14.49@97mph with a 2.20 60' in 1,800' DA conditions.

2) No changes to the car or launch technique, it did 14.32@98mph with a 2.18 60' in 200' DA conditions.

Just a difference of 1,600' made a .17 second and 1mph difference in performance. Then take a gander at the cars that significantly quicker ET/MPHs compared to the average and you'll see that many are running in negative DA conditions. There are some tracks in the northeast that run almost year round and sometimes the DA is on average of -2,000. That means the car is making 110% of it's normal power and will be running at least .3 and 2mph than in sea level conditions. It's very significant.

 

You are losing timeoff the launch and to 330'. Shave that 2.3 60 footer down to a 2.1 and you'll pick up a half a second at the other end of the track.


Here's a slip from my run in a bone stock AWD for comparison. I had a full tank of gas and 50 pounds of tools in the trunk too (wasn't planning on racing that day). I could prob bang out a 14.5 or 14.6 if i shedded unneccessary weight

R/T ... .040 (no stranger to drag racing)
60' ... 2.172
330 ... 6.197
1/8 ... 9.493
MPH... 74.35
1000... 12.334
ET ... 14.717
MPH ... 94.61

You should be capable of a 2.1 with your car as well.

 

Other parameters being equal, an 1800 ft increase in density altitude is about a 6% power loss. NA cars have no way to get that power back.

Based on the 60' times, I would bet spinning the tires to much at launch is the main problem.

 

I never said anything about the oxygen. If the air is less dense, the fuel charge will be less dense and vice versa. We're talking about an 1800 ft change, not 3500 ft change. Top fuel funny cars might be affected by an altitude change of 1800 ft but a DD won't see that much of a change. Top fuel can lose as much as 500 hp with an altitude change. We might lose .... 5hp..... That is negligible to me. Being off by a tenth of a sec could easily be the driver's error. OP asked what to do better. Altitude isn't his issue. Traction could be his issue; weight could be his issue; driver mod could be his issue. Altitude certainly isn't it. Geez people. This isn't a race car.

 

Incorrect. I work at the base. The runway markers indicate we're at 1870 above sea level. LVMS and the strip are less than 1 mile from the end of the runway. Impossible that the track is 800 ft higher. That's a steep slope. Hell I ran in Tucson that was 2200 ft above sea level and ran the same times I ran here with my Ion.

 

If altitude isn't an issue then why does the NHRA see reason to establish a correction factor table that takes into account 1,100' air and greater? Obviously they understand that even 1,100' air has an impact on a car's performance. 1,800' or 3,500' is going to have an impact on performance. You calculate DA via numerous historical weather condition websites and then apply the NHRA correction factor like I did to compute a theoretical run in sea level air and you'll see some wild differences.

I guess it's up to you whether you want to believe it or not that small changes in air density can affect a car's performance (especially a naturally aspirated one), but what I saying is the cold hard truth. I've been drag racing for over 15 years now and have ran a handful of cars down the strip with probably 500 runs under my belt. Without understanding DA and correcting for it, it's hard to make a legit comparison between runs on different days. I also full understand the impact of driving, 60', ideal shift points, etc. Drag racing far more complicated than people give you credit for.

Why is calculating DA so important? Because so many make the incorrect claim that mod "X" allowed their car to go "X" tenths of a second quicker when the Da may have been largely responsible for the improvement.

And finally, it's been my personal experience that some tracks are simply faster/slower than others for no real reason and I've never heard of Firebird being a very fast track. Go to Cecil, HRP, The Rock, Maryland, or E-town in the fall/winter and you can be assured you'll be running some of the fastest times in the country.

 

What tires were you using? What pressure in the tires? From what others have been saying you might have lit them up without realizing it, with all the excitement. Did you practice your launch before you went to the track?
With this experience I'm sure you'll do better next time.

 

It's got to be the driver(me). I just need to practice launching. My buddy who has a g37 sedan said he wants to help me with my launches. The tires are Yokohama yk520 stock when I bought it.

 

Not to veer off the quarter mile topic, but this post involves "racing."
I raced my buddy's 2006 is350 with an intake and exhaust. He had one passenger. he has 18 inch rims with 255 width rear tires (not sure how much tire width affects acceleration).
From zero he pulls 1.5-2 cars by third gear and quite frankly im disappointed. Im launching at ~2200 rpms with kuhmo summer tires with half tread. All I have is a z-tube.
On the highway he doesnt pull away as fast, but hes still good for pulling 1-1.5 cars.
Has anyone else experienced such destruction from a lexus? And does this indicate that I'm an inexperienced/bad driver?

 

the IS350 is faster than the G35, now if you were talking IS250 then that should be an easy kill