Dave, the vaunted pro-driven/factory set-up D500-1's time, in the flying
mile would have been good for a 4th place finish, in 1957 (where its
time was virtually equalled by a "man-off-the-street" , driving a car
that he himself had bought, and had driven to Daytona, without any
tune-up, and, certainly without any factory assistance on driving, or
set-up, on the car.
For the Standing Mile, the D500-1 would not have placed in the top five
recorded placings (that's as far as Sports Illustrated printed the
results).
A different "man-off-the-street" drove a different D501, in the Standing
Mile (he, too, had no factory backing, on a privately-bought car) , and
he scored a 4th place---in fact, that amateur's time was about 3mph
higher than the 56 D500-1, droiven by CHRY factory engineer/chief test
driver, Danny Eames.
That that ol' Danny had got any PRACTICE in driving the D500-1 , at the
proving grounds, before the car was shipped to Daytona?
Neil Vedder
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
--- Begin Message ---
- From: David Homstad <dhomstad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 22:03:29 -0600
Neil,
A couple of points:
1. I think the technology of 1956 was more than adequate to have electronic
timing instead of "recordings left to the interpretation of men holding stop
watches and starter's flags". At least at major events like Daytona.
2. The shipping weight of a 56 Dodge Coronet 2 door is only 3350 lbs. Add a
little gas and a driver and subtract the spare, and the race weight is in
the 3500 range. Add about 250 for a Custom Royal hardtop. This is quite a
bit less than 3700, and a whole lot less than a 4100 lb 57 Custom Royal.
3. The effect of an intake manifold with a "double log" (single plane = one
large chamber, D500-1 2x4 carbs) vs. a "balanced port routing" (dual plane =
separate runners from RH and LH sides of carb to ports, common street single
4 bbl) is most noticeable in normal street driving. The difference on a 315
Hemi is in the range of 10 - 15 hp. At low rpm the dual plane makes 10 hp
more. At high rpm the single plane flows better and makes 10 hp more. The
transition point where a single plane works better is around 3500 rpm. Since
very little racing is done below 3500 rpm, a single plane is favored for
racing applications. My Dodge single plane definitely shows no signs of
"sponginess" or a "lack of correct response to throttle settings below
engine speeds of about 3000rpm". It will roast the tires from a dead stop
and from an idle, with an automatic.
Dave Homstad
56 Dodge D500
-----Original Message-----
From: Forward Look Mopar Discussion List
[mailto:L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Eastern Sierra Adjustment
Services
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 6:26 PM
To: L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [FWDLK] The REST of the Story...
Yesterday, I had referenced relatively many published articles which
document the performance
of the 1956 & 1957 D500 Dodges.
Today, I'll present some performance comparisons on more-powerful
cars, so that their
capabilities can be considered, in relation to the published, and to the
claimed accomplishments,
of the 1956 D-500-1 race car, which had a 315c.i. Hemi engine, having
dual carbs, 10:1 c.r.,
and which was probably-conservatively rated at 295 gross horsepower.
Yesterday, I confirmed the 1956 D-500-1's 1956 Daytona Speed Week's
Flying mile (130.577 mph) , and Standing,
mile (81.786 mph) performances , which were accomplished by Chrysler
engineer/Chief Test Driver Danny Eames, with the
assistance of other factory-tuning/adjustments/trial runs (almost
certainly true, but the extent of which
I'm not aware).
I also confirmed that the two "man-off-the-street" (Hot Rod 5/57)
privateers, who had no factory backing, and
who happened to drive their 1957 D501's to/from Daytona, posted times
of 129.753 , and 84.408, respectively,
which virtually tied the 1956 Flying Mile, but BETTERED by almost 3mph
the 1956 Standing Mile , postings.
Finally, I mentioned that the 1957, and by extrapolation the 1956, times
were good enough only for a fourth
place finishing, in the two classes.
The winning speeds in the two classes (Sports Illustrated 2/22/57)
were: Flying Mile: 300C: 134.128; Buick (!):
130.766; Ford(!!): 130.058; D501: 129.753; and Buick: 129.683 .
The winning speeds in the Standing Mile were: 300C: 86.873; Merc:
85.511; Ford: 85.066; D501:84.408; and
300C: 83.897 .
The 1956 D-500-1's Standing Mile time (81.786) , in 1957, would not have
placed in the (recorded) top-5 finishers,
but would have secured a fourth place finish, in the Flying Mile (130.577).
How fast was the D500-1, or the D501 in quarter mile competition?
Unfortunately, Daytona probably offered the best shot at recording true
OEM performance times, because all the
interested parties (factories) brought their best-effort to the Beach,
for head-to-head competition, in
ostensibly fair/honest OEM mechanical condition, via scrutiny of NASCAR
officials and organization.
Of course, in any competitive environment, certain Liberties are taken
(as in the immortal words of S. Yunek:
"They didn't say you couldn't"), so, it is almost certain that any/all
of the corporate (and private, probably)
entries received varying-extents of having been 'smiled-upon', in their
preparation for Daytona.
On any private drag strip, the extent of 'modifications' to any car are
left to the creativity and duplicity
of each and every participant, and to the
integrity/knowledge/assiduousness of the entry-inspectors.
And, until well-into the 1960's, electronic drag racing time/speed
recordings were left to the interpretation
of men holding stop watches and starter's flags (and who, otherwize,
might be suspected of favoring certain cars/drivers
in order to promote the subject track and/or the speed-records recorded
AT that track ), who were, after-all,
"only human" in possibly mis-recording event-data.
Mistakes can also be honestly-made in writing-down an event's data
(transposing numbers, e.g.) .
OK; so what IS officially recorded, regarding the speeds of
contemporary stock cars, in relation to
any claimed performance data, from any 1950's "Race Car" (see
disclaimers, above)?
In 4/57, Speed Age (along with Hot Rod, and Sports Cars Illustrated: my
favorite car-mags) tested a 1957
Fury (318 c.i., 290 gross HP; 9.25:1 c.r.; open rear end, STICK SHIFT)
and recorded 0-60 of 8.21 , but no 1/4 times, despite their having
tested in the same issue a '57 Belvie (301 c.i., 235 HP/4-bbl carb) and
got 9.74 0-60, but, also, a 1/4 mile time of 17.54 .
S.A. remarked that the Fury :"...appeared just a bit slow in Low gear,
but it exploded into a mighty surge in second, as
the rpm built up." Its 1/4 mile time might have been in the range of
the mid 16's.
The above brings-up a point reiterated by Hot Rod (5/56, ppgs 28-29) ;
they went into
some paragraphs in discussing, as part of their 1956 D500 review, the
fact :" Anyone familiar with the theories and practices of intake
manifolding should immediately recognize the inherent limitations of the
"double log" manifold at low-and mid-range engine speeds. It would have
been just as easy and much more effective in these speed ranges to
manufacture a manifold with correctly designed and balanced port
routing. ..." . Their point was that that D500 manifold was not
particularly effective at speeds
where a car would be accelerating up toward its maximum speed range,
and, at high speeds :"...at the top end, it probably
doesn't make any measurable difference at all which type [manifold] is
used but with a 'double log' , one can definitely expect
a certain degree of 'sponginess' and lack of correct response to
throttle settings below engine speeds of about 3000rpm."
HR (1/58) tested a '58 Fury, as part of a "1000 Mile Test Drive". That
car had the 350c.i. engine with dual in-line AFB's,
305 gross HP, 3.73 open rear end, and the STICK shift. HR got drag strip
best times of 15.9 seconds, at 88 mph.
0-60 "averaged about 8 seconds flat." The car weighed 3,825 lbs (with
full tank of gas).
HR speculates that, with 4.10 gears, that the car might have an e.t.
:"NEAR 15seconds flat", at about 90mph.
If true, then HR expected to lose .9 second e.t., while gaining 2mph, by
lowering the gearset 37 'points'.
They must have had a lot of faith in that trannie's synchros!
In 4/58 S.A. tested the 361c.i. Super D500, in a CRL 2-dr HT,dual
in-line AFB's; 320 gross HP, weighing 3,850 (not real heavy), and
recorded 0-60 of 8.2 seconds, and a 1/4 mile of 16.4 @ 94mph (really
moving, at the end) .
I don't think that it had a SureGrip, but these fine numbers were
produced via 3.31 gears, and using only the "D"
button, and letting the car shift for itself.
S.A (3/59) tested a '59 CRL D500 convertible, 383c.i., single AFB,
AIR-bag /3.31 open rear end, 10:1 c.r. 320gross HP;
weight not-disclosed(-DAMN). Anyway, this NOT light/aero-mobile scored
an 8.8 second
0-60, and a 16.3 quarter mile @ 85mph.
"CARS" (7/60) tested a CHP Dart(front)/Polara(back half) D500 383/single
4-bbl AFB; 10:1 c.r., 3.31 open rear end
weighing a massive 4,150 (minimum weight, by statute: 3,950, for
ground-hugging weight) and recorded a 1/4 mile speed
of 86.25 (no need to record "times", but, BOY, does this car handle,
with HD-everything!
"Sports Cars Illustrated" (3/60) tested a 4-dr sedan Dart, with the
Cross Ram Inducted 361 10:1 c.r. 310 gross
HP, non-specified SureGrip(!), and T/Flite, and recorded 0-60 of 8.0
seconds and a 1/4 mile of 16.2 at 88 mph.
The car weighed 4,120 (for a Dart??)
"Motor Life" (9/61) tested a '61 Dart Seneca 2-dr sedan 'police pursuit'
, with a 383 long-ram intake, 10:1 c.r.,
330 gross HP, 3-on-the-tree, with a 3.23:1 SureGrip; car weighed 3,890lbs.
Before I mention its times, I ask you: WHICH would you rather expect,
to win a drag race ; this car, or a 1956 315c.i.
D-500-1 rated at 290 gross HP, 10:1 c.r., with a 1956-vintage 3-speed
trannie (not that there might be much improvement
having been put into them, during the intervening 5 years????) and
with a 4.56 or 4.89 open rear end , wearing
1956-vintage tires, and weighing ( I-forget; let's say, for charity:)
3,700lbs?
Well, that race will probably never occur, except on somebody's Bench,
but, M.L. recorded a 0-60 of
8.4 seconds, with a 1/4 mile of 16.5 seconds @ 89mph !
Not really all that fast, huh???? maybe it needs a lower gearset.
The POINT of all these test-comparisons (I'm sure that you've been
waiting to read) , is that DESPITE
considerable enlargements/improvements to engines/suspensions, etc, and
at least until the advent of the 413's
which were put into the late 61's and into the "Super Stock" 62's,
Chrysler was not able to improve, by very
much, the overall OEM performance of its hot-performers!
The biggest drawbacks to greatly improved performance (and the
CONSTANTS, throughout these 6 years), are the vehicle's WEIGHTS and
FRONTAL areas.
I know that the Physics-formulae must exist, and, I believe that by
knowing a given (car's) weight and the distance to be
moved (1/4 mile) within a certain time (let's say: 15seconds), that a
result can be obtained regarding the actual
road horsepower needed to transport that mass over that distance (of
course, some reasonable coefficient of friction
would be required, to be applied to the formula, and I'm not certain
about the application of gearing, either).
SO: COULD a 1956 D-500-1, producing (let's say:) 150 road HP move itself
1320 feet within 15 seconds?
Neil Vedder
.
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
--- End Message ---
|
|
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network