Joe,
For sure the only way to know with certainty is to do as you say and run it.
Other things to keep in mind;
1. Don't discount the areo difference, plus a 5.7 has a much more favourble
torque curve compared to a 5.2. You see it every weekend at the NASCAR tracks a
small dent in the front valence a car goes from leading the race to being
lapped by the field at the restictor plate tracks.
2. Every vehicle I have owned the speedo is reading at least a couple of mph
optomistic at 60 mph (I believe this is on purpose too)which is a 3.33% error
assuming that that error holds true to 115 indicated you are actually only
going 111 mph. My experince having been an engineer for a company that makes
instrumentation I would not be suprised if the error up near the top of the
scale is even larger (typically dial type gauges are designed to a spec between
20% and 70% of full scale). Magazines use radar or a 5th wheel to record speeds
to elminate this error.
Dave Clement
99 SLT+ CC 4x4
In article <MABBLJJNLFOLFKFHHCJPCECPDGAA.Joeman@gbonline.com>,
Joeman@gbonline.com ("Joseph A. Orsini") writes:
>
>
> Granted those were more aerodynamic but my Dak claims 230 horse on the 318
> only 20 HP shy of those cars. This has me tempted to try this some summer,
> a little vacation to the flats. Currently the Dodge really does not fill a
> niche in my line up and top speed mule could be it. The handful of times I
> have run it up to 115 the engine did feel like it had pull left so I know
> there is some more to go. With a cover or cab on the back and a small (IE
> not spindles) drop kit she should be little more aero friendly. Just
> because I would really like to know! Are there drag coefficient umbers on
> these trucks out there anywhere?
>
> -Joe
>
>
> . Corvettes, Camaros and Firebirds of the
> > late 80's with
> > 250HP 5.7's had top speeds in the 140's.
> >
> > Dave Clement
> > 99 SLT+ CC 4x4
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 01 2005 - 09:50:04 EST