Aaron,
You have to remember the speedo's up near the top of the scale have huge errors
and they are optomistic so you were not going any where near the indicated
speeds. Plus, just to go from 115 to 130 with your 2.5 would require almost
doubling the horsepower.
I am assuming it's a typo when you said 5.13's in the Fury. Assuming a 26-to
28" tall tire that is going to put the rpm in the 7500 to 8100 rpm range. No
318 2bl will spin those kinds of rpm.
Dave Clement
99 SLT+ CC 4x4
In article <00a001c5d52d$68b71240$bb90c944@aoldsl.net>, awyse@sw.rr.com ("Aaron
Wyse") writes:
>
>
> I don't see where 130mph out of a '99 with a stock V8 is unrealistic. My 95
> with a Stock 2.5L could get a little over 115mph.. but that was giving her
> all she had. My '72 Fury with a 2bbl 318 and 5.13's could hit 118mph.. I
> guess that would be even worse than early Dakota aerodynamics, and fully
> loaded as well.
> Aaron Wyse
> .
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joseph A. Orsini" <Joeman@gbonline.com>
> To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 1:55 PM
> Subject: RE: DML: '99 Dak top speed?
>
>
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > Yeah that is what I have resigned myself to, the only way to know is to
> run
> > it at a high speed run. Then you know for sure. There are just too many
> > variables to try and figure out what they will do. Heck maybe by the time
> I
> > do it I will have swapped in a 360 and it wouldn't be a fair test anyway.
> > And it is estimated Cup cars would be pushing 225 230 without restrictor
> > plates with the modern aero packages they have. In reality I think the
> Dak
> > should be good for something 130-140 without engine mods. Hopefully time
> > will tell and I can find out for sure. Thanks all for the input on this
> and
> > don't worry all testing will be done in a controlled environment and not
> on
> > the street where someone other than myself would be in danger.
> >
> > -Joe
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > 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
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 01 2005 - 09:50:04 EST