Personal best, and scary consistency

A

Agentlongwood

New member
It was super cold out and very low humidity wednesday night.  So I went to the track!  I ran EXACTLY the same time twice.  to the thousandth of a second...  13.053.  A couple runs later I beat that with a new personal best time of 13.048.  So close to 12s it's crazy.  But all in all I think that's pretty solid.  It's an MKS with every possible option, so it's a tad heavy.  I'm also just running 93 octane, no meth, no ethanol.  No downpipes or intake.  Factory wheels and all season tires.  Even left the carseat in the back. 
 
Yup, 93 Octane. All the mods I've done are in my signature.  As much as things like a thermostat and MAP sensor count as mods, lol.  When I was first doing datalogging with AJP I found my car has a weird 1st to 2nd gear shift.  It's way way harsher than 2nd to 3rd, even after giving the car a week to settle in.  So I asked him to dial it back a bit.  Now my car shifts softer than most people running a tune.  It's still better than stock, but it's super mild.  If I asked him to get more aggressive with it, I have zero doubts that the car could turn in a pass in the 12s.  I'm just playing it safe, since it's my daily driver.
 
Damn so close...I actually looked at a couple of your logs and tune.....It's crazy and bothersome but now that I have a few tunes out there I have seen similar tune files that run 12.4's and some that can't get into the 12's.

I've seen stock SHO's run mid 13's and tuned ones that can't get 12's....I've seen LMS tunes at the track that run mid 13's and LMS 3 bar tunes that run mid 12's

So all that said it is what it is. We know your car is making the boost we want, has responsible spark and all the vitals were healthy...And your car occupied has to be 4600lbs right? So honestly a 13 flat for what you are driving is sick really.....We are just damn spoiled today...

Here is a list off the top of my head recently that can't run with you:
400hp 2006 GTO
C5 Corvettes
Toyota supra TT 1998
300ZX TT 1996
370Z nismo
G37/M56 AWD
2010 mustang GT
Tons of SRT-8 cars I've seen run mid 13's at the track
Stock EVO's/STI's

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it
 
Heck, yeah!  I'm more than happy with where the tune is at.  I ran the car bone stock and my best time was 14.1 @ 96mph.  That seems like an enormous improvement.
Dropping over a full second and adding almost 10mph with a tune alone is crazy.  (My highest MPH is 105.23)  I joke that the car would be a bracket racing monster, with how consistent it is.

As for weight, it's well over 4600.  With me in the car, and all the options, and the carseat, I'm pretty sure it's over 4700 pounds. Google lists the MKS EcoBoost curb weight at 4479 lbs.  I assume that is the EcoBoost WITHOUT the sunroof, ACC sensors, etc. Those have to add something. I'm about 205lbs fully clothed.  So just me and the car is 4684. Add in the options and the carseat, and that has to be more than the 16 pounds to put me over 4700.

Once my powertrain warranty is kaput, I want to do some catless downpipes.  I imagine those would be good for gains of at least 0.048 seconds lol.
 
Agentlongwood said:
Once my powertrain warranty is kaput, I want to do some catless downpipes.  I imagine those would be good for gains of at least 0.048 seconds lol.
Click to expand...

It's actually .042 and it's well documented by many people that have never been on a dyno....There is an app you can download that transmits G forces through your ass then your brain neurons transmit that via Bluetooth to a digital readout
 
AJP turbo said:
It's actually .042 and it's well documented by many people that have never been on a dyno....There is an app you can download that transmits G forces through your ass then your brain neurons transmit that via Bluetooth to a digital readout
Click to expand...

I was being a smart ass since I'm .048 away from getting into the 12s.  I would guess they'd provide better gains than that...  But now that you mention it, I'm gunna be so bummed if by some stroke of bad luck, catless downpipes actually drop only .042 from my time and I run a 13.006.  I'd probably cry, lol.
 
Play with your launch and weight reduction if you can (ie, take some extra crap out of the car). I ran 14.2-14.4 stockish (with an Airaid CAI and axlebacks) but no tune or other mods) and my fullsize spare in the trunk).

Next time I tracked the SHO was with the AJP tune, and 170 t-stat added on, and ran between 12.8 and 13.5 all day, played a lot with my launch that night.

Last time out with full mods my best run was a 12.7 where the log showed I had an issue half way down the track or a bit further (loss of basically all my boost). I expect the car would have run 12.3 or so, maybe a bit better.

Every 50lbs you take out is ~.1 off your ET. Every .1 you take off of your 60' is ~.2 off your ET.

Good luck in your ET quest
 
I would like to see you get into the 12s.  In comparing your times with my 2010 MKS, your 60 foot time is just as good or a smidgen better.  However, it comes up a bit short after that. 

Are the 2013+ SHOs and MKSs more difficult to find that extra 2-3 tenths than on the 2010-2012s? 
 
I think it's just weight.  My 2014 MKS is 174 pounds heavier than the 2010 according to google's curb weights.  (4479 lbs to 4305 lbs).  Those figures only include standard equipment, so the panoramic sunroof, ACC sensors, massage seats, rear seat heaters, and on and on, are not even included in the 4479 lbs.  I think some of those options were not available on a 2010.  So since my car has them, the weight difference is even more pronounced.

The SHO is also lighter than the MKS, which I think accounts for why SHOs run quicker than I do with the same mods.  A 2014 SHO is 138 lbs lighter than a 2014 MKS by curb weight.  (4479 lbs to 4341 lbs)  And again some options are available on the MKS that are not on the SHO, such as the panoramic sunroof. 
 
OK, the weight difference could explain it.  Also, I had the lighter 18" wheels on my MKS instead of the 19s or 20s.  That might make a difference, too.
 
FYI - My 2012 Lincoln MKS weighted 4670lbs with me in it (I'm 175lbs).  I too had a car seat, spare/jack and some other crap.  I was running the LMS 93 race tune and clicked off several 13.3's in +3250 DA.  Your 60' is better than mine (I was hitting 1.9/2.0 60's spinning).  I think you'll hit 12's next chance you get and I hope the same for me.

Edit: Also, I weighted one of my wheel/tire and it was 61.5lbs!  We certainly could use some lighter wheels.
 
Since I raced both my 2012 and 2013 on Friday night bracket racing.  I found out that 2013 was way more consistent then the 2012.  All the same mods cause they swapped over all the parts.  I really noticed the difference when the sun went down.  The 2012 we had to chase it between rounds, that is change my dial in time.  Now the 2013 was freakin deadly on its dial in time.  Pretty much put the number on the car and forget it.  Yeah there were some nights we chased it, but it is was only a handful of nights.  Even when I went to running meth injection last year, the consistency still was there.  I scaled back my racing alot, but went back last Oct and won two classes the same night.  All the racers hate lining up against the SHO cause its dead on. 

That being said the only thing I have come up with that the difference is the ECU.  I mean the basically 2012 and 2013 are the same car with the powertrain and driveline.  What an ECU difference would make that is someone is who is more knowledgeable than me on that.  Im just going from my race experience.
 
ZSHO said:
Congrats to the OP! Nice Times.
Here's some good info for comparison! Z

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/lincoln/mks/mks_1_2/2014.html 4391 lbs

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/lincoln/continental_lincoln_8gen/continental_8/2017.html
4524 lbs
Click to expand...

Thanks, I appreciate the links.  There's a ton of info in there.  I noticed the 4391 lbs is for the AWD base model though.  The EcoBoost is listed as 4435 lbs.  What I'd really like to find is how much they weigh including all the factory options.  I think the only way to find that out though would be for me to drive somewhere to actually weigh it.
 
Agentlongwood said:
ZSHO said:
Congrats to the OP! Nice Times.
Here's some good info for comparison! Z

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/lincoln/mks/mks_1_2/2014.html 4391 lbs

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/lincoln/continental_lincoln_8gen/continental_8/2017.html
4524 lbs
Click to expand...

Thanks, I appreciate the links.  There's a ton of info in there.  I noticed the 4391 lbs is for the AWD base model though.  The EcoBoost is listed as 4435 lbs.  What I'd really like to find is how much they weigh including all the factory options.  I think the only way to find that out though would be for me to drive somewhere to actually weigh it.
Click to expand...
Are you anywhere hear the state border, any sea ports, or even a quarry?  I know out here the state patrol has truck weigh stations all over due to all the ports.  Then lots of quarries and gravel pits too.  Could always visit one and ask the person at the scale if you can sneak on to get a quick weight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
my 2017 SHO w/PP
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
27K
SHOdded
S
M
I'm getting a P0161 code and new sensors aren't solving the issue.
Replies
1
Views
5K
Macgyver
M
E
1966 F100 Gets a 1 of 5 Raptor Crate engines and 10R80
Replies
8
Views
9K
bpd1151
bpd1151
D
Coolant Leak Diagnosis and Advice
Replies
6
Views
6K
djshew12
D
S
Alamo City Motorplex first AJP runs.
Replies
2
Views
6K
Macgyver
M
Back
Top