Went to the track today to go for 9s, and...
#1
Went to the track today to go for 9s, and...
... I found the limits of the factory crank instead .
First pass down the track. Truck pulled like a ****, speedo showed over 110 at the 1/8, then poof! Truck just died, I pulled over because I didn't know if any oil let go. Back to the pits, pop the hood, turn the motor over, motor turns over, but balancer isn't spinning . Check the bolt, it was still tight, so it appears the crank must have snapped clean somewhere in the motor.
Last time on the dyno, the truck made 818 ft-lbs, and that was with the 112 at 18 psi. This time we were running the Works 140 at 24 psi. Probably closer to 925 ft-lbs, which is about 1060 ft-lbs at the motor using a 15% drivetrain loss value.
Stock crank, stock block, rods rated to 850, and off the shelf CP pistons, and they all lasted for over 2 years, and the CRANK failed. Not bad if you ask me. Guess I can't really complain, I sure can't think of any other factory crank from any manufacturer that's lived to 1000 ft-lbs of torque.
Oh well, nothing else is going right this year, might as well add this to the list.
First pass down the track. Truck pulled like a ****, speedo showed over 110 at the 1/8, then poof! Truck just died, I pulled over because I didn't know if any oil let go. Back to the pits, pop the hood, turn the motor over, motor turns over, but balancer isn't spinning . Check the bolt, it was still tight, so it appears the crank must have snapped clean somewhere in the motor.
Last time on the dyno, the truck made 818 ft-lbs, and that was with the 112 at 18 psi. This time we were running the Works 140 at 24 psi. Probably closer to 925 ft-lbs, which is about 1060 ft-lbs at the motor using a 15% drivetrain loss value.
Stock crank, stock block, rods rated to 850, and off the shelf CP pistons, and they all lasted for over 2 years, and the CRANK failed. Not bad if you ask me. Guess I can't really complain, I sure can't think of any other factory crank from any manufacturer that's lived to 1000 ft-lbs of torque.
Oh well, nothing else is going right this year, might as well add this to the list.
#3
Re: Went to the track today to go for 9s, and...
Originally posted by LightningTuner
... I found the limits of the factory crank instead .
First pass down the track. Truck pulled like a ****, speedo showed over 110 at the 1/8, then poof!
... I found the limits of the factory crank instead .
First pass down the track. Truck pulled like a ****, speedo showed over 110 at the 1/8, then poof!
Originally posted by LightningTuner
Truck just died, I pulled over because I didn't know if any oil let go. Back to the pits, pop the hood, turn the motor over, motor turns over, but balancer isn't spinning . Check the bolt, it was still tight, so it appears the crank must have snapped clean somewhere in the motor.
Truck just died, I pulled over because I didn't know if any oil let go. Back to the pits, pop the hood, turn the motor over, motor turns over, but balancer isn't spinning . Check the bolt, it was still tight, so it appears the crank must have snapped clean somewhere in the motor.
Originally posted by LightningTuner
Last time on the dyno, the truck made 818 ft-lbs, and that was with the 112 at 18 psi. This time we were running the Works 140 at 24 psi. Probably closer to 925 ft-lbs, which is about 1060 ft-lbs at the motor using a 15% drivetrain loss value.
Last time on the dyno, the truck made 818 ft-lbs, and that was with the 112 at 18 psi. This time we were running the Works 140 at 24 psi. Probably closer to 925 ft-lbs, which is about 1060 ft-lbs at the motor using a 15% drivetrain loss value.
Originally posted by LightningTuner
Oh well, nothing else is going right this year, might as well add this to the list.
Oh well, nothing else is going right this year, might as well add this to the list.
Sorry to hear about the rough yr but Im sure you will be back and be back faster. At least you get to build your own engine, if it was us we gotta pay to have it done
Good Luck
#5
#6
#7
Trending Topics
#8
#10
Originally posted by ShaneMcKenna203
would you be the 1st L in 9's? man that's fast. good luck, Shane
would you be the 1st L in 9's? man that's fast. good luck, Shane
#11
Originally posted by grinomyte
Yes that would be the first 2nd gen into the 9's. I believe sal was also the first to hit 10's but im not sure on that, he nevertheless holds the record at 10.48 as the fastest 2nd gen L, and the 2nd fastest truck in its class i believe. The first is another guy with a first gen L that runs in the 7's i think (pump gas too right?) I hope someone verifies this but i think thats pretty much correct.
Yes that would be the first 2nd gen into the 9's. I believe sal was also the first to hit 10's but im not sure on that, he nevertheless holds the record at 10.48 as the fastest 2nd gen L, and the 2nd fastest truck in its class i believe. The first is another guy with a first gen L that runs in the 7's i think (pump gas too right?) I hope someone verifies this but i think thats pretty much correct.
Sal's currently has the fastest posted ET for a Gen 2 Lightning...
#12
#13
Re: Hey Sal....
Originally posted by litnfast
Thanks for a least trying to set the bar higher. Good luck on your next attempt. Rumor has it there's a pretty "Nasty Lightning" down here in South Florida getting ready to dethrone ya... But until that happens your still the top dog.
Thanks for a least trying to set the bar higher. Good luck on your next attempt. Rumor has it there's a pretty "Nasty Lightning" down here in South Florida getting ready to dethrone ya... But until that happens your still the top dog.
#14