Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning Talk about modifications, or anything else associated with performance enhancements. Have a new idea for performance/reliability? Post it here. No idea is stupid! (please use Detailing and Appearance for cosmetic ideas)

Comparing generations (92, 93, and a pair of 2000's)

Old 07-19-2004, 11:20 PM
  #11  
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
 
TaylorD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TaylorD is on a distinguished road
Default

Ahh yes forgot about the no rockers, higher shifts power dives.

Todd you'll have to show me all the tricks, I bet you got the wheel sensors down in 15 seconds a side now with the tire on. I'll try the ELC pump up too, first time for both,

good thing I'll have a resident gearhead hanging around, speaking of
oh ya 1200 post! L67 baby!!!!!!!
Old 07-20-2004, 09:31 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
Posts like a Turbo
 
caminated2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
caminated2k is on a distinguished road
Default

Poping the wheel sensors off is easy, turn to one direction, reach around, turn to other direction, reach around.

I can confirm the talk of launching the 2K with how it distributes weight with power. I had a 2.12 60' with my pulley and cam at Norwalk but it felt like a boat taking off waiting to plane off haha.

With the PCM now and extra timing, etc, it'* worse. 21 degrees of timing and no knock is making some good power.

I owned a 92 SSEi back in the day... that car was lighter and tighter than my 2K is, however, my 2K is a much more smooth vehicle that can become 'violent' when need be..
Old 07-20-2004, 09:50 AM
  #13  
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
Thread Starter
 
willwren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

From my timeslips (I ran driverjohn'* 1992 SSEi twice, and each of the 2000'* once), the 60' times are this:

My 1993 SSEi:
2.239
2.344
2.298
2.360

driverjohn'* 1992 SSEi (K&N drop-in filter, Flowmaster Exhaust):
2.404
2.412

PontiacDad/PontiacMom'* 2000 SSEi (Bone-Evil, 3.3" pulley, gutted airbox w/ K&N, INTENSE PCM, TOG headers, good rubber, etc):
2.247

2000SilverBullet'* 2000 SSEi (similar mods to Bone-Evil, but 3.4" pulley and a straight-in cone intake, DHP PCM, TOG headers, and other significant exhaust work):
2.360

Keep in mind this is just from my own slips. All cars may have had better times. If all these, my 93 had the best 60', and was accomplished with simple bolt-on mods. I'm 1.1 seconds quicker in the 1/4 than a 92 with intake and exhaust, which I think is significant. Without the weight distribution problem on the 2000'*, this would be a different story, but remember that the 92 and 93 reach their tq and hp peaks quicker, which is also having an effect on this. Someone needs to invent a stiffener/brace/dampener or something for the rear of the 2000'* that can quickly pin in and out Beats the hell out of wheelie bars.
Old 07-20-2004, 09:53 AM
  #14  
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Rogue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Westerville, Ohio 2000 Black SSEi
Posts: 6,127
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Rogue is on a distinguished road
Default

Id be intretested to see some 1/8 times mph and 1/4 mph as well,. Gives an indiciacation of where the car is making or not making power.
Old 07-20-2004, 10:06 AM
  #15  
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
Thread Starter
 
willwren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Small sampling (I have slips against each car, but we all had multiple runs:
93SSEi
2.239 60'
9.897 1/8 @ 69.55
15.552 @ 87.05


92SSEi
2.404 60'
10.697 1/8 @ 65.01
16.666 @ 83.85

2000SSEi
2.247 60'
9.552 1/8 @ 73.94
14.812 @ 95.12

2000SSEi
2.285 60'
9.534 1/8 @ 74.80
14.740 @ 94.95
Old 07-20-2004, 11:06 AM
  #16  
Senior Member
Posts like a Corvette
 
Foghorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montréal, QC
Posts: 1,374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Foghorn is on a distinguished road
Default

The TCS systems have me curious. When I had the 2000 GTP we would remove fuse #28 from the Junction Box under the hood. This completely disables the TCS as well as the Magnasteer.

Now that I have the 97 SSEi all I have done at the track is to turn off the TCS via the swith. That said, my best 60' time is 2.10 seconds. On the GTP, even with Potenza RE730 tires and TCS disabled, I never got as good a 60' time :?

Interesting...

Cheers,
Old 07-20-2004, 11:27 AM
  #17  
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Rogue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Westerville, Ohio 2000 Black SSEi
Posts: 6,127
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Rogue is on a distinguished road
Default

Originally Posted by Foghorn
The TCS systems have me curious. When I had the 2000 GTP we would remove fuse #28 from the Junction Box under the hood. This completely disables the TCS as well as the Magnasteer.

Now that I have the 97 SSEi all I have done at the track is to turn off the TCS via the swith. That said, my best 60' time is 2.10 seconds. On the GTP, even with Potenza RE730 tires and TCS disabled, I never got as good a 60' time :?

Interesting...

Cheers,
The TCS switch on the 00'* do not disable tq mgmt, they disable the tire slip timing pull briefly but not entirely. My guess is (and I'm going to test this out at the track this weekend) that TQ MGMT is actually helping with your launch as its not allowing the tires to spin as much but your not getting full power at the launch.

To back this up ive noticed that my tires spin a lot more on the street before I hook my VSS back up after a day at the track. As soon as I put them back on, even after turning off TCS I notice the tires will no longer slip as much.

Next time at the track pull your VSS and see what kind of difference it makes on the launch (and trap speeds).
Old 07-20-2004, 05:00 PM
  #18  
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
 
TaylorD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TaylorD is on a distinguished road
Default

Originally Posted by Rogue
Next time at the track pull your VSS and see what kind of difference it makes on the launch (and trap speeds).
I plan on it this saturday
Old 07-20-2004, 05:46 PM
  #19  
Senior Member
Posts like a Corvette
 
Foghorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montréal, QC
Posts: 1,374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Foghorn is on a distinguished road
Default

Originally Posted by TaylorD
Originally Posted by Rogue
Next time at the track pull your VSS and see what kind of difference it makes on the launch (and trap speeds).
I plan on it this saturday
I'll try that this Sunday. Be curious to see, the TCS on the 97s is not as advanced as the 2000+, I can still lay good rubber even with TCS enabled, it just takes a couple of seconds for the system to react.

I assume the 2000+ Bonneville and the 1998 to 2003 GTP TCS are pretty similar, if not the same. I understand the Bonneville has Torque Management and only the 2004 GTP does.

A fellow nearby with a 2004 GTP has almost the same mods as TaylerD and Rogue and his best ET is 14.14. No doubt there is still a bit to be uncovered with TM, lightweight front ends and larger diameter wheels.

Cheers,
Old 07-20-2004, 11:07 PM
  #20  
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Allmachtige's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Genoa, Illinois
Posts: 4,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Allmachtige is on a distinguished road
Default

Yeah Foghorn I was gonna say, my 98 still can leave its mark with TC on. Why do you think Bonneville was late to get the updated TCS?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Comparing generations (92, 93, and a pair of 2000's)



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:42 AM.