#tci eclipse

[smolfangurl40]

Some art I've done for the Celestial Idiots and Celestial Void because I adore them (if y'all have recommendations for Sun and Moon channels I'm all ears)

[b33anie]

Have some sketches lovelies <3

[garbagechocolate]

Idk if ruin plays a role in the servant of evil au, but I imagine that if he did they could like threaten to remove dapt or something to get the creatures cooperation

Ruin does not play a role in Servant of Evil au. (It's not a tsams au let's make that clear) The au just uses characters that are very inspired by TSAMS. Like TCV or TCI. Solar plays the role of both Eclipse and Ruin, in a way.

[s3mag]

The LS engine. It’s kind of the final destination isn’t it. I see it a lot in my sick & twisted line of work: If you keep any one car long enough… and you keep kicking that can down the road far enough… eventually it bumps up against an LS swap & comes to rest. And you go, “Saaaay now, what’s this thing??”

The LS is the auto-aftermarket’s Roman Empire, and all roads lead to Rome if you stay on ‘em long enough.

Long story short, THAT’s why we’re sitting here looking at a turbocharged LS in Eric Englert’s 3000GT. It’s the result of being deeeeeeep in a labyrinth of 3000GT riddles & obstacles. You come up for air, and then all the sudden, the air’s full of tiny microscopic LS particles.

Backstory

So here’s the backstory – a 3000GT has been in Eric’s life for 20 years now. He met his wife in those earlier years with a ’91 model… and that car played a huge supporting role in their early relationship. He sold that first car so they could buy a house & build a family.

…Sold it for love how sweet.

But the 3000GT always had that sentimental value to Eric and his wife. So as the Englert family got planted & settled, Eric was able to pick this one up in 2010. A clean example of a pop-up headlight 3000GT. It was a 100% garaged & unmolested Arizona car, with original paint & a stock 6g72 engine.

Eric made the purchase, and then with open arms, Mitsubishi welcomed him back to the Mitsu-family & the car spun a bearing within the first month.

Eric built the 6g72 with bigger turbos & AEM management. He spun a bearing again.

He stuck a 3.5 6g74 in its place, made 500hp!! …And then shot a rod.

DSM Swap

After taking a bunch more hits with a bunch more 6g motors… Eric decided to pioneer a 4g63 (DSM) swap. A lot of people questioned why you’d go through the headache & torment of putting a 4g63 engine in a car that’s heavier than the Eclipse/Talon. But the 4G63 is a decimate-all engine with a lot of aftermarket support. And the 3000 is heavier, because it has heavier components – like a larger diff & CV axles. You can get a lot of the ‘dumb’ weight out of a 3000GT by removing all the complicated & overly-sophisticated technology of the time period. For example, swapping to a 4g63 with manual transmission takes 100-pounds off the nose… right off the bat. Then if you go through the car, and remove/replace heavy, burdensome suspension components, steering components, exhaust components, sound deadening, etc… you can get the weight about down to around DSM specs.

The 3000GT is actually very close to the 1G DSM chassis in design. It’s slightly wider, but it has the exact same wheelbase. You can literally use the 3000GT shifter & cables with the 4g swap. And a lot of your plugs & sensors (as well as your alternator) all plug right up.

So in short – Eric was running the DSM engine & transmission, with 3000GT axles & rear diff, and a modified 3000GT driveshaft. Eric engineered his own motor mounts for the 3000-to-4g63 swap… and he still makes them, in case anyone needs them for their own project.

With the 4g63-swapped version of this car, Eric was running 9.65 quarter-miles at 37-pounds of boost… WITH a full dash, carpet, and rear seats. BUT – on the street, Eric was running 50-pounds of boost and nitrous! So it was a low 9-second car… he just doesn’t have the time-slip to prove it.

Despite the impressive numbers on the 4g, he was breaking transfer cases at the track. And all the downtime in-between fixes waiting for custom parts, was causing Eric some impatience.

…So he decided to try the LS thing.

The LS Thing

The LS is not an easy swap in this car. It took waaaay more hours than expected, in terms of planning, cutting, and welding. Eric had to cut a new trans tunnel & firewall. So since he was eyeball-deep in it anyway, he said ‘screw it’ & made the hole bigger to move the engine further back towards the center of the car. He built a tube/chromoly subframe rather than hacking-up the original one… with the goal of functionally tucking 275 tires under the front.

The front brakes are off an SN95 Mustang. Eric’s also using Racecraft drop spindles for an SN95. Coilovers are Fortune Auto from an Evo 9. The power steering rack is courtesy of a schweet ’88 Thunderbird. And Eric’s using an electric hydraulic power steering pump off a Toyota MR Spyder.

The car just ‘debuted’ this past summer before LS Fest, where I bumped into him at a random gas station. It recently ran a 9.70 at 20psi… and that was limited to just rolling off the starting line, because he can’t launch it on stock axles.

With the Xona Rota XR400 84mm turbo + PTC Powerglide transmission, the car shifts so hard that it breaks axles literally every time at WOT… even on street tires. Eric carries extras in the trunk, and can often be seen replacing them on the side of the road. He’s running out of spares, so next up, Eric bought a Ford 8.8 rear-end & is buying super expensive built axles.

Family Affair

In hindsight, Eric would probably NOT do the LS swap again, simply because it was such a ton of work to get this engine into this chassis… referencing that he spent a year & a lot of dollars basically building a Japanese C5 lol. But having said that – Eric is 100% DEFINITELY glad he did it. He doesn’t regret the turnout… it was just a lot of work to get there. But for the Englert family, 3000GTs are kind of a family affair. They’re worth the hassle. And this car is equal parts crazy, clean, and unique. I mean shoot – you don’t see nice 3000GTs much anymore period… so to see one with an LS like this is pretty cool.

Eric has 4 kids – 18, 14, 13, and 6. Back when the 6-year-old was 4, he saw dad’s 3000GT with the front bumper off and said, “Don’t put the bumper back on, you’ll save weight.” Keep in mind… this kid is only 4 years old! Eric tried to explain aerodynamics the best he could. The next day, the kid (obviously having thought about it a good bit), came back and said, “Dad you should take the mirrors off… you’ll save weight annnd be more aerodynamic.”

Can’t argue with that!

Back when Eric’s 18-year old was just a baby, she left a froggy toy in his first 3000GT. That frog still sits in this car today, and has become Eric’s good-luck safety charm.

Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4 (5300GT VR2)

  Engine

5.3l aluminum gen3 LS

Stock gen4 rods and pistons (ring gap opened up for boost)

Stock 5.3 heads with TSP dual springs and pushrods

LJMS Stage2 turbo cam

LS6 intake

MSD plug wires

Drivetrain

PTC powerglide, reid case, and pro trans-brake

PTC torque converter

TCI Outlaw shifter

3 buttons (line lock, trans-brake, and bump)

Power Adder

Xona Rota XR400 84mm turbo from Robert at Forced Performance

Tial BOV

Tial 40mm wastegates (2)

NOS dry nitrous kit (fueling added by MS3Pro ecu)

Engine Management

MS3Pro-Evo ECU w/LS Swap harness

  Fuel

210lb Bosch injectors

Bosch 044 fuel pumps (2)

10-gallon fuel cell (modified to use the stock gas cap & fill tube)

ProMeth Volute Injection meth kit with 3-gal tank (triggered by MS3Pro ecu above 10psi)

FlexFuel using GM sensor and tuned in MS3Pro ecu

  Wheels

18×9.5 +35 ESR front with Nitto NT05 275/35/18

19×9.5 +40 ESM rear with Nitto NT05 275/35/19

17×9+35 XXR rear with M/T ET Street R (DOT slick) 28×11.50-17LT

Steering/Brakes/Suspension

Racecraft SN95 Mustang 2″ drop spindles

SN95 brake calipers & rotors

Hawk pads

Aerospace brake master on stock booster

-Vacuum pump and reservoir to maintain adequate vacuum

Hydraulic handbrake for rear brakes

Thunderbird PS rack

MR-S electric PS pump

Modified stock steering rack

Exterior

RetroSpec front lip and side splitters

Carbon Fiber hood & fiberglass hatch painted body color “snake eyes”

QuikLatch for hood, hatch, and front bumper

Carbon fiber covers for removed side mirrors

OEM foglights!!

Interior

10pt chromoly cage

Kirkey Pro Street drag seats

Perfect Tuning CANBus gauge

AEM Trim Pot (boost dial)

XS Power 14v battery in hatch

-GM truck alternator tricked with diodes to output 16volts

3000GT speedo & tach functional  😉

Fabrication – Owner Built

Recessed firewall (steel wheel barrow tub!)

Fabricated trans tunnel

Chromoly front subframe

Chromoly adjustable control arms

-QA1 heim joints, double adjusters and adjustable ball joints

Turbo kit with 4″ electric cutout to side-exit, or 3″ full aluminum exhaust

–(switch on center console)

Chromoly strut tower brace

Self built & self tuned. (except for the roll cage)

  Results….

4Gswap: 2.0l, 9.65 @ 143, 37psi and ran up to 50psi on the street and a 100shot up to 45psi

LSswap: 5.3l, 9.70 @ 146 20psi and just rolling out, no launch on stock axles.

Best trap of 148mph. (sprayed nitrous on the street but not at track yet)

Does wicked burnouts!

Engine Progression….

6g72. 135k mi 100% stock. Engine died by spun rod bearing within a month of ownership.

6g72. Bought a built used engine and went nuts doing the build I always dreamed of. (twin billet td05 turbos, AEM, custom FMIC to keep foglights, etc). After getting it driving, had low compression in one cyl.

6g72. Tore down used built engine for a full refresh, and also bought new aftermarket billet oil pump gears (mistake!). This engine died by spun rod bearing at only 400whp. Later discovered that the oil pump gears were not machined correctly causing oil pressure issues at higher rpm.

6g74. Parted out built 3.0l engine and ran a stock 3.5l 6g74 on the billet turbos. Lasted for a short while at 500whp & ended in carnage with a busted rod.

6g72. Stock replacement… sold billet turbos for used 14Bs. Had a lot of fun with this engine around 500whp for quite awhile, and eventually bent a rod.

6g72. decided on built engine again with big mofo cams to rev. Also bought a TIG welder to try fabbing. Modified my td05 kit for open wastegate dumps, and downpipe to expand to 4-inches, for a 4″ aluminum exhaust. Also swapped in an AWD auto (trans available in EU and Japan for the non-turbo awd 3000/GTO). LOVED the auto! Totally hooked on the instant & aggressive shifts, combined with zero boost lag between shifts. Engine died an early death due to crank balance issue that wiped out the mains. Demoralized yet motivated.

4g64. 4GSwap was born! Stock 2.4l with dohc head and a single 14B turbo paired with AWD auto for proof of concept. Engine didn’t die!!

4g64. built 2.4LR and HX40 turbo. Ran 10.7 on street tires. Died due to oil filter backing off & losing oil

4g63. 2.0 built, Forced Performance Super 99 turbo! Ran 9’s. Lots of fun. Engine didn’t die!! Parted out to go even crazier.

4g63. 2.0 long rod. Billet crank, aluminum rods, gas-ported pistons. Also ran 9’s, but ended up running a lot more boost on the street. Engine didn’t die!!! Sold & parted to fund LS Swap

5.3l iron block. Proof of concept engine. Issues with imported turbo so only ran 10.9. Engine didn’t die!! Swapped to aluminum block for 100lb weight savings. Sold iron block.

5.3l Aluminum block. Still kickin! 9’s at 20psi and no nitrous. A lot more of both to come. It may die. 😀

Already have a K1 forged stroker crank and K1 rods on the shelf. Plan to get Wiseco pistons to build a 5.95l stroker in a spare aluminum 5.3l junkyard longblock I picked up 😉

Text by Wooley   Photos by Ty Cobb

LS-swapped, turbocharged 3000GT… w/ fogs!! The LS engine. It’s kind of the final destination isn’t it. I see it a lot in my sick & twisted line of work: If you keep any one car long enough… and you keep kicking that can down the road far enough… eventually it bumps up against an LS swap & comes to rest.

[soukacatv]

Digital television (DTV) is the transmission of television signals, including the sound channel, using digital encoding modulator, in contrast to the earlier television technology, analog television, in which the video and audio are carried by analog signals. It is an innovative advance that represents the first significant evolution in television technology since color television in the 1950s.Digital TV transmits in a new image format called HDTV (high definition television), with greater resolution than analog TV, in a wide screen aspect ratio similar to recent movies in contrast to the narrower screen of analog TV. It makes more economical use of scarce radio spectrum space; it can transmit multiple channels, up to 7, in the same bandwidth occupied by a single channel of analog television,and provides many new features that analog television cannot. A transition from analog to digital broadcasting began around 2006 in some countries, and many industrial countries have now completed the changeover, while other countries are in various stages of adaptation. Different digital television broadcasting standards have been adopted in different parts of the world; below are the more widely used standards:

Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB) uses coded orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) modulation and supports hierarchical transmission. This standard has been adopted in Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia, total about 60 countries.

Advanced Television System Committee (ATSC) uses eight-level vestigial sideband (8VSB) for terrestrial broadcasting. This standard has been adopted by 6 countries: United States, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, Dominican Republic and Honduras.

Dual HD Input Modulator With ISDB-T And DVB-T Modulation

HD Encoder To DVB-T RF Modulator

DVB-T And ISDB-T Encoder Modulator

HDMI Encoder Modulator,16in1 Digital Headend,HD RF Modulator at Soukacatv.com

Integrated Services Digital Broadcasting (ISDB) is a system designed to provide good reception to fixed receivers and also portable or mobile receivers. It utilizes OFDM and two-dimensional interleaving. It supports hierarchical transmission of up to three layers and uses MPEG-2 video and Advanced Audio Coding. This standard has been adopted in Japan and the Philippines. ISDB-T International is an adaptation of this standard using H.264/MPEG-4 AVC that been adopted in most of South America and is also being embraced by Portuguese-speaking African countries.

Digital Terrestrial Multimedia Broadcasting (DTMB) adopts time-domain synchronous (TDS) OFDM technology with a pseudo-random signal frame to serve as the guard interval (GI) of the OFDM block and the training symbol. The DTMB standard has been adopted in the People’s Republic of China, including Hong Kong and Macau.

Digital Multimedia Broadcasting (DMB) is a digital radio transmission technology developed in South Korea as part of the national IT project for sending multimedia such as TV, radio and datacasting to mobile devices such as mobile phones, laptops and GPS navigation systems.

History of Digital TV

Digital TV’s roots have been tied very closely to the availability of inexpensive, high performance computers. It wasn’t until the 1990s that digital TV became a real possibility.

In the mid-1980s, as Japanese consumer electronics firms forged ahead with the development of HDTV technology, and as the MUSE analog format was proposed by Japan’s public broadcaster NHK as a worldwide standard, Japanese advancements were seen as pacesetters that threatened to eclipse U.S. electronics companies. Until June 1990, the Japanese MUSE standard—based on an analog system—was the front-runner among the more than 23 different technical concepts under consideration. Then, an American company, General Instrument, demonstrated the feasibility of a digital television signal. This breakthrough was of such significance that the FCC was persuaded to delay its decision on an ATV standard until a digitally based standard could be developed.

In March 1990, when it became clear that a digital standard was feasible, the FCC made a number of critical decisions. First, the Commission declared that the new ATV standard must be more than an enhanced analog signal, but be able to provide a genuine HDTV signal with at least twice the resolution of existing television images. Then, to ensure that viewers who did not wish to buy a new digital television set could continue to receive conventional television broadcasts, it dictated that the new ATV standard must be capable of being “simulcast” on different channels. The new ATV standard also allowed the new DTV signal to be based on entirely new design principles. Although incompatible with the existing NTSC standard, the new DTV standard would be able to incorporate many improvements.

The final standard adopted by the FCC did not require a single standard for scanning formats, aspect ratios, or lines of resolution. This outcome resulted from a dispute between the consumer electronics industry (joined by some broadcasters) and the computer industry (joined by the film industry and some public interest groups) over which of the two scanning processes—interlaced or progressive—is superior. Interlaced scanning, which is used in televisions worldwide, scans even-numbered lines first, then odd-numbered ones. Progressive scanning, which is the format used in computers, scans lines in sequences, from top to bottom. The computer industry argued that progressive scanning is superior because it does not “flicker” in the manner of interlaced scanning. It also argued that progressive scanning enables easier connections with the Internet, and is more cheaply converted to interlaced formats than vice versa. The film industry also supported progressive scanning because it offers a more efficient means of converting filmed programming into digital formats. For their part, the consumer electronics industry and broadcasters argued that interlaced scanning was the only technology that could transmit the highest quality pictures then (and currently) feasible, i.e., 1,080 lines per picture and 1,920 pixels per line. Broadcasters also favored interlaced scanning because their vast archive of interlaced programming is not readily compatible with a progressive format.

Inaugural launches

DirecTV in the U.S. launched the first commercial digital satellite platform in May 1994, using the Digital Satellite System (DSS) standard. Digital cable broadcasts were tested and launched in the U.S. in 1996 by TCI and Time Warner.The first digital terrestrial platform was launched in November 1998 as ONdigital in the United Kingdom, using the DVB-T standard.

Formats and bandwidth of Digital TV

Comparison of image quality between ISDB-T (1080i broadcast, top) and NTSC (480i transmission, bottom)

Digital television supports many different picture formats defined by the broadcast television systems which are a combination of size and aspect ratio (width to height ratio).

With digital terrestrial television (DTT) broadcasting, the range of formats can be broadly divided into two categories: high definition television (HDTV) for the transmission of high-definition video and standard-definition television (SDTV). These terms by themselves are not very precise, and many subtle intermediate cases exist.

One of several different HDTV formats that can be transmitted over DTV is: 1280 × 720 pixels in progressive scan mode (abbreviated 720p) or 1920 × 1080 pixels in interlaced video mode (1080i). Each of these uses a 16:9 aspect ratio. HDTV cannot be transmitted over analog television channels because of channel capacity issues.

SDTV, by comparison, may use one of several different formats taking the form of various aspect ratios depending on the technology used in the country of broadcast. In terms of rectangular pixels, NTSC countries can deliver a 640 × 480 resolution in 4:3 and 854 × 480 in 16:9, while PAL can give 768 × 576 in 4:3 and 1024 × 576 in 16:9. However, broadcasters may choose to reduce these resolutions to reduce bit rate (e.g., many DVB-T channels in the United Kingdom use a horizontal resolution of 544 or 704 pixels per line).

Each commercial broadcasting terrestrial television DTV channel in North America is permitted to be broadcast at a bit rate up to 19 megabits per second. However, the broadcaster does not need to use this entire bandwidth for just one broadcast channel. Instead the broadcast can use the channel to include PSIP and can also subdivide across several video subchannels (a.k.a. feeds) of varying quality and compression rates, including non-video datacasting services that allow one-way high-bit-rate streaming of data to computers like National Datacast.

A broadcaster may opt to use a standard-definition (SDTV) digital signal instead of an HDTV signal, because current convention allows the bandwidth of a DTV channel (or “multiplex”) to be subdivided into multiple digital subchannels, (similar to what most FM radio stations offer with HD Radio), providing multiple feeds of entirely different television programming on the same channel. This ability to provide either a single HDTV feed or multiple lower-resolution feeds is often referred to as distributing one’s “bit budget” or multicasting. This can sometimes be arranged automatically, using a statistical multiplexer (or “stat-mux”). With some implementations, image resolution may be less directly limited by bandwidth; for example in DVB-T, broadcasters can choose from several different modulation schemes, giving them the option to reduce the transmission bit rate and make reception easier for more distant or mobile viewers.

Receiving digital signal

There are several different ways to receive digital television. One of the oldest means of receiving DTV (and TV in general) is from terrestrial transmitters using an antenna (known as an aerial in some countries). This way is known as Digital terrestrial television (DTT). With DTT, viewers are limited to channels that have a terrestrial transmitter in range of their antenna.

Other ways have been devised to receive digital television. Among the most familiar to people are digital cable and digital satellite. In some countries where transmissions of TV signals are normally achieved by microwaves, digital MMDS is used. Other standards, such as Digital multimedia broadcasting (DMB) and DVB-H, have been devised to allow handheld devices such as mobile phones to receive TV signals. Another way is IPTV, that is receiving TV via Internet Protocol, relying on digital subscriber line (DSL) or optical cable line. Finally, an alternative way is to receive digital TV signals via the open Internet (Internet television), whether from a central streaming service or a P2P (peer-to-peer) system.

SKD3013 3 Channel HD Encode Modulator

SKD19 Series 1U Rack 12CH Encode Modulator

Some signals carry encryption and specify use conditions (such as “may not be recorded” or “may not be viewed on displays larger than 1 m in diagonal measure”) backed up with the force of law under the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty (WIPO Copyright Treaty) and national legislation implementing it, such as the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Access to encrypted channels can be controlled by a removable smart card, for example via the Common Interface (DVB-CI) standard for Europe and via Point Of Deployment (POD) for IS or named differently CableCard.

Protection parameters for terrestrial DTV broadcasting

Digital television signals must not interfere with each other, and they must also coexist with analog television until it is phased out. The following table gives allowable signal-to-noise and signal-to-interference ratios for various interference scenarios. This table is a crucial regulatory tool for controlling the placement and power levels of stations. Digital TV is more tolerant of interference than analog TV, and this is the reason a smaller range of channels can carry an all-digital set of television stations.

System Parameters (protection ratios) Canada USA  EBU  ITU-mode M3 Japan & Brazil C/N for AWGN Channel +19.5 dB (16.5 dB) +15.19 dB +19.3 dB +19.2 dB Co-Channel DTV into Analog TV +33.8 dB +34.44 dB +34 ~ 37 dB +38 dB Co-Channel Analog TV into DTV +7.2 dB +1.81 dB +4 dB +4 dB Co-Channel DTV into DTV +19.5 dB (16.5 dB) +15.27 dB +19 dB +19 dB Lower Adjacent Channel DTV into Analog TV −16 dB −17.43 dB −5 ~ −11 dB −6 dB Upper Adjacent Channel DTV into Analog TV −12 dB −11.95 dB −1 ~ −10] −5 dB Lower Adjacent Channel Analog TV into DTV −48 dB −47.33 dB −34 ~ −37 dB −35 dB Upper Adjacent Channel Analog TV into DTV −49 dB −48.71 dB −38 ~ −36 dB −37 dB Lower Adjacent Channel DTV into DTV −27 dB −28 dB −30 dB −28 dB Upper Adjacent Channel DTV into DTV −27 dB −26 dB −30 dB −29 dB

Established in 2000, the Soukacatv.com main products are modulators both in analog and digital ones, amplifier and combiner. We are the very first one in manufacturing the headend system in China. Our 16 in 1 and 24 in 1 now are the most popular products all over the world.

For more, please access to https://www.soukacatv.com.

CONTACT US

Dingshengwei Electronics Co., Ltd

Company Address: Buliding A,the first industry park of Guanlong,Xili Town,Nanshan,Shenzhen,Guangdong,China

Tel : +86 0755 26909863

Fax : +86 0755 26984949

Phone: +86 13410066011

Email:ken@soukacatv.com

Skype: soukaken

Website: https://www.soukacatv.com

Source: Wikipedia

The History of Digital television (DTV) and Digital Signal Receiving Introduction|Soukacatv.com Digital television (DTV) is the transmission of television signals, including the sound channel, using digital encoding modulator…

[itsworn]

This Procharged Small Block 1990 Mustang in Dangerously Fast

The element of surprise is nearly non-existent in today’s car community. It takes a pretty crafty dude to fool a crowd of gear heads, but that’s exactly what happens every time this 1990 Ford Mustang hits the track. We know what you’re thinking—“an aggressive looking Mustang on a 275 drag radial isn’t exactly a sleeper” and you’re partially right. The Fox body platform is so successful at drag racing that it raises your expectations, even when you see a stock suspension car on a relatively small tire. Jarred Hicks built the car and it has progressed from street car, to street/strip car, to a pretty serious stock suspension drag car. The car has been on quite the journey, from the occasional trip to Mexico in its street car days, to bumper-dragging passes in the eighth-mile with its current setup.

Jarred didn’t intend to build a sleeper, but it naturally happened as he continued to find horsepower without getting too carried away with racecar stuff. Although he admits that it is no longer street friendly, his Mustang looks like it could show up at the occasional cruise night. The car still has carpet, door panels, the stock dash, and it weighs more than his local racing class at Brainerd Motorsports Park requires, coming in at 3,150 pounds. So, just how quick and fast is this surprising Mustang? On a recent eighth-mile blast, Jarred ran a 4.85 second elapsed time at 145 miles per hour. If you need a quarter-mile reference for this to fully soak in, that would add up to approximately 7.70 seconds in the quarter. This guy is running 4’s with a production Boss block and 347 cubic inches. He won’t tell us all his secrets, but from what we gathered, it’s a pretty simple setup with fed by 30-plus pounds of boost from a Procharger F1X.

Racers often find the limits of their equipment in spectacular fashion, but Jarred is still trying to find the limit of his small block Ford, while chasing quicker elapsed times every time it rolls out of the trailer. Pushing a combination to its limit requires a delicate balance of tuning skill and good track conditions, and it also requires the willingness to strap in and put the hammer down. The car has been on the back bumper a few times, but when it’s on a straight pass, you can expect a big number. Jarred put it best when he said, “The little engine continues to surprise us each and every time it fires up and every time we go a little faster.” He continued, “I can’t believe it’s lived this long…if it never fired up again, I could not complain.” With that mindset, he will continue to turn the screws a little tighter to see what this 302-based combination can do. He plans to upgrade the roll cage and make a few more changes for the 2018 drag racing season, but we’re hoping he keeps the locals guessing with a combination that is much faster than it appears.

Tech Notes

Who: Jarred Hicks What: 1990 Ford Mustang GT Where: Resaca, Georgia Engine: The 302-based small block Ford starts with a Ford Motorsports Boss Block, which has been opened up to 4.030-inch, and fit with an Eagle forged crankshaft. The 3.5-inch stroke creates a final displacement of 347 cubic inches. A set of 5.4-inch Eagle connecting rods send the Ross pistons into motion, while a high-volume oil pump inside the Canton pan keeps the engine lubricated. Atop the short block is a set of un-ported AFR 220 Renegade cylinder heads. The only modification to the cylinder heads is the addition of O-rings, which allows for a tight seal, in combination with solid copper head gaskets. Inside the block is a Bullet roller camshaft, using a custom grind specified by Panhandle Performance to make the most of the centrifugal supercharger. The boosted small block features an MSD 7531 ignition box, combined with an MSD distributor and HVC2 coil. A Magnafuel 750 EFI pump and Billet Atomizer 225 injectors deliver a healthy dose of C-16 fuel. The exhaust system consists of custom headers with Magnaflow mufflers and 3.5-inch pipes.

Power Adder: Boost comes by way of a Procharger F1X, which rides low in front of the engine. It crams anywhere from 28 to 32 pounds of boost into the engine, depending on the tune-up. Jarred says that tuning his Mustang is a community effort, and he uses Big Stuff 3 to make sense of the boost, fuel and spark needed to make the car do its thing. The charged air from the Procharger snakes back to an air-to-water intercooler behind the passenger seat. From there, it enters the engine through a Wilson elbow and a Parker funnel web intake manifold, modified by Steve Chapman. Although the car has never been on a dyno, the elapsed times, trap speed and weight of the car tell us this thing is making nearly 1,500 horsepower at the flywheel.

Transmission: Ford drag racers sometimes refer to Powerglide transmissions simply as a “two speed” to keep from admitting that a GM product is in their car. The fact of the matter is there wasn’t much GM equipment left behind after Marc Wells at Trans Plus 2 modified the Powerglide extensively. Power transfer is handled by a custom PTC torque converter, which stalls to 4,500 rpm on the line.

Rearend: Jarred relies on 35-spline Strange axles, a spool, and 3.73:1 gears inside a slightly narrowed 8.8 rear end housing. Chattanooga Driveline built the custom driveshaft to tie it all together.

Suspension: Lyons Custom Motorsports in Rossville, Georgia is responsible for setting up the suspension on Jarred’s car. You’ll notice it doesn’t have a slammed stance, like most cars of its caliber. The biggest reasons for the stock-style ride height are the large tube headers and exhaust. It uses a UPR tubular K-member and control arms up front, with Strangle single adjustable shocks and Afco springs. Out back, Tim Lyons worked his magic on the stock style rear suspension, installing his custom control arms, an anti-roll bar, and Afco Big Guns coilovers. A manual rack keeps the car pointed straight, while a combination of Aerospace front brakes, Strange rear brakes, and a Stroud parachute brings the Mustang to a halt.

Wheels/Tires: Jarred’s Mustang rolls on a set of Billet Specialties Street Lite wheels, measuring 15×4.5 inches up front and 15×10 inches out back. The rears feature bead locks to keep the 275/60R15 Mickey Thompson ET Street Radial Pros from slipping on the bead.

Paint/Body: A custom-mixed orange hue covers Jarred’s Mustang, and the clean paint job gives it even more of a street car vibe. The only custom components are the hood and front bumper, which came from Schoneck Composites. Heath York handled the bodywork, stripping off several layers of paint, and straightening the panels. Heath painted the car using PPG materials.

Interior: Another aspect of Jarred’s car that hides some of its potential is a lack of extensive roll cage. The car does have a 10-point cage, built by Zartech Race Cars in Acworth, Georgia, but most cars capable of such quick elapsed times have a funny car cage and other safety features. Jarred straps into the Kirkey seat with G-Force harnesses, and grips a Grant steering wheel, while he selects the gears with a TCI Outlaw shifter. You will find a stock dash, gauge cluster, carpet, door panels and all of the original glass in Jarred’s Mustang.

Performance: Jarred originally intended to compete in NMRA True Street with a goal of running 5.90’s in the eighth-mile while retaining the car’s street friendly setup. He eclipsed that milestone about five years ago and hasn’t looked back since. The car has now run a best of 4.85 at 145 miles per hour, with an astonishing 1.15-second 60-foot time at Brainerd Motorsports Park in Ringgold, Georgia. With this type of performance at 3,150 pounds, that means the little 347 is cranking out nearly 1,500 horsepower!

Special Thanks to: Santana Baker (Jarred’s fiancé), Heath York, Chris Mulkey, Tim Lyons, Adam Turner, Robbie Kellerhals, Jason Harvey, Duston Ghorley, Mike Schlapa, the Sikes crew, and the Mafia crew.

The post This Procharged Small Block 1990 Mustang in Dangerously Fast appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

from Hot Rod Network http://www.hotrod.com/articles/procharged-small-block-1990-mustang-dangerously-fast/ via IFTTT

[itsworn]

Chevys Dominate at Optima’s Ultimate Street Car New Jersey

The trip to Millville, New Jersey, was a long haul for some who compete in Optima’s Search for the Ultimate Street Car series, but it was well worth the effort for those who made it to the fifth event of the season. A sold-out field spent two days attacking the tarmac in and around New Jersey Motorsports Park, jostling for position in the series points chases, as well as pursuing coveted invitations to the 2017 SEMA Show and Optima Ultimate Street Car Invitational in Las Vegas.

Larry Woo’s 1968 Camaro has been a solid performer all season long, but his third event proved to be his breakout performance. Woo posted the highest GTV points total of the season (481 points), which not only secured his invitation to Las Vegas but propelled him to the top of the points standings. John Lazorack III, whose LS-powered 1988 Chrysler Conquest TSi won the season opener, has the car to challenge Woo for the regular season championship. However, Lazorack is based on the West Coast and is only signed up for one of the remaining events, and with the other one sold out he’s only got that one last shot.

Chad Ryker’s 1968 Camaro is signed up for the final two events but he needs to come up with 511 points to pass Woo, who is also signed up for the regular season finale at Road America. The points totals are based on a competitor’s three best finishes of the year, so if Ryker averages 463 points in his final two events and Woo doesn’t pick up any additional points at Road America, he’ll get the job done. However, Ryker’s best performance so far is 418 points at Las Vegas Motor Speedway.

That leaves Brian Hobaugh’s 1973 Camaro as the only competitor with a realistic shot of catching Woo. When the two faced off earlier in the year at Pikes Peak, Hobaugh came out on top 444 to 433. Even though Hobaugh is based in California, he is planning on running the final two events, which includes a trip all the way to Wisconsin in early October. If Hobaugh averages 450 points in his final two events he’ll catch Woo’s current total. However, Woo can add to his current total with a performance at Road America that eclipses 429 points, his lowest total of the season.

The points chase in the Recaro GTS class is similarly tight. Jeremy Swenson’s 2011 ZR1 has opened up a sizable lead over the car currently in second, Brandon Williams’ 2009 Nissan GT-R. However, it’s a competitor further down in the points that has a shot at catching and passing Swenson.

Paul Curley’s Corvette and Austin Barnes’ Viper could both challenge Swenson for the championship, but neither registered for any additional events after they punched their respective tickets to Vegas. Glen Barnhouse’s Corvette, Danny King’s Porsche, or Lynn Proctor’s Viper could’ve also challenged Swenson but they’d all need two more events to do it and they are all currently only registered for one of the remaining two. That leaves Jake Rozelle’s 2003 Corvette, which is registered to run the final two events and currently sits 481 points behind Swenson.

However, Rozelle doesn’t need to reach that total in either of those events to catch Swenson. If Rozelle averages 471 points in his final two events he’ll pass Swenson’s current point total. However, Swenson is signed up for Road America, so he can add to his total at that event with a performance of 459 points or better.

Last year, Rich Willhoff’s 2006 Corvette won the Holley EFI GTL class with 1,462 points. Ken Thwaits’ 2006 Mitsubishi Evo has already passed that total this year but it still might not be enough to win in 2017. Mike DuSold’s 1967 Camaro currently sits 16 points back in second place and he is signed up to run at the season finale at Road America. If DuSold can post 488 points, he’ll pass Thwaits’ current total. DuSold posted a 492 points haul earlier this season at NOLA Motorsports Park so that’s a real possibility.

However, Thwaits might not even be in the lead by that point. Willhoff is scheduled to run again at Auto Club Speedway and he only needs 478 points to pass Thwaits. Willhoff hasn’t scored less than 493 points at any event yet this season so that could put the target on his back going into the final event.

In the Franklin Road Apparel GT class, Bryan Johnson’s 2013 Camaro didn’t quite wrap up it’s third consecutive class championship with his third straight win this season at New Jersey Motorsports Park, but he’s about as close as you can get. Cliff Elliott’s 2016 Mustang, the second-place holder in the overall standings after the New Jersey event, could score a perfect 500 points at the final event and he’d still finish almost 30 points behind Johnson.

The only competitor with a mathematical shot at this point is Jordan Priestley’s 2016 Camaro SS, which posted a 439-point finish in the season opener. Priestley is signed up to run the Camaro in the final two events. However, he’d need to average 484 points in those events, which would also require him to beat Johnson, which has only happened once since Johnson began running in the series. While Danny Popp’s Corvette may get a lot of well-deserved credit for his string of wins at the OUSCI, when it comes to late-model muscle cars, Bryan Johnson’s Camaro has encountered no equal in all-around performance.

It’s a quick turnaround for the series, as the action resumes the weekend following the New Jersey Motorsports Park event and it’s happening on the opposite coast! Only a handful of competitors will make the cross-country trek, so we’re anxious to see what will nearly be a completely different field of competitors at Auto Club Speedway. If you’d like to learn more about the series and how you can participate with your street car, check out the series website at DriveOPTIMA.com.

Bryan Johnson’s 2013 Camaro has been untouchable in the Franklin Road Apparel GT class for quite some time now. He doesn’t just get it done on the track, where he posted Top 5 overall finishes on the Detroit Speed Autocross and Falken Tire Road Course Time Trial, but he also shows very well in the Lingenfelter Design & Engineering Challenge. Johnson has gone through the criteria and made sure his car checks all the boxes for the judges and consistently finishes on the podium in his class and in the Top 20 overall.

Chad Langley came closest to catching Bryan Johnson this weekend, thanks in part to a Seventh place overall finish on the Falken Tire Road Course Time Trial. Since Johnson already had an OUSCI invite, runner-up Langley was given the nod.

As more competitors in this series gain valuable experience, it gets harder and harder for newcomers to place well their first time out. Chris Faircloth’s 2007 Z06 is one of the exceptions. Thanks to a string of Top 10 finishes in the timed segments, Faircloth picked up the TCI Engineering First-Timer Award for the top rookie performance of the weekend. The best part of that award is that Faircloth’s entry fee for the weekend was refunded!

New Jersey Motorsports Park Results:

GTV Class (pre-1990, 3,200+ pounds)

Larry Woo, 1968 Camaro

James Shipka, 1967 Camaro

Nicholas Weber, 1967 Corvette

  Recaro GTS Class (post-1989, 3,200+ pounds, two-seaters & AWD vehicles)

Jeremy Swenson, 2011 Corvette

Danny King, 2011 Porsche Turbo S

Mike Gallagher, 2016 Ford Focus RS

  Holley EFI GTL Class (any non-compacts under 3,200 pounds, including forced-induction vehicles)

Feras Qartoumy, 2008 Corvette

Chris Faircloth, 2007 Corvette

Jim Stehlin, 2001 Corvette

  GTC Class (naturally aspirated two-wheel drive compacts, 107-inch wheelbase or less)

Jeff Hahn, 1999 Honda Civic

Erik Vandermey, 2007 Mazda MX-5

Rick Hoback, 1993 Mazda RX-7

  Franklin Road Apparel GT Class (post-1989, 3,200+ pounds, 2wd sedans, 4-seater coupes, trucks, etc.)

Bryan Johnson, 2013 Camaro

Chad Langley, 2017 Camaro

Brian Preston, 2014 Camaro

  Spectre Performance Spirit of the Event Award: Ken Edwards, 1966 Ford Mustang

  Remaining 2017 Optima Search for the Ultimate Street Car Schedule

Auto Club Speedway                                         September 1-3

Road America                                                   October 6-8

Optima Ultimate Street Car Invitational                November 4-5

David Thomas’ 2016 Z06 really epitomizes the spirit of this series. Thomas drove his Vette up from South Carolina to compete, but ended up shredding a serpentine belt on Sunday, which damaged some of his wiring. He had the car taken to a local dealership to have repairs done on Monday so he could head out for Fontana, California, as soon as possible to make the next event, trailer-free!

Nick Weber had previously built an incredible Chevelle that competed in this series, but sold it late last year to help fund his latest project: this C1 Corvette. He ran a C6 at New Jersey Motorsports Park, but brought down the C1 so everyone could see his progress on the project. We can’t wait to see the final result!

Jeremy Swenson continues to stretch out his lead in the Recaro GTS class, winning again in New Jersey. He won’t make the swing out West so he’ll be watching at home to see how much Jake Rozelle is able to close the gap at Fontana.

The post Chevys Dominate at Optima’s Ultimate Street Car New Jersey appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

from Hot Rod Network http://www.hotrod.com/articles/chevys-dominate-optimas-ultimate-street-car-new-jersey/ via IFTTT