Jump to content

Continental at the track


Recommended Posts

I wonder how many old farts with Continentals will run them at the drag strip? I only got in one run before a thunderstorm shut us all down. I launched it really easy with the plan of getting more aggressive with it in later runs. Unfortunately the rain spoiled my plan. I ran a 13.56 which is decent for being 100% stock and really humid air. I think with a brake boost launch and better air, it would run 13.3 stock. I am still waiting on Livernois to develop a tune for it.

 

Bullet%20at%20Brainerd_zps2sbznxdz.jpg

bullet%20at%20Brainerd3_zpsd8rcmtjp.jpg

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how many old farts with Continentals will run them at the drag strip? I only got in one run before a thunderstorm shut us all down. I launched it really easy with the plan of getting more aggressive with it in later runs. Unfortunately the rain spoiled my plan. I ran a 13.56 which is decent for being 100% stock and really humid air. I think with a brake boost launch and better air, it would run 13.3 stock. I am still waiting on Livernois to develop a tune for it.

Did you race the red MKZ pictured in the opposing lane? If so....who won? Be honest!

Bullet%20at%20Brainerd_zps2sbznxdz.jpg

bullet%20at%20Brainerd3_zpsd8rcmtjp.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how many old farts with Continentals will run them at the drag strip? I only got in one run before a thunderstorm shut us all down. I launched it really easy with the plan of getting more aggressive with it in later runs. Unfortunately the rain spoiled my plan. I ran a 13.56 which is decent for being 100% stock and really humid air. I think with a brake boost launch and better air, it would run 13.3 stock. I am still waiting on Livernois to develop a tune for it.

 

How does that compare to your stock MKS? I realize it won't be apples to apples since you didn't run it hard, just roughly how does it compare?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never ran my MKS at the track when it was stock. However, my stock MKS was around 13.7 - 13.8 based on an Aeroforce gauge that I had in the car. The Conti is slightly quicker. While the Continental has more horsepower and torque, they have built a lot more torque management into the Continental to make the shifts smooth and protect the transmission. Power is cut substantially at the shift points. The MKS had plenty of torque management, too, but not as drastic as the Conti.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never ran my MKS at the track when it was stock. However, my stock MKS was around 13.7 - 13.8 based on an Aeroforce gauge that I had in the car. The Conti is slightly quicker. While the Continental has more horsepower and torque, they have built a lot more torque management into the Continental to make the shifts smooth and protect the transmission. Power is cut substantially at the shift points. The MKS had plenty of torque management, too, but not as drastic as the Conti.

 

Imagine what the Conti will do when the 9 speed hits and they don't have to protect the transmission as much.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Tuned SHO with some bolt ons will do 12.9 in the 1/4 mile. Stock its about 13.7 with the performance package.

 

Did some poking around...a Continental actually weighs roughly the same or more then the bigger MKS...WTF The Conti is 4 inches shorter and I'm assuming not as tall as the MKS either.

Edited by silvrsvt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Tuned SHO with some bolt ons will do 12.9 in the 1/4 mile. Stock its about 13.7 with the performance package.

 

Did some poking around...a Continental actually weighs roughly the same or more then the bigger MKS...WTF The Conti is 4 inches shorter and I'm assuming not as tall as the MKS either.

 

 

Are you comparing AWD to AWD (of FWD to FWD)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if the two 30 way seats in the Conti weighed 100 lbs more than the front seats in the MKS. Not sure how the Nano compares to the ecoboost in weight.

 

I would expect the nano to weigh a bit more since it is CGI instead of Al. CGI is lighter than gray iron, but heavier than Al I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

...a Continental actually weighs roughly the same or more than the bigger MKS...

117.9 - 201.4 - 2017 Continental

112.9 - 205.6 - MKS

......or.......

205.6 - 112.9 - MKS

201.4 - 117.9 - 2017 Continental

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see so many Tesla's where I live. I am the poor guy surrounded by rich folk. In my opinion, they are the play toys for the rich (at least at this point). There is a guy down the street that has two, the two seater and the SUV one. He also has a Lexus GX , LS430 and a 911. Electric cars are stupid fast but I have to wonder, if you floor it a lot does that kill your battery life (I would think so).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of the guys at the track were joking that if the Telsa owner ran a few more times I would be able to beat him.

 

Sort of like the F-16 and F-18 pilots arguing about which fighter jet was better.

 

The F-16 pilot said his plane could do everything the F-18 could.

 

The F-18 pilot says "oh really? Let's fly 50 miles offshore at 3000 feet and turn off one engine......"

 

 

 

(for you non-airplane folks, the F-18 has two engines, the F-16 only one)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Highly unlikely the 2018s will get the 9 speed. The version GM is currently using would not stand up to the torque of the V6 turbos. They may be working on a more robust version but we haven't seen it yet. I still think the first Ford products to get the 9 speed will be the Fusion and MKZ 4 cylinder models. Of course, I could be completely wrong.

 

The 9 speed would likely improve EPA mileage ratings but I am skepical that it would do much for performance in vehicles with a flat torque curve. The first 4 ratios are very similar to the 6 speed and those 4 ratios will take a vehicle to about 100 mph at WOT. It may shift quicker than the 6F55 but I am sure it will still be torque managed to make it creamy smooth.

Edited by brucelinc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...