M&H Drag Radial Results

rottenronnie

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Messages
4,345
Reaction score
2,486
Location
Calgary, Alberta
This is a repost from the Racing Forum, but maybe others can post their thoughts specifically on the M&H setup...

I wish the M&Hs (390-40-17) were even taller.
With my setup, the truck doesn't like the lower tires dropping the rear ratio from 4.56 to 4.91s. It feels a bit like a mountain bike stuck in low range and mile-per-hours harder with the factory 22s.
Good 1.8 60' (1200 r.p.m. launch) with the M&Hs though, and a decent 12 second E.T. on a 5200 foot track.
The auto needs frequent band adjustments.

How do Caltracs work with the factory radials, for members using those?
 
Last edited:
My first time at the track I tried to use the stock tires and I think I ran a 16.00 1/4 mile with a horrible 60' like 3.2. Haven't ever even thought of trying stock tires after that. I do have 410s in it so it helps me using the M&H DR's.
 
The Caltracs work with weight transfer. The more transfer the better the Caltracs work. All we can do to improve the weight transfer other than the M&H's is the front and rear QA1's from Justin.
 
Change your gear ratio..... .410s w/ the 390's feels perfect...with 150 shot puts your right at 5600 in 4th through the traps. Plus you might get better MPG on the highway too
 
Yellow venom said:
Hey Rottenronnie did you get out to a track? If so what did you run?

Nothing too earth shattering yet. At a 5220 foot D.A. it ran a 12.87 (1.8 second 60 foot with a 1200 R.P.M. launch) at 104.85 into a 18 M.P.H. head/crosswind but the tranny wouldn't shift into high gear and the engine was bouncing off the rev limiter at around the 1100 foot mark. Right after that, it ran a 15.9 @ 83 M.P.H. and as you can tell from the stock hemi truck times, something wasn't quite right!! I had to let off a few times and then finally just coast...
The tranny goes in for repair again tomorrow. He thinks it might be a bad governor because the fluid is nice and clear. I had just tightened the bands 2 weeks ago so maybe some junk got into it; we will see here shortly.
I really need to get it to a good track (Edmonton or the Hat is 4 M.P.H. and 4 tenths quicker than we are here). But I'll let you know once I get some everything-is-working-like-it-should times. Even better- a chance to get it to a sea level track (that is tough this time of year during construction).

There should be a fairly low 12 in there without too much problem.

But for now...that's racing I guess!!!:burnout:

Ron
 
Last edited:
Rice Eater said:
Change your gear ratio..... .410s w/ the 390's feels perfect...with 150 shot puts your right at 5600 in 4th through the traps. Plus you might get better MPG on the highway too

Thanks for the tip about the 4.10s, they should put things back on track from the 4.91s it thinks it has now.

I DON'T LIKE the "low range" the M&Hs put the truck in. The Strikers and cam choice produced a wide, relatively flat torque curve varying only 20 ft. lbs. from 3800 to 5400; that part worked out and it seems to be breathing well even without headers...but the truck doesn't want nor need the "low gear".

I am cursed right now as the stock wheels and tires are way over matched and the drag radials make it a screamer (and not in a good way).
The mileage on the highway is good and hit just over 20 (a bit bigger gallon here in Canada though), with a pen and paper calculation. Both the highway and city mileage figures rose 20% over last year, before I did the engine work over the winter.

If the truck was a track-only vehicle, I might consider a gear swap but I don't want it for the track only or I would have bought a Lightning.:D

I may have to look at a gear swap in the future though and/or pray for someone to make taller drag tires.

Ron
 
Last edited:
moparracing said:
for me, caltracs stopped the wheel hop & gave me more straight line control....... not alot of help in the traction department, though. :(

Thanks, that is what I needed to know...
 
rottenronnie said:
Thanks for the tip about the 4.10s, they should put things back on track from the 4.91s it thinks it has now.

I DON'T LIKE the "low range" the M&Hs put the truck in. The Strikers and cam choice produced a wide, relatively flat torque curve varying only 20 ft. lbs. from 3800 to 5400, so that part worked out well; but the truck doesn't want nor need the "low gear".

I am cursed right now as the stock wheels and tires are way over matched and the drag radials make it a screamer (and not in a good way).

I may have to look at a gear swap or pray for taller drag tires.

Ron
i gotta agree with ya....... i was really disappointed in just a 3/10's difference in my drag radails over the stockers..... and yeah, it was screamin' @ the 1/4 too.....:(
 
moparracing said:
i gotta agree with ya....... i was really disappointed in just a 3/10's difference in my drag radails over the stockers..... and yeah, it was screamin' @ the 1/4 too.....:(

I am hoping to get in more track time once the tranny is sorted out. What a bummer that was!!
I had the tranny modded to shift into high at redline and Chris Jensen figured the ABS sensors may have been confused as the rears are now turning quite a bit faster than the fronts and that could be keeping the tranny from shifting like it should! Well at least I know it runs high 12s under "less than ideal conditions".

If you hear anything about a taller tire setup, let me know and I will do the same.

Thanks!

Ron
 
Last edited:
Our local track is 1/8 th mile and my truck likes the lower gearing, going thru the lights in the high part of third gear.
 
FATJACK said:
Our local track is 1/8 th mile and my truck likes the lower gearing, going thru the lights in the high part of third gear.


THAT would work; especially for you with a manual transmission.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Support Us

Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Back
Top