GTECH PRO

[project89]

do u guys trust these things,are they accurate,one of my friends came over and brought his,and its saying the rs went 13.21@115 mph in the 1/4 with 342 hp


do i get to do a happy dance now, or are these things ****** and inacurate

[Tsar]

dsm peeps back in the day said they were crap, i dunno. never had one.

[Mike]

if its acurate.....you sir need traction.......

[project89]

i most certainly do need traction car is all over the place.but not getting traction is kinda saving my rear end from blowing up,the car still has the 10 bolt in it.

[misterjuice]

had one back in the day..............it said my stock buick skylark had 250 hp and went the 1/4 mile in 14.2 sec @98 mph............................. so no....from my experience....it's poo

[project89]

lol before the turbo the thing went 14.8 and had like 225 hp
edit
and im suposed to get 100 hp per 7psi of boost and i made that test run at 11 psi

[bad64chevelle]

I actually found it pretty accurate. My buddys mustang went 14.1 on the Gtech and 14.2 at the track, both were at 92 MPH.

[BonzoHansen]

I actually found it pretty accurate. My buddys mustang went 14.1 on the Gtech and 14.2 at the track, both were at 92 MPH.

I've heard that too. Or at least close enough & consistent. Meaning if it is off by 5%, it is always off by 5%. that consistency would make it a useful tuning tool.

[Tru2Chevy]

Yea, most of the people I've heard talk about the Pro said that it was off a bit, but usually consistent.

- Justin

[12secondv6]

Eh.... get track times... that is the proof.

And, your 10 bolt should be fine.... you are not at silly power levels yet

[bad64chevelle]

oh and as for the horsepower aspect those things are WAYYYY off. When I used it on the camaro when it was 100% stock it told me i was runnins 13.85 (a reasonable assumption) but i when i was doing the Horsepower part one run it told me i was making 550 Horsepower and another run it told me I was making 97HP

[Tsar]

oh and as for the horsepower aspect those things are WAYYYY off. When I used it on the camaro when it was 100% stock it told me i was runnins 13.85 (a reasonable assumption) but i when i was doing the Horsepower part one run it told me i was making 550 Horsepower and another run it told me I was making 97HP
wow thats way inaccurate for horsies :rofl:

[bad64chevelle]

yeah it was really bad in that aspect, but the others were pretty accurate. I didnt believe that it was correct saying my buddys stang was going 14.1 at 92 then we hit the track and it went 14.2 at 92 and i was really shocked.

[project89]

so its a safe quess that the car wopuld run very low 13's in its current state?
:happy dance: :woot:
cant wait to get this thing upto 21 psi and run the nitrous :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

[bad64chevelle]

good luck with that...sure hope it all holds up...

[project89]

well right now im doing the fuel system upgrade thing.injectors,255 lph walboro pump.ive been trying all day to call up the guys at ttp so i can set up a time to take the car up there and get it on the dyno,and tunned,but its either always busy,or i get the answering machine,that ya cant leave a msg on cause its full lmao

[bad64chevelle]

for some reason that doesnt surprise me...

[Savage_Messiah]

yeah it was really bad in that aspect, but the others were pretty accurate. I didnt believe that it was correct saying my buddys stang was going 14.1 at 92 then we hit the track and it went 14.2 at 92 and i was really shocked.

14.2.... at 92?! what was his 60'????

[bad64chevelle]

Ill have to ask him this was about 3 years ago i dont remember. why?

[project89]

that is a low mph for a low 14.sec run

[bad64chevelle]

its a mustang...all the fun is in the first two gears then they hang their tongues out.

[project89]

lmao

[bad64chevelle]

you laugh cause its the truth. the car was definitely good for 13.8ish he was having a problem with second gear not letting him into it at WOT, and he was spinning alot.

[project89]

god dam 21# injectors and im still lean @ idle im thinking i may just have to buy a set of 30#'ers or larger

[Savage_Messiah]

Ill have to ask him this was about 3 years ago i dont remember. why?
Because I run 14.9's at 91 MPH on 2.1 - 2.0 60 foots... that MPH seems way low for a 13 sec run, or even a low 14 sec run, to me...

[bad64chevelle]

Because I run 14.9's at 91 MPH on 2.1 - 2.0 60 foots... that MPH seems way low for a 13 sec run, or even a low 14 sec run, to me...
I am like 99% sure he went 92 but when I see him I will double check. I may be wrong...

*EDIT* i apologize i was thinking the MPH of the wrong car, he went 14.2 @ 97, i just wen back and watched the video...

[Savage_Messiah]

ohhhhkay that sounds better :lol:

[98tadriver]

I actually found it pretty accurate. My buddys mustang went 14.1 on the Gtech and 14.2 at the track, both were at 92 MPH.

I had the original gtech, and it was within .1 of a second of the track times. however the trap speed was generally 5-8 mph generous

track- 12.78 @ 111mph
gtech- 12.78 @ 119mph

[project89]

I had the original gtech, and it was within .1 of a second of the track times. however the trap speed was generally 5-8 mph generous

track- 12.78 @ 111mph
gtech- 12.78 @ 119mph
scweet so im looking at 13.21@107-113 and thats still untuned and at low boost levels