Lingenfelter 427 CID Twin-turbo: "that guy is gone"

[Irie_eyes]

http://www.converter.cc/LPE%20TT%20Burnout.jpg

TT 427 ci
725 hp/650 lb-ft
http://lingenfelter.com/packages/427TT.htm

0-60 mph: 3 sec
1/4: mid-9s

9.2 1/4 run
http://www.converter.cc/LPE_TT_C5_9.2s.mov
Smoking a twin-turbo Viper
http://lingenfelter.com/main/lpe_tt.avi

[**DONOTDELETE**]

first i wish i could buy a z06...and then i wish i could do this conversion to it...thats just sick...can that car actually be driven on the streets...it doesnt look very "streetable"...man it must be hard to get good traction from a hard launch in that car

[thearabian]

thats a hot vette!

look at the hood though, near the windshield, is it me or do the turbos barely fit?

[Dousan_PG]

its probably to release the heat out of the engine bay....japanese drifters/racesr do that often. or have a vented hood.

aaron

[**DONOTDELETE**]

if im not mistaken, the only place that lingenfelter could fit the turbos was in the front wheel wells, in front of the tires. so i guess that engine compartment must be real tight. and yeah, it looks like the hood cant even close all the way.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

A guy at my friends school has a Lingenfelter. I've seen it...his front end hopped up when he floored it for me. I hate him because his family are millionaires.

Originally posted by fingercots:
if im not mistaken, the only place that lingenfelter could fit the turbos was in the front wheel wells, in front of the tires. so i guess that engine compartment must be real tight. and yeah, it looks like the hood cant even close all the way.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]The turbos aren't in front of the tires:
http://lingenfelter.com/packages/8280wb.JPG

It looks like the turbos are mounted just aft of the front suspension.

If you look at the install page, there's nothing that adds height to the engine. They probably just popped the hood for a little extra air into the engine compartment to cool things down a tad.

Asad

[BigBadBuford]

If you checked out the new Motor Trend issue where they have this car racing a jet, you can see the motor looks practically stock from the top. I think it ran a 9.27@150 and 0-60 in 1.97 seconds!

[**DONOTDELETE**]

hey asad, looks like youre right.

anyway, those times from that motortrend article are insane. the fastest car ive ever been in was an old shelby cobra roadster replica that my friends dad built. that thing had a 428 super cobra jet in it that was worked out to 440ci and was producing about 500hp and 550lb-ft. that thing accelerated so fast that it was hard to keep your neck straight, i cant even imagine what it must be like to do 0-60 in less than two seconds.

[c5hardtop]

Not sure about that one, but we have a couple Corvetteforum members that are in 9s N/A (no supercharger/turbo). The cars are very streetable, one is for sale for $59k.

[MaximaOrange]

Originally posted by BigBadBuford:
If you checked out the new Motor Trend issue where they have this car racing a jet, you can see the motor looks practically stock from the top. I think it ran a 9.27@150 and 0-60 in 1.97 seconds!<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]I read that article too. You forgot to mention, it beat the jet in both the 0-60 and 1/4 mile. Not that the jet was slow or anything, but that's an amazing Corvette. It also explains why there's no mass produced stock twin turbo V-8 setup in any car.

[Irie_eyes]

I don't know Lingenfelter sells "as is" 9 sec 1/4 car.

I first seen the car in the DuPont Registry and was blown away by the stats and posted sites I found.

The tires look street legal, I think they are M/T cheater slicks or drag radials.
The launch is by the book...no traction loss at launch, rear squat front lift, front wheels skimming the top.
Look like it runs drag suspension, or adjustable but setup for the 1/4.
The specs don't show a different rear gear or if it's the stock IRS (which would just makes it a wickeder drag car).
It's does run an automatic, 4-speed I think.
It's pretty amazing how they tuned the torque converter to not stall too high and unleash traction robbing power to the rear and not stall too low to have turbo lag/bog.
And it must be legal.
I don't know if it has a roll cage, cause NHRA rules dictate certain ETs and trap speeds require certain safety equipment.

It would be nice to see how it performs on a race track.
This "might" be the drag racing representation of the 427TT, but I think he sells it as is. ...+$50,000 for the 427 TT setup.

I just see this as Lingenfelter potential, not really Corvette potiential, although it the best engine/car combination and hardest to pull off.

Imagine what this motor could do in a MT900...

[Wobble]

I read that article too. You forgot to mention, it beat the jet in both the 0-60 and 1/4 mile. Not that the jet was slow or anything, but that's an amazing Corvette

it only won because the jet couldent use the afterburner (almost 2x the thrust) if it had it would have both won and destroyed the vette and killed its driver.

[The_Chosen_One]

1.97 seconds to 60 mph is insane! Can that be driven on the street legally? I wonder if there are any other faster street legal cars out there

[Slack00]

Originally posted by Wobble:


it only won because the jet couldent use the afterburner (almost 2x the thrust) if it had it would have both won and destroyed the vette and killed its driver.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]I don't think jets typically launch with their afterburners on....

Originally posted by Slack00:
I don't think jets typically launch with their afterburners on....<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]I think they do if they're launching from an aircraft carrier.

Asad

[MaximaOrange]

Originally posted by asad137:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]Originally posted by Slack00:
I don't think jets typically launch with their afterburners on....<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]I think they do if they're launching from an aircraft carrier.

Asad</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]Are you sure they use afterburners? I always thought they were catapulted.

[6speeder]

Originally posted by MaximaOrange:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]Originally posted by asad137:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]Originally posted by Slack00:
I don't think jets typically launch with their afterburners on....<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]I think they do if they're launching from an aircraft carrier.

Asad</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]Are you sure they use afterburners? I always thought they were catapulted.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]They are definitely catapulted. But the engine thrust must be pretty high in addition if not on afterburner because if you notice, part of the carrier's runway raises up behind the engines. The question is whether that's to give the enignes something to push off of or to prevent damage to people or planes behind the engines or both.

[ 05-16-2002, 03:11 PM: Message edited by: zackcruz ]

[6speeder]

OK. I just did some research and fighters DO use their afterburners for taking off from carriers, short runways and high powered maneuvers in dogfights.

[Nismo]

Part of the carrier's runway raises up behind the engines. The question is whether that's to give the enignes something to push off of or to prevent damage to people or planes behind the engines or both.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]It's only there to protect the people on the flight deck; it doesn't provide any thrust. All Navy aircraft are catapulted, and all carrier planes use maximum thrust during takeoff. Of the Navy's two afterburner-equipped jet planes, the F14 always uses full afterburner (it's a very heavy plane), while the F18 only needs it when fully loaded.

[6speeder]

Originally posted by Nismo:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]Part of the carrier's runway raises up behind the engines. The question is whether that's to give the enignes something to push off of or to prevent damage to people or planes behind the engines or both.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]It's only there to protect the people on the flight deck; it doesn't provide any thrust. All Navy aircraft are catapulted, and all carrier planes use maximum thrust during takeoff. Of the Navy's two afterburner-equipped jet planes, the F14 always uses full afterburner (it's a very heavy plane), while the F18 only needs it when fully loaded.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]Thanks for clearing that up.

[Slack00]

Originally posted by zackcruz:
Thanks for clearing that up.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial[/img]Ditto.

[FanaticZ]

well i just watched it on speedvision and the jet lauched with the afterburners on, i couldn't tell if anything was behind the plane. its 0-60 was around 3.4seconds, probably had a lot to do with the weight of the jet even with all that power.
kinda funny when they took the vette driver up for a spin and wathcing him alomst puke/black out on a 7g turn.