tranceformer95

iTrader: (20)

Oh boy, everyone's getting antsy about the 370z. Nissan needs to release the official specs already, and end all of this speculation!

BrianV

LS2 C6 Z51 weighs around 3200LBS with 400HP, it'll definitely be faster than the 370Z so I'm thinking 13.3-13.4 for the Z. The Vette does 12.7-12.9

lowtempo

looks like the 370z's body is similar to the Z4M, with running close to the same power output.... I would say it can run mid-high 12's.
Just like the Z4M or older M coupe.....

trebien

Again, I don't care about drivers. What everybody wants to know, is what potential the car has. This has nothing to do with the driver. The max potential has to do with mechanical limits of the vehicle, and that's about a 13 flat.

After that, it's the driver's responsibility to get the most out of the vehicle. But if a cr@ppy driver gets a 15 flat, it's not the car's fault.

Again, what is the CAR capable of... that is the question. Because you can take 100 drivers and get very different times. But you can take 100 cars, and with a good driver, the times will be very similar, and you can know the potential of the car.

And drag racing bores me...

3hree5ive0ero

iTrader: (95)

Ok, Mr. Ivy League. Apparently, the definition of "potential" escapes you.

Potential means the maximum amount of performance the car can output. By your "definition" of potential, then it should be 12.7 as I have stated previously.


What part of "12.7 @ 110 at best and low-mid 13s on average" did you not understand? Let's use your definition: "The car has the potential to be a 12 second car, but most drivers will only get it to low-mid 13s. Therefore, the car is capable of running 12s." You say that the "mechanical limits of the vehicle" is 13s. If that was the case, then NOBODY, no matter how godly they are in drag racing, will be able to get it into 12s. You make no sense, seeing how you're only contradicting or even misunderstanding yourself.

Also if drag racing bores you, why are you arguing with your obscure definitions of "potential" and "capable?"

Let me just add one more thing. You obviously lack knowledge in the department of drag racing. If you really knew what you were talking about, then you'd know that "mechanical limits of the vehicle" is only theoretical, as DA (density altitude) can drastically change the outcome.

trebien

Actually, if it's running a 12.7, then traps would be higher... probably more like 113 or so... a 13 flat would get you about 109-110.

But anyway, you're saying the 370Z should run with a 2006 Vette, which is a high 12 second car (testing at 12.7 or so on average)? Sure, makes sense. Same weight. But the Vette has 400HP/400T. Riiiiiight.

You're obviously very experienced.

Tell you what. Throw the Z off a cliff, it'll probably go even faster.

Anyway, I don't care what others drive it at. I want to know, with me behind the wheel, what can I expect fom this car - what is it's potential - in other words, what can it provide for me. I don't care about the doofus in the car next to me. I want to know what I can expect, based on the power and weight of the vehicle. The car's potential is based on power, weight, transmission, gearing, design, etc. These are CONSTANTS. You keep introducing variables, such as different drivers, different tracks, etc. Those are changing, and they don't matter to me. I want to know what performance to expect in average conditions, based on how the constants interact with each other. THAT'S the potenetial of the car itself.

Good bye, you bore me.

ajcool2

iTrader: (11)

Well with 3000lb and .2 more liters a 12.7@111 would be my guess. The HR's are doing 13.1's stock. I dont see why high 12's are hard to beleive.

3hree5ive0ero

iTrader: (95)

Why don't you read the rest of my post?

I ran the 13.212 @ 104.75. You're right, the I need 5-6 more mph to pick up another 2 tenths of a second. I also ran 12s with traps under 108. Again, you don't know jacksh1t when it comes to drag racing.

The Vette is a much faster car than "high 12s." It's the people putting it (thus, limiting) it to only weak high 12s.

And yet again, you're proving my point. YOU are limiting the car. The car does have its constants (as you stated above) but because you're the variable, you change the outcome. Most, if not 99.9999% of the population never see the full potential. Full potential is the maximum value that can be achieved. By introducing a variable, like you for an example, you don't achieve the maximum value possible.

Maybe you're better at numbers than word problems. Think of this equation:
Y = 12.7 X

The absolute best X can be 1. Most X's are less than 1. Do you see how the maximum value of Y was never achieved?

You keep assuming yourself to be able to achieve this false maximum value of 13s, when in reality, it is capable of 12s. Maybe in YOUR inexperienced hands, it's only capable of 13s, but for some, it'll be 12s. And thus, that is the "potential," not your measly 13 second run.

Go back to your Ivy League and go learn some basic English and Math, then come back.

I'm done with you.

SnakeBitten

iTrader: (8)

Im no engineer or pro drager but I believe the 370z has a potential 12 run bone stock, as 3five and others have said, just based on what the best runs of the HR Z is. I dont see why that is so hard to believe. I feel like a broken record since this has been said many times already by many....Driver and track/conditions will put a 370z in the 12's stock if it can nail that 60'.

trebien

Because you posted the rest after I hit "quote", and you know it. You can't hide the fact that you changed it - it says "edited".

Anyway, I made a perfect score on the SAT, so I doubt I need to go brush up on math and english.

I understand you probably spend a lot of time hanging out at tracks, and talking to people about racing. Good for you. I lived that life, and I know my ****. I've built engines, and trannys. I've dragged, and road raced, and club raced. And I really don't care what you think, cause you're a poseur. Go big or go home.

There are many people on here excited about the new 370Z that is shaping up to be a performance bargain, and they want to know how fast it'll be. No big deal... let them dream and talk about it. All I did was try to bring some reality to the discussion, based on CONSTANTS, the weight and power. It won't be a mid-13 car, and it won't be a mid-12 car.

I don't know why you've got your p@nties all in a wad, but whatever. We'll revisit this thread over time as more numbers and data points come out.

As for your times, your engine is running out of power at the top end. You should be trapping higher. But it's an older DE, isn't it? Not exactly a high-end hp engine. What's that in your sig, a whole 252 whp, dropping off before 6500 rpm? Point made. And this got you 13.2/105? Nice 60 ft, which explains a good time with a lagging trap. So a 370Z that weighs the same, with much more higher-end HP to carry it across the line, will trap about the same as your car? C'mon.

The VQ37 is a high-revving engine with high-end HP. That will help post a fairly high trap. And the 370Z may have a little higher-HP tuning than the G37.

I'll say it again. I would expect a flat 13 to trap at 109 for this car. Hell, compare it to the new G37 sedan, testing at 13.5/105 and 13.8/104. Imagine a 400+ pound lighter car with the same drivetrain, maybe a few more high-end HP. They are trapping the same as you, with .3 - .6 longer run.

We'll see... take care.

trebien

I agree. I think with average conditions, we're looking around 13-13.1 for most published testing. But (as I've stated before) there is a good chance it will occasionally dip into 12's under ideal conditions.

scotts300

iTrader: (46)

Screw English and Math, I want to know what you did to your car to run a 13.2 @ 105 with your 03' with 252rwhp. I haven't run my 03'Z33 yet, but our power is about the same and I don't expect to run a low 13.

ajcool2

iTrader: (11)

He did the driver mod.

3hree5ive0ero

iTrader: (95)

If you were any bit smart as you claim to be, then you'd know that any "edits" I did was for ADDING, not CHANGING what you quoted. Compare what you quoted to my post. I changed nothing there, but just added. BTW, look at the time stamps. It took you that long to come up with a response that weak? My edited time stamp is still well before your reply. You're fighting a losing battle.

SAT? Because that's a great achievement. Why don't you tell me about your high school rank, your honors classes, your PCAT score, and whatever else while you're at it?

You may have experience being at the tracks, but obviously you didn't really learn the ins and outs to know what truly matters.

Of course the Z34 won't be a mid 13 sec car. The DE Z33s were mid 13 sec car. And of course it won't be a mid 12 sec car and apparently your reading comprehension is on the low side since nobody made that claim.

You claimed that it NEEDED to trap 110+ to be flat 13s. I've seen a 13.000 @ 100.00 at one of the competitions I entered. The correlation between trap speed and E.T. isn't always stable or constant. But, you knew that, it seems. Maybe you worded it differently from what you were trying to convey. However, there is still SOME level of correlation between the two, so you can't really rule anything out.

So you're not agreeing with me then? Make up your mind buddy. I've said it multiple times that the current HR Z33s are low-mid 13 sec cars with occasional low low 13 sec runs (and 12 sec runs, if we're lucky to see that ever happen). I've also said that the Z34 will hit 12.7 with the best of them and will be a very low 13 sec car on average. Thanks for contradicting yourself all over the thread to finally realize I am right (as shown by the quoted above).

I've actually had less power than 252.xx whp when I ran that particular run. I put the dates to show that there was a difference in mods between the 13.2 runs and the dyno date.
I'm strictly against modding the Z just to mod it. There's no point in modding, if you can't make use of the power. I work on getting the best time possible.
At the time of the 13.212 run, I had a popcharger, mrev2, 5/16" spacer, and test pipes. Of course, I couldn't have pulled that run if I wasn't running slicks.

And yes, I did this too. I've visited the track religiously when I first got the car up until last year. Although I was new to the drag racing, I think I picked it up fairly quickly and practice made "perfect." In honesty, I could've done better on that run, but what's done is done.

scotts300

iTrader: (46)

I'll have to try that. I have a few 1320' runs under my belt, but those are with the TT. Never with an N/A, but I'll set a relatively easy goal of 13.5 and hope for the best.

trebien

You asked why I didn't respond to the rest of your post. And I said because you added it later - it wasn't there when I hit "quote", so I didn't read it, so I didn't respond to it. This is a very basic concept you're failing to comprehend, and takes minimal intelligence.


I had enough experience to be hitting 10s... seems like more experience than you have. Don't be a hater 'cause you're slow.

Wrong. People have made that claim in various threads (such as the following gems), and that's why I'm throwing some logic and physics into the discussion:

Wrong again. Show me.

Where did I contradict that? Speaking of bad reading comprehension, from my earlier post in this very thread:


For the final time, I'm discussing the mechanical potential of the car - CONSTANTS. NOT variables like track conditions, DA, drivers and other cr@p that you keep wanting to throw into the discussion.

Seriously, I know you're a hot **** admin on some my-e-pen!s-is-bigger-than-your-e-pen!s forum, but I've got better things to do... like run a company.

Toodles.

3hree5ive0ero

iTrader: (95)

You know what? I'm done with talking to you. Obviously, English isn't your strong suit and you don't really know what the **** you're talking about. And since I'm feeling generous, I'll let the personal **** talking aimed directly at me, and not my posts, go. It is against the rules, but I wouldn't want to ban a 'tard.

CaliTouring

iTrader: (5)

you have to be nuts to think its going to hit the 12s

scotts300

iTrader: (46)

Call me nuts (or make me a monetary bet), but I'd put $$ on someone running a 12s 1320' in a 370Z before June of next year.

Alberto

iTrader: (14)

LOL @ this thread, and the ignorant ****'s saying it wont hit 12's and the guys who obviously dont know $hit about drag racing thinking it will trap over 112mph...