any one test drive back to back 276 hp vs 300hp
08-11-2005, 10:29 AM
#102
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure I believe their motivation was to simply hit the 300hp mark. It would seem to me they could have done that with less changes...? Given their competition (price-wise, not logically) they had to bump power to keep up for sure, but it makes me wonder if more changes are planned down the road that necessitated the rev-up configuration. Oh well, guess we'll just have to wait and see. 
08-11-2005, 11:20 AM
#103
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 2,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nano
the rev-up engine peaks 200rpm later...
the rev-up engine has 200 rpm of usable extra power over the old engine.
(6600-6200 = 400 vs 7000 - 6400 = 600). The fact it can shift later in each gear is not really an advantage(see shorter 350evo final drive). At peak torque(4800rpm for both engines), the old engine is producing ~14hp more than the new one!
The old engine pulls harder from 0 to 6200rpm(it will *put down* power faster from 0-6200rpm). At peak power(6200-6400), the new engine has about same torque as the old engine. Everytime you are under 6200rpm the old engine pulls harder. Having the same gear ratio, the only advantage of the rev-up engine is the extra more flexible powerband, not raw power.
What you are saying doesn't make sense, rev-up doesn't account for "faster on a straight". A faster line and different drivers make more sense. Hell, ~13hp doesn't even account for 1/2 second on an entire lap. With slicks and suspension it makes even less sense. Anyway, scientifically, inertial dyno numbers are more accurate than sunday track story.
Shifting at redline(7000rpm) on rev-up engine(3-4-5th gear) puts you at around 5500rpm. On old engine shifting at redline(6600rpm) put you at 5200rpm. marginal considering the old engine peaks 200rpm later.
yes, the new engine is faster. But do not make it in what it is not. It's just a minor "tweak". 99.9% of mortals couldn't possibly feel the difference... if not for the old engine "felling" as it pulls harder from stoplights.
the rev-up engine has 200 rpm of usable extra power over the old engine.
(6600-6200 = 400 vs 7000 - 6400 = 600). The fact it can shift later in each gear is not really an advantage(see shorter 350evo final drive). At peak torque(4800rpm for both engines), the old engine is producing ~14hp more than the new one!
The old engine pulls harder from 0 to 6200rpm(it will *put down* power faster from 0-6200rpm). At peak power(6200-6400), the new engine has about same torque as the old engine. Everytime you are under 6200rpm the old engine pulls harder. Having the same gear ratio, the only advantage of the rev-up engine is the extra more flexible powerband, not raw power.
What you are saying doesn't make sense, rev-up doesn't account for "faster on a straight". A faster line and different drivers make more sense. Hell, ~13hp doesn't even account for 1/2 second on an entire lap. With slicks and suspension it makes even less sense. Anyway, scientifically, inertial dyno numbers are more accurate than sunday track story.
Shifting at redline(7000rpm) on rev-up engine(3-4-5th gear) puts you at around 5500rpm. On old engine shifting at redline(6600rpm) put you at 5200rpm. marginal considering the old engine peaks 200rpm later.
yes, the new engine is faster. But do not make it in what it is not. It's just a minor "tweak". 99.9% of mortals couldn't possibly feel the difference... if not for the old engine "felling" as it pulls harder from stoplights.
I have driven both 35th and mine 05 Enth back to back, I found no difference in sound or power.
Last edited by spacemn_spiff; 08-11-2005 at 11:22 AM.
08-11-2005, 12:16 PM
#104
Registered User
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I called the place where I got my car dyno, but they did not answer. They can send me a dyno comparison of my stock 05 Track vs a stock 03 or 04 Z. Hopefully they will call me back soon.
08-11-2005, 10:16 PM
#105
Originally Posted by Nano
The old engine pulls harder from 0 to 6200rpm(it will *put down* power faster from 0-6200rpm). At peak power(6200-6400), the new engine has about same torque as the old engine. Everytime you are under 6200rpm the old engine pulls harder. Having the same gear ratio, the only advantage of the rev-up engine is the extra more flexible powerband, not raw power.
Do the maths, at peak power the revup engine has more torque.
Anyways, that whole discussion is pointless since all Z are getting the newer engine eventually.
08-11-2005, 10:50 PM
#106
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the old engine puts down power faster from 0-6200 rpm in ANY gear, in 1st to 6th. More torque means just that, *produces power in less time*. Even when you pop 2nd gear, you go bellow 6200rpm, and the old engine is catching up again.
BTW assuming cars are rated properly,
at 6400 rpm rev-up engine is producing 246 lbft torque
at 6200 rpm old engine is producing 243lbft torque
at peak torque(4800)... old engine is already producing 250hp
where at peak torque(4800rpm)... rev-up is producing 237hp
pretty marginal considering the 200rpm gap. I do think the rev-up engine is faster. But I find the difference so lame all considered, that to me it's more of a marketing gimmick than a real performance leap.
BTW assuming cars are rated properly,
at 6400 rpm rev-up engine is producing 246 lbft torque
at 6200 rpm old engine is producing 243lbft torque
at peak torque(4800)... old engine is already producing 250hp
where at peak torque(4800rpm)... rev-up is producing 237hp
pretty marginal considering the 200rpm gap. I do think the rev-up engine is faster. But I find the difference so lame all considered, that to me it's more of a marketing gimmick than a real performance leap.
Last edited by Nano; 08-11-2005 at 11:04 PM.
08-15-2005, 05:57 PM
#108
Registered User
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, I had the dyno shop email me my basline and an 03 baseline. These were both done on the same dyno and the 03 had 12,000 miles on it. My basline was done in 78 degree weather with humidity at 40%. The 03 Z was done in 52 degree weather with humidity at 38%. Sorry about some of the gaps in my run, I am not sure exactly why it did that. I am going to try and get him to email me the file again to see if mine is corrupt. The smoothing is set to 0 only because if I put it on anything else mine would mess up and have spikes. Enjoy!
http://community.webshots.com/myphot...ecurity=DvphPx
http://community.webshots.com/myphot...ecurity=DvphPx
08-16-2005, 03:53 AM
#111
Originally Posted by thawk408
Sorry, I posted the wrong link. Here you go:
http://community.webshots.com/photo/...23976169DvphPx
http://community.webshots.com/photo/...23976169DvphPx
Thanks !
Weird gap, but we can still imagine what the curve looks like.
As a track driver, the 4500-7000 rpm range is what interrests me. The rev-up engine is the obvious choice here.
08-16-2005, 05:24 AM
#112
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by thawk408
Sorry, I posted the wrong link. Here you go:
http://community.webshots.com/photo/...23976169DvphPx
http://community.webshots.com/photo/...23976169DvphPx
have they beend dynoned in SAME gear? (it doesn't look like it)
what does gear ratio 47.11 and 60.56 mean?
The 03 is not only less powerfull, but even produces less peak torque! (you peak torque at 5000rpm)
weird dynoes
Last edited by Nano; 08-16-2005 at 05:35 AM.
08-16-2005, 07:55 AM
#114
New Member
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 3,775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by arejohn
I liked the 300hp, leather seats, wheels, brakes, etc, but with the extra money I could buy a boat. To each his own.
08-16-2005, 10:54 AM
#115
Registered User
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nano
was the 03 automatic?
have they beend dynoned in SAME gear? (it doesn't look like it)
what does gear ratio 47.11 and 60.56 mean?
The 03 is not only less powerfull, but even produces less peak torque! (you peak torque at 5000rpm)
weird dynoes
have they beend dynoned in SAME gear? (it doesn't look like it)
what does gear ratio 47.11 and 60.56 mean?
The 03 is not only less powerfull, but even produces less peak torque! (you peak torque at 5000rpm)
weird dynoes
Last edited by thawk408; 08-16-2005 at 10:56 AM.
10-12-2005, 03:14 PM
#117
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fletch69z
From the BMI video it looks like there isn't really a noticable difference unless you took the two to the track and raced them, but driver skill could easily make up for the difference between the two, IMO.
10-12-2005, 03:59 PM
#119
Registered User
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by D350Z10
Both are underrated in hp... great buys, Although Ive heard that the 287*hp Z is lighter! So really its all on personal likes or dislikes. Both VERY VERY similar!
