Notices
2003-2009 Nissan 350Z

CarTest 2000 Results

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-27-2002, 07:24 PM
  #1  
SKiDaZZLe
Charter Member #34
Thread Starter
 
SKiDaZZLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: -
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default CarTest 2000 Results

well all...

i was just playing with a virtual Z in CarTest using most of the info from the C&D article...

(www.cartest2000.com)
What i changed: weight: 3188 lbs. per Jay.

I left every other measurement like C&D found (HP, torque, top speed/gear, gear ratios, Cd, height, width, track, etc).

This is what CarTest spit out:

Best 0-60: 5.42 with Clutch Dump at 1800RPM
Best 1/4mi: 14.10" @ 101.84 MPH
Top Speed: 165 MPH (gear limited)
SkidPad: .907 G's

What does this show? Well, it shows that the weight should HAVE been stated as 3188 lbs. (Which is what it is, right?)

And... the only way these numbers will be lower is if the car they tested did not have the final HP/torque. (IE, their car was 287/274... hopefully ours is higher...)

Michael

attached is data sheet:
Attached Thumbnails CarTest 2000 Results-350-data.jpg  
Old 06-27-2002, 07:25 PM
  #2  
SKiDaZZLe
Charter Member #34
Thread Starter
 
SKiDaZZLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: -
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

here is the results:
Attached Thumbnails CarTest 2000 Results-350-test.jpg  
Old 06-27-2002, 09:21 PM
  #3  
kroams
Registered User
 
kroams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Wow, good job. Thats pretty neat. If you got those numbers at 3188 lbs I don't see how it could weigh 3300+
Old 06-27-2002, 09:30 PM
  #4  
jeffw
New Member
 
jeffw's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I don't know if the Java version of CarTest2000 is the exact same algorithm as the MSDOS version but...

I noticed that CT2k for DOS defaults to a 0.5sec shift for manual transmissions. I imagine if you are power shifting you could shave that down a bit. Would 0.25sec be too aggressive of a shift? This might signify that C&D were doing easy shifts in their tests...

Also, the torque curve is just an approximation based off of two points (torque at 4800rpm and torque at 6400rpm). The real torque curve is going to be different. I know this is obvious to most of y'all but figured it was worth pointing out to those that start playing with the program.

It's a fun program to play around with. You can get the DOS version for free (really it's shareware) on their site. The Java version is prettier but I'm not sure what you get over the DOS version as far as functionality goes.

--
Jeff
Old 06-27-2002, 10:23 PM
  #5  
Shalashaska
Registered User
 
Shalashaska's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Drivetrain loss?

Does it compute a different drivertrain loss for the carbon fiber driveshaft or does it not consider that. If it does not then the 3322 weight could be right for the preproduction with extra perceived power coming from the driveshaft getting more power to the wheels. Considering this, if the actual weight is 3188 then we will see better figures as suggested by JmanZ, SeedyRom and others.

-Mike
Old 06-27-2002, 10:27 PM
  #6  
jeffw
New Member
 
jeffw's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Drivetrain loss?

Originally posted by Shalashaska
Does it compute a different drivertrain loss for the carbon fiber driveshaft or does it not consider that. If it does not then the 3322 weight could be right for the preproduction with extra perceived power coming from the driveshaft getting more power to the wheels. Considering this, if the actual weight is 3188 then we will see better figures as suggested by JmanZ, SeedyRom and others.

-Mike
You can set the drivetrain loss to be whatever you want (buried in menus). At most, I think the carbon fiber would knock off a percentage point of loss. Probably wouldn't affect the results much.
--
Jeff
Old 06-27-2002, 10:34 PM
  #7  
droideka
Registered User
 
droideka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: frisco, tx
Posts: 1,362
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Smile

So, we do have to shift into 4th to finish the 1320, huh? That could very well explain the high trap, bad ET, couldn't it?
Old 06-27-2002, 11:36 PM
  #8  
SKiDaZZLe
Charter Member #34
Thread Starter
 
SKiDaZZLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: -
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Running some more tests, and changing some parameters made some new findings...

Changes:
Manual shift time from .5 to .4 sec (read somewhere this is really acheivable)
Mechanical Losses from Axles and shafts from 5% to 4% (for carbon fiber... just a quess)

Recalc best launch to be clutch dump @1700 RPM...

0-60: 5.25s
1/4mi: 13.92 @ 103.10

I hope some of the other mags can get down to about this level (if not better )

michael
Old 06-27-2002, 11:50 PM
  #9  
SKiDaZZLe
Charter Member #34
Thread Starter
 
SKiDaZZLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: -
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

here is a comparison to "competition"
Attached Thumbnails CarTest 2000 Results-compare.jpg  
Old 06-27-2002, 11:55 PM
  #10  
droideka
Registered User
 
droideka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: frisco, tx
Posts: 1,362
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Thumbs up



Third gear is going to KILL in traffic! HOORAY for TORQUE!

Old 06-28-2002, 07:39 AM
  #11  
Flyingscot
Registered User
 
Flyingscot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Wow! Finally, I get some torque. All I've had for the last 10 years is "talk".
Old 06-28-2002, 08:07 AM
  #12  
BrianZ
Registered User
 
BrianZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

WOW!

Those are some great looking numbers to me. This thing's gonna be a blast, and a breeze, to drive!
Old 06-28-2002, 08:29 AM
  #13  
blackSunshine
Charter Member #84
 
blackSunshine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

166 *drool*

not like I'd go that fast on a highway, officer. And I'm not suicidal yet either.

I think this car is going to get me to sears point very soon after I break it in.
Old 06-28-2002, 08:33 AM
  #14  
dvlad
Registered User
 
dvlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: James Brown
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

SkiDaZZle, where did you find this program? Is it downloadable somewhere?

Thanks

Dan
Old 06-28-2002, 08:39 AM
  #15  
max2000jp
Registered User
 
max2000jp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally posted by SKiDaZZLe
here is a comparison to "competition"
That program isnt really accurate if you look at it.....It says the M coupe runs 13.8, when in reality it runs 13.1. Just a quick observation
Old 06-28-2002, 08:44 AM
  #16  
dvlad
Registered User
 
dvlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: James Brown
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally posted by VQracer
you can download it from the link in his original thread.
ahahahaha...thanks VQ. I'm such an idoit. Just like a newbie sometimes.
Old 06-28-2002, 04:59 PM
  #17  
BigBadBuford
Registered User
 
BigBadBuford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hummelstown, PA
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

To make people feel even better, CarTest does have conservative 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Any way you set up the launch in that program it still sucks and will either roast the tires or the clutch for the first 50 feet or so. I'm sure when you get it to the track people will be out there pulling 13.7's or even quicker.
Old 06-29-2002, 04:23 PM
  #18  
rai
Registered User
 
rai's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: maryland
Posts: 2,572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default skidazzle

I like those numbers. You hit the nail on the head.

Could you simulate the Z if I modded it up a little say to 316 HP (10% increase)?

Also is temprature standardized? What temp? If it can be adjusted what kind of HP could we get at on a winter day??

Last edited by rai; 06-29-2002 at 04:39 PM.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
lapham3
Maintenance & Repair
8
10-07-2022 03:15 PM
Lt_Ballzacki
Brakes & Suspension
39
08-06-2021 06:19 AM
MM'08_350Z
VQ35HR
225
04-22-2021 09:42 PM
Gruppe-S
Body Interior
13
05-16-2016 10:42 PM
slimjim888
Mid-Atlantic Marketplace
2
09-09-2015 06:07 AM



Quick Reply: CarTest 2000 Results



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:28 PM.