Notices
Australia/New Zealand Queensland, South Australia, Victoria, New South Wales, etc.

I put it down the Drag strip

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 22, 2004 | 11:58 AM
  #41  
frosty's Avatar
frosty
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
From: NEWCASTLE - NSW - AUS
Default

APSILON:

This is the answer:
(apologies to Harry)
Attached Thumbnails I put it down the Drag strip-350z_uh_lg.jpg  
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2004 | 04:33 PM
  #42  
mchapman's Avatar
mchapman
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 1
Default

Frosty, that is slower than a TT Zed.


Aps, Do you know what TT setup he had? Was it the Greddy Kit?
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2004 | 05:14 PM
  #43  
mchapman's Avatar
mchapman
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 1
Default

13.4@108.1 Is what road and track got out of the Greddy Zed.
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2004 | 06:33 PM
  #44  
apsilon's Avatar
apsilon
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
From: Sydney Australia
Default

Not sure about one of them and the other is a custom setup. Both were first time at the drags which explains a little of it and at least one had a slipping clutch but I think the real culprit is weight. The Zed is a bit of a porker.

Frosty I've had an aftermarket SC before and much prefer turbos. For the money though and for those who just want a bit of extra oomph I think they'd be worth looking at. If I'm going to go FI I want at least an extra ~100rwkw.
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2004 | 07:25 PM
  #45  
mchapman's Avatar
mchapman
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 1
Default

I think turbos are far more tunable than a supercharger and they would put less stress on the engine at low rpm when your not thrashing it.

I dont really care too much about the quater mile times, if I get an extra 100kw I would be happy as well.
Reply
Old Mar 23, 2004 | 11:24 PM
  #46  
4WSboy's Avatar
4WSboy
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
From: Sydney Australia
Default

Originally posted by frosty
APSILON:

This is the answer:
(apologies to Harry)
I think I'll get one of them there gizmo's. Where dya get em Frozty?

Steve
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2004 | 08:47 PM
  #47  
frosty's Avatar
frosty
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
From: NEWCASTLE - NSW - AUS
Default

I can't compute it fully, but if you go back to page one of this thread, there was a degree of surprise at the figures I posted for a not too hot STI.

The Motortrend thread started relating to the test between the S2200, RX8 and the Z shows figures in acceleration times of 0 - 151kph @ 13 secs for the Z.

Additionally, 4WSBOY quotes 14.5 @ 155.6 for the 400m.

Some techno-mathmatician can deduce from this some interesting conclusions - what do you say? Somebody calculate how far Motortrend travelled in 13 secs.

FARTZKIE No Hutch

Last edited by frosty; Mar 24, 2004 at 08:49 PM.
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2004 | 11:21 PM
  #48  
DavidM's Avatar
DavidM
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
From: Oz
Default

0 - 151kph @ 13 secs for the Z.

That is 0-161kph in 13sec .... 100mph is just over 160kph.

Somebody calculate how far Motortrend travelled in 13 secs.

About 365m. The Zed in Motor Trend article covered 400m in 13.77sec. So all I had to work out what distance it covered in the last .77sec. At speed of somewhere between 155 abd 162kph (ie. 162kph being the trap speed), the car would cover about 35m in that interval.
Reply
Old Mar 26, 2004 | 01:55 AM
  #49  
4WSboy's Avatar
4WSboy
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
From: Sydney Australia
Default

Originally posted by DavidM
0 - 151kph @ 13 secs for the Z.

That is 0-161kph in 13sec .... 100mph is just over 160kph.

Somebody calculate how far Motortrend travelled in 13 secs.

About 365m. The Zed in Motor Trend article covered 400m in 13.77sec. So all I had to work out what distance it covered in the last .77sec. At speed of somewhere between 155 abd 162kph (ie. 162kph being the trap speed), the car would cover about 35m in that interval.
What is that original charger in the pic? Frozty.
Reply
Old Mar 26, 2004 | 02:40 AM
  #50  
frosty's Avatar
frosty
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
From: NEWCASTLE - NSW - AUS
Default

$WSBOY -

Go to

www.hopupracing.com/enpe.html

But of course there's lots of alternatives as to vendors - this one seems to have a number of alternatives on the one site.

I like it because it tucks away without bonnet mods, and isn't going to turn my car into a fire-breathing monster with the resultant loss of reliability. I'm past spending squillions on upgrading drivetrain - I just want a hike of say 50kw - that'll surprise all the boy racers and still be trouble frree.

that's about the power I would have liked the Z to have had stock.

Check out the Vortech unit also.

And Paxton.

FROGGLEZ
Reply
Old Mar 28, 2004 | 03:20 AM
  #51  
4WSboy's Avatar
4WSboy
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
From: Sydney Australia
Default

Originally posted by mchapman
I think turbos are far more tunable than a supercharger and they would put less stress on the engine at low rpm when your not thrashing it.

I dont really care too much about the quater mile times, if I get an extra 100kw I would be happy as well.
\\

Mchap, Re your above comment, where would you enjoy the extra 100kw?
Reply
Old Mar 28, 2004 | 04:24 PM
  #52  
mchapman's Avatar
mchapman
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 1
Default

That seems like a strange question,

But the answer is I would enjoy the extra 100kw everywhere. Even when im not driving.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Colombo
Forced Induction
35
Nov 9, 2020 10:27 AM
EnjukuRacing
Engine
0
Sep 30, 2015 06:55 AM




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:58 AM.