Has anyone really pulled 300rwhp yet on a N/A VQ?
#101
Vendor - Former Vendor
iTrader: (66)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,465
Likes: 1
From: Santa Ana CA 92701
Originally Posted by PoWeRtRiP
who even cares anymore. its only 300whp. its not like thats really that much. id rather see an n/a z that breaks 12.5 in the 1/4, than 300whp on a "dynojet".
can we use a more fair basis for our assumptions here?
can we use a more fair basis for our assumptions here?
Cheers,
Gary
Gruppe-S
#102
Originally Posted by Gruppe-S
Yup! You have to remember dynos can vary over 25whp from dyno to dyno. Generally speaking the dynapacks tend to read the highest. The true indication of horsepower is actually found in the 1/4 mile trap speed for any given car. Dyno horsepower is only relative to that particular dyno itself. This is why we have 400whp STI's (on our dyno) trapping the same trap speeds as 500whp STI's on other dynos.
Cheers,
Gary
Gruppe-S
Cheers,
Gary
Gruppe-S
I haven't re-reflashed since installing the MD Iso-Thermal & Copper, which may get me more yet (it made enough difference to throw an IAT sensor reading right after install, so it's quite cleary doing it's job).
Interesting note: The 3.917's made no appreciable difference on the dyno, but on the street it gives me more than all the other mod's combined IMO. How else could I possibly hang side-by-side an '04 Zo6 from a dig up to 150 (convertible, & auto, but still . . .), TWICE, on a mere 242whp? Or run off and leave a (1st year) GTO, outrun an M3, hang w/ a 2000 'stang w/ 100-shot of Nos, outrun a man. WS6 (2 auto's too), Camaro SS, etc. etc. (Let the trolling & flaming begin . . . )
The answer lies in all the above discussion, no doubt.
#103
PS- We SHOULD be taking about peak vs. steady curves as well, for what a motor does for just a second is obviously not as important as what it does from off-idle all the way to redline. It's like the new revup motors: less PEAK torque, but more torque overall. Numbers can be so deceiving.
My "peak" hp may only be 242, but notice how long it remains in effect:
https://my350z.com/forum/attachment....1&d=1139600952
My "peak" hp may only be 242, but notice how long it remains in effect:
https://my350z.com/forum/attachment....1&d=1139600952
#105
Originally Posted by Z_xtc
PS- We SHOULD be taking about peak vs. steady curves as well, for what a motor does for just a second is obviously not as important as what it does from off-idle all the way to redline. It's like the new revup motors: less PEAK torque, but more torque overall. Numbers can be so deceiving.
My "peak" hp may only be 242, but notice how long it remains in effect:
https://my350z.com/forum/attachment....1&d=1139600952
My "peak" hp may only be 242, but notice how long it remains in effect:
https://my350z.com/forum/attachment....1&d=1139600952
#106
Originally Posted by Z_xtc
And why I've seen a lot of people posting in the 240's bone stock baseline (maybe it wasn't SAE corrected) yet with all my mod's I only pulled a 242 on this particular dyno (SAE corrected). The owner said that other Z's baselines were in the 220's (not 240's) that he'd done on that dyno, and that mine was the strongest n/a he'd done so far. So, talking about your difference in dyno's . . .
I haven't re-reflashed since installing the MD Iso-Thermal & Copper, which may get me more yet (it made enough difference to throw an IAT sensor reading right after install, so it's quite cleary doing it's job).
Interesting note: The 3.917's made no appreciable difference on the dyno, but on the street it gives me more than all the other mod's combined IMO. How else could I possibly hang side-by-side an '04 Zo6 from a dig up to 150 (convertible, & auto, but still . . .), TWICE, on a mere 242whp? Or run off and leave a (1st year) GTO, outrun an M3, hang w/ a 2000 'stang w/ 100-shot of Nos, outrun a man. WS6 (2 auto's too), Camaro SS, etc. etc. (Let the trolling & flaming begin . . . )
The answer lies in all the above discussion, no doubt.
I haven't re-reflashed since installing the MD Iso-Thermal & Copper, which may get me more yet (it made enough difference to throw an IAT sensor reading right after install, so it's quite cleary doing it's job).
Interesting note: The 3.917's made no appreciable difference on the dyno, but on the street it gives me more than all the other mod's combined IMO. How else could I possibly hang side-by-side an '04 Zo6 from a dig up to 150 (convertible, & auto, but still . . .), TWICE, on a mere 242whp? Or run off and leave a (1st year) GTO, outrun an M3, hang w/ a 2000 'stang w/ 100-shot of Nos, outrun a man. WS6 (2 auto's too), Camaro SS, etc. etc. (Let the trolling & flaming begin . . . )
The answer lies in all the above discussion, no doubt.
Last edited by thawk408; 02-10-2006 at 12:29 PM.
#107
Originally Posted by thawk408
Sorry, but z06 only comes in hardtop 6spd and if you didnt know that then I question your credibilty on the other runs. Maybe you beat them, maybe you didnt.....I dont know.
#108
What should a 290 whp Z run a 1/4 mile with your good performance street tires (PS2) , assuming a good driver. The reason I ask is where hell are all the NA Z's in the 12s with decent trap speeds? You figure with all these claimed Z's in the 280 to 290 whp range, shouldnt they be easily running 12.9 to 13.1 trapping around 108-110? Add on a 3.97 final drive and you can shave another .3 to .4 off that and should be into mid to high 12s? Does this sound right or am I smoking crack?? I mean, how does a 997 c2s with 355whp run 12.6, and trap 113? It cant be all just traction can it? Why cant a Z with similar power run even close?.. Someone please tell me.
#109
Hhhmmm...
Originally Posted by Z_xtc
...Interesting note: The 3.917's made no appreciable difference on the dyno, but on the street it gives me more than all the other mod's combined IMO. ...
Thanks,
Mike
#110
Originally Posted by konspec
here's something I've been curious of for awhile. Has anyone ventured into the possiblity of a ITB set up? I know that right now it's popular for most high reving inline motors but, nothing is impossible to fab. It might be really expensive to fab but, for the gains from ITBs it could be worth it instead of engine internal/stroking/boring. Just a thought, I could be crazy.
In that same thread, I think they talked about Tommy Kaira doing a custom ITB setup on a Z... it cost around $30k and gained 13whp IIRC.
#111
Originally Posted by frostyrock7c
I'm on the fence about getting the gears myself, I track my car quite frequently and seldom drag, but for comparison purposes, what kind of 1/4 or 0-60's are you getting? I guess I'm asking, just how much better does it help the Z33 accelerate? Anyone ??
Thanks,
Mike
Thanks,
Mike
#112
Originally Posted by Armitage
I read a thread, I think it was on this site, about an ITB setup. IIRC, it is very difficult and expensive to do because the Z is not drive by wire, rather its all electronic. As a result, the entire ECU system needs to be yanked and replaced with something that is compatible with an ITB setup.
In that same thread, I think they talked about Tommy Kaira doing a custom ITB setup on a Z... it cost around $30k and gained 13whp IIRC.
In that same thread, I think they talked about Tommy Kaira doing a custom ITB setup on a Z... it cost around $30k and gained 13whp IIRC.
#113
i really don't understand why an ITB setup is so ridiculously expensive? it should make it easier that it is drive by wire... a couple bux at radio shack is all it would take to resolve any issues of fooling the ECU...
#115
Adam,
what specific information do you have to transmit to the computer? the only thing I can think of is throttle plate position (inbound) and control (outbound)?
it really depends on whether that is transmitted as a digital signal (op codes and whatnot) or as an analog voltage level... if it is the former, it could get very very tricky, but if it is the later, it's simplicity in an of itself to slave a second throttle plate off the first.
As for controlling the throttle plate (outbound information), again, if it's analog voltage it'd be a couple bux to get a 2nd throttle plate responding to the 1st plate's signal... problem is that you'd need to build a central encoding/decoding module if the signals were opcodes (and this would require the complete list of possible position codes/etc...)
what specific information do you have to transmit to the computer? the only thing I can think of is throttle plate position (inbound) and control (outbound)?
it really depends on whether that is transmitted as a digital signal (op codes and whatnot) or as an analog voltage level... if it is the former, it could get very very tricky, but if it is the later, it's simplicity in an of itself to slave a second throttle plate off the first.
As for controlling the throttle plate (outbound information), again, if it's analog voltage it'd be a couple bux to get a 2nd throttle plate responding to the 1st plate's signal... problem is that you'd need to build a central encoding/decoding module if the signals were opcodes (and this would require the complete list of possible position codes/etc...)
#116
Mjedens and myself, as far as I know were the closest. Now I havent dynoed since adding the upper and lower manifolds, but I have been alot more reliable than any Forced inducted motors in the Chicago area. I will have a new dyno and tune within the next 5 weeks. I will post up then.
#117
Originally Posted by Z_xtc
And why I've seen a lot of people posting in the 240's bone stock baseline (maybe it wasn't SAE corrected) yet with all my mod's I only pulled a 242 on this particular dyno (SAE corrected). The owner said that other Z's baselines were in the 220's (not 240's) that he'd done on that dyno, and that mine was the strongest n/a he'd done so far. So, talking about your difference in dyno's . . .