Speed Magazine 350Z Tuner Wars!
I never believe road & track mag, the numbers are always way the f@ck off. The first time they covered the Z in 2003 they stated it ran a 15.20 in a 1/4 mile...wtf.....maybe with thier driving but the Z is faster than that stock. Maybe its just on that same track that they can't get any traction...I don't know 
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 869
Likes: 2
From: Washington
Just finished reading the article. The times do suck compared to what you see on the dyno. The Audi TT with less total power has 0-60 3.8s and 12.3 @ 113. However, a large part of this was the launch control. I wonder if something like RaceLogic's launch control in a TT VQ35 will at least get sub 5 sec 0-60 and 1/4 in the 12's.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,052
Likes: 1
From: Charlotte, NC
Originally Posted by Alberto
I have to disagree with your opinions on the Vortech. Out of the box to me is a kit that is put on with no tuning modifictations, meaning exactly out of the box, and on the car. Most out of the box Vortech numbers are 320-340 whp and WAY rich from what I have seen, most guys with an out of the box but tuned R4 software hit 370-390whp. If you wanna include tuning with what comes in the kits then all of the turbo kits, even the Turbonetics ST kit (with no tune at all), would easily surpass the tuned Vortech numbers but of course with a much better powerband and much more TQ. You couldnt tune the Greddy all that much higher because you would need to by the harness to adjust the timing. APS TT and prolly ST out of the box would easily surpass te Vortech in a direct out of the box dyno shootout. Ive never seen a direct out of the box Vortech with 370+rwhp, no way.
And as far as the driver in that article, he may be the big d!ck on the road course, but he'd get laughed at around here running 14.2 in a stock Z. Just by seeing that he ran better times in the Vortech s/c Z over the Greddy Z, that tells me he couldnt control the power off the line worth a damn. Even with a slighlty worse launch in a Greddy TT, he should have easily overpassed the s/c by the end of the 1/4 <-----just my opinion
And as far as the driver in that article, he may be the big d!ck on the road course, but he'd get laughed at around here running 14.2 in a stock Z. Just by seeing that he ran better times in the Vortech s/c Z over the Greddy Z, that tells me he couldnt control the power off the line worth a damn. Even with a slighlty worse launch in a Greddy TT, he should have easily overpassed the s/c by the end of the 1/4 <-----just my opinion
Who would buy a bolt on FI kit and not tune it?! That's exactly what I meant. The TT kits out of the box and tuned typically are tuned more conservatively from what I've seen to keep from blowing up. The Vortech kit (and other SC kits) have proven to be more reliable for HP in a strictly bolt & tune form. Again, if you take the time and money to tack on extra stuff that doesn't come with the TT kits to them, they clearly make more power, but I see far more Vortech kits bolted on and tuned only hitting 370-380 than I see with TT kits being bolted on and tuned only.
Originally Posted by mcduck
Who would buy a bolt on FI kit and not tune it?! That's exactly what I meant. The TT kits out of the box and tuned typically are tuned more conservatively from what I've seen to keep from blowing up. The Vortech kit (and other SC kits) have proven to be more reliable for HP in a strictly bolt & tune form. Again, if you take the time and money to tack on extra stuff that doesn't come with the TT kits to them, they clearly make more power, but I see far more Vortech kits bolted on and tuned only hitting 370-380 than I see with TT kits being bolted on and tuned only.
at you 
Even if the horsepower number was lower the low end torque would make them faster. Why is everyone getting stuck on hp. I don't want a "dyno queen" cough Supras cough. I want a good torque number. 
Originally Posted by Alberto
Wow, thought you were more mature than that. I agree who with any common sense would put on a kit and not tune, unfortunately many people have done that (cough-Greddy), still do that, and will continue to do that. Your not very smart if your saying "out of the box" includes tuning-to me it doesnt, so that would make your Vortech statement completely false. You wanna compare the Vortech out of the box + tuning to any Turbo kit tuned? Every single Turbo kit minus the Greddy (cuz you would need to buy other parts to tune) would dyno higher than the Vortech, its that simple. Say otherwise Im going to at you
at you
Originally Posted by theking
Even if the horsepower number was lower the low end torque would make them faster. Why is everyone getting stuck on hp. I don't want a "dyno queen" cough Supras cough. I want a good torque number.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,052
Likes: 1
From: Charlotte, NC
Originally Posted by Alberto
I completely agree with you. But I dont want to turn this into a s/c vs turbo pissing match. I just dont think mcduck's views are correct, they are obviously biased. We can disagree without being rude to each other and lauging at each other, at least I thought we could.
) ... and I base my statements strictly on what I've seen posted as far as dyno sheets on this forum. I recall seeing many Vortech Zs posting numbers anywhere from 360-380 (when tuned) with only nominal additional bolt-ons. The stuff everyone has like aftermarket exhaust, plenum replacement, etc. The turbo kit numbers I've seen with similar mods and tuning have been lower.This is an academic discussion at this point anyway as Gary King posted the dyno numbers for the cars tested. Based on those numbers, the Greddy car should have been quickest and the JWT car should have, at worst, been on par with the Vortech car.
As I stated in an earlier post, it could very well be that the nature of the turbo cars to have more torque at lower RPM would work against them if the cars were run a slick track.
Hey McDuck, you'll recall I had pretty sad 60ft times at the Rockingham with my 19inch street tires...around 2.1 to 2.2. But I recall yours were the same...or dare I say..worse? 
In theory, with a lot of practice, and good grip, the 60ft times should be very close between a TT and an SC.....if both are running the same power levels.
In theory, with a lot of practice, and good grip, the 60ft times should be very close between a TT and an SC.....if both are running the same power levels.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,052
Likes: 1
From: Charlotte, NC
Originally Posted by Sharif@Forged
Hey McDuck, you'll recall I had pretty sad 60ft times at the Rockingham with my 19inch street tires...around 2.1 to 2.2. But I recall yours were the same...or dare I say..worse?
In theory, with a lot of practice, and good grip, the 60ft times should be very close between a TT and an SC.....if both are running the same power levels.
In theory, with a lot of practice, and good grip, the 60ft times should be very close between a TT and an SC.....if both are running the same power levels.
Also leads me to another question... you going to get some 18s for that beast? Thinking a set of track rubber (for strip and/or road course) on 18s would be a good thing for you to have.
Originally Posted by mcduck
Rockingham is a **very** slick 1/4 mile and, as we know now, my car was not running anywhere near peak efficiency. How much power were you pushing on the Greddy at that time? I know you were getting much better trap times that weekend, but your trap speeds were only a few mph higher (not in line with the difference we saw in trap times).
Also leads me to another question... you going to get some 18s for that beast? Thinking a set of track rubber (for strip and/or road course) on 18s would be a good thing for you to have.
Also leads me to another question... you going to get some 18s for that beast? Thinking a set of track rubber (for strip and/or road course) on 18s would be a good thing for you to have.
At the time, the car was running about 416whp. My trap speeds were about 118mph. Trap speeds are usually pretty stable, even with relatively large variations in 60ft times. Trap speeds are almost entirely the result of whp...not launch. Good launches result in lower ET's.
I had neither good ET's or good 60ft times. But lots of power!
sharif, if you don't mind me asking, with your FI setup, what are some of your approximate 1/4 times at the different stages of power you've gone thru?
like with 416whp, and 118mph trap speed, what was your time on that run?
like with 416whp, and 118mph trap speed, what was your time on that run?
Originally Posted by sentry65
sharif, if you don't mind me asking, with your FI setup, what are some of your approximate 1/4 times at the different stages of power you've gone thru?
like with 416whp, and 118mph trap speed, what was your time on that run?
like with 416whp, and 118mph trap speed, what was your time on that run?
I havent been out to the track since the engine build, as I am conducting some fine tuning.....will be soon enough.
Originally Posted by sentry65
were those times with street tires I'm asuming? you used 275 michellin PS2 on 19" volk GTC's in the rear right?
The Michelin PS2's are the BEST corning street tire on the planet. Unfortuntely, their extremely stiff sidewall leaves a LOT to be desired, in terms of straight line launch grip.
Originally Posted by Sharif@Forged
Yes, street Michelin PS2's 19 275.
The Michelin PS2's are the BEST corning street tire on the planet. Unfortuntely, their extremely stiff sidewall leaves a LOT to be desired, in terms of straight line launch grip.
The Michelin PS2's are the BEST corning street tire on the planet. Unfortuntely, their extremely stiff sidewall leaves a LOT to be desired, in terms of straight line launch grip.
other than drag radials or slicks, what tire would you consider to be a good drag race tire? BFG KD maybe?
oh, those drag times were on the stock LSD right?
thanks man, I'm just curious about everyone's real world FI driving experience
BTW, really big fan of your car
Last edited by sentry65; Jul 7, 2005 at 01:33 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
From: Long Island
Originally Posted by xswl0931
Just finished reading the article. The times do suck compared to what you see on the dyno. The Audi TT with less total power has 0-60 3.8s and 12.3 @ 113. However, a large part of this was the launch control. I wonder if something like RaceLogic's launch control in a TT VQ35 will at least get sub 5 sec 0-60 and 1/4 in the 12's.
The Axis Car (dyno'd @ 358 whp) had an Nismo LSD and it Ran on ADVAN A048's 285's car pulled 13.5 @ 107
In the cars defense they tested the 1/4 segment @ an unused runway, rather than a sticky dragstrip!
The 1/4 times are not that good...true...But every car that the company's sent to rep. thier kits was on street tires and ran with the same driver on the same stretch of road and the same track . So it was a good test for the conditions . Granted if the 1/4 mile was done at a 1/4 mile track the Turbo car would have faired better . The driver may have launched every car the same and at the same rpm , also resulting in wheel spin from the turbo cars . I guess I'm just a little tickled that the Vortech did so well against the turbo car...got to love it.....big smile
1/4 times were not great but definitely an interesting article to read.
For those who haven't read it, I still recommend you do.
They touched alot on the handling and performance results.
For those who haven't read it, I still recommend you do.
They touched alot on the handling and performance results.
then again, his stock 1/4 and 0-60 time looks about right - given the higher altitude
so how can he get the stock car to be within normal range, but the FI cars are barely faster?
so how can he get the stock car to be within normal range, but the FI cars are barely faster?