Notices
Forced Induction Turbochargers and Superchargers..Got Boost?

Whp = speed

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 02:47 PM
  #1  
james12345pt's Avatar
james12345pt
Thread Starter
New Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 215
Likes: 7
From: asheville, nc
Default Whp = speed

What the smallest amount of whp that will affect the 1/4 speed of the 350z (3500 lbs)? Will increasing the whp create an linear relationship to increased 1/4 mile run times. i.e. 25 whp = 2/10 sec off of your 1/4 run.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 02:51 PM
  #2  
graffkid732's Avatar
graffkid732
New Member
iTrader: (44)
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,646
Likes: 11
From: New Jersey
Default

Stock Z can run Low 13s 500whp Z can run high 14s.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 02:52 PM
  #3  
marques1's Avatar
marques1
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,094
Likes: 6
From: austin, texas
Default

I don't believe there is a linear relationship. If you notice 11 sec cars need to gain a substantial amount of more horsepower to hit 10's. The faster you go the more aerodynamics plays in to the equation. So, no whp isn't linear to 1/4 mile time, my assumption.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 02:55 PM
  #4  
350ztttt's Avatar
350ztttt
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 800
Likes: 2
From: Solon, Ohio
Default

How you drive determines the time more often than whp. My first 1/4 mile was in a '10sec car', and it took me 13 to get down the strip.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 03:17 PM
  #5  
davidv's Avatar
davidv
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 42,753
Likes: 11
From: Tucson, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by marques1
I don't believe there is a linear relationship. If you notice 11 sec cars need to gain a substantial amount of more horsepower to hit 10's. The faster you go the more aerodynamics plays in to the equation. So, no whp isn't linear to 1/4 mile time, my assumption.
Correct. It takes more additional horsepower to go from 13.5 to 13.0 seconds than is does to go from 14.0 to 13.5. And double or triple that to get from 13.0 to 12.5 seconds.

The relationship is exponential. You are working with the law of diminishing marginal returns.

You can add incremental horsepower here and see what happens to ET: http://www.wallaceracing.com/Calculators.htm

Last edited by davidv; Dec 15, 2010 at 03:19 PM.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 03:22 PM
  #6  
davidv's Avatar
davidv
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 42,753
Likes: 11
From: Tucson, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by 350ztttt
How you drive determines the time more often than whp. My first 1/4 mile was in a '10sec car', and it took me 13 to get down the strip.
ha ha good one. I am a 14 second driver in a 13 second car.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 03:24 PM
  #7  
davidv's Avatar
davidv
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 42,753
Likes: 11
From: Tucson, AZ
Default

BTW where is your ET?

https://my350z.com/forum/drag/233840...ons-stock.html
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 04:21 PM
  #8  
neverenough's Avatar
neverenough
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
From: louisiana
Default

maybe it would be better to focus on what whp does in relation to your trap speed. I know alot of 800whp 12 second supras lol. The mph will tell what kind of power a car is making even if there is a poor driver or poor traction.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 04:29 PM
  #9  
Alberto's Avatar
Alberto
Cranky FI Owner
Premier Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 34,715
Likes: 8
From: DMV
Default

Even then, a $hit driver will trap lower than a good one at ANY power level

So the Supra that runs 12.3 @ 121mph would run 11.4 @123 with me in it...
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 05:24 PM
  #10  
JustinTime's Avatar
JustinTime
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
From: Orlando/Boynton Beach, FL
Default

Originally Posted by Alberto
Even then, a $hit driver will trap lower than a good one at ANY power level

So the Supra that runs 12.3 @ 121mph would run 11.4 @123 with me in it...
I definitely agree with that lol
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 05:54 PM
  #11  
nathanwl2004's Avatar
nathanwl2004
New Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 738
Likes: 0
From: charlotte ,nc
Default

in theory your hypothesis makes sense. all things equal, the more horse power you can make, the faster your car would go. however in practical application there are way too many variables to calculate this to any degree of precision, let alone accuracy.

variables include
traction (tires, track surface)
driver
weight ( different models weigh different amounts, driver weight)
power delivery
atmospheric conditions (temp, barometric pres, wind, humidity etc.

then you must conscider that the faster you go the greater the ammount of power required to accelerate. a graph of the amount of power that is nessecary to continue to accelerate looks something like a upward opening parabola with the range restricted to only possitive values. it begins at zero and the faster you go, the closer you get to a vertical assymptote. eventually the amount of power that is required to accelerate on mile per hour faster become rediculous

plus like I said more power= more speed if and only if you can put the power to the ground (without wrecking, or creating a huge smokey cloud down the dragstrip).


in other words the answer to you question is: no there is no linear equation where X-hp=Y reduction in 1/4 mile time

if you could marginalize all of the variables then you could perhalps derive a quadratic equation. but not a linear one.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 06:38 PM
  #12  
*Boose*'s Avatar
*Boose*
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,447
Likes: 0
From: Rapid City, SD Ellsworth AFB
Default

So explain this. Why is it that the fastest stock 07 Z we have seen on this site trap a 109, and the fastest bolt on trap the same and run nearly identical times or quicker times with lower mph? Even with a 20-30 whp difference.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 07:46 PM
  #13  
Alberto's Avatar
Alberto
Cranky FI Owner
Premier Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 34,715
Likes: 8
From: DMV
Default

Originally Posted by *Boose*
So explain this. Why is it that the fastest stock 07 Z we have seen on this site trap a 109, and the fastest bolt on trap the same and run nearly identical times or quicker times with lower mph? Even with a 20-30 whp difference.
The launch was better in the lower whp car

I'll post my Dynojet WHP numbers thruout my cars runs, mod levels, you can see its not consistent.

238whp stock = 13.7 @ 101.4

262whp bolt-ons = 13.1 @ 107

380-390whp Turbonetics = 11.9 @ 116mph

525whp Greddy, old setup, JWT S1 cams, 13psi, LETTING OFF BRIEFLY = 11.1 @ 126

600whp WELL DRIVEN is EASY 132mph trap. Many on here require much more power to trap 132mph or higher and well, that just plain sucks

650ish whp is 134mph easy, with a good driver. Unfortunately the norm for most here in the FI section (as most upgrade power before even honing skills at NA levels) is pretty trash.

Last edited by Alberto; Dec 15, 2010 at 07:48 PM.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 08:36 PM
  #14  
davidv's Avatar
davidv
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 42,753
Likes: 11
From: Tucson, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by *Boose*
So explain this. Why is it that the fastest stock 07 Z we have seen on this site trap a 109, and the fastest bolt on trap the same and run nearly identical times or quicker times with lower mph? Even with a 20-30 whp difference.
Density altitude. Look at the racers who have been bumped in November and December. These hardcore fools are out there when it is 40 degrees.

Tailwind. Never seen racing cancelled with a tailwind. Crosswind yes. Tailwind no.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 09:15 PM
  #15  
scotts300's Avatar
scotts300
350Z-holic
Premier Member
iTrader: (46)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,193
Likes: 7
From: Away
Default

Exponential relationship. You need a lot more power to keep going faster.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2010 | 09:19 PM
  #16  
bbs350z's Avatar
bbs350z
Registered User
iTrader: (85)
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,662
Likes: 2
From: Scottsdale AZ
Default

and the proper suspension/tires/gearing to put it down efficiently. get a balance and youll see results
Reply
Old Dec 16, 2010 | 05:06 AM
  #17  
roger22's Avatar
roger22
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
From: SOCAL
Default

300hp=14's
400hp=13's
500hp=12's
600hp=11's
700hp=10's
Reply
Old Dec 16, 2010 | 05:18 AM
  #18  
Alberto's Avatar
Alberto
Cranky FI Owner
Premier Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 34,715
Likes: 8
From: DMV
Default

Originally Posted by roger22
300hp=14's
400hp=13's
500hp=12's
600hp=11's
700hp=10's
If you have palsy, then yes follow the above. 400whp is 11's in a Z. If its not, look at the idiot behind the wheel.
Reply
Old Dec 16, 2010 | 06:18 AM
  #19  
athensgls's Avatar
athensgls
Banned
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
From: never never land
Default

Got a buddy who ran 12.1 @ 126 in a nismo hr with gtm stg1 and 10 psi.

I made 408 on a mustang dyno at 8psi and I beat a 123 camaro and a 122 cobra from 60 mph. Down at sea level we go alot faster... I'm currently tuned to 450whp on 10 psi I'm gonna take a stab at a z06 soon. They trap around 126 down here stock.
Reply
Old Dec 16, 2010 | 07:04 AM
  #20  
Quamen's Avatar
Quamen
Registered User
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,383
Likes: 2
From: Wisconsin
Default

Originally Posted by Alberto
650ish whp is 134mph easy, with a good driver. Unfortunately the norm for most here in the FI section (as most upgrade power before even honing skills at NA levels) is pretty trash.
This is exactly why I am concentrating on lightening and stiffening my car this winter rather than more power. Come spring I can take it out with the new wheels and slicks and concentrate on launches and adjusting my setup at under 350whp. Once I get better then I am going to bump it up with some nitrous

Last edited by Quamen; Dec 16, 2010 at 07:05 AM.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:44 AM.