Yes exactly Dr.

 

So basically the degree of suckiness is erratic when you really suck?

 

Its called area under the curve. Yes the SC'ed 350z's are making close to the same peak numbers as a Z06 but the Z06 is making it earlier in the RPM range and maintaining it too redline. Where as the 350z's curve is linear power and takes revs to build boost and make power. Also the torque curve on the Z06 is a lot stonger.

 

I think so, since its at my house

 

Hmm, I guess this goes back to the statement "there is no substitute for displacement"? Lets just tell the WRX people that.

 

I ran that modded Z06 last night on the highway. 40-130 roll. He's putting down like mid 400's hp and tq, I forget his mods but some aggressive cam, exhaust, headers, gears etc.. Anyway we got it on tape but I don't have it yet. I didn't do as bad as I thought I did, 2 runs, lost by about 3 cars - 3 1/2. Not that bad. It's about the same or a little less then he pulls on a near stock Z06, so I'm right there with them we think, or I have a slight advantage over them, we'll find out this weekend.

 

Good job Ravaz! Do you think you can match the launch of a Z06? I am sure many Z owners would love to see this match up.

Come to think of it, what a great theme for a track day Vette/350Z combo.


Jeff - zland

 

ya and just have the Author drive one of the vettes so its easier for us 350Z.

 

I don't care if the driver was making 14 sec passes. For testing comparisons, what bothers me are the different 60' times. 2.195-2.445 is a pretty wide range, especially when the ATI car had the highest trap speeds but also the worst 60'. Stillen made the most low end hp/tq, and the second best 60', while the stock car had the second worst 60' times. Obviously these poor times weren't caused by wheel spin. Equal out the 60' times and the ATI car was the winner here.

 

I think without "beating a dead horse", it is fair to say the 1/4 mile times are not optimal. In addition, taking cheap shots at Carl (especially when he is not here to defend himself) does not benefit anyone unless you really need to try to cut someone down to make yourself feel better. I am just mentioning this because I think that the reason for comments should be to determine performance of these products.

I feel the dyno is more accurate data. The driving impressions on the track are also good data and this is where Carl has spent most of his driving time. I think Carl was able to put his ego aside when listing the other driver out performing him in the 1/4 mile. We could have easily omitted the 1/4 mile data altogether but felt we would let it speak for itself. One thing that the 1/4 mile data does show is that launching these SC 350Z's is a challenge for the average driver or one not practiced in the 1/4 mile.

I hope my comments just keep the discussion on target and positive. The reason I got involved at all is to try to provide the Z community with information we can all use and want to know. As with anything in life, you try your best and sometimes you get it perfect, other times you dont. If we had all day to run 1/4 mile, I am sure Carl could have improved his launch. We it was, we had half day at Autocross, half day at 1/4 mile.

Jeff - zland

 

I think credit should be given where it is due. We got a dyno set up, established a standard criteria agreed upon for running the dyno with all companies. We ran 2 different track type tests. Most magazines dont like this kind of comparision because it puts products side by side. In other words, you will see how the products do compare on the dyno on the same day thus more accurate method of measuriing how the kits perform. It is easier for a magazine to just print the data manufacures give them without conducting the dyno test themselves thus they would be tests done in different conditions. Things like boost levels were measured to make sure you were getting accurate data. We did not just post any dyno here, we verified the dyno by putting them side by side on the same day. A lot of magazines dont even post a dyno, they just post hp/torgue numbers.

Another point is other magazines do not come here and discuss issues with you. I for one am making an effort to try to provide the best information I can for you guys thus listen to your impressions of the article and of the data.

Jeff - zland

 

Well I cant wait to read the article. I have been so busy lately that I haven't driven my Z in months. Sorry i missed out on the march 5th event. I have been out of town for a few months. I am back now. Hopefully I get my Sport Z magazine soon.

 

SKK100 (Sam):

I hope you get your copy soon and be sure to give me some feedback on what you think. Yeah, I was looking for you and your friends silver Porche on Mar 5th. Art Singer, editor was there too hoping to meet you in person.

We had another Stillen out there, this one was a rag top. Did you see the pics of it?

Thanks again for getting your Z involved in the test. I enjoyed the process and having the opportunity to see all of them at one time. I hope it helps others in making their decision.



Jeff - zland

 

I think I can beat a stock Z06 at the track. The one's here are getting sub 2 second 60's, so that's where I'm getting beat, they got 18's and I got 19's. The guy i ran last night just ran a 11.68 @ 122 with a 1.80 60'. So I really didn't do that bad last night Next time I go to the track I got a few stock and near stock Z06's lined up to run me, I did alot of sh*t talking and finally got them to run, so hopefully soon I'll run them, unless someone buy's my SC off me first.

Bill

 

while the 1/4 mile times were not the best, how bout all those talking **** take their cars out on a road course. You in your car with any mods you want and i'll even donate my car again for carl to drive its 100% stock other than the wheels. I'll put money on carl getting a much better lap time. Everyone has different skills when it comes to driving a car, Carl's skills happens to involves turns. All I see here is people talking **** about his dragging ability, but Carl has been professional and have not posted in his defence, most likely due to the fact that he works for sports z magazine and would not be in the best interest of the magazine to do so. My car a Base 350Z had the dissadvantage of running smaller tires and wheels (17 vs 18) and without LSD, but he was able to pull track times that beat the other Z's that were there that day by quite a margin, probably around 1 sec+. With all that said it was a pleasure doing the article with Sports Z Magazine. Everything was done professionally and fairly as possible.

 

ravaz/Bill: Are you selling your AC? If yes, what are you going to get instead?

Ted: Thanks for the "other side of the story". You are right, there was a number of cars including Z's autocrossing that day and Carl did quite well. If I remember correctly, he got about the best time of the day with the exception of one Z06 and I remember people saying that guy was known for being an excellent driver.

Jeff - zland

 

I wasn't taking a cheap shot at Carl. (I'm assuming you were talking about me since you replied to my post) To clarify my point, I don't care if he was making 14 or 15 sec 1/4 runs, as mentioned earlier. My problem is that the 60's were all over the map. Even the stock 60' was better than the ATI 60'. I just feel this comparison is poor and more runs should have been recorded with similar 60' times. If anything I was dissapointed with the way this portion of the shoot out was organized / recorded. This had little to do with the poor track times. The fact that a different driver pulled off such a better time is also a little embarrassing to say the least. I probably wouldn't have included that in the article.

 

whosdady:

I agree that it would have been better to have a longer period to get proper launching on 1/4 mile. We ran the cars until closing time. The data was included and the disappointment in times was pointed out as well. Not all data turns out like you thought it would but never the less, data is data and we trust the readers can look at it and determine what information they can conclude from it or discount if they like.

If we would have ran the 1/4 mile test then not include it, then someone would make a point of why did we not include it. I am amazed how some comments are made without knowing the entire story but that is the nature of the internet I guess. All we can do is try to get data in the most accurate way possible, present the data, and possibly make comments that may explain why the data might be a certain way or not. In this case, Carl clearly stated his times were not what he hoped them to be. He is an experienced track driver thus again the data does reveal that driving and launching a car with this hp is a challenge.

Jeff

 

I know it takes a lot of effort to organize an event/article like this. In no means am I flaming that. I use articles and other people's reviews and opinions all the time for my upgrade decisions. So I think they are very important. That being said, why are these the times posted for the S/Cs? You said you had half a day at the 1/4 mile. Was each car only run once? In half a day of drag racing, there were only a total of 4 runs?

If the cars were run more than one time a piece, are there 60' times that are closer together? "Data is data". You are correct. But comparing a car with a 2.4 60' to a car with a 2.1 60' is irrelevant data.

A general rule for drag racing: every .1 you knock off of a 60' = .2 on the 1/4 mile time. Can you see how the different S/Ced cars are penalized by not comparing the same 60' times?

Blah blah blah- you are a teacher, so I hope you see this as just constructive criticism.. on one tiny part of the whole article.

The horse was beaten, breathed its last breath, was left for the buzzards, and I still came over and kicked it a few times... sorry.

What disapoints me the most is trap speeds. My AUTO corvette was trapping 109mph with only about 300 at the wheels.

 

Nothing, going to part the car out and sell everything including the car.

Bill