0 - 100kph Times

[09GTR]

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

[Max_ST-R]

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

wow, quicker than both Motor and Wheels who couldn't crack 4.0 secs. Why are they so slow, when EVERY single acceleration test around the world regularly yields 0-60 mp/h times in around 3.3 sec and 0-100 km/h between 3.5-3.7 secs?

[bb_gtr]

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

Wow! Will be interesting to see the future results!

[09GTR]

Wow! Will be interesting to see the future results!

From memory the magazine journos didn't use launch control, that could explain it.

[Doos]

the nissan dealer told me if i used the LC for twice or more, it will damage the transmission/clutch, which will cost big bucks to replace.

but it seems like everyone here is not too concern about it and keep using the LC.

any feedback????

[09GTR]

the nissan dealer told me if i used the LC for twice or more, it will damage the transmission/clutch, which will cost big bucks to replace.

but it seems like everyone here is not too concern about it and keep using the LC.

any feedback????

I think you'll find that's scare tactics. My dealer has been quite reasonable about it. Unlike LC1, LC2 seems to be reasonably easy on the car - that said I've only done it twice, and wont be using it at all with the modifications.

[Modena]

What happen to the 3.3 sec?

[fungoolie]

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

I have not timed mine yet using GTech or equivalent but had a few races against my brother's 997 911Turbo, Auto, (the faster one), with overboost engaged. (680Nm instead of 620Nm for 10 seconds). Carried out on a closed track. Using walkie talkies to countdown to the start made for a very unscientific starting process and each of us would win the start on different occasions making for some varying results.

1) 911 stalled to approx 2000 with gentle throttle and GT-R stalled to 2500 with partial throttle. 911 won start by a car length, (due to me napping at the get go), GTR had passed it by 100 KPH and was a car length ahead at 150 KPH.

2) Same conditions GTR won start and pulled ahead by 2-3 car lengths at 150 KPH.

3) Both cars launched with no brakes whatsoever, just floor the accelerator. GT-R leapt ahead by 2-3 car lengths and pulled away steadily.

4) 911 stalled to 2100 RPM with throttle floored. His boost rose to 9 PSI before we even started moving... GT-R again stalled "gently" to 2500 RPM so no "pre" boost to speak of there. I napped again at the start, or perhaps he cheated!! Lost start by 2 car lengths and maintained gap to him to around 100 KPH but did not reel him in at all.

I had 1850 kms on the clock, his car 10,000 kms. All my tests were done with VDC set to race and Suspension to comfort, in Auto with trans set to race. I didnt disengage VDC and it still allows the revs to rise to over 3000 RPM so why bother disengaging it? VDC in race mode does not cull engine power if traction is lost. I didnt have the fortitude to do a 3000+ RPM launch with both pedals floored......yet

[09GTR]

What happen to the 3.3 sec?

Maybe the 3.3 sec time was for 0 - 60 mph rather that 0 - 100 kph, or LC1 might be faster. Anway, I reckon the HKS kit will see a time well under 3.3 seconds.

[GT-Ricer]

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

With just 1150km on the odometer and K&N filters installed, my GTech Pro RR results were not as good as yours:

All 3 settings on R, no launch control, stall to 2500RPM (electronically limited!), floor the gas and step off the brake: 4 runs:

0-20m 2.552 sec, 0-100kph 4.344sec

2.575 4.377

2.542 4.316

2.560 4.351

The first second and a half after launch it feels like stretching an elastic band as the boost builds up and then all hell breaks loose. I am wondering if the brand new clutches need to bed in more because it feels very laggy from a dig, until a second or two after launch when it goes berserk. I never got a hint of a wheel spin on smooth new asphalt. Also, the engine may still be a bit tight?

This car is definitely a rolling start king but from a dig, without launch control, it's not setting the world on fire.

[GT-Ricer]

I've heard so much inconsistency with pricing in Australia for this new GTR, and there has been some discussion over another forum about ...

_______________________________________________________________________________

Acne Adult Medicine Cure

wheelchair lift

And how is the pricing policy going to improve the 0-100kph times?

[09GTR]

With just 1150km on the odometer and K&N filters installed, my GTech Pro RR results were not as good as yours:

All 3 settings on R, no launch control, stall to 2500RPM (electronically limited!), floor the gas and step off the brake: 4 runs:

0-20m 2.552 sec, 0-100kph 4.344sec

2.575 4.377

2.542 4.316

2.560 4.351

The first second and a half after launch it feels like stretching an elastic band as the boost builds up and then all hell breaks loose. I am wondering if the brand new clutches need to bed in more because it feels very laggy from a dig, until a second or two after launch when it goes berserk. I never got a hint of a wheel spin on smooth new asphalt. Also, the engine may still be a bit tight?

This car is definitely a rolling start king but from a dig, without launch control, it's not setting the world on fire.

I've been told the standard airbox is better than the aftermarket job, I certainly had this problem with my EvoIX, it went faster with the std airbox.

Interestingly my 0 - 20m times were similar to yours. I had 2600 kms on the car.

[GT-Ricer]

I've been told the standard airbox is better than the aftermarket job, I certainly had this problem with my EvoIX, it went faster with the std airbox.

Interestingly my 0 - 20m times were similar to yours. I had 2600 kms on the car.

Thanks for the tip. The thought crossed my mind!

It appears that both cars have the same turbo lag down low, hence similar sluggish 20m, but yours has a better top end which could be due to the air box.

I will swap back to stock air filters and give it another shot at 2000km.

What was your max HP reading? Mine was only 265kW with 1830kg gross weight input.

Good luck with the HKS!

Edited May 29, 2009 by GT-Ricer

[rehab2010]

4.3sec-4.4sec 0-100km/h.

Seriously fellas, 370Z with a few mods would probably do that, or very, very close to that. For sure I know that an EVo-X would do 3.5sec 0-100km/h in FQ-400 guise. If my car is 30% slower than what Nissan advertised in 2007 and 2008, 3.3sec, then I would be seriously pissed of with them.

[paulr33]

as comparison my gtst with 190rwkw and typical mods, 4.88 - 0 to 100km/h with apexi RSM and g sensor correction

[09GTR]

4.3sec-4.4sec 0-100km/h.

Seriously fellas, 370Z with a few mods would probably do that, or very, very close to that. For sure I know that an EVo-X would do 3.5sec 0-100km/h in FQ-400 guise. If my car is 30% slower than what Nissan advertised in 2007 and 2008, 3.3sec, then I would be seriously pissed of with them.

I suspect the 4.3 - 4.4 second car is an exception. I was getting 3.7 easy, in fact each run was getting quicker. The journos managed 4.0 flat (without LC).

The 4.4 second car had an aftermarket airbox in it which probably slowed it down.

The JDM cars are getting 3.3 seconds because they are running 15 psi compared to the ADM 12 psi. And as you would know, that is very easy to fix. My gut feel is that these cars (even in JDM spec) are going to be easy to tune to big power without too many risks, which is no different to most turbo cars these days.

[HEKT1K]

as comparison my gtst with 190rwkw and typical mods, 4.88 - 0 to 100km/h with apexi RSM and g sensor correction

hahaha to all you r35 owners!

...and good steering Paul

[GT-Ricer]

I suspect the 4.3 - 4.4 second car is an exception. I was getting 3.7 easy, in fact each run was getting quicker. The journos managed 4.0 flat (without LC).

The 4.4 second car had an aftermarket airbox in it which probably slowed it down.

The JDM cars are getting 3.3 seconds because they are running 15 psi compared to the ADM 12 psi. And as you would know, that is very easy to fix. My gut feel is that these cars (even in JDM spec) are going to be easy to tune to big power without too many risks, which is no different to most turbo cars these days.

Today I re-tested my car’s acceleration times over 5 runs after 1800km, with stock air filters in place for the past 500km.

My 0-100kph times ranged from 4.37ces to 4.55 sec. I tried everything and every combination: stall against the brake to 2400RPM (limit) ; step of the brake and hit the gas. No real difference.

My car engages quite well and after 10-20m or so it bogs down for about 1 sec before taking off again with real momentum.

It refuses to accelerate from a dig in a linear fashion.

This bog-down happens in first gear so it has nothing to do with a gear change.

It seems that after the initial launch something in the ECU shuts down or retards the timing, before it resumes on its ballistic trajectory.

I spoke to Mathew at Col Crawford who will be doing my first service next Wed-Thurs. We will go for a test drive and also compare with the demonstrator car.

It’s a real disappointment so far!

[aphid]

As another comparison I measured 3.7 seconds 0-100 also with an apexi RSM in my r34.. At the time it had a t04z running 19psi and was in dire need of new tires, with all tests conducted on a nice backroad

[rehab2010]

Today I re-tested my car's acceleration times over 5 runs after 1800km, with stock air filters in place for the past 500km.

My 0-100kph times ranged from 4.37ces to 4.55 sec. I tried everything and every combination: stall against the brake to 2400RPM (limit) ; step of the brake and hit the gas. No real difference.

My car engages quite well and after 10-20m or so it bogs down for about 1 sec before taking off again with real momentum.

It refuses to accelerate from a dig in a linear fashion.

This bog-down happens in first gear so it has nothing to do with a gear change.

It seems that after the initial launch something in the ECU shuts down or retards the timing, before it resumes on its ballistic trajectory.

I spoke to Mathew at Col Crawford who will be doing my first service next Wed-Thurs. We will go for a test drive and also compare with the demonstrator car.

It's a real disappointment so far!

I hear you.............