Jump to content
SAU Community

Nations Cup 2004: GODZILLA time!!

SS8_Gohan

By SS8_Gohan,
in General Automotive Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest INASNT

Guest INASNT

Posted
Posted
hey, just a heads up u can buy the 7.1L Monaro,

but it isn't called a monaro it is somesort of HSV with 427 in it, similar to the monaro use in the race

Your a knob! Holden will never build a 7L monaro EVER!

Nissan need to bring a GT500 GTR over to race, then it will be able to compete fairly with the 427 HRT or this year i mean CV8 monaro

xRHETTx Mentor

xRHETTx

Posted
Posted
hey, just a heads up u can buy the 7.1L Monaro,

but it isn't called a monaro it is somesort of HSV with 427 in it, similar to the monaro use in the race

Holden were going to sell the HRT 427 but it became too expensive and they called it off. It was going to have a production run of 100 cars or something. I read this in the drive section of the paper about a year ago, so it must be true. :rolleyes:

Duncan Grand Master

Duncan

Posted
Posted

I understood that Falken GTR rolled at the nismo festival the other week, it'll need some straightening before they can run that one :rolleyes:

A GTR ran in nation's cup in 2002, not surprisingly it wasn't competitive. The N-GT class cars are highly modified from their base cars, and in a global sense the monaros aren't actually far ahead (if at all), they are just very well suited to bathurst 24hrs - in fact they were not particularly competitive in Nations cup this year.

And the Nations cup cars certainly do not run stock boost, heads, cams etc etc, they are fairly open and would be pulled back into line only if they faster than the competition.

Finally, the reason the GTRs aren't competitive is 2 fold - too heavy, and the base engine is too small...

Guest INASNT

Guest INASNT

Posted
Posted
Holden were going to sell the HRT 427 but it became too expensive and they called it off.  It was going to have a production run of 100 cars or something.  I read this in the drive section of the paper about a year ago, so it must be true. :P

They were gonna sell em but not to the same spec as the bathurst!

I think it was all a publicity stunt and they were infact never going to produce 1 for the public.

rsx84 Veteran

rsx84

Posted
Posted

i was under the impression that the nations cup was a power to weight deal fixed to different configerations, lets say rear engined sports car above $90,000, along those lines??

P.S. what engine base is the 300kw gts monaro?

SS8_Gohan Grand Master

SS8_Gohan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The stripped down version of the Mongrel is 1600kg from memory

R34 GTR is 1550kg or there abouts stock, stripped down plus full race gear, i reckon would be the same if not lighter. I think a properly and professionally backed R34 GTR, with a good driver would be very competitive.

EDIT: Monaro CV8 Kerb weight: 1640kg (530i 4 door is lighter!, packed with TV's, Sat Nav, full leather, full 17inch spare wheel, 8 airbags, etc...)

R34 GTR kerb weight: 1540kg (wasn't far off :P)

So yeah, i reckon in full race trim, the GTR would be lighter than the Mongrel. Just make sure the 600 horsies are ready to play, and i reckon u'd do ok.

that's my tree fitty

cheers.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kinkstaah
      Are you an oil nerd?

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I think the concept is highlighting the various scenarios where thicker oil helps, and thicker oil potentially doesn't help and only generates heat and costs power, in turn for safety which isn't actually any safer (unless you're going real hot). If anything this does highlight why throwing Castrol 10w-60 for your track days is always a solid, safe bet. 
    • GTSBoy
      Are you an oil nerd?

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Jason should have shown a real viscosity vs temp chart. All the grades have very little viscosity difference at full operating temperature.
    • dbm7
      BCNR33 Blower Motor Resistor - Testing

      By dbm7 · Posted

      Oops... I meant to include the connector  view... BR/W - power from fuse L/W - motor negative to fan control amp (and off to HVAC pin19) OR/B - PWM signal (from HVAC pin20) B --  ground  
    • Murray_Calavera
      Steps to DIY sanding car back ready for respray....

      By Murray_Calavera · Posted

      Yep, if you are applying filler it sounds like there is something wrong with the body lol. Safe to assume there is going to be a lot of sanding going on if your still applying fillers.  Picture a perfect bare metal panel, smooth as glass. You lay down your primer, it's perfect. (why are you going to sand it?) You lay down the colour and clear, it's perfect. No sanding at all took place and you've got a perfectly finished panel.  You won't be chasing your tail, sounds like you were prepping to start laying filler. If your happy with the body after the sanding, there is some bare metal exposed and some areas with primer, no issues at all, start laying the filler. You are safe to lay filler on bare metal or primer (of course check your technical data sheet as usual for what your filler is happy to adhere to).  This isn't a 100% correct statement. There is primer that is happy to adhere to smooth bare metal. There are fillers that are happy to adhere to smooth bare metal. Just make sure you're using the right materials for the job.  Typically if you are using filler, you would go primer, colour and clear. I've never seen any instances before where someone has laid colour over body filler (maybe this happens, but I haven't seen it before). So your plan sounds pretty normal to me. 
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I don't think there's any way someone is push starting this car.. I honestly can barely move it, and moving it and steering it is just flat out not possible. I'm sure it is, but needs a bigger man than me. I have a refurbished starter now. The starter man was quite clear and consise showing me how nothing inside a starter really should contribute to slow cranking, and turned out that for the most part... my starter was entirely fine. Still, some of the wear items were replaced and luckily it didn't show any signs of getting too hot, being unfit for use, etc. Which is 'good'. I also noticed the starter definitely sounded different, which is a bit odd considering nothing should have really changed there.... Removed and refit, and we'll pretend one of the manifold bolts didn't fully tighten up and is only "pretty" tight. GM only wants 18ft/lb anyway. I also found a way to properly get my analog wideband reading very slightly leaner than the serial wideband. There's Greg related reasons for this. The serial output is the absolute source of truth, but it is a total asshole to actually stay connected and needs a laptop. The analog input does not, and works with standalone datalogging. Previously the analog input read slightly richer, but if I am aiming at 12.7 I do not want one of the widebands to be saying 12.7 when the source of truth is 13.0. Now the source of truth will be 12.65 and the Analog Wideband will read 12.7. So when I tune to 12.7 it'll be ever so slightly safer. While messing with all of this and idling extensively I can confirm my car seems to restart better while hot now. I did add an old Skyline battery cable between the head and the body though, though now I really realise I should have chosen the frame. Maybe that's a future job. The internet would have you believe that this is caused by bad grounds. In finding out where my grounds actually were I found out the engine bay battery post actually goes to the engine, as well as a seperate one (from the post) to the body of the car. So now there's a third one making the Grounding Triangle which is now a thing. I also from extensive idling have this graph. Temperature (°C) Voltage (V) 85 1.59 80 1.74 75 1.94 70 2.1 65 2.33 60 2.56 55 2.78 50 2.98 45 3.23 40 3.51 35 3.75 30 4.00   Plotted it looks like this. Which is actually... pretty linear? I have not actually put the formula into HPTuners. I will have to re-engage brain and/or re-engage the people who wanted more data to magically do it for me. Tune should be good for the 30th!
×
×
  • Create New...