Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Andrew

I tend to think that yesterday would be a bad example of what your car could do. The temperate was way too high to have the turbo operating efficiently.

I do recall Jetwreck did some tests when his car was still on the standard turbo and he was gettign around 6.5sec. This was timed by passenger.

Cheers

Andy

Yeh I did some timings.....2AM i the morning in the middle of winter....would have to go and find the thread again....it's somewhere on SAU.

That was taking my car to 110km's on the dial(GPS =100km's)

Mod's at the time were a cat back exhaust and a decent air filter.

Have to admit last night would not have been the best test time with the standard IC.....but if you had one of these :cheers:

post-37023-1261082434_thumb.jpg

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I've heard a lot of people say A/C uses about 10% of your power, but it gets worse for a turbo car with a relatively small engine.

More drag on the engine means it will take longer to spool the turbo (ie it will rev slower up to 2000rpm or whenever the turbo starts hitting building boost) - this would have a huge effect.

Not only that, turbo cars tend to perform really badly in hot weather and really well in cold weather, compared to n/a cars.

Did a small test this morning while getting onto the freeway and got the time down to about 7-8's

will do it again tonite, the wet shouldnt matter that much.. i cant seem to slide/spin/or loose traction no matter how much i try with these pirelli dragons

Did a small test this morning while getting onto the freeway and got the time down to about 7-8's

will do it again tonite, the wet shouldnt matter that much.. i cant seem to slide/spin/or loose traction no matter how much i try with these pirelli dragons

I managed just below 8 seconds 0-100 in my s2 when driving it home from the gold coast (back to adelaide). The car had minimal luggage in it, and 2 adults. Temperature would've been mid 20's. Plenty of room for improvement too - only revved to 2500rpm before lifting the brake and taking off...(I'd only just bought the car so didn't want to go too overboard).

The M35 is quite a bit faster than the s2 (at least it feels that way) so it has everything going for it. Just a matter of getting it all right in one go. :)

Btw rather than use the GPS for timing, it would be easier to use the GPS to work out where the speedo needle sits when the GPS says 100km/h. Then use the speedo to time it from 0 until it reaches that same point. Timing with a stopwatch will always be a tiny bit out due to reflexes etc. but there's not much else you can do.

Edited by pixel8r

Sorry to keep hammering this thread but I just wanted to mention that I raised our concerns about the validity of the tests by "Test Driven Australia" and they have given their response - in the comments below the article. In summary, the M35 pictured is not the one tested, and the one that was tested has been confirmed as being completely stock - including stock boost and exhaust. Whilst I still feel the numbers are too low, TDA stand by their results.

zei20l - I dont have an iphone but I do have an android phone (HTC magic) - which is very similar. I've just looked and found an app which should do what you say. Its called aDyno. There's another one called Speedometer but the free version doesn't do 0-100 times etc and I'm not into paying for apps that I'll rarely use. Will let u know how this works when I get a chance. :)

Edited by pixel8r

OK I have an old 2007 Wheels in my hands...only the SS Sedan but close enough.

SS - MT - 0-100=5.6, 1/4 =13.9

SS - AT - 0-100=5.8, 1/4 = 13.9

Now the wagon is 60kg's heavier so lets take a shot in the dark and add .5 of a second on. The M35 is still not quicker.

I'd say that the article and the writer is FOS!

Edited by Jetwreck
OK I have an old 2007 Wheels in my hands...only the SS Sedan but close enough.

SS - MT - 0-100=5.6, 1/4 =13.9

SS - AT - 0-100=5.8, 1/4 = 13.9

Now the wagon is 60kg's heavier so lets take a shot in the dark and add .5 of a second on. The M35 is still not quicker.

I'd say that the article and the writer is FOS!

Agree.

Ulterior motive to sell M35's if you ask me... or paid off by a dealership that sells them perhaps....

isnt there an iphone app that does this??

it uses a combination of the g-force sensor inside and GPS to work out pretty accurately

What i am using now is the same.

it does actually start timing as i let go of the brake so its accurate there..

i'll get to it tonite again if i get bored.

  • 4 months later...
Im quite happy to go get a time slip. Gives me one more reason to race my wife. When I get a time slip I will pm it to both of you. Just for informations sake I didn't come in here to cause problems I simply voiced my opinion as you have.

Edit: would a ss ute be a suitable comparison? , I've got a friend with one or a guy at work has a hsv clubsport would you prefer a comparison with that?

how did you go with this....got time slips yet?

Edited by Jetwreck
Let me clear it up

Stagea: 240kw's ATC = approx 160kw's ATW

SS Wagon:270kw's ATC = approx 180 to 190kw's ATW(corrected from the 260 I first said)

F6: 310kw's ATC = 200kw's+ ATW(my guess would be 230-240kw's)

i find this thread really interesting. i sold my VE SS sportwagon (manual) to buy my C34.

The SS had 213rwkw in stock form

I Deleted the rear mufflers and added straight pipe.

Same day, same dyno, same operator - 225rwkw.

there is no way my c34 in its current form(hiflow cat, nismo exhaust, pod) would even come close to beating it in a straight line. i, ve never driven a 35, but i couldn't imagine them being 3-4 seconds faster 0-100.

but the C34 is a much nicer car to drive than the SS was and it handles better at speed.

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



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • This has clearly gone off on quite a tangent but the suggestion was "go standalone because you probably aren't going to stop at just exhaust + a mild tune and manual boost controller", not "buy a standalone purely for a boost controller". If the scope does in fact stop creeping at an EBC then sure, buy an EVC7 or Profec or whatever else people like to run and stop there. And I have yet to see any kind of aftermarket boost control that is more complicated than a PID controller with some accounting for edge cases. Control system theory is an incredibly vast field yet somehow we always end up back at some variant of a PID controller, maybe with some work done to linearize things. I have done quite a lot, but I don't care to indulge in those pissing matches, hence posting primary sources. I deal with people quite frequently that scream and shout about how their opinion matters more because they've shipped more x or y, it doesn't change the reality of the data they're trying to disagree with. Arguing that the source material is wrong is an entirely separate point and while my experience obviously doesn't matter here I've rarely seen factory service manuals be incorrect about something. It's not some random poorly documented internal software tool that is constantly being patched to barely work. It's also not that hard to just read the Japanese and double check translations either. Especially in automotive parts most of it is loanwords anyways.
    • If you are keeping the current calipers you need to keep the current disc as the spacing of the caliper determines the disc diameter. Have you trial fitted the GTS brakes fit on a GTSt hub or is this forward planning? There could be differences in caliper mount spacing, backing plate and even hub shape that could cause an issue.
    • Hi there I have a r33 gts with 4 stud small brakes, I'm going to convert to 5 stud but keep the small brakes, what size rotor would I need?
    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
×
×
  • Create New...