Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

And at the end of the day thats what it comes down to :P

boat vs sport boat..

I just did a test with my box stock NM35 with the iPhone app called Dynolicious.

What is the weight of the car? It asks in the app. I put in 1700KG as a guess.

Here are the results. Foot on brake, rev to about 2800rpm with a little slip off the line.

First run I got 6.2 sec 0-100km.

Second run:

0-10 km/h: 0.49 sec

0-20 km/h: 0.84 sec

0-30 km/h: 1.26 sec

0-40 km/h: 1.70 sec

0-50 km/h: 2.16 sec

0-60 km/h: 2.66 sec

0-70 km/h: 3.28 sec

0-80 km/h: 3.98 sec

0-90 km/h: 4.69 sec

0-100 km/h: 5.45 sec

Think its a little optimistic?

Chris.

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • 4 months later...
just a little....the 6.2 seems closer to the target!

Reading Spoolin12's post piqued my interest so I "borrowed" my daughter's I-Phone and installed a free App called Pocket Dyno to see what it showed.

I did 3 runs tonight (14 deg outside) in my wifes stock NM35 (well, I have removed the inspection plate on the airbox) and it's about as heavy as any Stagea could be.

The first 2 runs were in auto mode and I launched at fairly low revs. Afterwards I realised I was so interested in what was going on with the app that I forgot to put my foot flat to the floor :D . The 0-100 times were 7.91s and 7.32s.

My last run was in manual mode and I changed up before the redline. The app returned a time of 6.89s but I reckon a proper go at it might drop the time by a tenth.

The other info it provided: 0-25km/h 1.05s, 0-50km/h 2.42s, max G's 0.55 and 166 whp (124kw) based on me inputing 1700kg as the total weight. I would almost bet those last figures aren't right....

I don't know how accurate the Pocket Dyno times are but maybe they're not too far off the mark. Not bad for a free app though I suppose.

So, I don't think anyone here would debate that a Stagea isn't great value for money, but faster in a straight line than a SS Sportwagon? Tell him he's dreamin'

Reading Spoolin12's post piqued my interest so I "borrowed" my daughter's I-Phone and installed a free App called Pocket Dyno to see what it showed.

I did 3 runs tonight (14 deg outside) in my wifes stock NM35 (well, I have removed the inspection plate on the airbox) and it's about as heavy as any Stagea could be.

The first 2 runs were in auto mode and I launched at fairly low revs. Afterwards I realised I was so interested in what was going on with the app that I forgot to put my foot flat to the floor :thumbsup: . The 0-100 times were 7.91s and 7.32s.

My last run was in manual mode and I changed up before the redline. The app returned a time of 6.89s but I reckon a proper go at it might drop the time by a tenth.

The other info it provided: 0-25km/h 1.05s, 0-50km/h 2.42s, max G's 0.55 and 166 whp (124kw) based on me inputing 1700kg as the total weight. I would almost bet those last figures aren't right....

I don't know how accurate the Pocket Dyno times are but maybe they're not too far off the mark. Not bad for a free app though I suppose.

So, I don't think anyone here would debate that a Stagea isn't great value for money, but faster in a straight line than a SS Sportwagon? Tell him he's dreamin'

Your times are pretty close to what I would expect.

For those interested, the kerb weight of the car is 1680kg - i'm not sure if the iphone app wants the weight including the driver or not. The weight probably doesn't affect the timing calcs however - it would be there for the kw/hp calculation.

So if we assume around 6.5-6.8s 0-100km/h, does anyone have access to a VE sportwagon SS to try the same test in it? can probably find this sort of info on the net, although unless you do consecutive runs in both cars with the same conditions and same driver, its never going to be scientific anyway. And this thread is here because the article that claimed to do this scientific test has clearly incorrect results.

To put it another way, has anyone got evidence of the SS sportwagon doing 0-100km/h in less than 6.5s? and no, that article doesn't count. I would be very surprised if the v8 was slower.

Your times are pretty close to what I would expect.

To put it another way, has anyone got evidence of the SS sportwagon doing 0-100km/h in less than 6.5s? and no, that article doesn't count. I would be very surprised if the v8 was slower.

Motor magazine lists the VE Sportwagon SS-V kerb weight at 1872 kg. 0-100 time 5.5 sec, standing quarter at 13.6 sec. These numbers are slightly slower than a VE SS-V sedan, but the sedan weighs in at 1789 kg; almost 100 kg lighter. The only time you'll be dragging off a VE wagon, is on a wet road, or in Scotty's beast.

For those interested, the kerb weight of the car is 1680kg - i'm not sure if the iphone app wants the weight including the driver or not. The weight probably doesn't affect the timing calcs however - it would be there for the kw/hp calculation.

You are entirely correct. The App does want the weight of the vehicle, including driver, fuel, cargo etc so it can calculate power. I took a stab at 1700kg, but I weigh a whole heap more than 20kg I can tell you! I thought the calculated power was a bit optimistic and it would have been even higher had I input weight at 1800kg, which could be closer to reality given fuel in tank and me in driver's seat.

I don't know if it is clever enough to allow for the extra driveline loss of AWD / auto trans etc, but I suspect not and that could be the reason for the rubbery power figures.

I like your idea of running a similar test to confirm. Anyone want to lend me their SS Sportwagon for about 6 seconds?

Edited by Commsman

cant speak for off the line or a ve..but i beat a vq SS v8 wagon from 100-171 by a good 2 carlengths ..both cars were auto....then the speed limiter got me..and he rolled by as he obviously had no speed cut.

both cars had 2 passengers.

mine is bog stock apart from a K&N flat panel , and scottys old custom exhaust 3inch with dump & HKS muffler.

cant speak for off the line or a ve..but i beat a vq SS v8 wagon from 100-171 by a good 2 carlengths ..both cars were auto....then the speed limiter got me..and he rolled by as he obviously had no speed cut.

both cars had 2 passengers.

mine is bog stock apart from a K&N flat panel , and scottys old custom exhaust 3inch with dump & HKS muffler.

Nice work! Nothing like a big exhaust to make a huge difference over stock.

Hate it when that happens tho. I reckon you've got to be far enough ahead so that when you are about to hit the speed limiter you hit the brakes instead and they can see your brake lights so they know you've called it off.

All under controlled conditions, of course :) .

just htinking in regards to the whole rwd wheelspin of the holden, even if you decide to put on traction control, you aint putting out the full 270kw. your traction control will close to null the slippage on the wheels but therefore only give enough kw so the wheels wont be spinning, so at 1500rpm you may get 180kw and at 2500rpm you may get 230kw and at about 3500-400rpm it will give you full use of the 270kw, so it could all be possible. unless we get full dyno results with and a drag slip, we cant depend on a iphone app etc, gps may be good, but its still a mobile phone, not a speed radar.

once i get my stupid misfiring or fuel cutting sorted out, i will take it to the dyno and to drags to see how it goes. my car will be a close to stock s2 manual, only upgrade will be a full exhaust system, 3" dump +200cell cat and 3" hks silent exhaust. it will also be tested bypassing the boost solenoid and including the 2 stage boost solenoid.

but then again, it will be a c34 series 2 with neo engine and not a m35.

Installed an 8 point earthing kit and, yes, including the transmission bracket when earthing an M35 makes a bit of difference to gear shifts (still nowhere near a shift kit obviously)
Nice work! Nothing like a big exhaust to make a huge difference over stock.

Hate it when that happens tho. I reckon you've got to be far enough ahead so that when you are about to hit the speed limiter you hit the brakes instead and they can see your brake lights so they know you've called it off.

All under controlled conditions, of course :) .

was the safest controlled conditions ive seen..200kms out of newcastle heading to sydney at 4am with no one on the dual carriageway but me and mr (gay purple) v8 ss for a good 100kms.

Couldve sat on the limiter for a good hour.. beautiful roads. Makes the M1 in qld look like a dirt track.

Edited by PetroDola
  • 2 weeks later...

interesting to note though as i only just noticed it that they called the test stag in this face off a GT in one of the fuel descriptions..unsure if its a typo but could explain the mysterious 13.5 on the quarter time which is supposedly stock.. stock from nismo mebe :?

"M35 Stagea 250GT RS-Four - Fuel Best/Worst/Average – 7.8L/100km / 15.1L/100km / 11.0L/100km"

never heard of GT Rs Four.. anyone know any info on this?

interesting to note though as i only just noticed it that they called the test stag in this face off a GT in one of the fuel descriptions..unsure if its a typo but could explain the mysterious 13.5 on the quarter time which is supposedly stock.. stock from nismo mebe :?

"M35 Stagea 250GT RS-Four - Fuel Best/Worst/Average – 7.8L/100km / 15.1L/100km / 11.0L/100km"

never heard of GT Rs Four.. anyone know any info on this?

It would have been a typo and I dare say points to how much they actually know about the M35 (like a lot of dealers out there :P )

Oh yeah, and that "best" economy? Can't see it happening in real world conditions without the use of a lean tuned piggyback....

Edited by iamhe77
Whos to say their test car didnt have an aftermarket ECU without them knowing. Hence the fantastic performance they were getting

No-one, but even with a re-flash in Japan, I find it hard to believe they get that "best" economy... of course I can only base this on the examples of a VQ25det M35 re-flash A/F ratios I have garnered from re-map services in Japan (ie a range of 11.1-13.2:1 is the "leanest" anyone was willing to do)

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

    • Nah. For something like boost control I wouldn't start my design with PID. I'd go with something that originates in the fuzzy logic world and use an emergency function or similar concept. PID can and does work, but at its fundamental level it is not suited to quick action. I'd be reasonably sure that the Profecs et al all transitioned to a fuzzy algorithm back in the 90s. Keep in mind also that where and when I have previously talked about using a Profec, I'm usually talking about only doing an open loop system anyway. All this talk of PID and other algorithms only comes into play when you're talking closed loop boost control, and in the context of what the OP needs and wants, we're probably actually in the realm of open loop anyway. Closed loop boost control has always bothered me, because if you sense the process value (ie the boost measurement that you want to control) in the plenum (after the throttle), then boost control to achieve a target is only desirable at WOT. When you are not WOT, you do not want the the boost to be as high as it can be (ie 100% of target). That's why you do not have the throttle at WO. You're attempting to not go as fast as you can. If the process variable is measured upstream of the throttle (ie in an RB26 plenum, or the cold side pipework in others) then yeah, sure, run the boost controller closed loop to hit a target boost there, and then the throttle does what it is supposed to do. Just for utter clarity.... an old Profec B Spec II (or whatever it is called, and I've got one, and I never look at it, so I can't remember!) and similar might have a MAP sensor, and it might show you the actual boost in the plenum (when the MAP sensor is connected to the plenum) but it does not use that value to decide what it is doing to control the boost, except to control the gating effect (where it stops holding the gate closed on the boost ramp). It's not closed loop at all. Once the gate is released, it's just the solenoid flailing away at whatever duty cycle was configured when it was set up. I'm sure that there are many people who do not understand the above points and wonder wtf is going on.  
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...