Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

Seeing as we have a 1/4 mile thread thought i'd chuck this up as its more of a real world performance benchmark and i'm intrigued as to what the quicker stags are getting down to

Its nice and easy if you've got an ecutalk or a boost controller that does 0-100's

use a format like this:

Model:

Mods:

Power:

->0-100 Time:

So mine is:

Model: S2 RS4S

Mods: Turbo back exhaust, constant high boost mode

Power: 137 awkw (from prev owner, was running 7psi but is now running 10)

->0-100 Time: 5.65 as read from the ecutalk (with a quite a bit of clutch slip)

Cheers, Tom

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/315900-stagea-0-100-times/
Share on other sites

So mine is:

Model: S2 RS4S

Mods: Turbo back exhaust, constant high boost mode

Power: 137 awkw (from prev owner, was running 7psi but is now running 10)

->0-100 Time: 5.65 as read from the ecutalk (with a quite a bit of clutch slip)

Cheers, Tom

O-100 in 5.65 - I should check your reading

Edited by RSVFOURUK

yeah my speedo does read a tiny bit under, but probably still a sub 6 sec time

did also launch from about 5k rpm

lets see some more times, most boost controllers have these kind of functions if set up correctly

Bear in mind RSFOURUK that most of the world uses km/hr not miles/hour. But it still looks a bit quick to me.

Yes sorry about that

The 260RS was supposed to do 0-60mph (100kmph is 62,5mph) in 6 seconds so 5.65 would be a fair bit quicker.

Yes sorry about that

The 260RS was supposed to do 0-60mph (100kmph is 62,5mph) in 6 seconds so 5.65 would be a fair bit quicker.

Another thing to keep in mind is that Stagea speedos read high... usually by 7-10% :(

Not sure how the factory measure their 0-100kph times, but a 0-110 speedo reading time would give a more accurate 0-100 real world time... if that makes sense :)

blazt tells me mine does 6.3 on a good slip launch from 4 grand . cat back front mount 0.65 bar . half a tank and my 100+ kg

are you going into third or limiting 2nd? could cut my time if i let it hit the limiter in 2nd

There's a program I've got on my iPhone that measures acceleration, braking, g-forces (on a skidpan or during acceleration/braking) and approximate power outputs.

It's called Dynolicious, here's a link...

I haven't had a chance to use it yet because I like owning a car and having a licence and dont' want to risk either of those by "practicing" on the road, so maybe at the next track day or skid pan day I'll try them out.

The gtech bangers are quite good, used to sell them and trial used one, was pretty close to the money on a friends tt 300zx we are talking about 5 years ago and have no idea what model, from memory they were about 400bucks to buy

Or just use the stop watch on your phone.

if you've got a digital camera that takes video you can use that, there are bits of software about that let you go through frame by frame and you can work out the exact point when you hit 100

let see some times ppl

mine was like 3.?? (cant remember exact number, but was measured with gtech) when i did it years ago with the old motor setup, it did a 11.1 @128mph on the gtech on same run (street tyres on the street with stock gtr manual box). 560hp at wheels, and pretty modified (too much to list)

Edited by unique1

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

    • Don't they cool down technically when you're sitting at a set of lights? 
    • The circuit if not a resistor divider is using an opamp to deliver a specific current normally. By maintaining the current as resistance changes, the voltage does too. Add to that, thermistors are normally non linear too,which can make creating a function impossible. Most uses of a thermistor people will utilise a lookup table to get the corresponding temperature.
    • On a scale of 1 to 10, how shit are the RE003's? (10 being ultra mega shit) Was hoping they'd be alright for a non-daily driven R32 that might get driven to Charnwood Macca's in the dry once a month, and maybe the odd hoon up and down the hills that pass for mountains in sunny Canberra.  Bob Jane currently running a "Buy 4 Get 1 Free" deal on RE003s and my brain can't comprehend anything else being value for money
    • Yeah, they look good. I should try to fit them on mine. But being a GTSt, the guard shape probably doesn't suit properly.
    • Nah, it's not a simple voltage divider. I'm not enough of an electronics guru to know how they make these circuits work. If I had a better idea of how the ECU's temperature measuring is done, I could then actually do as you want, which is turn that resistance chart into a voltage chart. But my approach has not worked. What I did was interpolate the sensor ohms values for the temperatures you listed, as you did not have any of them on a temperature ending in zero or 5. These are: °C ECU V sensor ohms (interpolated) 58 2.68 11.85 57 2.7 11.89 56 2.74 11.93 54 2.8 12.01 49 3.06 12.208 47 3.18 12.284 43 3.37 12.42 I then assumed 5V supply to the resister and calculated the voltage drop across the sensor for each of those, which is just 5 - the above voltages, and then calculated the current that must be flowing through the sensor. So you get:             Values in sensor °C ECU V sensor ohms (interpolated) Supply volts Volt drop Current 58 2.68 11.85     5 2.32 0.195781 57 2.7 11.89     5 2.3 0.19344 56 2.74 11.93     5 2.26 0.189438 54 2.8 12.01     5 2.2 0.183181 49 3.06 12.208     5 1.94 0.158912 47 3.18 12.284     5 1.82 0.14816 43 3.37 12.42     5 1.63 0.13124 And then use that current and the ECU's sensed voltage (which must be the voltage drop across the in ECU resister is there is one) to calculate the resistance of that in ECU resistor. You get:             Values in sensor   Other resistor °C ECU V sensor ohms (interpolated) Supply volts Volt drop Current   Volt Drop Resistance 58 2.68 11.85     5 2.32 0.195781   2.68 13.68879 57 2.7 11.89     5 2.3 0.19344   2.7 13.95783 56 2.74 11.93     5 2.26 0.189438   2.74 14.46381 54 2.8 12.01     5 2.2 0.183181   2.8 15.28545 49 3.06 12.208     5 1.94 0.158912   3.06 19.25592 47 3.18 12.284     5 1.82 0.14816   3.18 21.46325 43 3.37 12.42     5 1.63 0.13124   3.37 25.67816 And that's where it falls apart, because the resulting resistance would need to be the same for all of those temperatures, and it is not. So clearly the physical model is not correct. Anyway, you or someone else can use that information to go forward if someone has a better physical model. I can also show you how to interpolate for temperatures between those in the resistance chart. It's not fun because you've got to either do it like I did it for every 5°C range separately, or check to see if the slope remains constant over a wide range, then you can just work up a single formula. I'm just showing how to do it for a single 5° span. For the 58°C temperature, resistance = 11.77+2*(11.97-11.77)/5 The calc is a little arse backwards because the resistance is NTC (negative temperature coefficient), so the slope is negative, but I'm lazy, so I just treated 58 as if it was 2 degrees away from 60, not 3 degrees away from 55, and so on.
×
×
  • Create New...