If a stock 5.7 Monaro is doing the 400m in 15s and the Ford BA turbo is doing 14.3s then 14 second standard zeds or even 12 second zeds (yes modded of course)are truly awesome as we all know, so my question is when trying to explain to non car people, "Where does the Zed lie in performance ratings?" Is the zed in the top 50% of power performance cars, yes I'm sure it is! But is it in the top 20% or even the top 10%, that I don't know. What do you think? cheers Geoff
I think, were in the mix with EVOs suppra honda and WRX, although the new sti wrx with 206kw is very quick, but a pig to drive, and theres a range off other nissan turbos, GTR GTST liner ect, that are with us,but make no mistake, a good stock TT is rapid and has more appeal than the all the rest put together :zlove
The zed is definately up there (TT) with the other jap turbos. I would put them ahead of 180 and 200's and even some v8's. As for the monaro, those things are capable of great times. It really depends on how well you drive since they are a bi@tch to shift. All the managers in my work drive monaros (some LS2)and from the tracks they leave they can certainly boggie.
what I find interesting is that an NA zed will also do 15's with the fastest that I've seen being a 14.5 by Trayns... Not bad for a 15 year old 3 litre NA motor. Cheers
Is a BA turbo supposed to do 14.3? My first run at WSID last week was against one and it only did a 15.2. At stage 3 a TT should be able to do high 12s - low 13s, not many (if any) cars under $100,000 will beat it. I was comfortably passing 300kw HSV's , Lotus Elise, Porsche Boxster, Chrysler Crossfire, new M3 and M5 BMW, 05 WRX sti and others down the straight at the last Eastern Creek open track day. Fastest thing there was a GT3 Porsche and I didnt get to have a clear shot at it on the straight as he went in to the pits, but I was catching him up at about 2 seconds a lap.
Must be those super light wheels of yours I can never understant what the deal is with the GT3 and GT2 Porsche. Isn't the GT3 a N/A? The GT2 is a TT with 100hp more power and look at the difference in torque!!! Yet those times are practically the same, weight is only about 60kg's difference. So what's the story???
Re: Is a BA turbo supposed to do 14.3? A stock BA won't do that, Ford had to "de-tune" the XR6 turbo so that the V8 still held the kilowatt title, I have heard that the boost on the turbo can be easily increased so that it will be running at 300kw, they would easily run in the 14's possibly in the 13's.
Re: what the deal is with the GT3 and GT2 Porsche well, think about it this way, the GT2 is a high powered rear engined RWD car. would take a very able driver to make full use out of it. a NA GT3 on the other hand is perfectly balanced and would be a lot easier to produce near identical lap times. take those 2 cars to say, nurgburgring or le mans with insanly long straights, then the GT2 should leaves the GT3 in the dust.
Stock BA XR6 Turbo is about 190-195 RWKW, as per our dyno day in Bris (we had one there with us taking part). Add a $1200 computer (Cappa) to increase boost and customise the tune, and the car can achieve 240-250 RWKW, especially with a better exhaust. That's well over 300KW at the flywheel. Match that with a good driver, and you'll get a low 13 or high 12, specially as they have traction control too Stock Zed is 206 Flywheel KW (rated) so it gives some comparison.
Don't forget that the 206Kw figure for the Zed is just a 'gentlemens agreed' figure, and is probably much higher, as witnessed at many Dyno-days. Certainly not in the 240-250 class, but not to be sneezed at!
so if my car now has approx 230-240 rwkw (with my new intercoolers) that would mean (+ 1/3rd) i have 320 Kw at the engine? XR6T... boo hiss... (i spat one out tonight, by the way )
Re: so if my car now has approx 230-240 rwkw (with my new intercoolers) I read this in another thread about losing 30% of your power through the drive train. I would have to disagree with this as a set figure. Having the same drive train but putting mods on the engine will not cause a constant 30% loss. So if you are running an imagainary 300kw at the flywheel a 30% loss would mean 210kw at the wheels. (90kw loss) Increasing the power at the flywheel to 350kw and keeping the drivetrain the same should not mean that you will lose 105kw through the same drive train, it should stil be the original 90kw.
Up with the best! I say...I whooped the pants off a Hyundai Excel only yesterday and boy was the old girl who was driving it annoyed!
Drivetrain losses are ALWAYS a percentage of flywheel horsepower.... that 30% rule is only used as a "guesstimate" and is usually referring to autos (use 25% for manuals). The more horsepower produced at the flywheel the greater the number of hp lost through the drivetrain but ALSO the more hp getting to the wheels because it is a percentage. One would assume the percentage would shrink as the horsepower produced at the flywheel rose but the only way you would get figures on it would be to put the motor on an engine dyno then fit it to the car and put the car on a chassis dyno and log the differences. There would also be some traction losses on the chassis dyno, especially when you are producing BIG horsepower. If your theory were correct (a constant 90kw drivetrain loss) then a stock TT would only put about 125kw to the wheels.
John, it might have been a different story..... if one of her bowls hadn't rolled under the clutch pedal :thumbsup:
First things first Don't compare enignes across models and assume the more turbo's the better. The GT3 was design as a lighter weight sports car for rich semi-retired racers to trash something about in the Porsche Cup. The Twin Turbo 911, is the top of the range street machine and the GT3 was suppose to be the street car for the track as the Twin Turbo model had all the bells and whistles for luxury street performance, sort of like GT3 is to the skyline like the Twin Turbo would be to the Z, one's a full racer, one's a real "GT" luxury power house (GT in terms of it's original 90's super car Grand Turismo definition ie full luxury and yet kickass power too). After kicking everyone's butt on the track, the GT3 was left alone and all the car media started bagging on the Twin Turbo as the mother of all street cars and yet when your pushing 220 into a corner or hitting 300 on the straight (on public roads mind you, heaps of reviews in Motor magazine a few years back) anyway they complained that even at those speeds the car seemed to drive it self and unlike a lambo or Ferrari, you didn't have to focus on sticking gear changes and you didn't feel like you were fighting the car to do what you wanted.... Sooooo They designed the GT2 to replace the street Twin Turbo 911, and took off the front and middle diff, making it rear wheel only, with out all the driver assist and slip control between front and rear diff's (middle diff would control power between front and rear), they stuck in an extra 50kw somewhere and made a monster of a street car and said "Here stop your bitching, if you wana car that you can barely drive... fine customers always right try the GT2" I'm a keen follower of Porsche technology as a friends dad was a mechanic for Porsche and would work in my dad's workshop every now and then and help people build track cars with dad, and some of the tech they had back then made other car companies look like toys in comparison. But the info I get is usually from him, so might be a little bias, as I have never raced Porsches and can only take his word on most things. Then again one famous car reviewer, when he saw the first Z32, was quoted as saying "It looks like Mr Ferrari ran off with Mrs Porsche and had a kid called 300zx" So how can you beat that !!!!!
