Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey all,

Went to calder last friday for the 1st time and and ran my car a few times, was wondering what sort of times other similiar cars was getting as i was going up against 11 sec cars!

My car and Mods:

1993 R33 Gts-t (Auto)

Performance mods:

Apexi N1 catback Exhuast

R34 Side mount cooler

running 9 Psi

Tyres: 17 inch rims with 245 continental tyres (about 60% thread) 22 PSI

and everything else is pretty much stock. Not tuned or anything like that.

My best time was:

14.29 @ 157 km/h

most my times was between 14.3 and 14.6 - i had about 11 runs.

I found that the car would launch hard but then die in the last 100 meters :D

i would be very happy with that time.

our skylines up north just cant seem to push the same times. different track and maybe the prep will probably be part of the reason.

what 60ft time?

hmmm really? the weather could also play a part i guess....on friday (when i went) it wasnt too bad, track temp was about 24 degrees..

60ft time was: 2.11

660' - 9.12 @ 125 km/h

That's a good time.

Are you planning to go quicker?

ye id love to break into the 13 seconds... and then i will be happy.

My car is a daily driver, ive had it for about 5 years and i've done 110,000 km's on it since ive got it...

I rekon maybe with a FMIC, high flow cat + dump pipe i could improve the top end a bit and maybe break into the high 13's!

But at the same time, as it is now, its great for day to day street driving / over taking and quicker off the line than more modified / tuned manual R33's of some of my mates and i don't know if i want to lose that to gain a few milliseconds on the drag strip!

What was your 60ft times?

Their is some easy time to be made up at a reasonable cost.

1) Get yourself a pair of R32 GTR rims (or 300ZX rims) and buy a new pair of Mickey Thompson ET Street tyres. This will lower your 60ft time without a doubt and should cost under $700.

2) Get a 1 piece front/dump pipe along with a new hiflow cat to finish off your exhaust system. You will have more power right through the rev range which will result in a higher terminal speed (currently ~94mph) and should cost under $700 as well.

What was your 60ft times?

Their is some easy time to be made up at a reasonable cost.

1) Get yourself a pair of R32 GTR rims (or 300ZX rims) and buy a new pair of Mickey Thompson ET Street tyres. This will lower your 60ft time without a doubt and should cost under $700.

2) Get a 1 piece front/dump pipe along with a new hiflow cat to finish off your exhaust system. You will have more power right through the rev range which will result in a higher terminal speed (currently ~94mph) and should cost under $700 as well.

60ft time was 2.11

thanks for the tip! ye i'm def going to invest in making the exhaust to turbo back me thinks!

Justjap have a nice deal going for you:

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/JJ...RB-t204414.html

So much cheaper than I first thought, wouldn't take more than an hours labour if it is a straight fit to your existing cat-back exhaust so you should be able to have it fitted for about $500 all up.

is it losing traction on launch?

being auto and stockish, I don't think it would.

anyway.

to get something like a 13.9 (in to the 13's as you're said).. get the exhaust finished (dump pipe and front pipe in one and a new large cat).

then get an SAFC and have it tuned.

Even the blue screen SAFC would get you a good increase in power, especially in the upper end.

the Blue screen ones would be below $300 now for sure.

dump/front pipe in one can be picked up for about $200 from a number of places brand new.

SAFC tune will probably set you back about $200.

all of that easily under $1K.

should push power to near 190rwkw.

should net you 13.xx

if you are losing traction on launch, then look in to tyres too.

I would also race with 16's instead of 17's.

I dare say that your 17's with tyres would weigh more than the stockers which weigh 16kg with tyres.

EDIT - don't replace the R34 SMIC with a FMIC.

you will lose the response that you love at the moment.

it is more than up to the task.

If the R34 SMIC doesn't have any ducting to it, I would look in to making one for it.

Water spray is another option but probably not needed.

Edited by GTST
What was your 60ft times?

Their is some easy time to be made up at a reasonable cost.

1) Get yourself a pair of R32 GTR rims (or 300ZX rims) and buy a new pair of Mickey Thompson ET Street tyres. This will lower your 60ft time without a doubt and should cost under $700.

2) Get a 1 piece front/dump pipe along with a new hiflow cat to finish off your exhaust system. You will have more power right through the rev range which will result in a higher terminal speed (currently ~94mph) and should cost under $700 as well.

his current mph is more like 97

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

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...