Jump to content
SAU Community

Straight Line Performance

Amir

By Amir,
in R35 GTR

 Share

Recommended Posts

scathing Grand Master

scathing

Posted
Posted
dont you think if you put your foot down in a 300rwkw car, it will wheelspin at 80km/h

To humour you I'll answer this question directly, too.

It depends on how good the rest of the car is.

I've driven a 280rwkW 350Z running a 275 width Pirelli P Zero. With a rolling start in 1st gear, it wheelspun around 600RPM from redline. Second gear roll starts were completely fuss-free all the way to the limiter.

If you're talking about some shithouse car with retreads on the back then, yeah, it might be a struggle. But the W427 or the new Typhoon would have its suspension engineered around its power output. If a 350Z with geometry-affecting lowering springs and 275 width tyres can cope with that amount of power and torque, so can a modern Falcodore.

Amir Rising Star

Amir

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Lets think about that, based on my post that we're responding directly to Amir's question in the first post of this thread?

(Emphasis added by me, spelling mistake is by him)

Would you care to revise your statement, given the context of his question?

OK heres a scenario. the 3 cars are all in 3rd doing 40km/hr in the dry and they floor it. The 3 cars dont lose traction.

My assumption will be that the F6 and w427 will not fall behind the GTR. Similar weight, power and torque.

If Im not wrong the old F6 had accleration figures from 80-120km same as the Porsche 911.

geeteeare Apprentice

geeteeare

Posted
Posted

It sounds like compare Falcon XT, Holden Omega with WRX :laughing-smiley-014:

Come on, they aren't same league.

FG F6, W427 should compare with BMW M3, M5 or AMG E63...

and GT-R should compare with Porsche 997TT or Corvette Z06...

FORD, HOLDEN .........stop dreaming :nyaanyaa:

iijj Community Regular

iijj

Posted
Posted

The R35 wins acceleration comparos with ferraris, Lambos and plenty of other past and present exotica. Why does the performance seem to contradict establish traditional power to weight boundaries? My guess (cos I'll never get near the tiller of one!) is a combo of traction control, more advanced electronic controlling of various components (eg 'box, diff, susp., turbo boost, launch ctrl, clutch etc) and, yes, 4WD.

Other pts...

CSV makes the car tested in the latest MOTOR, not HSV.

Traction is going to be an issue with RWD high powered cars, even once rolling.

The F6 will not produce (stock) more than 310kW and will weigh more than GTR (think 13.2 ish WITH t/c).

The W427 will produce more power than GTR, will be significantly porkier and won't better high 12's, stock.

People on those forums WILL compare apples with oranges all day...

Me... I'll be drinking reconstituted juice, but I still dream of the taste of the real thing!

scathing Grand Master

scathing

Posted
Posted
OK heres a scenario. the 3 cars are all in 3rd doing 40km/hr in the dry and they floor it. The 3 cars dont lose traction.

My assumption will be that the F6 and w427 will not fall behind the GTR. Similar weight, power and torque.

At what speed do they stop? What gear are they in?

If you're talking about a 3rd or 4th gear roll from 40km/hr to the top of 3rd on the HSV, it would be close. The R35 will be off-boost.

If we're talking first gear from 40km/hr to 160km/hr (the "old ton"), even if the W427 doesn't break traction when you grab second its gearchange will still be far slower than the R35's. The ratios should also be a lot closer in the GT-R. The R35 will be on boost by 40km/hr so the displacement advantage over a smaller turbo engine is negated. Its aerodynamic profile is better.

I'd say the two sedans would struggle to keep up with the GT-R.

And the F6 won't even be a competitor. There's no way FPV will permit their I6 to outpower their range-topping V8, for marketing reasons. The knuckle draggers who buy these kinds of cars wouldn't stand for it. And the Ford V8 is well off the pace. Unless FPV somehow manages to find a couple of Ford GT engines and fit them, the F6 will always be hobbled to under 300kW.

R32zilla Experienced

R32zilla

Posted
Posted
i read that the GTR acceleration 0-100 from roll start is about 4.2 (cant find the article i read it)

so thats how ford and holden get such good 0-100 times?

rolling at 0 k's an hour....:P

Zoggy Proficient

Zoggy

Posted
Posted

alright alright i got my words mixed up , no need to point and laugh :cheers:

i read somewere ( cant confirm were ) that the gtr accelerated from 0-100 in about 4.2 without using the launch control , thats what i meant.

Mr_GaZZa Rising Star

Mr_GaZZa

Posted
Posted
alright alright i got my words mixed up , no need to point and laugh :/

i read somewere ( cant confirm were ) that the gtr accelerated from 0-100 in about 4.2 without using the launch control , thats what i meant.

ROFL!!!!

dude, seriously WTF?

its under 4s without launch control...

go youtube and check out the review/test videos

hahaha its like 3.4s 0-100km wif launch control

Zoggy Proficient

Zoggy

Posted
Posted (edited)

guys i think there is some confustion here... I know it pulled 3.3 sec 0-100... but i read on one of the earlier reviews that it took the tester 4.2 seconds from 0-100 WITHOUT launch control... i dont really beleive it would take that long but i havnt seen anyone test the 0-100 without launch control , does anyone know what it would pull ??

Edited by Zoggy
geeteeare Apprentice

geeteeare

Posted
Posted
alright alright i got my words mixed up , no need to point and laugh :down:

i read somewere ( cant confirm were ) that the gtr accelerated from 0-100 in about 4.2 without using the launch control , thats what i meant.

it's about 4s flat if you don't use launch control.

Amir Rising Star

Amir

Posted
  • Author
Posted
guys i think there is some confustion here... I know it pulled 3.3 sec 0-100... but i read on one of the earlier reviews that it took the tester 4.2 seconds from 0-100 WITHOUT launch control... i dont really beleive it would take that long but i havnt seen anyone test the 0-100 without launch control , does anyone know what it would pull ??

can't see why some are getting so pissed off b/c you qouted a time 0.2s off without launch control?

R31Heaven Proficient

R31Heaven

Posted
Posted

Why is it every one is trying to find some scenario were a Ford or Holden may win, the fact is on a track road scenario the GTR is faster that is that, you take 100 scenarios the GTR will win 99% but Holden, Ford fans wil say but it bet a GTR 1% FFS get over it. LOL

  • 2 weeks later...
Cain Community Regular

Cain

Posted
Posted
To humour you I'll answer this question directly, too.

It depends on how good the rest of the car is.

I've driven a 280rwkW 350Z running a 275 width Pirelli P Zero. With a rolling start in 1st gear, it wheelspun around 600RPM from redline. Second gear roll starts were completely fuss-free all the way to the limiter.

If you're talking about some shithouse car with retreads on the back then, yeah, it might be a struggle. But the W427 or the new Typhoon would have its suspension engineered around its power output. If a 350Z with geometry-affecting lowering springs and 275 width tyres can cope with that amount of power and torque, so can a modern Falcodore.

Hell my TT 350z with Kumho's and load's of neg camber on rear wont spin up 2nd when hitting boost.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • funkymonkey
      Jacks that fit under GTR lips that can reach the subframe?

      By funkymonkey · Posted

      I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • Duncan
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Duncan · Posted

      You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...