Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

wow, quicker than both Motor and Wheels who couldn't crack 4.0 secs. Why are they so slow, when EVERY single acceleration test around the world regularly yields 0-60 mp/h times in around 3.3 sec and 0-100 km/h between 3.5-3.7 secs?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4600450
Share on other sites

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

Wow! Will be interesting to see the future results!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4601844
Share on other sites

the nissan dealer told me if i used the LC for twice or more, it will damage the transmission/clutch, which will cost big bucks to replace.

but it seems like everyone here is not too concern about it and keep using the LC.

any feedback????

I think you'll find that's scare tactics. My dealer has been quite reasonable about it. Unlike LC1, LC2 seems to be reasonably easy on the car - that said I've only done it twice, and wont be using it at all with the modifications.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4602186
Share on other sites

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

I have not timed mine yet using GTech or equivalent but had a few races against my brother's 997 911Turbo, Auto, (the faster one), with overboost engaged. (680Nm instead of 620Nm for 10 seconds). Carried out on a closed track. Using walkie talkies to countdown to the start made for a very unscientific starting process and each of us would win the start on different occasions making for some varying results.

1) 911 stalled to approx 2000 with gentle throttle and GT-R stalled to 2500 with partial throttle. 911 won start by a car length, (due to me napping at the get go), GTR had passed it by 100 KPH and was a car length ahead at 150 KPH.

2) Same conditions GTR won start and pulled ahead by 2-3 car lengths at 150 KPH.

3) Both cars launched with no brakes whatsoever, just floor the accelerator. GT-R leapt ahead by 2-3 car lengths and pulled away steadily.

4) 911 stalled to 2100 RPM with throttle floored. His boost rose to 9 PSI before we even started moving... GT-R again stalled "gently" to 2500 RPM so no "pre" boost to speak of there. I napped again at the start, or perhaps he cheated!! Lost start by 2 car lengths and maintained gap to him to around 100 KPH but did not reel him in at all.

I had 1850 kms on the clock, his car 10,000 kms. All my tests were done with VDC set to race and Suspension to comfort, in Auto with trans set to race. I didnt disengage VDC and it still allows the revs to rise to over 3000 RPM so why bother disengaging it? VDC in race mode does not cull engine power if traction is lost. I didnt have the fortitude to do a 3000+ RPM launch with both pedals floored......yet

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4603192
Share on other sites

I recorded the following 0 - 100kph times using a GTech pro RR device (settings RRR):

Automatic mode with launch control 3.764 seconds -flat surface

Automatic mode with no launch control 3.900 - flat surface

Manual Mode with launch control 3.820 -flat surface

Manual mode without launch 4.064 - uphill

This is for an ADM, premium, 22 degrees.

Tests were conducted at the track.

When the HKS 570 kit and Cobb custom tune (Croydon racing developments) are installed next week, I will post the enhanced 0- 100kph numbers for comparison purposes.

With just 1150km on the odometer and K&N filters installed, my GTech Pro RR results were not as good as yours:

All 3 settings on R, no launch control, stall to 2500RPM (electronically limited!), floor the gas and step off the brake: 4 runs:

0-20m 2.552 sec, 0-100kph 4.344sec

2.575 4.377

2.542 4.316

2.560 4.351

The first second and a half after launch it feels like stretching an elastic band as the boost builds up and then all hell breaks loose. I am wondering if the brand new clutches need to bed in more because it feels very laggy from a dig, until a second or two after launch when it goes berserk. I never got a hint of a wheel spin on smooth new asphalt. Also, the engine may still be a bit tight?

This car is definitely a rolling start king but from a dig, without launch control, it's not setting the world on fire.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4618228
Share on other sites

I've heard so much inconsistency with pricing in Australia for this new GTR, and there has been some discussion over another forum about ...

_______________________________________________________________________________

Acne Adult Medicine Cure

wheelchair lift

And how is the pricing policy going to improve the 0-100kph times?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4618919
Share on other sites

With just 1150km on the odometer and K&N filters installed, my GTech Pro RR results were not as good as yours:

All 3 settings on R, no launch control, stall to 2500RPM (electronically limited!), floor the gas and step off the brake: 4 runs:

0-20m 2.552 sec, 0-100kph 4.344sec

2.575 4.377

2.542 4.316

2.560 4.351

The first second and a half after launch it feels like stretching an elastic band as the boost builds up and then all hell breaks loose. I am wondering if the brand new clutches need to bed in more because it feels very laggy from a dig, until a second or two after launch when it goes berserk. I never got a hint of a wheel spin on smooth new asphalt. Also, the engine may still be a bit tight?

This car is definitely a rolling start king but from a dig, without launch control, it's not setting the world on fire.

I've been told the standard airbox is better than the aftermarket job, I certainly had this problem with my EvoIX, it went faster with the std airbox.

Interestingly my 0 - 20m times were similar to yours. I had 2600 kms on the car.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4624654
Share on other sites

I've been told the standard airbox is better than the aftermarket job, I certainly had this problem with my EvoIX, it went faster with the std airbox.

Interestingly my 0 - 20m times were similar to yours. I had 2600 kms on the car.

Thanks for the tip. The thought crossed my mind!

It appears that both cars have the same turbo lag down low, hence similar sluggish 20m, but yours has a better top end which could be due to the air box.

I will swap back to stock air filters and give it another shot at 2000km.

What was your max HP reading? Mine was only 265kW with 1830kg gross weight input.

Good luck with the HKS! :action-smiley-069:

Edited by GT-Ricer
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4625420
Share on other sites

4.3sec-4.4sec 0-100km/h.

Seriously fellas, 370Z with a few mods would probably do that, or very, very close to that. For sure I know that an EVo-X would do 3.5sec 0-100km/h in FQ-400 guise. If my car is 30% slower than what Nissan advertised in 2007 and 2008, 3.3sec, then I would be seriously pissed of with them.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4626857
Share on other sites

4.3sec-4.4sec 0-100km/h.

Seriously fellas, 370Z with a few mods would probably do that, or very, very close to that. For sure I know that an EVo-X would do 3.5sec 0-100km/h in FQ-400 guise. If my car is 30% slower than what Nissan advertised in 2007 and 2008, 3.3sec, then I would be seriously pissed of with them.

I suspect the 4.3 - 4.4 second car is an exception. I was getting 3.7 easy, in fact each run was getting quicker. The journos managed 4.0 flat (without LC).

The 4.4 second car had an aftermarket airbox in it which probably slowed it down.

The JDM cars are getting 3.3 seconds because they are running 15 psi compared to the ADM 12 psi. And as you would know, that is very easy to fix. My gut feel is that these cars (even in JDM spec) are going to be easy to tune to big power without too many risks, which is no different to most turbo cars these days.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4627099
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I suspect the 4.3 - 4.4 second car is an exception. I was getting 3.7 easy, in fact each run was getting quicker. The journos managed 4.0 flat (without LC).

The 4.4 second car had an aftermarket airbox in it which probably slowed it down.

The JDM cars are getting 3.3 seconds because they are running 15 psi compared to the ADM 12 psi. And as you would know, that is very easy to fix. My gut feel is that these cars (even in JDM spec) are going to be easy to tune to big power without too many risks, which is no different to most turbo cars these days.

Today I re-tested my car’s acceleration times over 5 runs after 1800km, with stock air filters in place for the past 500km.

My 0-100kph times ranged from 4.37ces to 4.55 sec. I tried everything and every combination: stall against the brake to 2400RPM (limit) ; step of the brake and hit the gas. No real difference.

My car engages quite well and after 10-20m or so it bogs down for about 1 sec before taking off again with real momentum.

It refuses to accelerate from a dig in a linear fashion.

This bog-down happens in first gear so it has nothing to do with a gear change.

It seems that after the initial launch something in the ECU shuts down or retards the timing, before it resumes on its ballistic trajectory.

I spoke to Mathew at Col Crawford who will be doing my first service next Wed-Thurs. We will go for a test drive and also compare with the demonstrator car.

It’s a real disappointment so far!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4650647
Share on other sites

Today I re-tested my car's acceleration times over 5 runs after 1800km, with stock air filters in place for the past 500km.

My 0-100kph times ranged from 4.37ces to 4.55 sec. I tried everything and every combination: stall against the brake to 2400RPM (limit) ; step of the brake and hit the gas. No real difference.

My car engages quite well and after 10-20m or so it bogs down for about 1 sec before taking off again with real momentum.

It refuses to accelerate from a dig in a linear fashion.

This bog-down happens in first gear so it has nothing to do with a gear change.

It seems that after the initial launch something in the ECU shuts down or retards the timing, before it resumes on its ballistic trajectory.

I spoke to Mathew at Col Crawford who will be doing my first service next Wed-Thurs. We will go for a test drive and also compare with the demonstrator car.

It's a real disappointment so far!

I hear you.............

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/270400-0-100kph-times/#findComment-4650903
Share on other sites

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. Was just wondering if you were having a small stroke or if there was some slur/gaf/inside joke that I wasn't aware of.
    • That was a fark up, it's Salamanca Place I was thinking of. And now I'm curious as to what potential slur/gaf I have caused with Salamander Road, ha ha!
    • Actually everyone on the roads was really well behaved. The only person that did any minor tailgating was a local hoon in a Turbo Focus. Unfortunately we weren't going the same way so there was no grand initial D touge battle. Lots of people pulled over and let me through. The amount of "Hey man nice car, omg skyline, nice 34 man woo" was suprising. Like really suprising. Like almost annoying. My partner was obviously surprised, she'd never seen anyone in the real world point out the car/like the car/want to chat about the car before, so to have like 3 people per day mention it was notable, I could finally say SEE? SOMEONE THINKS THEY'RE COOL. Everyone was also pretty suprised about the weather. Every day was dry and about ~13-14C. Mount Wellington had a sign that said they close the gates at 9pm and I was heading up there at about ~7:30. It was VERY apparent that conditions were getting significantly worse by the minute on the way up and down. The road on the mountain was terrible though, it's no driving road. I have various suspension related questions now. Luckily it was only about 20 minutes from where we were staying to the top of the mountain as said Google maps. We only had the 2 nights in Hobart. We went to the Farm Gate Market though which was really good - And went down to the Hastings Thermal springs/caves down there during the day. I'd definitely be up for going back again, so luckily there's a few more sights yet to see. Didn't get to do the west coast/queenstown/cradle mountain so this was supposed to be a 'scouting' trip anyway of sorts if I were to one day do/take part in/organize a more car-focused trip. As for the boat, it wasn't bad. Well it was bad, but not in the way you're thinking. We did the night trip which leaves at 6:45 (though you have to be there ~2 hours earlier) and arrives the next morning at about 6am. There is nothing to do on the ship. If you plan accordingly and bring a book/tablet/show to watch/charger you can just chill out, take some Travacalm and just sleep through it. The food there is an extremely basic buffet that costs $32 a plate, or $14 for a $3 pizza. The way back we had a travel kettle and a few different types of cup noodles and made our own tea/coffee in the room. This was a far superior way to do it. At the very least book one of the rooms with beds. I guess as we were in the off season we didn't have room mates. You get an option for rooms with 4 beds (2x bunks) or a room with just the two bottom beds. There's also some option for a deluxe queen bed but it's much pricer. We've been on sleeper trains in Asia before so we figured this is similar (and it was)
    • You just gotta be really, really, really clear and decisive with what you want your end product to be. 99% of people who want this conversion aren't "I want to run a 295 front tyre!" so they don't really need the widebody. They just want the OEM body to look a little less dumpy, so bonnet, bar, skirts job done with some camber, stretch, slam. It's when you want that, but then decide to pivot later you get big problems. See also if you're willing to get an all in one fibreglass bar, and you're willing to accept fibreglass problems like cracking the entire item on a driveway, instead of just a piece attached to the bottom, etc etc etc. Decide this all before buyin'.
×
×
  • Create New...