Jump to content
SAU Community

Idea's For A Time Attack Car


dmac_25
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yeah I seen his build years back what he is selling it for is pretty cheap for what he wants.

Budget would be what ever the parts costs can build engine tune it on the dyno weld up a cage and do all the work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The problem is anything quick in Time Attack wont be legal to run in IPRA or Prod Sports or Targa tas etc

anything turbo in IPRA costs Squillions to even make the top 10 of a state round.

If you ask me I can't justify spending $200k on a car that will be used once a year and needs the likes of John Boston/Tarzan Yamada to be driven quick.

But if thats what you want then an EVO is the only real choice for time attack stuff (you don't want to know how much has been spent on the Cusco WRX)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I look into it following the trend with an evo seems to be the only option to tick all boxes.

Even if you didn't race the car in ipra the car would be built for it.

Did some research on increasing a 4g63 capacity and found some nice info on bringing them out to 2.6 with a BC kit and a 4g64 block.

Evo 5 are pretty cheap these days as well.

Yeah it's a bit disappointing the cusco wrx and it's numbers.

Will have to upgrade the dyno to awd tho with an evo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about an S-Chassis with AWD. Say S14 with GTR running gear!

Didn't FullRace build one in the USA for time attack? Interesting to hear how it went against EVO's and the like.

Just as heavy as a GTR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then go full house S-Chassis with SR23VET simliar to Scorch S15.

I still think it didn't go close to it's potential at this years event. Plenty more to come and was fastest Nissan there.

Added piccy cause everyone loves looking at hot nissan racecars!!!

post-34918-0-05350200-1316753797_thumb.jpg

Edited by nismoman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I look into it following the trend with an evo seems to be the only option to tick all boxes.

Even if you didn't race the car in ipra the car would be built for it.

If you want to be competitive in Superlap, you need to get this idea completely out of your head, unless you're thinking of Clubsprint class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about an S-Chassis with AWD. Say S14 with GTR running gear!

Didn't FullRace build one in the USA for time attack? Interesting to hear how it went against EVO's and the like.

Hard to take you seriously if you think that's a good idea, if you want AWD it makes sense in every way to stay with a factory AWD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the rules say, "must retain standard shock tower", says nothing about using them.

Seriously, I'm curious as to what the prize money for winning Superlap/WTAC is outright?

Would it be more than winning an Aust. Champ Sports Sedan Championship? Do they have prize money?

Do sports sedans even have prize money State or National level?

Maybe it's for no money, and just for the glory....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I'm also starting to lean to an S chassis as well considering how well they went as well.

The main thing would be to try get it nice and low in its curb weight and enough power.

Would like to run a vh45 in it been in the process of building a sc kit with a m122 would give nice low down drive out and if what people are saying they weigh they are about 150 pounds lighter then an RB if the weights are correct

Link to comment
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
 Share




  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Opened up the cluster to inspect the gauge itself for signs of damage and it looks good. Got curious since that needle doesn't go back to a "neutral" position by itself (it stays in the same position when ignition is off. so I manually moved it to 1/2. Connected it back, turned on the ignition and the needle started moving up! Not sure what's up with that but before that the needle was way down below empty like fully south west. There's always a chance that the needle moved slightly the first time I tried and I didn't notice because of how slowly it moves and how far it was from the markings. I don't know if the current needle position is accurate so I'll fill it up and see where that brings it. I guess I'll try to adjust it manually if it doesn't get to F. Looks like the needle position is relative and not absolute? Thanks all for your help and patience!
    • You're confusing two different responders and more than one issue. The stock Neo ECU boost sensor is used by the ECU for protection purposes. It is essentially only an overboost sensor. It is not used for determining engine load for fuelling or ignition purposes. That task falls solely to the AFM. Any aftermarket ECU that either has an onboard MAP sensor or a plug in one, will use the MAP sensor as the primary load sensor. Or I should perhaps say "can", rather than "will", because some of them have the option of using other primary load sensors. That MAP sensor is not for the same function as the stock Neo boost sensor. The reason I recommended against a plug and play ECU is that they are intended to run a particular engine and usually in the car that the particular engine came in. So, if you have a transplanted engine in a different car, with some parts of the original missing (such as the boost sensor, for example) and therefore likely non-standardness of the loom and its insertion into the car's loom, then it is very likely that you will run into the same problems with needing to fix up wiring to make it work that you would with the stock ECU. And, if doing so for the stock ECU is enough of an obstacle that you start considering a standalone plugin as a solution, it should become clear that the plugin is quite possibly not the solution you'd hope it to be. It would just lead to more of the same type of problem solving work to get it going. In the above paragraph and in my earlier post, the lack of the boost sensor is not critical. It was just used as an example of something that we knew you did not have right, such that the stock ECU would not work. I took that as an indicator of a reasonable probability that there were other related problems hiding there.
    • I can think of two places in my city of <1.5million population that specialise in automotive instrument repairs.Unless you're out in the wilds of Quebec, you have 3 major Canadian and 3 major US cities within the same distance as the single nearest city to mine. Surely there is somewhere you could send it.
    • I never cared for twins but whenever these conversations came up, I always presumed the higher number represented a larger turbo. Learn something new everyday. 
    • Interesting, I've never seen a failure like that before but with the age of these cars and the general questionable-ness of all kinds of parts these days you can't rule anything out I suppose. Boost leak testing the boost control system would've revealed this though.
×
×
  • Create New...