Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

My question would be if cars with minimal mods are doing 6 second flat (or under) 0-100km/h, then why are the 1/4 mile times not displaying that. If your doing a 0-100 in 5.9, then I would have thought the quarter would be a lot faster than 14.6

Example- humor me.

03-06 350z. Accepted to do a high 5.# second 0-100. Does a quarter in around 13.6 to 13.9. Stock.

Anyway, just my opinion. They might be going faster than I thought.

See what "the stag wagon" comes back with!?

My question would be if cars with minimal mods are doing 6 second flat (or under) 0-100km/h, then why are the 1/4 mile times not displaying that. If your doing a 0-100 in 5.9, then I would have thought the quarter would be a lot faster than 14.6

That's because they're not doing sub 6 sec 0-100 times, lol.

I have no idea if the Pocket dyno is accurate. I only used it because a) it was free & b) a reasonable form of comparison. It tells me that I dropped ~1.5 sec from one test to another, but in the real world I could have dropped from 5:00 minutes to 4:58.5 (sic).

Hand timed runs or phone apps are useful but not a proper comparison across cars/driver/location. Need a drag strip or other fancy electronic timing for that.

Yeah, it is debatable. And its all been done before. Some people would remember the M35 vs VE sportswagon thread, where a road test claimed that a stock M35 would do a 13.5 quarter, and 0-100 in 5.7 secs. lol- I'll buy that one!

Have to strap on some high end accelerometers and get a real figure if we want to end the debate. Really, does it matter? We have a good range of 1/4 mile times, and hopefully some really fast ones too once Scott gets his back together, and sky^rit as well. So we can compare them, and there is no error or subjectivity with 1/4 times. :)

Went on u tube found a 2002 ar/x in Russia doing a 0-100 showing the speedo dash only so being bored I did 10 stop watch times on it and got an average of 6.5 it sounds about right. Giving the amount of n m these cars have.??????

awd does count for a fair bit on 0-100, but not so over a 1/4m. My s1 c34 0-100 started in the low 7s std, and did a 5.99 before it went pop, using a HKS hard wired timer! Will see with the new motor, low 4s hopefully?

With a highflow the 0-100 times will usually be slower, that is assuming both turbo's are tuned properly and run the same mods. It's only past 50kph that mine would start to wind up and by then the stocker would be 2 or 3 car lengths in front.

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

    • Hey guys, I’m a veteran detailer with years of hands-on experience. I’ll be sharing quick, effective detailing tips to help you keep your Skyline (or any ride) looking its best. Got a question? Fire away!
    • I guess when I say it's a POS I mean.. the solution and the stuff has the capacity for maybe... 1 spot. You know, as a spot cleaner. What I really *want* is the ability to do an entire car, all upholstery, all carpet, mats, all seats, door card inserts, A pillars, roof liners, etc. In one go. I get lured by all the jank that comes out and think "I'd like to be able to clean to that degree"
    • I've got one (not the car one, the domestic spot cleaner one, which is basically the same jobbie) and have driven it hard for hours and hours at a time. Grimy sofas, 6' floor rugs, etc. I'd blame your specific example rather than the whole category. I haven't used mine in the car, because.... you know, it's my car. So there is no-one else's ball sweat in the driver's seat, there's no kid food/drink spills or hand prints inside because they've never had an opportunity to put them there. You know, basic, standard Skyline rules.
    • I normally run with I think a 10mm, and definitely use the second handle you can add to a drill. They hurt when they bins up!   For the crush tube, once all subframe is clear, I'd try some stilsons and see if I can get it to start to twist.
    • Probably because they couldn't, because the use of the variable resistor to create a "signal" in the ECU is managed by the ECU's circuitry. The only way that VDO could do it would be if they made a "smart" sensor that directly created the 0-5V signal itself. And that takes us back to the beginning. Well, in that case, you could do the crude digital (ie, binary, on or off) input that I mentioned before, to at least put a marker on the trace. If you pressed the button only at a series of known integer temperatures, say every 2°C from the start of your range of interest up to whatever you can manage, and you know what temperature the first press was at, then you'd have the voltage marked for all of those temperatures. And you can have more than one shot at it too. You can set the car up to get the oil hot (bypass oil coolers, mask off the air flow to oil coolers, and/or the radiator, to get the whole engine a bit hotter, then give it a bit of curry to get some measurements up near the top of the range.   On the subject of the formula for the data you provided, I did something different to Matt's approach, and got a slightly different linear formula, being Temp = -22.45*V + 118.32. Just a curve fit from Excel using all the points, instead of just throwing it through 2 points. A little more accurate, but not drastically different. Rsquared is only 0.9955 though, which is good but not great. If you could use higher order polynomials in the thingo, then a quadratic fit gives an excellent Rsquared of 0.9994. Temp = 2.1059*V^2 - 34.13*V + 133.27. The funny thing is, though, that I'd probably trust the linear fit more for extrapolation beyond the provided data. The quadratic might get a bit squirrely. Hang on, I'll use the formulae to extend the plots.... It's really big so you can see all the lines. I might have to say that I think I really still prefer the quadratic fit. It looks like the linear fit overstates the temperature in the middle of the input range, and would pretty solidly understate what the likely shape of the real curve would say at both ends.
×
×
  • Create New...