Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Well I've finally done it! I've gone down to the drag strip and took my R33 for a run. With no mods, well except for a K&N panel filter and a heavy duty clutch I managed to get a 14.9 on my first go. Searching on his forum looks like most stock skylines get between low 15s and high 14s. So atleast I know my car is doing OK. Timeslip can be found here

http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/rafsland/DSC01425.jpg

Now that I have the BUG to get a better time I looking to you guys for some advice. Before I start increasing my horse power I would like to be able to launch as good as I can. So what rpm do you guys find that gives you the best times and what about types pressure?

My first launch I launched with about 3500 rpm. My second launch I used 5000 rpm and my time was a little worse 15.06. The track at willow bank is so grippy I thought more rpms would be a good idea :(

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/45119-first-drag-in-my-r33/
Share on other sites

That 60' isn't *too* bad at 2.269 .. i mean even if you got a really good launch you'd could get it down to a flat 2.0. Even if you did theoretically thats really only going to knock 0.269 off your final time, and you would still be mid 14's there really. So probably that 3500 to launch at is not too bad to be honest in your car.

So really it points to just the rest of the power not being there in your car after that initial 60' - combined with slow gearchanges or something like that as the MPH is a little low.

So really, just some modifications if you ask me will push you into lower 14sec territory and beyond.

Thanks for the reply! There is another "test and tune" at willowbank in a couple of weeks. I would like to improve on my time, hopefully get it into the mid 14's .. Gee first time ever to willowbank and Im hooked, it's worse then nicotine ;)

Your saying my mph is a little low :( for a stock R33. My gear changes were as quick as I could possibly move my hands and I reved just before limiter, 6999. Also using BP ultimate - oh and I just changed the oil to castrol 5/30. What MPH should I be getting?

At the moment I just want to concentrate on getting my stock R33 optimised - then work on that!!

Has anyone found advancing the timming to improve the MPH? Maybe my timming is out a little!?!?!

Even if you did theoretically thats really only going to knock 0.269 off your final time

Have you been drinking?

Well done on not being one of the talkers and actually getting out there!!! Regarding the above comment, taking 0.269sec off of your 60 foot time will have the effect of taking more like 0.5 - 0.6 secs off of your ET. Having said that, it's a great start. There are people on this forum that are running low 12's that because of a 2.2 60' time, can't take advantage of their extra horsepower.

Try different things to get the most out of your car. Try running 20psi in your rear tyres to aid in the launch, change gears just before 7krpm and have fun.

Let us know how you go and good luck.

Adrian

Have you been drinking?

probably...think i was mixing up something i was going to say and what i did say :-s oops

if you get past the first 60' quicker, you will be going quicker at that point, which should mean you get a higher MPH and better time at the end. it will definitely be more than 0.269 :)

but anyhow.. test and tune is also wednesday nights also. Few of the SAU regulars will be there tomorrow night running (inc me).. Have only run a few times in VIC (and didn't do spectacularly) so will be interesting to see how i go.

Is the "test and tune" busy on Wednesday nights? Last saturday night it took about 1.5 hours to get a run. :P

Next time I go down the track I'll play with the tyre pressure. I'll give the 20psi a go!

Do you think it is possible to get a flat 2 60ft with a stock skyline? Has it been done before?

Yeah i think a flat 2 would be possible with the correct setup and a good launch.

I was also going to point out what 2rismo picked up on. Up to the 60ft mark is where you'll make or break so to speak. My advice would be to work on your starts. That's where you can pick up some time if you know what you're doing.

Scott

You got the bug just like me :(

Your mph might be a little low but I wouldnt expect it to rise very much until you get an exhaust. The 60ft is good for a first time.

When I had a cat back and pod I ran 14.3@98mph with a 2.4 60ft.

0.269sec off of your 60 foot time will have the effect of taking more like 0.5 - 0.6 secs off of your ET

That means my car is good for 13.2-13.3 with a decent launch... I really gotta practice my launches.

taking 0.269sec off of your 60 foot time will have the effect of taking more like 0.5 - 0.6 secs off of your ET.

The basic rule of thumb is, every tenth gained over the 60' is two tenths off the ET. So as a random example... say someone was to run a 12.357 ET on a 2.119 60', and then they managed to drop their 60' to a 1.900, they "should" get an 11.919 ET. And then they would be very happy :(

There are people on this forum that are running low 12's that because of a 2.2 60' time, can't take advantage of their extra horsepower.

Are there? Who? :cheers:

When I had a cat back and pod I ran 14.3@98mph with a 2.4 60ft.  

.

So your saying just an exhaust from the cat back and some decent airflow will drop off ~ 0.5- 0.7 secs?... Even though your 60ft was not awesome. What type of exhaust did you get?

Yep. Exhaust mods are a turbos best friend :rant:

The extra air flow will see the boost rise by a few psi forcing your mph to go up and ET to come down.

Mine is a Jasma 3" and was on the car when it arrived from Japan. I added a 3" dump/front pipe and @ 10psi ran 13.8@101 with a 2.2 60ft. Since then I have added high flow cat and chip and I'm hunting low 13s... I just need to launch it properly.

Thanks for the input guys. it has been helpful and I really want an exhaust now!!! :D

From the research I sifted from the crap and the real 1/4 miles times I have come up with this. I'm trying to keep it real so I can have fun and challenge myself every step of the way through my mods. how does this sound guys?

A stock R33 Skyline GTS-T (when I say stock I mean absolutely nothing done to it - not even an airfilter ) with an experienced driver should get at best down the 1/4 mile a 14.8 - 14.5!!! I think the best I have read is a 14.7...

Give this car a 3 inch catback exhaust and a 14.3 with 2.4 60ft is possible, so maybe a flat 14.0 with an awesome 60ft is possible

Pump up the power with a dump pipe and 10psi and a 13.8 is possible!

Anything extra is into the sub 13 and beyond.. Too many combinations to list!!

All this talk is making me want to go the the drags and see what times I can get!

Another thing that is bothering me, has anyone broken anything going down the quarter with your skyline? Assuming you have less than 250kw at the wheels.

Another thing that is bothering me, has anyone broken anything going down the quarter with your skyline? Assuming you have less than 250kw at the wheels.
I've had around 30+ runs over the last 7mths all around 14.1-14.8sec and never broken a thing. Drive in, run, drive home and live another day :D

I have however had quite a few Holdens destroy themselves right beside me on the first run of the nite hehehe.

I've had around 30+ runs over the last 7mths all around 14.1-14.8sec and never broken a thing. Drive in, run, drive home and live another day :D

I have however had quite a few Holdens destroy themselves right beside me on the first run of the nite hehehe.

hehehe Thats what I like to hear :D ....

When I was talking to the guy I was racing "commodore SS " he warned me to be careful about breaking a diff or somthing on the drive chain as he had done before!! But I was 99.9% sure I had nothing to worry about - after all, the skyline is the upgrade KING it was built for torture :) 30 runs down the track confirms it for me!!!

  • 2 weeks later...

I went down the track again last night in an attempt to beat my last time. Well I succesfully did but cheated a little. Instead of adjusting the tyre pressure and changing my launch revs to get a better time I raised my boost by ~2 psi. I did this by taking of the hose that goes to the solenoid and plugged in a little rod with a hole in it. Got my friends boost gauge and drilled out the hole until I reached ~9psi. Pretty dodgy but it worked. Anyway I managed to get a 1/4 mile time of 14.546 at 94.98 mph and a 60ft time of 2.146.

here is the link http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/rafsland/DSC01426.jpg

Im pretty happy since I beat every stat from my last run without spending a cent. I hope if I add another 2psi I can drop another 0.4s which will give me 14.1 :cheers: without spending a cent.

From the research I sifted from the crap and the real 1/4 miles times I have come up with this. I'm trying to keep it real so I can have fun and challenge myself every step of the way through my mods. how does this sound guys?

A stock R33 Skyline GTS-T (when I say stock I mean absolutely nothing done to it - not even an airfilter ) with an experienced driver should get at best down the 1/4 mile a 14.8 - 14.5!!! I think the best I have read is a 14.7...

I managed to hustle my stock (yes really) gtst in 14.2....but I was running sticky r type tyres so that may be the difference. Unfortuntely the timing at wsid was not working properly that night so they didn't give me a 60' time :P

I managed to hustle my stock (yes really) gtst in 14.2....

I looked at your profile and I noticed you were running 9psi. So I don't think you can say your car is stock - your car was modified slightly. In my case unless my driving was better I was able to reduce my quarter mile by 0.4secs. So for the guys out there looking for the fastest real possible time in a factory condition i.e stock skyline will be mislead. But a 14.2 with only 9psi is still awesome. That time was beating skylines I saw last night that had 300 horses at the wheels - well done.

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...