Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Had the GTR back at the drags last night got a personal best in before the radiator decided to pack it in went [email protected] with a 1.7 60ft. Car is currently making 270rwkw on unigroups dyno in Sydney .

My question is that to me the trap speed seems abit low for this power level specially after reading about other r32 GTR's with similiar power going 117mph plus though the top end ?.

r/t .549

60' 1.784

330' 5.077

660' 7.837

mph 91.48

1000' 10.138

ET 12.104

MPH 113.99

k/mh 183.45

Don't know the cars exact race weight at the time. It's a r32 GTR vspec N1 had about half a tank of fuel and rear plus passanger seats removed. The pass seemed pretty clean didn't miss any changes and shifted at about the right rpms. What do you guys reckon?.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/52954-trap-speed-vs-rwkw/
Share on other sites

Mate, honestly it sounds about right. If I didn't know ny better though, i'd say thsi post was a total gee up. :P

All jokes aside, if i was guessing what your trap speed probably should be, +/- 10% i'd have to say it's not too far off what i'd expect. I would prob have guessed about 115mph so that's not too bad. Well done for getting out there and racing though :cheers:

Adrian

i have n1 turbos in my r33 gtr , stock injectors ( they are at their limit ) stock cooler , even stock airbox ,ebc and power f/c on 1.2 bar .

i have run 11.7 @120.85 mph , 1.846 60 ft but a lot of wheel spin in first and a little in second .

Yeh must not be much more left in it then, I soppose it's time to lean on these 2530's abit harder then. I'd love to know how these other GTR's with even less power then mine are trapping 117mph plus or maybe the owners are stretching the truth.

Hey wrxhoon hows things. Do you know what type of power you are making at the wheels?. Like I said before there are even a few examples of r32 GTR's on these forums with less power running in the high 11's at 117mph plus , one example would be HIRISK's old white r32 GTR which trapped 117mph with about 250rwkw. I'm alittle frustrated at the moment because everything else is fine I'm just lacking that little bit of top end to be able to reach my goal of an 11 sec pass.

was it you last wednesday at wsid ? i was there with another r33 gtr testing it .

i just noticed you have 2530"s ( i thought you had n1's ) .

i know of another r33 with 2530's he has about 275 kw and hid 12.1 @110 mph but 1.7 60 'in all his runs . we took it and had it retuned but never been at the drags again it will be intersting to see what he does now .

i dont know what power i have but at a guess 300 rkw min .

i wish i could get 1.7 60 ft , mine is not a vspec so that may be the reason for not geting traction .

Hey wrxhoon hows things.  Do you know what type of power you are making at the wheels?. Like I said before there are even a few examples of r32 GTR's on these forums with less power running in the high 11's at 117mph plus , one example would be HIRISK's old white r32 GTR which trapped 117mph with about 250rwkw. I'm alittle frustrated at the moment because everything else is fine I'm just lacking that little bit of top end to be able to reach my goal of an 11 sec pass.

Yep was me at WSID last wednesday white 32 GTR with black wheels. Yep I saw you guys there and I had a funny feeling it was you but wasn't 100%. After what you say about your mates r33 my figures seem pretty right now . Looks like I'll just have to lean on the turbo's more and come up with something closer to 300rwkw for some consistant 11sec passes .

i was there with another gtr , series 3 f33 , this one has gtrs's and i'm trying to sort it out , it has 340kw but could only do 12.4@113mph , the clutch was sliping if you launched hard .the last run we got a good launch 1.8 60 ft but missed 3rd gear, it did 12.4 but 110mph , that should have been 12-12.1 .

the other gtr with 2530's has been tuned since but hasnt been back at the drags , that should do high 11's now .

my car should do low -mid 11 's with 121 mph trap , when i took it there the track was very slippery though .

with a better tune and your 1.7 60 ft + lighter car you should do 11's every day .

if you want a good tune pm me and i'll tell you where to take it .

we are taking the series 3 there on monday , let you know how it goes when we go back to wsid .

i got a feeling that the n1 turbos are much better than a lot of people think they are .

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...