Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yeah, many people reckon that an auto VN would normaly beat a near stock 5 speed R31. Its probably true. The humble VN is (as much as I hate to say it) probably one of the fastest non performance cars you can get. Mine has no trouble winningfor some reason. Not every time, but the vast majority. I think a 15.9 backs it up though. Maybe its just my driving style and dodgy homestyle mods?

I don't belive in stop watch figures but somewhere in the high 7's is what I thought I got when I done it. A more reliable way might be if someone enters my 15.9 and trap speed of 138 km/h into a racing calculator, those calculators normal work well. On the day I went to willowbank all stockish V6 VN autos ran mid 16's and the best I saw a 5 speed ute run was a 16.2. (dispite the manual being quoted as doing a 15.7 which is pretty damn good for a dunger family car)

And as for the new commodore, (nelson voice) HA HA. (end nelson). What a dunger. MY brother said he went cruising in his mates supercharged VT V6 calais, and it got beaten by heaps of auto VNs. So I agree with the newer heavier slower rule for commodores. You would have to be pissed of to have bought one of these new commos. Does anyone know what the 400M times are for the new ones?

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I forgot to mention.. :P

My inlaws have a 91' VN Auto, Its now done 280,000km's, had a motor rebuilt at 230,000 and trans at 260,000.

That for some reason only runs 0-100 in a mid to high 8. :(

The inlaws other car a BMW 4banger 318is 5speed sits neck and neck with it. :D

I do think the motor had a bit of a rough rebuild though, it doesn't sound quite right and is as rough as hell.

hey.. What about the old TC 4speed Cortina's.. lol

A mate of mine bought one that had a 250 2v motor in it.

Apparently from factory they made 170hp (126kw).

He put a 350holley, extractors and 3" straight through exhaust and managed to run a 14.9.

Went pretty damn hard at the time.

It used to be slightly faster than my TE 250 4speed with holley, extractors, holley and mild cam.

I remember those days like they were yesterday..

lol I went through 6 4 speeds, and 2 auto's.

The auto's were a little sluggy but couldn't be beaten for street long unlimited length burnouts. lol

ahh the days when I didn't seem to worry about loosing my license.

Guest jimmyd17

there is quite a variety of fast and slow VN commodores though. i have a theory that the series I VN's are faster. basically because with the series II, they *fixed* the temporary cooling system slapped on the series I to accomodate for the FWD to RWD adaption. with the series I, the inlet and outlet are at either end of the engine, thus requiring a much longer hose to reach to the rear. with the series II the longer hose was eliminated by making both the inlet and outlet at the front of the engine. the problem with this is, that the cylinders run at slightly different temperatures. with the series I, logically its likely that you will have a more even temperature between all the cylinders creating more efficient and more powerful combustion. this is by no way proven or anything.. its just a theory. and my VN is one of the last series I (8/89):P.. and its a bog stock auto wagon with roof racks, electric everything so its about the heaviest VN you could get and it ran under 8 secs 0-100 :wassup: btw, over 100k's its nothing special. im sure it would be left behind by VS's (maybe close with a VT) and should be left by a VZ too.

Well I have one that I use just for burnouts it a TE 250 with 4 speed, stock besides locked diff and extractors. It smokes it up in 4th with both wheels spinning on a burnout pad, I reckon that would be a tough ask even for a GTSt.

The series 2 VN had a inlet modification in the form of a ram tube in the plenum. This made the car idle better and created less "wheel spin for worried soccer mums of the line" That said my mate has a S1 VN without this tube and I still beat him every time I have raced him. It is actually a performance mod to remove this tube in a S2 VN.

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...