Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Finally run a half reasonable time

12.1 @ 111mph

but i have a question... last time with 200rwkw i ran a 12.90 with 200rwkw or there abouts.

now im up around the 300rwkw.

My time has gone almost a second up, yet my MPH hasnt changed one skeric really. Any ideas why that is?

I made a nice 1.90ft, same as my old 12.9 run was.

So they were pretty similar, jsut the times changed :headspin:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/75175-finally-a-decent-time-and-a-q/
Share on other sites

At Heathcote i was running 12.7@111 and i have around the 235rwkw mark. What was your half track speed? Should be around 87mph. Something sounds a miss even with a 1.9 60'. Are you sure you werent shutting down just before the line, Ive done that before.

What mph was your 12.9?

12.1@111mph you must be getting of the line pretty quick!, i only ran 12.4@112mph when i went - and i have 4wd launch!

oops, it was 109mph, and id run 110/111 just for times of 13.00/13.10 etc

my 660ft times was 9.3/80.7 mph... i wasnt backing off thats for sure.

I kept my foot in right past the little white checkers :rofl:

i went easy on the launch as the cars just burns the tyres if i try a decent one

my 660ft times was  9.3/80.7 mph... i wasnt backing off thats for sure.

I kept my foot in right past the little white checkers  :rofl:

i went easy on the launch as the cars just burns the tyres if i try a decent one

There is something wrong with that 660' time, your at least 1.0 off the pace and 8mph. Check it with your other runs at the 660' mark.

correction, stoopid a$$ me looknig at the wrong sheet

660ft was 8.00

mph/660 was 94.8=68

It has way more than it did wheni ran a 12.9, i seriosuly doubt there was another second in there back in its old form. I've changed nothing traction wise at all.

If anything the tyres are a bit older and crappier now than they were a year ago (12.9 @109mph/200rwkw)

I know the problem. :P

Well m yguess anyway is that the clutch was starting to struggle in the top gears, and what you though may have been wheelspin into 2nd nd maybe into 3rd was actually the clutch starting to give up...well perhaps a combination of both.

That night at Clader where you chopped me my clutch was getting worse with every run, by the end of th enight my mph had dropped 3-4mph when only running approx 200rwkws.

Anyway food for thought:)

with the power you claim your trap speed is way down might be an idea to run it up on a dyno just to double check maybe you have a problem ?. Your abit slow to the 660ft mark and you mph is down thing is your 60ft times aren't bad at all .

For whats it's worth I know my car is abit of a differen't kettle of fish but I have one of the slips here for a [email protected] and on that run went

660ft 7.837@91mph with a 1.8 60ft .

Also don't be fooled into thinking peak power dyno read outs are everything can you tell us abit more about the car and mods .

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

    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
×
×
  • Create New...