Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

http://www.importforums.com/information.htm

the R32 GTST 400m times of 14.63???

mine has a zorst, running 10psi and remapped ECU and POD and would only just get into the 14s... some semi slicks as well and then maybe that time would be true... then again im not the best launcher in the world.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/9470-these-stats-cant-be-right/
Share on other sites

My GTS-4 Sedan Auto, Very stock (Just Cheap pod filter and cold air induction) has run a 15.4 in very hot conditions, after a few runs, I am very sure with a good launch and the right conditions I could run 15 flat.

A manual r32 GTS-t Coupe could run a 14.6.

Greg.

absolutely stock?

those times are meant to be for STOCK cars.... when i took mine the first time when all it had was a zorst and nothing else it ran a 15.5 on a coldish night... i spose with decent wheels it maybe able to do a 15.0 but that still isnt stock

Mine ran 14.6 with a cat back exhaust, blitz ECU, air pod, stock turbo, 11psi. This was on a night that i broke it on my 6th run, no compression in cylinder 6 (2 valves burnt). After fixing it we discovered that it had been running for a while with lower comp in that cylinder, so it was a tad down on power. Feels quicker now that its all fixed up.

If i tried again with a bit of practice I might get it down to a 14.4. While the figure the site stipulates is probably now a genuine stock time... its not THAT far off. However their weight listed is also a bit off the mark (i believe the 32 gtst weights 1350-80?)

Red17

But i dont see the point in hammering the car when I havent changed anything that would make it go any faster :)

I ran a 14.2 with cat back exhaust/filter and standard boost.!!

2.1 ish 60 foot. and I had ran a 1.9 earlier in the night. So theoretically it was good for a 14 flat if i could get the same launch..

With full exhaust/tune/pump/boost I am hoping for hi to maybe mid 13 with a good launch

Originally posted by Duncan

I ran 14.3 with stock zorst, stock airbox, stock everything except 9psi boost.  R33 gtst, we all know they are better :uh-huh:

butt uglier.

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

    • Input shaft bearing. They all do it. There is always rollover noise in Nissan boxes - particularly the big box. Don't worry about it unless it gets really growly.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...