HFC + Exhaust + Intake = 12's?

bboypuertoroc

So you don't see it happening because your drag skills are sub-par?

It's the same thing people said about the HR 350Zs... "oh lawd, they won't hit low 13's... no f'n wai gai". Look what happened.

And we already got an AUTO 370Z that hit a damn 13.1. I put money on it that the 370Z will dip into the 12's with nothing more than tire pressure changes and a good driver.

__________________

Phimosis

Hi. Nice to meet you. Could we start over without you flaming me? I'm an experienced racer. No, I'm not the fastest. If I were, I would race for a living. I live in a hot area with low humidity and track times tend to be slow (DA calculations run around 2500-3500). I objectively state the facts and make suggestions to help move this community forward. We have a lot of people speculating on how fast their 370z is. They are currently not that fast with the mods on the market, but not many people are taking their car to the track, or they are not posting their time slips for fear of being mocked. I'm simply trying to get more people to take their car to the track rather than playing arm-chair quarterback.

The fastest time I have seen posted for a 370z with no modifications is 13.36 seconds and the fastest time that I have seen for any 370z at any level of modification is 13.21 seconds from our own "ZforMe", but his DA calculation was -565, which is going to produce a very fast time.

So even with mods and very favorable track conditions, the 370z is only hitting 13.2 second quarter mile times. That is why I said I think it's going to take a set of drag radials to get into the 12's.

If you disagree, prove me wrong.

wstar

FWIW, my 13.4xx runs were at a DA of about 1500, which makes them line up better with ZforMe's results I guess. And no, I still haven't scanned the slips (I don't have a scanner here, and I haven't been by Kinko's lately, sorry).

Edit: And I do plan to get back there soon and do it right, hopefully this Friday.

__________________
7AT Track Car!
Journal thread / Car setup details

Phimosis

I went to a handy-dandy internet quarter mile et calculator to crunch some numbers.

Edmunds inside line tests this car at 3359 lbs. With a 170lb driver, that is a total of 3529 lbs. Plug that into the ET calculator with 332 flywheel hp and it says: 13.49 seconds. Pretty much in line with what car magazines have been getting.

So how much power do we need to get a 12.9 at that weight? 380hp according to our internet calculator.

Using 17% drive train loss (that whas the calculator's #, not mine) that means you would need a baseline dyno run of 284whp.

How much would we need for a 12.9 second quarter mile? 324whp. That means a 40 whp gain would get us there. Sounds reasonable. Just hasn't happened yet.

With some of these initial dyno numbers coming in under 260 hp I was worried that Nissan fudged their power output numbers... but it looks like that is not true.

Anyways, just some food for thought....

ianthegreat

I've got around 350hp 360trq and i'll usually run right at 13.01 on stock rubber full pressure. Maybe that will give you some comparison.

My 60's are also pretty terrible - 2.0+

KingDavid

15 days later, he forgets his own thread, lol.

Induction parts + ECU reflash dyno results

You made 343whp.

Darkaeon

Actually I posted multiple 13.2s splits with nothing more than the Stillen G3 intake on my 7AT base and this was on the track in Fayetteville, NC which is notorious for being a slow track due to it being slightly uphill and terrible 60 ft traction. I rarely ever had tire spin probs and was seeing constant 1.9 - 2.0 60 ft times.

As it stands now, I just moved back to Texas and am home visiting in Houston so I plan to try and make it out to Houston Raceway Park this friday night June 5th to see if I can lay down some better times. I would love to get some of you other houston guys out there this friday, PM me on here and maybe we can arrange a meet up out there or something.

Phimosis

On your fastest run, 4/13/09 @ 8:53 pm, the DA was 389. Your ET of 13.341 @102.889 would correct to 13.333@102.859. Convert that to a 3100 DA that we had on our last track day (5/29/09) and it would be an ET/trap speed of 13.85 seconds @ 98.9 mph, which would universally be considered slow in this forum. hot track in low humidity = slow track.

Darkaeon

So now my time is considered slow because I did it in favorable weather conditions? Thats a bit of nonsense if you ask me! Also your looking up a DA of the time when I posted the splits at 8:50 at night, not when I actually made the pass which was early afternoon closer to 1-2 pm in the middle of the heat/humidity of the day. Not to jump on ya, but you don't take a good time on a good day and turn around and convert it to a slower time in less than favorable conditions. If anything it should be the other way around. I mean yes it sux, but you don't discredit someones posted times because they were fortunate to have good weather at the time of their runs. Weather conditions do make all the difference in the world, this is true, thats why we got a few HR's with 13.1 times even, but hey a timed run is a timed run is a timed run, if you were lucky to have favorable conditions on your side that day, more power to ya, sorry to those that don't tho! But don't discredit someone else's times.

wstar

The DA thing isn't about discrediting anyone. It's just a useful way to really compare numbers. Otherwise someone who lives in a bad climate for drag racing really has no way to compete or compare with anyone else.

__________________
7AT Track Car!
Journal thread / Car setup details

Darkaeon

True, but shouldn't you take the times with high DA and convert them to a more normal condition, then to take times posted in good DA conditions and convert them to bad DA conditions, making the times seem bad?

wstar

Well his point was that your car would run a crappy time at his track, not that your time was crappy. It's just a track comparison.

__________________
7AT Track Car!
Journal thread / Car setup details