Nissan 370Z Forum - my 370z vs. 350z Supercharger S3

Nissan 370Z Forum (http://www.the370z.com/)

- Track / Autocross / Drifting / Dragstrip (http://www.the370z.com/track-autocross-drifting-dragstrip/)

- - my 370z vs. 350z Supercharger S3 (http://www.the370z.com/track-autocross-drifting-dragstrip/8819-my-370z-vs-350z-supercharger-s3.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MightyBobo (Post 205395)

Dude, even then, thats a pitiful time. Im fairly sure the previous generation Mustangs (260HP 4.6L, before the retro styling) were able to click off low 14's in their cars, stock. NO excuse for running that kind of time other than shitty driving, or a problem with the car.

Well lets say that 370 there has a 20% loss of power. That takes it from 332 to 266bhp, using that figure and your mustang numbers, puts the Z right in line with low 14's. So, judging by that logic, a 14.1 is a reasonable time.
Now lets say the elevation is 3700 ft. ASL, at sea level, it calculates to a 1/4 mile time of 13.464, which I would say is an average time for an average driver in a 370.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red370 (Post 205417)

Not saying that isn't the case. But, he's in Edmonton, which is right around 2100 feet in altitude. Just look at the 370's time: "14.179 @ 101.75mph (60' 2.331)". Problem there isn't the altitude, its the 60'...he'd easily be in the high 13's if his 60' would improve. Furthermore, that would mean that the SUPERCHARGED 350Z was making LESS horsepower than the 370z. Not just a little bit, either, a lota bit. He had a better 60', and a slower trap speed. AKA: either the guy was lying about being supercharged, or there is a problem with the car more than likely.