Is it possible for a 2nd gen. to achive 160 mph? COuld the body hanlde that kind of speed? What HP would be need?

 

160mph ? As in 260kph ? Thats just a catback + filter + donwpipe in a TII I'm halfway there (filter + catback, just need the downpipe)....

My best top speed as of today is 238-240kph, but that is BEFORE the new catback (which was clogged to hell and back -twice )....Friend of mine with no cats and cone filter reached 250kph going -very- slightly uphill and still had room/power to accelerate...

Really dont see any problem for any turbo FC reaching 260kph....reaching 300kph, now THAT'S a different story....

 

Based on the 200hp S5 Turbo's 135mph top speed, to reach 160mph (156km/h) you need 333hp. To get 300km/h (188mph) you'd need 536hp and taller gearing.

 

You're talking actual mph or readings on speedo ?

And the S5's top speed is 135+ mph, which means it varies with the specific HP output....

Anyway, I have seen 240kph with clogged exhaust and stock filter, so I guess 250kph (on speedo) is now doable, and 260kph is not too far fetched with DP...

 

These are calculated values based on the simple mathematical relationship between top speed and power, not speedo readings. Not sure what you mean by that. Magazine articles I've seen quote the stock top speed as 216km/h or 235mph. Top speed only changes if power changes...

BTW, I should have mentioned in my previous post that an FC would probably take flight before it reached 300km/h! More downforce would be required for safety, so you'd need even more power to overcome the drag that'd cause. 600hp oughta do it...

 

in 1986 racing beat made a 2nd gen that went 238mph (400ish kph) then in 1995 they got a 3rd gen to 241mph. these cars were very heavily modified, but for a closer to stock car 160mph is probbably doable.

 

What I meant is that the actual kph/mph vary from that on the speedo due to the inaccuracy of the system on any -stock- car. And I've seen stock top speed rated at 135+ mph, which means that the car had some more power left to give when it was timed, and that the top speed could vary with the power output of the specific car (normal NA engines' output fluctuates, that goes double for turbo-ed ones). Granted it could not fluctuate more than +- 2-3mph, but this means that top speed in stock form could vary from 132 to 138mph....

 

You _could_ change the drag coefficient too, to gain top speed... but I doubt these people are plating over their undercarriage or anything..

(sorry, just being nit-picky :p)

 

Yeah, there is an awesome video of what happens at over 200MPH when the nose gets light. Anyone got it?

 

Yeah I got it only it is at my home PC and not in the office one...

 

since the air is the thing slowing you down at those speeds, I would guess that proper aerodynamics would benefit you more at higher speeds than slight increases in power.

 

Roll up the windows, put down the headlights sunroof & antenna, turn off all accessories, head downwind & downhill.
Of course you could just drive off a cliff. I expect Thelma & Louise made over 170MPH.

 

crap.. my civic made 120 and was still accelerating fairly well

 

I made 151 with just with adding the racing beat exhaust. And I was at about 6300 rpm when I saw the end of the road coming up quick. I suspect I could get at least 155 by 8000rpm if not a little more. So it shouldn't be too hard to get to 160

 

**** i also have a damn Saturn and it can pin and hold a steady 130mph with like no trouble
i would like to think a nice 7 could do 160 fairly easy
my 7 freezes at 100 ?????

 

Remember, our cars are 12-16 years old and *most* cars back then would be making miracles to hit 140...

Yes, nowadays a saturn will hold 130 and a Jeep *might* be able to take a N/A in a stargiht line.... cars have just gotten *better.*

 

I your N/A is running right it will easily do 120+ It would also have no problem beating a Jeep in a straight line. My girlfriend has a 95 wrangler, and it cant even come close to my 88 vert.

 

Oh, I have NO problem hitting 120. She still pulls hard at 121+. And I have no problem smoking a mid 90s 4.6L stang... let alone a jeep.

I'm just saying that a 86 base with clogged cats or tired engine and slipping clutch is not gonna fair too well compared to the *average* modern car

 

160 is possible.

My new rebuilt engine with Racing beat exaust, down pipe to mufflers, pulled about 165. however this was on a down hill stretch. it can go about 130 up hill.

the major problem with maintaining these speeds is heat build up. If you plan on regularly pushing the rex to these limits it would be highly recomendable to make sure the coolent system is up to par, if not eagle. I think that they (checker autozone) sell special coolent addatives that drops over all engine temp by as much as 20 degrees. I've never used it, though.

 

at what 9000 Rpm? LOL. the car redlines before 150.

 

car did not red line. Sat in 5th gear and buried @ 150 while continuing to accelerate with no redline beep or fuel cut-out. I think that she was probably just under 8000

 

Ok, Here's an idea I think we can all live with. We all probably know someone with a little GPS unit they use for fishing or whatever. Use some velcro and stick it to the dash and watch it's reported MPH readings. The satalite couldn't care less if you're reaching redline or have improper air pressure or any of that crap. Also, GPS is legal to navigate aircraft with so they have to be "somewhat" accurate (read: dead on *****) to prevent people from falling from the sky below stall speed.

When I get my motor done, (hopefully before august) I'll take my `86 N/a out and do the same.

 

Now, I'm all about speed and all, but something you need to realize (and I'm sure most of you know this, but I'm just saying):

Anything past 140mph is scary. To me.
I dont' know, maybe it was the dump truck almost merging into my lane at 150mph that did it to me.

Hah. Whatever.

 

This is relvinnian: Same exact scenario. 152mph when I just had a RB turbo-back. I've been at 160 indicated, stock tire height. I believe with slightly different gearing I could have seen much higher.

No it doesn't.

I'm curious as to what variables you inputed. Stock FC is .31 CD, and a turbo II with the "aero package" is .29.

I'm at Drakk0r's house working on his n/a-turbo project. I'll mess with it when I get home.

 

No variables are needed. As stated, this is based on the power and top speed of a stock S5 Turbo (146kW, 216km/h, Australian Motor magazine, 1989). Assuming CdA doesn’t change (i.e. you’re just adding power, no bodywork), the new top speed is easily calculated from the relationship between power and speed.