2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992) 1986-1992 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections.
Sponsored by:

What Limits Vert Top Speed?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-27-03, 12:23 PM
  #1  
Rotary Enthusiast

Thread Starter
 
cafcwest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 1,123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What Limits Vert Top Speed?

Yup, what limits the vert to the 115mph top speed? Is it a different ECU than coupes? Would swapping ECU's 'fix' it? Or is it something else?
Thanks,
-Jayson
Old 12-27-03, 12:39 PM
  #2  
Eat Rice Don't Drive it.

iTrader: (3)
 
1987RX7guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Laredo, Tx
Posts: 12,752
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Lack of power. There is no governer on any FC that I know of in the US. If you have the power you can keep going untill you run out of gears and redline.
Old 12-27-03, 12:40 PM
  #3  
Erk
1 day Sober! Never drunk again!

 
Erk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Irving, Texas
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Verts are just alot heavier then other models of FC.
Old 12-27-03, 12:48 PM
  #4  
Rotary Enthusiast

 
ponykiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: KC
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I can get my 91 vert to 130.

Verts are limited by a higher Cd (Coefficient of Drag), and a greater mass. I would assume your 'vert is an auto if you can only get it to 115, or is an S4. If you get a cone intake and replace your cats with a straight pipe, you should be able to get to ~125.
Old 12-27-03, 12:57 PM
  #5  
Senior Member

 
hpram99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: -
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've been up past 125 (spedometer speed) probably around 117 (real speed) in my s5 vert. I'll let you know how 2' of 3" straight pipe affects top speed when I get my engine back together
Old 12-27-03, 01:47 PM
  #6  
Former Moderator. RIP Icemark.
 
Icemark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Rohnert Park CA
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 19 Posts
Top speed is around 125 in stock verts. It is only limited by gearing and aerodynamics, not by anything electrical
Old 12-27-03, 03:17 PM
  #7  
13B N/A POWA!

 
KiyoKix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Everywhere, WRLD
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Icemark is correct, it has nothing to do with weight either. Weight determines acceleration not top speed.
Old 12-27-03, 04:00 PM
  #8  
Rotary Enthusiast

 
ponykiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: KC
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by KiyoKix
Icemark is correct, it has nothing to do with weight either. Weight determines acceleration not top speed.

More weight means larger frictional force at the tires. This means more resistance to both acceleration and top speed (when limited by power).
Old 12-27-03, 04:12 PM
  #9  
Rotary Enthusiast

Thread Starter
 
cafcwest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 1,123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I thought I had read in an old Motor Trend that the vert were limited to 114mph, thats why I questioned. The car seems to pull quite hard and then just stop right there.
Old 12-27-03, 04:20 PM
  #10  
Full Member

 
venomrx7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: South Mississippi
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is it an S4? My 1990 vert goes well past that with the stock ECU. I hit about 136 on the highway last night racing a neon, so it will go past 114.
Old 12-27-03, 07:19 PM
  #11  
Jesus is the Messiah

 
Tofuball's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Posts: 4,848
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've done 120 something. :/
Old 12-27-03, 07:35 PM
  #12  
I'm a boost creep...

 
NZConvertible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally posted by ponykiller
More weight means larger frictional force at the tires. This means more resistance to both acceleration and top speed (when limited by power).
This is true, but the rolling resistance of the tires is a tiny, tiny fraction of the overall forces that must be overcome. At high speed they are so small compared to aerodynamic drag they are not worth considering.

The only reason why the 'vert would be slower than the NA coupe is aerodynamics.
Old 12-27-03, 09:18 PM
  #13  
Lives on the Forum

iTrader: (8)
 
RotaryResurrection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Morristown, TN (east of Knoxville)
Posts: 11,576
Received 25 Likes on 18 Posts
I'd say the change in CD and weight both affect the vert's top speed.

I have had my convertible up to 151mph, had 1krpm to go until redline, and have a witness who I scared the **** out of...
Old 12-27-03, 09:24 PM
  #14  
Senior Member

 
downwinddave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Treasure Island, FL
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Depends on how long the hill is.
AND how big your ***** are.
Old 12-28-03, 01:22 AM
  #15  
I'm a boost creep...

 
NZConvertible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally posted by RotaryResurrection
I'd say the change in CD and weight both affect the vert's top speed.
The 'verts ~15% extra weight would be lucky to have a 1-2mph effect. The maths proves it's all about aero.
Old 12-28-03, 01:24 AM
  #16  
Lives on the Forum

iTrader: (8)
 
RotaryResurrection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Morristown, TN (east of Knoxville)
Posts: 11,576
Received 25 Likes on 18 Posts
Yes, on a straight stretch, you are right. KNowing how slow verts are in stock form, it would take 2-3 miles or more to get up to top speed. How many of us can say we can travel 3-4 miles without encountering a hill? As soon as you hit that grade, even a slight one, weight comes into play.
Old 12-28-03, 01:42 AM
  #17  
Rotary Enthusiast

 
ponykiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: KC
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by NZConvertible
This is true, but the rolling resistance of the tires is a tiny, tiny fraction of the overall forces that must be overcome.

While I agree that the additional frictional force due to weight is small compared to the aerodynamic drag of the car, it is still there and still will make a difference. This is why I originally stated both mass and Cd as the reasons for decreased top speed.

RotaryResurrection is correct about the hills and the increase in mass having a larger effect when moving up the hill.
Old 12-28-03, 05:32 PM
  #18  
I'm a boost creep...

 
NZConvertible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
The power required to overcome drag force due to weight on the tires inceases linearly with speed. The power required to overcome drag force due to air resistance inceases to the third power of speed. I don't think people appreciate the massive difference that makes.

While you are technically correct to mention weight, in reality it's almost irrelevent. The effect of the extra weight of the 'vert has a miniscule effect on top speed when compared to the effect of the higher Cd.

And top speed isn't ususally measured on a hill...
Old 12-28-03, 11:17 PM
  #19  
Sam
big boost baby

 
Sam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Okinawa, Japan
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
151.. pretty good. hopefully when my Turbo Vert is fixed and tuned I can do that : )
Old 12-28-03, 11:35 PM
  #20  
Rotary Enthusiast

 
ponykiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: KC
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by NZConvertible
And top speed isn't ususally measured on a hill...
Wait a minute.... Are you sure?
Old 12-28-03, 11:48 PM
  #21  
JKM

 
JKM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Burlington, NC
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by downwinddave
Depends on how long the hill is.
AND how big your ***** are.


Best post ever.
Old 12-29-03, 04:52 AM
  #22  
Rotary Enthusiast

 
andrew lohaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: fl
Posts: 1,255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
why do these "top speed" threads always end up having to explain that weight has baisicaly no influence on top speed.

to simplify

top speed=hpXgears Vs. drag(mostly aero)

we clear?

anyway i think the main reson the vert is down on speed is that it doesn't share the coupe's slippery .29 c.d.

oh and you should probobly have the top up. i dont think anyone mentioned that yet. (i guess ill be the wise ***)
Old 12-29-03, 07:25 AM
  #23  
Rotary Freak

 
Bukwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: DC Area
Posts: 2,702
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
before Kevin and me swapped a t2 into my s4 vert I used to hit 130 no probs.
Old 12-29-03, 10:41 AM
  #24  
Former Moderator. RIP Icemark.
 
Icemark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Rohnert Park CA
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally posted by andrew lohaus
anyway i think the main reson the vert is down on speed is that it doesn't share the coupe's slippery .29 c.d.
Only the 86-87 Sport had a .29 Cd, all the other coupe models have around .31 Cd.

The vert has .33 Cd top up, and .38 Cd top down.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
C. Ludwig
Single Turbo RX-7's
49
01-30-19 06:31 AM
Don49
Race Car Tech
4
09-03-15 05:03 PM
IB Cristina
West RX-7 Forum
0
08-20-15 05:46 PM



Quick Reply: What Limits Vert Top Speed?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:23 PM.