Post your 40-70 times
03-01-02, 09:02 AM
#76
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Georgia
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is interesting, R/T does a similar test from top gear from 50-70 and there are luxury cars posting better times. I'm curious to know how you all do from top gear.
03-02-02, 10:14 PM
#78
The Sloth
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After coming back from the Miami Grandprix, which is about 150 miles from home (round trip), I did (2) two more test runs. At 35 mph, I stabbed it and started the chronograph watch @ 40 mph and stopped it at 70 mph.
1st run: 4.2 sec
2nd run: 4.05 sec
Conditions:
As mentioned above and night time and about 76 degrees F.
1st run: 4.2 sec
2nd run: 4.05 sec
Conditions:
As mentioned above and night time and about 76 degrees F.
03-03-02, 01:48 AM
#79
Originally posted by Mr. Belvi
This is interesting, R/T does a similar test from top gear from 50-70 and there are luxury cars posting better times. I'm curious to know how you all do from top gear.
This is interesting, R/T does a similar test from top gear from 50-70 and there are luxury cars posting better times. I'm curious to know how you all do from top gear.
03-03-02, 03:17 AM
#81
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mr. Belvi
This is interesting, R/T does a similar test from top gear from 50-70 and there are luxury cars posting better times. I'm curious to know how you all do from top gear.
This is interesting, R/T does a similar test from top gear from 50-70 and there are luxury cars posting better times. I'm curious to know how you all do from top gear.
thanks
Bill
03-03-02, 10:10 AM
#82
Rotary Optimist
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: San Clemente, CA
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure my Millenia would beat my RX-7 in that test - so I guess it's a better faster car... huh? I don't even think I would want to punch it at 50mph in 5th!
What a bogus test for low displacement/high-revving engines!
What a bogus test for low displacement/high-revving engines!
04-18-02, 01:10 AM
#84
03 Cobra Killer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: All Over
Posts: 1,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I finally had the stopwatch in the car with me so I tried a few runs.
Ambient was about 60F
Intake temp on PFC ranged between 45-55C
3/4 tank of gas
I weight 150lb
PFC set on preset 2 high-boost (.9 bar), I hit a max of .88
Times ranged from 3.90 - 4.10 (slightly uphill v/s slightly downhill going back and forth on the same road)
Probably averaged about 4 flat
My hi-flow cat goes on tomorrow even though I already put it in my sig. The rest of the mods listed are accurate.
K
Ambient was about 60F
Intake temp on PFC ranged between 45-55C
3/4 tank of gas
I weight 150lb
PFC set on preset 2 high-boost (.9 bar), I hit a max of .88
Times ranged from 3.90 - 4.10 (slightly uphill v/s slightly downhill going back and forth on the same road)
Probably averaged about 4 flat
My hi-flow cat goes on tomorrow even though I already put it in my sig. The rest of the mods listed are accurate.
K
04-18-02, 05:32 AM
#86
Super Snuggles
A few interesting numbers from Car Test 2000*...
40-70 mph (seconds)
4.59 - 1999 Mustang GT
4.27 - 1999 SS Camaro
4.18 - 1993-95 RX-7 TT
3.93 - 1993-98 Supra Turbo
3.49 - 2001 Mustang Cobra
3.05 - ~320 RWHP RX-7 TT
2.87 - 1996 S351 Saleen Mustang
2.78 - 2001 Lambo Diablo 6.0
2.74 - ~395 RWHP "BPU" Supra Turbo
2.60 - 1999 Dodge Viper GTS-R
2.44 - 2002 Z06 Corvette
2.22 - 1991 Ferarri F40
2.05 - ~360 RWHP RX-7 TT
1.95 - 1997 McLaren F1
1.79 - Corvette C5-R
1.58 - My "RX-7" w/3.28:1 differential
1.29 - 2001 Yamaha YZF-R1
1.19 - 2001 Suzuki GSX-R 1000
*All estimates, of course, but interesting nonetheless.
Stock weights, power, and aerodynamics, and starting precisely at 40 mph in either 2nd or 3rd gear, whichever resulted in the best results for each vehicle.
40-70 mph (seconds)
4.59 - 1999 Mustang GT
4.27 - 1999 SS Camaro
4.18 - 1993-95 RX-7 TT
3.93 - 1993-98 Supra Turbo
3.49 - 2001 Mustang Cobra
3.05 - ~320 RWHP RX-7 TT
2.87 - 1996 S351 Saleen Mustang
2.78 - 2001 Lambo Diablo 6.0
2.74 - ~395 RWHP "BPU" Supra Turbo
2.60 - 1999 Dodge Viper GTS-R
2.44 - 2002 Z06 Corvette
2.22 - 1991 Ferarri F40
2.05 - ~360 RWHP RX-7 TT
1.95 - 1997 McLaren F1
1.79 - Corvette C5-R
1.58 - My "RX-7" w/3.28:1 differential
1.29 - 2001 Yamaha YZF-R1
1.19 - 2001 Suzuki GSX-R 1000
*All estimates, of course, but interesting nonetheless.
Stock weights, power, and aerodynamics, and starting precisely at 40 mph in either 2nd or 3rd gear, whichever resulted in the best results for each vehicle.
04-18-02, 05:42 AM
#88
Super Snuggles
Originally posted by Mr. Belvi
This is interesting, R/T does a similar test from top gear from 50-70 and there are luxury cars posting better times. I'm curious to know how you all do from top gear.
This is interesting, R/T does a similar test from top gear from 50-70 and there are luxury cars posting better times. I'm curious to know how you all do from top gear.
Based on this test, I get 8.65 seconds for the 2002 Z06 from 50-70 in 6th gear. 6th gear is 0.56:1. I got 14.37 seconds for the 1999-up SS Camaro with a 0.50:1 6th gear. What a joke. At the start of the "pull" it's only at about 1,100 rpm. What the hell are they thinking?
04-18-02, 05:49 AM
#90
Super Snuggles
Originally posted by LUV94RX7
2.05 - ~360 RWHP RX-7 TT
Cartest2000 never gave me this number. How did you get it to come with that #??
Ken
2.05 - ~360 RWHP RX-7 TT
Cartest2000 never gave me this number. How did you get it to come with that #??
Ken
Then again, you're getting different numbers for my car, even though I've sent you all the parameters, so who knows what's going on with your machine.
04-18-02, 05:58 AM
#91
Originally posted by jimlab
Enter the weight for a base model RX-7 with no cats (about 2,740 lbs.) and 420 hp @ 6700 rpm and 352 ft. lbs. @ 5200 rpm (Brooks Weisblat's dyno figures). 19.3 sq. ft. for frontal area is the only other change besides P275/40-17s (6.72 ft. circumference). Start in 2nd gear @ 40 mph and let it run to 70.
Then again, you're getting different numbers for my car, even though I've sent you all the parameters, so who knows what's going on with your machine.
Enter the weight for a base model RX-7 with no cats (about 2,740 lbs.) and 420 hp @ 6700 rpm and 352 ft. lbs. @ 5200 rpm (Brooks Weisblat's dyno figures). 19.3 sq. ft. for frontal area is the only other change besides P275/40-17s (6.72 ft. circumference). Start in 2nd gear @ 40 mph and let it run to 70.
Then again, you're getting different numbers for my car, even though I've sent you all the parameters, so who knows what's going on with your machine.
Ken
04-18-02, 06:25 AM
#92
Super Snuggles
Originally posted by LUV94RX7
My cartest2000 software is screwed up. Can't start in 2nd gear. To be accurate you have to load the dyno curve. You used general parameters. I did a "standing start accelleration and marked the time at 40mph and the time at 70mph and subtracted.
My cartest2000 software is screwed up. Can't start in 2nd gear. To be accurate you have to load the dyno curve. You used general parameters. I did a "standing start accelleration and marked the time at 40mph and the time at 70mph and subtracted.
Your problem is that you aren't using rolling start, and increasing starting velocity to 40 mph before starting the run. You can then bump it up to 2nd or 3rd gear, start the run, and when it hits 70 mph, you have your 40-70 time.
Subtracting the 0-40 time from the 0-70 time will give significantly slower results (4.86 sec. for a stock FD) because you're including any tire spin from the launch, and the time it takes to move the car from a standing start in the calculation. Neither of which are present in a true 40-70 acceleration measurement, which is meant to eliminate the driver's launching skill as a variable...
04-18-02, 02:40 PM
#93
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did this recently along with a boost response test. It was right aroudn 3 seconds both directions with my stopwatch. Kinda hard to focus though, it would help to have an assistant or computer to do it for me.
This test is not very good for comparing RX-7s. Most of the time of this test was spent before the turbo transition on my car. Once the transition happened, the car sprung forward very quickly. A better test would shift the speeds up a bit and take 3rd gear to 7000 RPM or even higher.
Since mods on FD's only add significant power from about 4500 RPM up, using a test that extends out of that range is just watering down the results.
Wade
This test is not very good for comparing RX-7s. Most of the time of this test was spent before the turbo transition on my car. Once the transition happened, the car sprung forward very quickly. A better test would shift the speeds up a bit and take 3rd gear to 7000 RPM or even higher.
Since mods on FD's only add significant power from about 4500 RPM up, using a test that extends out of that range is just watering down the results.
Wade
04-18-02, 02:44 PM
#94
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim and Ken,
Why don't you two just have an imaginary race between your unfinished and/or inaccessible cars and settle this ONCE AND FOR ALL!!
Throw in my stripped 2400 lb FD with 800 rwhp that I'm gonna build some day...
just ribbing you guys
Wade
Why don't you two just have an imaginary race between your unfinished and/or inaccessible cars and settle this ONCE AND FOR ALL!!
Throw in my stripped 2400 lb FD with 800 rwhp that I'm gonna build some day...
just ribbing you guys
Wade
04-18-02, 03:14 PM
#97
Full Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: So Bay, CA
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, 1/4 tank with watch hand on the wheel and other hand on my G-SHOCK. I say it would've been better last week, cause something happened while I changed out a turbo coolant hose on Monday. I think I forgot a vacuum hose or my airpump belt is too loose/tight.
04-18-02, 04:23 PM
#98
Super Snuggles
Originally posted by Wade
Jim and Ken,
Why don't you two just have an imaginary race between your unfinished and/or inaccessible cars and settle this ONCE AND FOR ALL!!
Throw in my stripped 2400 lb FD with 800 rwhp that I'm gonna build some day...
just ribbing you guys
Jim and Ken,
Why don't you two just have an imaginary race between your unfinished and/or inaccessible cars and settle this ONCE AND FOR ALL!!
Throw in my stripped 2400 lb FD with 800 rwhp that I'm gonna build some day...
just ribbing you guys
Apparently, my engine is finished. I was just asked to allow another 48 hours for "presentation" of the results. There is video of the dyno session, figures, crating, weighing the engine, and a bunch of other stuff to take care of. That's assuming I'm happy with the results and I don't tell them to try another cam grind.
Meanwhile, I'm waiting on more people than I care to talk about for various parts to finish my car, and trying to find someone to make me a 3.28:1 ring and pinion set, and... and finish up the headlight project, and finish the bushings sets for the MKIII and MKIV Supra, and maybe start the bushing set for the FC, and... You get the picture.
Car Test 2000 is just fun to play with in the mean time.
Last edited by jimlab; 04-18-02 at 04:30 PM.
04-18-02, 11:42 PM
#99
Originally posted by Wade Jim and Ken,
Why don't you two just have an imaginary race between your unfinished and/or inaccessible cars and settle this ONCE AND FOR ALL!!
Ya, you are right, I'll be lucky to get my car back by 8-1-02. Fun to do planning on what my 20-100mph time will be. S/B tad less than 7 seconds. No I'm not expecting to beat Jim's V8 Chev FD. But a new Z06 does it in 9 seconds and the new 500hp Viper s/b 8.5 seconds. I'll clean their clocks.
Throw in my stripped 2400 lb FD with 800 rwhp that I'm gonna build some day...
Here's cartest2000 2400lb car, 150lb driver, 50 lb fuel, racing slicks, 235-45-17 tires, 2nd gear no shifting, 7800rpm max then it's 40-70mph in .79 seconds. PS: with slicks you do a wheelie for quite awhile.
just ribbing you guysWade
Why don't you two just have an imaginary race between your unfinished and/or inaccessible cars and settle this ONCE AND FOR ALL!!
Ya, you are right, I'll be lucky to get my car back by 8-1-02. Fun to do planning on what my 20-100mph time will be. S/B tad less than 7 seconds. No I'm not expecting to beat Jim's V8 Chev FD. But a new Z06 does it in 9 seconds and the new 500hp Viper s/b 8.5 seconds. I'll clean their clocks.
Throw in my stripped 2400 lb FD with 800 rwhp that I'm gonna build some day...
Here's cartest2000 2400lb car, 150lb driver, 50 lb fuel, racing slicks, 235-45-17 tires, 2nd gear no shifting, 7800rpm max then it's 40-70mph in .79 seconds. PS: with slicks you do a wheelie for quite awhile.
just ribbing you guys
Wade
04-18-02, 11:44 PM
#100
Originally posted by jimlab [Subtracting the 0-40 time from the 0-70 time will give significantly slower results (4.86 sec. for a stock FD) because you're including any tire spin from the launch, and the time it takes to move the car from a standing start in the calculation. Neither of which are present in a true 40-70 acceleration measurement, which is meant to eliminate the driver's launching skill as a variable... [/B]
[/B]
Ken