LUV94RX7

iTrader: (3)

Sorry, make that 1.83 seconds. second gear all the way.

Ken

jeff48

1994 Touring Automatic
HKS downpipe as only mod
12-10-12 pattern
70-80 degree days
second "gear" w/ "hold"

flat topography consistent 3.8 second runs.
"Uphill" runs average 4.1
"downhill" runs average 3.4

evot23

iTrader: (17)

Good to see the post still alive and kicking...and to think in the beginning no one would post.

Some sweet times being posted!

nocab72

Anyone with the non-sequential mod on stock turbo's run these tests? Since there isn't a transition, I expect better times from you guys...

K

jeff48

My specs are the same as from my earlier post of today

1994 Touring Montego Blue Automatic with 68K miles on chassis, replaced turbos w/used set (guy claims 55K on used set)(still set in sequential mode and push 12-10-12 boost pattern). Only mods are an HKS downpipe and gauges.

Thought I would provide a little more info and some throw in some other variables...Sooo, on my way to work this a.m. I decided to do some playing.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ambient temps were about 65 degrees.

Engine temp ran between 195 and 210 throughout the test periods.

A/F ration gauge consistently in the "just barely" rich range (2 blocks on the Autometer sport-comp)

all tests done as follows on topographically level straight pavement

Set gear lever to selected range
bring speed to 35 mph
stomp accelerator
as the needle hit 40/punch the stopwatch
as the needle hit 70/punch the stopwatch

40-70 time gear selected rpm range

3.8 S/ with hold 3200-6800
3.9 S/ with hold 3200-6900
3.8 S/ with hold 3200-6900
3.8 S/ with hold 3200-6700

3.7 S/ no hold 4200-6700
3.6 S/ no hold 4300-6500
4.2 S/ no hold 4500-6700

6.6 D/ with hold 2500-3800
7.0 D/ with hold 2300-3500
6.8 D/ with hold 2300-3600

Don't ask me about the weird numbers for the S/ no hold group. I have no idea why those should be that way (inconsistent--higher low end rpms--lower e.t.s than with hold) but that is what the gauges reported.

As the engine temps increased above 200, the times did tend to get worse. I presume the automatic trans was running pretty hot by then also, but as yet, I don't have a transmission temp gauge. I would think the higher e.t.s are a function of decreased transmission efficiency at higher fluid temps rather than a falloff in engine efficiency at higher, but still within normal range, coolant temps.

CTV1337

wow this became one CRAZY thread.....Nice reading though

Flybye

I'm game It's been a little rainy here in my part of Jersey, though. As soon as I get a chance, I'll post my times up. My FD runs fine and the stop watch around my wrist works perfectly. I have no excuses other than the rain itself.

Hmm...I think for the hell of it I'll do the J30, too

Piston Pete

Did some more. Averaged 4.65. She's stock and still doesn't run strong.

Ant

kwikrx7

Actually this 3rd gear test doesn't really favor a non-seq FD unless full conversion was done with all-bolt-ons and streetport (boost comes on earlier) When my parallel turbos were working correctly I'd get full boost by 3200 rpms .. in this test at 40 mph we are at 3K on the nose so non-seq. cars that don't get full boost until 4K would be at a slight disadvantage but should make it up with the transition and more midrange power. I remember having 2 times of 3.5 seconds with a failing primary - but I don't get full boost until 3.8-4K now with failing primary. Can't wait for the upgraded twins - should send it beow 3 seconds I did the 40-70 second gear test last night for kicks and did it in 2.3 seconds but bounced off the rev limiter (70mph is redline at 8K) These test are pretty cool since I don't plan on going to the dragstrip anytime soon and calculates more streetracing times rather than full 1/4 mile times - so many people make the mistake and judge a car on the 1/4 mile time only.

Flybye

Just came back from my runs in 3rd gear

1st run: 3.7s
2nd run: 3.4s
3rd run: 3.6s
4th run: 3.5s
5th Run: 3.4s

Me weighs 250lbs and I had a 1/2 tank of gas.

Mods:
Intake
DP
MP
Borla REALLY old POS 2.5" inlet CB (But it sounds nice )
Power FC at 13.5psi
Efini Y-Pipe

Outside temp: 65 degrees
Outside humidity: 50%

Flybye

Oh....umm.....it's everyone else's turn

Flybye

I'm just keeping the love alive

yy4u

Why 3rd gear, I'm no where close to full boost or any sort of substantial power at 40mph in 3rd.

Flybye

That is what makes it interesting

jeff48

Run any gear you want to. Just make the runs and post your times, your car with any mods and the regular variables (temp. gasoline load. human load weight [yours and passenger] etc.). This isnt for money or bragging rights...it is just a tool to help us see if we can do something to make us all GO FASTER!!!!!!!!!!!

jeff48

OOPS Post what gear you are running---Autotrans should post gear and HOLD button position.

kwikrx7

I was looking at Road and Track today and noticed the new M3 did 40-80 in 5 seconds flat - not a bad comparison test for a lightly modded FD. Would probably have to start at 30 and nail it and hit the timer at 40. When I read these articles I always read their 0-40 time and their 0-80 or 100 time and subtract the 2 numbers. It's tough to compare 1/4 mile times since I never launch my car. But reading these times out of magazines gives you a rough idea of how you would do compared to other powerful cars.

t-von

iTrader: (8)

Ok 2 runs 91 Rx7 converible. Hot Texas weather. One run, 100 degrees f "todays record" tank almost empty, I weigh 220 lbs. I did the test wrong by accident and started at 40, puched it and stopped timing at 70. My time was 10 sec flat. Tried same test around midnight, temp was about 80 degrees. My time once again was 10 secs.

But the way, I can't wait till I get my first Fd

nocab72

Finally was out late in my (stock) 2001 4.4i X5 (daily driver) and had a stopwatch with me.

3/4 tank of fuel (which is alot of fuel in this SAV!)
Using the standard BWM S(port) mode, not using the steptronic, the X5 weighting in at a heafty 4800+lbs rated @ 290hp & 324 tq fwhp pulled 6 consistant

5.30 - 5.33 second 40 - 70 passes!

Not bad for a 2 1/2 ton SAV!

K

MadMaxine

bump

nocab72

Got my buddy with a '98 Honda Accord EX Coupe, 4cyl, 5spd to pull some 3rd gear passes last night/this morning.

His average for 10 passes was 7.63sec.

The only performance mod he currently has is an intake.

K

Wade

iTrader: (1)

Guys, the numbers that other cars do are pretty meaningless... heck these numbers are pretty meaningless for our own cars given that 40-70 isn't even in an FD powerband. Just compare 1/4 mile MPH and (less importantly) ET if you really want to compare cars.

Are those other cars even geared the same, are those tests in the mags in the same gear? I doubt it... do this test in 2nd gear instead of 3rd and your times will be drastically different.

I guess my point is this... lets please come up with a good standard test or kill this thread, because it is pretty pointless.

Wade

SPOautos

The 40-70 test where you start in 3rd gear at 30 then start timing at 40 has been around forever. I think there is even info about it on Rob Robinettes site(or another old site like that). The point of the whole thing is to compare one 3rd Gen to another not to compare it against other cars. Its desined to put all the 3rd gens on a even playing field with no user error (as far as driving is concerned) and compare different 7's with different mods. People also used it to make sure there car was running ok. It was a means for people with no boost gauge to make sure there car was running at the level its supposed to.

Its not designed to compare again other cars and all this other crap. If you guys was to compare accel performance with other car stick with the 1/4 mile.

This is basically to make sure your car is running and boost like its supposed to. Its a good test to check the seq system if you dont have a boost gauge.

STEPHEN

technonovice

The test and similar ones are also good to see what effects mods and tuning have taken. Run tests before and then after. Nonetheless I'm always interested in what other cars are do.

Wade

iTrader: (1)

Not to say the 40-70 test has no valid use at all (it does, Stephen suggests some possible uses), but it still isn't ideal even for comparing changes before and after on an FD. A lot of 40-70 mph is out of the powerband of an FD.

Two FD's doing this test right next to each other, one stock and one with an extra 100+ horsepower... the modded one will start to run away from the stock one but only at the very end of the test. This is because almost all of the power gains from modding will be from 4500 RPMs and up. If the test were more in the neighborhood of 50-90 mph in 3rd then the difference would be more measurable. This is still slow enough that most people could perform it safely on an interstate.

Wade