A friend picked up a new 2006 Lamborghini Gallardo. We drove around in the car this morning and I'll tell you the thing is a blast with a sexy balance of engine noise, zip and tight steering. It has the paddle shift. The newest model has bumped HP to 520.

A G-tech pass was performed in my usual test location of 1400 ft above sea level at about 65F. The Lamborghini was tested with driver only and low fuel to keep weight to a minimum. These are both valid runs with zero Gs base line starts. Attached are the screen shots for Speed and Gs data.

Black - 2006 Lamborghini Gallardo, paddle shift, driver only, low fuel

Red - 1993 touring Rx-7, Power FC 11 psi, DP match ported to exhaust manifold, MP, CB HKS carbon ti, supra fuel pump, modified stock air box to enhance forced induction and flow volume, weight reduction low fuel mini battery

 

is that compared to an old map you had of the fd cause it says you sold it

 

Looks like he needs to work on that launch, 2.2 60fts are horrible for an awd car.
The 0-60mph time should also be alot faster 4.1 on the reviews I've read, if he learns to launch it will be much quicker.

 

520hp and a 13.1 1/4 mile? wtf?

 

wonder how accurate are those...

 

Yes, I sold the FD and picked up the Superformance Cobra.

 

The reviews may have had a manual with clutch, a professional driver and tested at sea level. The car we tested has no clutch. Yoiu just put it in first gear and mash the throttle. I'm not quite sure why it bogs down at the start and takes so long to shift for you when you pull the paddle. Perhaps there's an alternate setting in the car which would improve those characteristics of the car.

 

The most important part is to provide an initial self leveling launch in the test location after the unit is mounted securely. This ensures a zero Gs base line for a valid run. I provided the Gs page to display that both runs were valid.

Here's a link displaying accuracy
http://www.gtechpro.com/accuracy.html

 

 

how the hell do you register a 12.59 1/4 @ 120+ w/ a 2.4+ 60ft time? W/ stock twins no way that's accurate..G

 

that can definately be accurrate. Spinning the tires increases mph while lowering your et because of a shitty 60 ft time.

i have been looking forward to hearing your 1/4 numbers?

 

11 psi.. I am not buying it. I am not flaming anyone just the validity of the #'s. As for my #'s. I took the car to the strip for the 1st time ever last week. My 1st time ever on the strip (yes, VIRGIN NEWBIE). I was running my regular street tires (17's) w/ reg. air pressure (32psi). I ran a 13.05 @ 115.66 w/ a 2.4 60ft. Spinning through 1st and 2nd. I have not decided on whether or not I will purchase some drag radials/slicks and slap them on my stock rims just to see how low of a # I can get. I did have a good time trying it out. So we will see what the future brings. G

 

I ran a 12.65 @119 with a 2.4 0-60 ft

 

Stock twins? >12psi?

 

oh yeah...you are right....at 11psi there is no way he could trap 120mph. u didnt mention 11psi part in your first post.

 

The G-tech run may have been around 12 psi, it varied depending on how the weather was.

The first thing which might cause some confusion is the G-tech provides actual speed at end of 1/4 mile. The drag strip provides an average speed between two beams of light 66 feet apart. The G-tech speed will be higher. The times, given same rollout, will be alike G-tech vs. drag strip. A 120 mph G-tech would be about the same as a 117 ish drag strip.

Before the addition of mid pipe, fuel pump, light weight battery and adding more boost I took the same FD as in the G-tech run to the drag strip.

http://members.***.net/thenormandie/...CB.PowerFC.jpg

At the time of the drag strip run I had a bit under 10 psi on the Power FC with just DP, CB and modified stock air box. Max boost came out to be 9.6 psi after the run. The pass down the strip had a heat soaked car after sitting in the staging line for about an hour with intake temps over 60C, I had wheel hop and spin through 1st and 2nd. If you look at the run it doesn't take much imagination to believe a half second could be shaved off making a pass with cool intake temps, more boost, mid pipe and less weight.

It's not like I have something to gain with sharing mid 12 second G-tech passes. I just want to share comparative data performed using the same testing device. The Gallardo is as it's represented just as the FD is as it's represented.

Here are a couple shots of the car just before I sold it with 19,000 original miles

http://members.***.net/sonysnakes/Rx...20exterior.jpg

http://members.***.net/sonysnakes/Rx...20exterior.jpg

Check this out. When's the last time you saw an FD with the driver seat in this condition?
http://members.***.net/sonysnakes/Rx...ver%20seat.jpg

http://members.***.net/sonysnakes/Rx-7%20dash.jpg

Here's one of my favorite comparisons. My FD vs. my 2003 Z06

 

Thank you for all the great info!
I have used the G-tech and I know how consistent the readings are.
"comparative data performed using the same testing device" is the key. As long as the testing device is consistent. The G-tech is consistent.
Jon

 

Great seat, just had mine redone.

How does being 1400 ft above sea level affect trap speed? I though it would be slower than at sea level. Did you ever actually dyno the car? Like you said, same conditions for both cars would equal some you could compare between the 2.
I'm in Ga and my best was 12.5 @119 with street tires at 32 psi. My latest dyno before the run was 363 rwhp with stock seq twins at roughly 1 bar of boost.

Tim

 

Now the #'s are making more sense... Nice shots of the ride...G

 

Nice car!!
How did you get it that clean?
I mean it, Mine is blk and I cant get it right.. even wax makes marks
Jon

 

So greg when are you going to get a bull??

We are just about to finish an 95 diablo...

 

I started with good paint and a clean car. Even the vacuum lines were like new. The old guy that was the original owner had it up to 16,000 miles never had the car in the rain or snow. There was some swirls in the black that showed up in sun light.

When I got the car I tried everything to get rid of that swirl. I used the best, most expensive 3M products down to weird stuff like Turtle was swirl remover. The Turtle swirl remover was the best product for the job. I took a couple days going over the car. From there I then went through polishes. Some looked great, some didn't. I forgot what I ended up with, but the new bomb that I've discovered is the Maguire's with the Rx-7 on the label. They sell it at Wal Mart.

For the couple little chips that I had I used the Turtle was product that's black which comes with a little black crayon to fill in. That stuff rocks.

 

On a dyno dynamics dyno it was 278 wheel HP a while back. I forgot if that was before the mid pipe and fuel pump and at what boost, but it's hard to compare just dyno numbers from different dynos anyway. I'm certain the stock air box fixed up to have force more air is better than just sitting on the dyno. G-tech is cool because it give realized HP with the car in motion including tire drag, wind and anything else which might slow the car down while actually accelerating. I attached a HP vs time page for the modified FD and a few stock cars. For this testing the weight of the car must be entered into the G-tech to provide correct results as it's one of the numbers used in the calculation. I never weighed my FD, but it should be pretty close with driver and about 1/4 tank of fuel. Weight would be irrelevant for actual acceleration testing.

The cars which we might be familiar with are included to give reference. I think enough guys have put their stock C5 Z06 on the dyno. What are they on a Dynojet? About 360? The actual advertised engine HP figures can be looked up on line. The graph attached would be from speed runs, so the displayed HP at given shift points will be higher as the inertia of rotating mass is contacting the drive line of lower rotating mass. Look at flat points in 3rd and 4th gear for a valid power comparison.

 

EVEN AT 12 PSI....a 120 mph trap is amazing! actually i dont think anyone has done that.
typically 300rwhp gets u a trap of 110mph, 350rwhp gets u 115-117, 360-390 gets you 118-122.

i am not an expert 1/4 racer but i have ben doing it for several yrs with my FD at a few different rwhp and mod levels.

 

"Look at flat points in 3rd and 4th gear for a valid power comparison."

OK, now I dont get it.
Skip the inertia peaks and you got the Z06 at 275 whp at real peak (just before shift). And your 7 is even lower??
Jon