the stock figures are 14.3 or something and down at Calder my mate did 4 runs at around 14.1-14.5...they r only 206 kw stock. t/c was off...but we tried it on and he got a better time...no wheel spin I guess. as ben says so many factors...its all about averages...gotta do a few passes.FTO338 wrote:Hey Chris is that 14.5sec for 350z is when the traction control on or off? I know when the traction control is off the 350z is bloody fast, a stock one can beat some of the mild mod Skyline & 180sx i know of.
But if its on, even a FTO can give it a hard time
Dyno result
Moderators: IMC, Club Staff
-
khunjeng
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 4455
- jedwabna poszewka promocja
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:00 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Victoria
-
payaya
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 3670
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 5:00 pm
the power to weight ratio of the FTO is 8.09. Looking at its competitors the Integra Type S has a power to weight ratio of 7.98 which puts its smack bang in FTO territory.
Both cars are FWD Coupes, weight about the same, bout the same power both have valve timing. In Motor magazine is has the Type S at 7.98 0-100 15.4 quarter mile.
So would it be fair to suggest the GPX stock would be around this speed as well??? Or is it unreasonable??? There seems to be so many deviation from the stock manufacturers claims really we dont really know.
Another is the Peugeot 206 GTI. Low 8's power to weight and performance stats are about the same.
The 350 has a power to weight of 7.05 and quarter mile time is 14.3 0-100 in 6.3 which sounds about right.
The GT has a power to weight of 6.3 400m in 13.98 and 0-100 in 5.81 which also sounds right.
So for a FTO to keep up with the 350Z you'll need about 175kws at least autos are no hopes! But with the mods it could be possible but then you have to factor in torque figures and the engine characteristics.
My opinion is unbiased. The FTO is a great car but stock they are not that quick. Well done to you guys who have gotten the FTO into the 14's even low 14's but this is bascially the limit and a lot of time and effort goes to getting the car this quick. It is not possible for a 2.0L to be quick period. Race cars maybe but there is nothing special about the FTO it just a car! The 2.0L might be on the powerful side, but its still only a 2.0L. Considering the FTO is so highly sprung stock its hard to extract more power out of it as its already at its upper limits! You get a XR6T spend 1000 bucks on it and its at 300kws. $1000.00 for 60KW these gains are what im talking about we dont see in FTOs. LS1 V8's are getting around 400kws from simple edit, edhaust intake and cams. Thats 140kws more than stock! I just dont understand te who concept of spending $500.00-$1000.00 bucks for an extra 10kws??? I mean if you want a fast car go get something else spend less on it and it will be very quick??? Maybe even start on a platform with more performance parts available??? Im not complaining about the speed of my car thats why i have not done many performance mods because i dont find it worthwhile. If i want a quick car, i'll move to a better starting platform. There is only so much you can do with the FTO, considering there is not much in the way of performance products makes it even worse. All up i think the FTO is a great car but going fast is not what it really is good at.
Both cars are FWD Coupes, weight about the same, bout the same power both have valve timing. In Motor magazine is has the Type S at 7.98 0-100 15.4 quarter mile.
So would it be fair to suggest the GPX stock would be around this speed as well??? Or is it unreasonable??? There seems to be so many deviation from the stock manufacturers claims really we dont really know.
Another is the Peugeot 206 GTI. Low 8's power to weight and performance stats are about the same.
The 350 has a power to weight of 7.05 and quarter mile time is 14.3 0-100 in 6.3 which sounds about right.
The GT has a power to weight of 6.3 400m in 13.98 and 0-100 in 5.81 which also sounds right.
So for a FTO to keep up with the 350Z you'll need about 175kws at least autos are no hopes! But with the mods it could be possible but then you have to factor in torque figures and the engine characteristics.
My opinion is unbiased. The FTO is a great car but stock they are not that quick. Well done to you guys who have gotten the FTO into the 14's even low 14's but this is bascially the limit and a lot of time and effort goes to getting the car this quick. It is not possible for a 2.0L to be quick period. Race cars maybe but there is nothing special about the FTO it just a car! The 2.0L might be on the powerful side, but its still only a 2.0L. Considering the FTO is so highly sprung stock its hard to extract more power out of it as its already at its upper limits! You get a XR6T spend 1000 bucks on it and its at 300kws. $1000.00 for 60KW these gains are what im talking about we dont see in FTOs. LS1 V8's are getting around 400kws from simple edit, edhaust intake and cams. Thats 140kws more than stock! I just dont understand te who concept of spending $500.00-$1000.00 bucks for an extra 10kws??? I mean if you want a fast car go get something else spend less on it and it will be very quick??? Maybe even start on a platform with more performance parts available??? Im not complaining about the speed of my car thats why i have not done many performance mods because i dont find it worthwhile. If i want a quick car, i'll move to a better starting platform. There is only so much you can do with the FTO, considering there is not much in the way of performance products makes it even worse. All up i think the FTO is a great car but going fast is not what it really is good at.
Last edited by payaya on Mon Apr 17, 2006 2:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
payaya
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 3670
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 5:00 pm
Does anyone know why so many Jap cars are quoted at 206??? Japan use to have a gentlemens agreement where no manufacturer was to surpass this figure as they did not want a war between manufacturers. But do you believe the car companies followed it? Yes as in quoting this figure but so many were secretly more powerful than that. Do you believe a 206kw car would be able to do twelves low thirteen quarter miles??? NO way! You can safely say the GTR, NSX, EVO, STI Supra all supassed this mark without officially quoting it. GTR was dyno'd in Motor a while ago and was found to have 220 at all fours! So you can safely say an 206kw vehicle coming from Japan is more the that. The rules have been relaxed so the true specs of cars in Japan will slowly flow in.khunjeng wrote:the stock figures are 14.3 or something and down at Calder my mate did 4 runs at around 14.1-14.5...they r only 206 kw stock. t/c was off...but we tried it on and he got a better time...no wheel spin I guess. as ben says so many factors...its all about averages...gotta do a few passes.FTO338 wrote:Hey Chris is that 14.5sec for 350z is when the traction control on or off? I know when the traction control is off the 350z is bloody fast, a stock one can beat some of the mild mod Skyline & 180sx i know of.
But if its on, even a FTO can give it a hard time
Eg http://www.j-garage.com/nissan/skyline/gtr/02spec.htm
1.8 tonnes 206KW and does low 12's???? Yeah right!
-
spetz
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 2915
- Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 6:00 pm
14.3 was on street tyres
With a 60ft time of 2.19 I think
Car has an LSD as well, and it is a lancer not an FTO, just an FTO engine in it.
Unfortunately as someone said, it's neither the best car, nor engine to modify.
Ultimately, I do like fast NA FWD cars. And Honda really is the answer. Not only are parts more readily available, cheaper, and with proven power results, but with a cast iron V6 block in the front of a small car handling will never be great.
What I would love right now, more than a skyline, WRX, 180, 200 etc would be an EK civic coupe, with full worked K20A in it
With a 60ft time of 2.19 I think
Car has an LSD as well, and it is a lancer not an FTO, just an FTO engine in it.
Unfortunately as someone said, it's neither the best car, nor engine to modify.
Ultimately, I do like fast NA FWD cars. And Honda really is the answer. Not only are parts more readily available, cheaper, and with proven power results, but with a cast iron V6 block in the front of a small car handling will never be great.
What I would love right now, more than a skyline, WRX, 180, 200 etc would be an EK civic coupe, with full worked K20A in it
-
khunjeng
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 4455
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:00 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Victoria
to answer payaya question its 206...there are all Nissans with basically the same spec engine. Just cos its 206 now...doesn't mean it has to be 206 witha few k spent on it...hehe in fact I think the 350z has been under tunned a lot...just wack an emanage or powerFC on your nissan and see the difference in more aggressive fuel mappings etc.
in fact the Laguna has the same 3.5L as the Z but spec'd at like 170kw or something...
My GTST engine is rated at 187(fly)...although I now getting 190 atw now...with a help of some boost (0.7bar) and some other stuff...no big deal really in skyline land.
The Type S is about the same as the FTO...I have raced a few...but the Type S mods much better. At Revzone here in Melb I saw 3k spent on a Type R (2002 but the same) and it made 145 or something at the wheels...now that would blow away even mild boost turbo fto I think...
The NIsaan and Honda aftermarket parts and the fact that (I believe) they are very conserative with their stock setups means the can get a lot more grunt out of them when u tinker with them....
But I raced a XR6 today just to see what would happen....yeah I took him once I got to like 80+...and I'm in a tip...and only 106 or something atw.
so there u go!! hehe
in fact the Laguna has the same 3.5L as the Z but spec'd at like 170kw or something...
My GTST engine is rated at 187(fly)...although I now getting 190 atw now...with a help of some boost (0.7bar) and some other stuff...no big deal really in skyline land.
The Type S is about the same as the FTO...I have raced a few...but the Type S mods much better. At Revzone here in Melb I saw 3k spent on a Type R (2002 but the same) and it made 145 or something at the wheels...now that would blow away even mild boost turbo fto I think...
The NIsaan and Honda aftermarket parts and the fact that (I believe) they are very conserative with their stock setups means the can get a lot more grunt out of them when u tinker with them....
But I raced a XR6 today just to see what would happen....yeah I took him once I got to like 80+...and I'm in a tip...and only 106 or something atw.
so there u go!! hehe
-
spetz
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 2915
- Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 6:00 pm
This car went onto another dyno for a dyno day
Did 132.5kw atw but I am sure this dyno reads high
Here's a pic:
http://fordmods.datamine.tk/gallery.asp ... G_4043.JPG
Did 132.5kw atw but I am sure this dyno reads high
Here's a pic:
http://fordmods.datamine.tk/gallery.asp ... G_4043.JPG
-
khunjeng
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 4455
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:00 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Victoria
i have never really understoof the "high-dyno" stuff...I mean I undertand it might read high to make people happy...but can some1 explain to me exactly why...i.e shootout vs blah blah///
mind u If I got 130kwatw with my fto (regardless of high/low) Id be happy...its sh*t load more than what I have...I doubt the dyno could be that off??? dunno.
mind u If I got 130kwatw with my fto (regardless of high/low) Id be happy...its sh*t load more than what I have...I doubt the dyno could be that off??? dunno.
-
spetz
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 2915
- Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Well he got 120kw on a different dyno which I think is more accurate than this one
I did 112kw atw on this one and I doubt my car would make that much now
I think it depends how the dyno is setup etc
Some dyno's just always read higher than others. ie what they show on the screen is higher than other ones, some are lower and so on
I did 112kw atw on this one and I doubt my car would make that much now
I think it depends how the dyno is setup etc
Some dyno's just always read higher than others. ie what they show on the screen is higher than other ones, some are lower and so on
-
khunjeng
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 4455
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:00 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Victoria
yeah 112 sounds right. I made 106 without my SAFC or e-manage...that would bring me up to about 112 this is with no extactors or downpipe upgrades....this would get u another 5 u might think...at least give u some more torque.
my guess would be with these types of basic mods your looking at 115 or so...if u get more than that your going well.
Now I've been driving my FTO all week again I rememebr its not that slow and goes well over 3k!
my guess would be with these types of basic mods your looking at 115 or so...if u get more than that your going well.
Now I've been driving my FTO all week again I rememebr its not that slow and goes well over 3k!