# Litchfield Stage 4 , real world performance



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

Today i should have been taking my Stage 4 to fighting torque but unfortunately it was cancelled. However as it was such lovely weather i decided to get up very early and go for a blast and also do some real world timings.

The car never fails to impress me and i was grining ear to ear by the time i got back after a fantastic blast down some completely empty country lanes.

I did manage to do some timings on my Vbox, on a very long private driveway of course ..

30-130 in 9.6 secs on one run and 30-120 in 7.7 on another. Had one go at a launch control and hit 0-60 in 3.0 and 0.100 in 6.6. The car is just awesome !!

Make sure you have a drive this weekend, best one left this year


----------



## saucyboy (Nov 1, 2009)

Just got back from a blast my self mate :thumbsup: The air was lovely and fresh this morning and the car just felt awesome as always. I only came in as the roads started to get cars or should I say cyclists on them. 

Seeing your figures yours must feel insane :smokin: Glad to see you're enjoying it mate


----------



## bobel (Jul 26, 2010)

Great stuff Marc, I'm running the same spec myself (GTC 600r) so pretty similar figures, I always find it takes a good spin on country roads to really appreciate the car, it's the instant thrust out of bends in 3rd gear that blows the mind, I think a 600bhp GTR is probably the ultimate road car, I've been toying with the idea of going 700 bhp range but in all honesty I'm not sure you can extract much more enjoyment let alone speed out the car in the majority of situations.


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

bobel said:


> Great stuff Marc, I'm running the same spec myself (GTC 600r) so pretty similar figures, I always find it takes a good spin on country roads to really appreciate the car, it's the instant thrust out of bends in 3rd gear that blows the mind, I think a 600bhp GTR is probably the ultimate road car, I've been toying with the idea of going 700 bhp range but in all honesty I'm not sure you can extract much more enjoyment let alone speed out the car in the majority of situations.


So right, the bendy country lanes flicking between 3rd and fourth is just fantastic, feels computer game fast, but so involving, and manages to feel totally safe and planted at the same time. I also keep toying with Stage 5, but not sure the extra power would make any difference on the road, nothing can touch it already.


----------



## Jm-Imports (Feb 12, 2007)

nice weather here too got my car all clean for a drive later, tax runs out in september aswell.


----------



## john beesla (Jun 6, 2011)

Awesome mate glad your enjoying it!! those are impressive times,
Im totally gutted been so busy not been able to get out for a blast!!!:bawling:


----------



## bobel (Jul 26, 2010)

Just out of interest marc what launch are you using to get 3.0, LC5 R/C/off? And what launch rpm?


----------



## barry P. (May 9, 2010)

I'm heading off to Duxford airshow in mine in a few minutes, should be a great day out, a quick run in the GT-R and then watch some Spitfires with a bright blue sky as a backdrop :bowdown1:


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

I went out for a blast last night to put some charge in the battery.

It wasn't until I got home that I realised I didn't use 100% throttle once!


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

barry P. said:


> I'm heading off to Duxford airshow in mine in a few minutes, should be a great day out, a quick run in the GT-R and then watch some Spitfires with a bright blue sky as a backdrop :bowdown1:


Sounds fun enjoy !


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

bobel said:


> Just out of interest marc what launch are you using to get 3.0, LC5 R/C/off? And what launch rpm?


It was LC4 R/C/Off 4000rpm, very hard to get perfect traction


----------



## sw20GTS (Jul 29, 2010)

barry P. said:


> I'm heading off to Duxford airshow in mine in a few minutes, should be a great day out, a quick run in the GT-R and then watch some Spitfires with a bright blue sky as a backdrop :bowdown1:


Might go there too (depending on camera...) might keep an eye out for you


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

30-130 is a good benchmark, any 30-100 as for me 130 is very risky on most roads.


----------



## *MrB* (Dec 2, 2009)

Good figures, roll on October for my next trip to Litchfields!!


----------



## Takamo (Oct 18, 2005)

Been out in mine to a ferrari meet was invited by a friend so I thought I'd go along and have a butchers, anyway when I turned up there was about 6 gtr's there representing, there were a total of about 35-40 cars which included Ferraris, Porsches and one or two other jap cars. After a brief time we were told that we had to leave and drive around 30 miles to another location where another meet was planned so we all left as a convoy but as you do everyone started showing off by powering away from eachother so us gtr boys decided it was time to unleash our beasts and shut them all up and like clockwork we anialated all the so called super cars in seconds after which they kept behind and behaved themselves, three out of the 6 gtr's were stage4 or equivelant and the power difference was emense between our gtr's and the standard gtr's and the other cars


----------



## Browntrouser (Aug 21, 2012)

Had a few nice drives myself this weekend. Sadly for me I have to cope with out the box 2010 performance, but it is still stark raving mental amounts of power and acceleration on any road. Coming from an XKR I think I'm the only person here who is constantly impressed by the MPG too!


----------



## maxxwaxx (Feb 25, 2008)

MarcR35GTR said:


> I did manage to do some timings on my Vbox, on a very long private driveway of course ..
> 
> 30-130 in 9.6 secs on one run and 30-120 in 7.7 on another. Had one go at a launch control and hit 0-60 in 3.0 and 0.100 in 6.6. The car is just awesome !!
> 
> Make sure you have a drive this weekend, best one left this year


Funny that did exactly the same thing this morning at 6am. Got back from canaries last week and flew out to barcelona this morn for work so took car out early for an hour. Roads were quiet and managed 0-60 2.9 30-130 in 9.7 and 0-100 in 6.6 (on an airfield of course) Looks like these Litchfield stage 4s are very similar. As you say the torque in 3rd and 4th is amazing. Best 3k ive ever spent :thumbsup:


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

Guys, do you get those times from the vbox or do you continually log and generate the times on your pc ?


----------



## RichF-R35 (Jun 16, 2012)

maxxwaxx said:


> Funny that did exactly the same thing this morning at 6am. Got back from canaries last week and flew out to barcelona this morn for work so took car out early for an hour. Roads were quiet and managed 0-60 2.9 30-130 in 9.7 and 0-100 in 6.6 (on an airfield of course) Looks like these Litchfield stage 4s are very similar. As you say the torque in 3rd and 4th is amazing. Best 3k ive ever spent :thumbsup:


Was that in auto or manual to get them times?

Rich


----------



## saucyboy (Nov 1, 2009)

Browntrouser said:


> Had a few nice drives myself this weekend. Sadly for me I have to cope with out the box 2010 performance, but it is still stark raving mental amounts of power and acceleration on any road. Coming from an XKR I think I'm the only person here who is constantly impressed by the MPG too!


Mate you are quite right. Even in standard form they are mentally quick and soooo much fun :chuckle:


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

ChuckUK said:


> Guys, do you get those times from the vbox or do you continually log and generate the times on your pc ?


The vbox gives it all, incredibly simple to use.


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

Yeah I own one, shame you don't continually log, could of pulled off a lot more info.


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

ChuckUK said:


> Yeah I own one, shame you don't continually log, could of pulled off a lot more info.


My problem is i am fully Apple at home , and the vBox software isnt compatible. Must buy an old laptop at some point, just for that.


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

Glad your enjoying the conversion guys. We have another free update coming soon 

Regards

Iain


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

Litchfield said:


> Glad your enjoying the conversion guys. We have another free update coming soon
> 
> Regards
> 
> Iain


Sounds good Iain, look forward to it !


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

maxxwaxx said:


> Funny that did exactly the same thing this morning at 6am. Got back from canaries last week and flew out to barcelona this morn for work so took car out early for an hour. Roads were quiet and managed 0-60 2.9 30-130 in 9.7 and 0-100 in 6.6 (on an airfield of course) Looks like these Litchfield stage 4s are very similar. As you say the torque in 3rd and 4th is amazing. Best 3k ive ever spent :thumbsup:


Max, Amazingly close figures to mine, so i guess everyone knows what they get for their Stage 4 money, incredible value in my opinion. What settings did you use to get 2.9 0-60, Im finding it hard to get under the 3.0 !


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

Plenty of emulators out there or Bootcamp. Next time enable continuous logging, won't effect the info you get but send the files to me, as I'll be interested to look at the data.


----------



## Karls (Jul 12, 2010)

Yep, Bootcamp performs perfectly


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

ChuckUK said:


> Plenty of emulators out there or Bootcamp. Next time enable continuous logging, won't effect the info you get but send the files to me, as I'll be interested to look at the data.


I took your advice and used an emulator crossover which worked fine on mi iMac. I had set logging on before so had lots of data to go through and got the hang of the software pretty quickly. Its great stuff, will post some acceleration graphs soon.


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

Great stuff, 30-100 please


----------



## sumo69 (Mar 31, 2008)

ChuckUK said:


> Great stuff, 30-100 please


5 to 5.2 seconds I believe :clap:


----------



## Johnny G (Aug 10, 2012)

That's blistering - and just purely comical 

Love it.


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

sumo69 said:


> 5 to 5.2 seconds I believe :clap:


Must be faster than that, my does it in 5.6secs and is standard.


----------



## sumo69 (Mar 31, 2008)

ChuckUK said:


> Must be faster than that, my does it in 5.6secs and is standard.


I have done 0-100 without any LC in 6.9 so assuming the LC would knock 0.3 at the most off that equates to a 6.6 - is 0-30 in 1.4-1.6 reasonable or is it less than that?

David


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

sumo69 said:


> I have done 0-100 without any LC in 6.9 so assuming the LC would knock 0.3 at the most off that equates to a 6.6 - is 0-30 in 1.4-1.6 reasonable or is it less than that?
> 
> David


0-30 with LC gave me 1.4 secs


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

ChuckUK said:


> Great stuff, 30-100 please


30-100 was 5.2 seconds, 60-100 3.6


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

ChuckUK said:


> Must be faster than that, my does it in 5.6secs and is standard.


That doesnt sound right unless it is a MY12. 

Standard MY 09 or 10 is somewhere between 7.8 best or 8.3 worst to 100 from all the road tests and around 3.5 0-60 so 60 to 100 taking between 4.3 and 4.8, mine always does 60-100 between 3.4 and 3.6 which is 25% faster about equal to the difference in power to weight between standard 480 to 500 and Stage 4 610 ish


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

59 plate here, 60-100 is 3.7 dead, have plenty of runs over the years and they have always been around those times. I was going to finally get a tune on mine, don't think I'll bother now.

This is why real world info is more important for your average road user, I'll post my graphs


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

ChuckUK said:


> 59 plate here, 60-100 is 3.7 dead, have plenty of runs over the years and they have always been around those times. I was going to finally get a tune on mine, don't think I'll bother now.
> 
> This is why real world info is more important for your average road user, I'll post my graphs


Chuck, good figures, real world info is definitely the most interesting. What is your best 0-100, things that can still make a big difference of course is the slope of the road being tested on. I think it would be interesting to create a sticky some where her eof real world vBox acceleration graphs for different model years and different stages . All these cars are awesome, standard or tuned.


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

MarcR35GTR said:


> Chuck, good figures, real world info is definitely the most interesting. What is your best 0-100, things that can still make a big difference of course is the slope of the road being tested on. I think it would be interesting to create a sticky some where her eof real world vBox acceleration graphs for different model years and different stages . All these cars are awesome, standard or tuned.


Yes that's a great idea, I wish all tuners would post in gear times etc, as for me if I have 1000 or 100bhp it's not important. I have never done 0-100, I suppose mainly because I can't ever see myself having a race at the lights, where as 30-100 etc we all do very often 

Yes road slopes can make a difference, although I have nearly always got those times. There is no question in my mind from 100 onwards your car would be way faster but this always brings me back to the real world argument of where do you drive those speeds. 

I'd be interested to see a Stage 1 or 2, as if mine is not far off a Stage 4 in real world figures, what would those do ? Stage 5 would be nice to compare also.


----------



## sumo69 (Mar 31, 2008)

Chuck

There is an insignificant difference between Stage 2 and 4 - my stage 2 has been dynod @ SRR on a warm day @ 604.7bhp and 620lb/ft torque.

Now my engine may be a strong one, but stage 4's will be at most 10-15 bhp and 10lb/ft torque more. In other words, 1.5 to 2% which won't show on the stopwatch below 100mph.

David


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Stage 5 would show up without question.

I've now put my foot down fully and it is just monstrous. Has serious traction issues in the bone dry with hot sticky tyres.

I don't care what anyone says, anyone wanting more than stage 5 is insane. You just can't use it on the road to the point where you could enjoy the benefits on top of the measly 750bhp or so that stage 5 gives you.

It might be faster, but it is so insane already that your senses are so wired trying to stay alive and making sure you don't lose your license that it just can't be enjoyable.


----------



## sw20GTS (Jul 29, 2010)

The GTR just comes with insane power. I'm "only" on Stage 1 but WOT in 2nd I can feel the rear end start to give a little. This is on the "eco" map limited to 0.5 boost as well!


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

Adamantium said:


> Stage 5 would show up without question.
> 
> I've now put my foot down fully and it is just monstrous. Has serious traction issues in the bone dry with hot sticky tyres.
> 
> ...


That's not what I wanted to hear, you've got 305's on the rear too? The traction control rarely kicks in in R-mode with stage 4.


----------



## thunderball (Nov 28, 2011)

Surely the issue at 600bhp & 600lb/ft is traction. In the dry, my stage 4 loses traction at 100mph under 100% acceleration in 4th, with traction control cutting in (in TC 'normal' mode) suggesting the car is losing traction. Whilst I woud love the stage 5, I just don't understand how the chassis can realistically cope with much more as it just can't put it all down.

I'm with Adam in that even with stage 4, let alone 5, on an A or B road it's difficult to drive flat out, as you are concentrating on just keeping it on the road. 

Incidentally, this logic probably won't stop me going to stage 5


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

No, didn't stop me either! and I have more planned but nothing that will affect headline power. Torque potentially although I doubt I'll be taking advantage of the safetynet I will be installing for the above reasons of traction.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Yeah, despite loving my 285/35 "square" MPSS set up currently, I fear I am going to have to go back to 285F 315R R888s when I go to Stage 6+, the MPSSs simply won't have enough traction...


----------



## AnEvoGuy (Aug 17, 2011)

David.Yu said:


> Yeah, despite loving my 285/35 "square" MPSS set up currently, I fear I am going to have to go back to 285F 315R R888s when I go to Stage 6+, the MPSSs simply won't have enough traction...


Any more details David? Litchfield I'm guessing?


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

ChuckUK said:


> Yes that's a great idea, I wish all tuners would post in gear times etc, as for me if I have 1000 or 100bhp it's not important. I have never done 0-100, I suppose mainly because I can't ever see myself having a race at the lights, where as 30-100 etc we all do very often
> 
> Yes road slopes can make a difference, although I have nearly always got those times. There is no question in my mind from 100 onwards your car would be way faster but this always brings me back to the real world argument of where do you drive those speeds.
> 
> I'd be interested to see a Stage 1 or 2, as if mine is not far off a Stage 4 in real world figures, what would those do ? Stage 5 would be nice to compare also.


Found best 30-100 time so far is 5.0. See attached graph


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

thunderball said:


> Surely the issue at 600bhp & 600lb/ft is traction. In the dry, my stage 4 loses traction at 100mph under 100% acceleration in 4th, with traction control cutting in (in TC 'normal' mode) suggesting the car is losing traction. Whilst I woud love the stage 5, I just don't understand how the chassis can realistically cope with much more as it just can't put it all down.
> 
> I'm with Adam in that even with stage 4, let alone 5, on an A or B road it's difficult to drive flat out, as you are concentrating on just keeping it on the road.
> 
> Incidentally, this logic probably won't stop me going to stage 5


On a bumpy country lane traction can be a problem, but I don't see much interference on decent A roads with 620/620. May be the newer cars have revised traction control, it certainly let's you go fairly sideways on track before finally kicking in.


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

David.Yu said:


> Yeah, despite loving my 285/35 "square" MPSS set up currently, I fear I am going to have to go back to 285F 315R R888s when I go to Stage 6+, the MPSSs simply won't have enough traction...


Time for another debate on tyre size vs contact patch size


----------



## sw20GTS (Jul 29, 2010)

Anders_R35 said:


> Time for another debate on tyre size vs contact patch size


That is always an interesting debate  I like wider tyres but so far I'm thinking that would only benefit track use? As mentioned earlier, some of my commute has bumpy (but twisty ) roads - will wider tyres improve grip or make it worse?


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Anders_R35 said:


> Time for another debate on tyre size vs contact patch size


No debate. R888s grip a LOT better than MPSSs in the dry, as well they should, being an R compound track day tyre.

But re contact patches, I would like to try the 305/30 and 295/35 MPSS options, but I doubt they would cope well with 850hp...


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Anders_R35 said:


> On a bumpy country lane traction can be a problem, but I don't see much interference on decent A roads with 620/620. May be the newer cars have revised traction control, it certainly let's you go fairly sideways on track before finally kicking in.


No, he should simply never drive it in Normal VDC (unless it's very wet). R mode is great!


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

thunderball said:


> Surely the issue at 600bhp & 600lb/ft is traction. In the dry, my stage 4 loses traction at 100mph under 100% acceleration in 4th, with traction control cutting in (in TC 'normal' mode) suggesting the car is losing traction. Whilst I woud love the stage 5, I just don't understand how the chassis can realistically cope with much more as it just can't put it all down.
> 
> I'm with Adam in that even with stage 4, let alone 5, on an A or B road it's difficult to drive flat out, as you are concentrating on just keeping it on the road.
> 
> Incidentally, this logic probably won't stop me going to stage 5


That's interesting because I have no traction issues in my MY11 stage 2.
It just goes... even with Yoko advans on which are good in the wet but worse than the stock tyres or Michellins.

Although when I want to play I always flip TC into R.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

CT17 said:


> That's interesting because I have no traction issues in my MY11 stage 2.
> It just goes... even with Yoko advans on which are good in the wet but worse than the stock tyres or Michellins.
> 
> Although* when I want to play I always flip TC into R*.


Yup, that's the key. TC is annoyingly, almost dangerously intrusive when trying to use all the performance in the dry. As many have reported, it even cuts in on downhill straights where there is no wheelspin!


----------



## sw20GTS (Jul 29, 2010)

David.Yu said:


> No, he should simply never drive it in Normal VDC (unless it's very wet). R mode is great!


Are you saying it's better to drive in R mode most of the time? I find this intriguing. I normally just leave the TC alone unless I find a very quiet road or on a track/private land.


----------



## thunderball (Nov 28, 2011)

David.Yu said:


> No, he should simply never drive it in Normal VDC (unless it's very wet). R mode is great!


There's a time and place for R, but my confidence was knocked when pulling out to overtake a crawling arctic on an uphill overtaking lane and the back end stepped out and nearly pitched me into an oncoming wagon, also tight B roads with arnco and 600bhp+ I also leave to the foolhardy - I find the 'R' TC tolerance a little too startling at times!


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

thunderball said:


> There's a time and place for R, but my confidence was knocked when pulling out to overtake a crawling arctic on an uphill overtaking lane and the back end stepped out and nearly pitched me into an oncoming wagon, also tight B roads with arnco and 600bhp+ I also leave to the foolhardy - I find the 'R' TC tolerance a little too startling at times!


I found that with stage 4 too. Wondered if it was the extra torque, because my stage 2 seems easier to control in R mode. You can jump on the power a little eariler IMO. It's less twitchy.
I'm not aware of difference in R mode from MY10 to MY11, so I wondered if that extra bit of power/torque from stage 4 was taking the TC/R by surprise a little if you are heavy footed?


----------



## bobel (Jul 26, 2010)

Have to say I don't find traction an issue with my GTC 600r, I drive in normal traction setting on lower boost but usually switch it to R mode if running full boost! I'm running. Bridgestones and have to say even on track I found them quiet good traction wise too!


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

thunderball said:


> There's a time and place for R, but my confidence was knocked when pulling out to overtake a crawling arctic on an uphill overtaking lane and the back end stepped out and nearly pitched me into an oncoming wagon, also tight B roads with arnco and 600bhp+ I also leave to the foolhardy - I find the 'R' TC tolerance a little too startling at times!


Have you been on a track day, I think that's the perfect place to explore the limits of traction control. When I first drove on track, I found the loose rear end (relative to scooby) a very strange sensation. But after a while it feels normal and your reaction to a bit of oversteer becomes more second nature. 

The experience on track would definately help if I was in that situation on the road. I drive with TC in normal in the wet.


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

David.Yu said:


> No debate. R888s grip a LOT better than MPSSs in the dry, as well they should, being an R compound track day tyre.
> 
> But re contact patches, I would like to try the 305/30 and 295/35 MPSS options, but I doubt they would cope well with 850hp...


I might look in to the R888's if I go stage 5, they must be as rubbish as dunlops in the wet though?


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Anders_R35 said:


> I might look in to the R888's if I go stage 5, they must be as rubbish as dunlops in the wet though?


Very good when they have decent tread depth actually as they have a very soft compound. MPSSs are awesome in the wet though!

No doubt, MPSS is by far the best allrounder re noise, ride, grip in wet and dry, longevity and even price. But if you're going 850+ I doubt they'll have the traction to put it down.


----------



## sumo69 (Mar 31, 2008)

I drive with R as my default unless its really hammering down with rain or the rods are flooding - no issues with traction when dry and I am on Bridgestones.

David


----------



## grahamc (Oct 1, 2006)

Anders_R35 said:


> I might look in to the R888's if I go stage 5, they must be as rubbish as dunlops in the wet though?


On my Scooby, they were great in the wet, I think standing water may be a different story. The problem with the Rs is the road noise!! The only thing stopping me for using them.


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

As David has said the MSS tyres seem to find a lot more traction on the track. When we tested the Dunlops and Michelins at the Ring you really noticed the Dunlops needed warming to get maximum grip but in our car they would light up much quicker coming out of bends. We had the luxury of the Syvecs traction control running as well which meant that there was a much softer intervention if we went over the limit (and a cool noise  )
If I'm driving one of our Stage2+ cars on the road I would switch it to Race mode on the Traction control as it does not cut in as readily.


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

MarcR35GTR said:


> Found best 30-100 time so far is 5.0. See attached graph


This is an overlay of your plot and mine, it's rather bizarre as by 55mph you are travelling 5mph more than me. After this the curves are pretty much running parallel to each other which I don't understand, as power really starts to show effect at higher speeds. I then replotted from 55-100mph and did an overlay on yours, it seems you gain .3 below 55 and .3 above. My start was from 2nd as it was rolling, I'm guessing yours was from a 0-100 run so there maybe some 1st gear in there from you.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

I don't think true 30-100mph times should be cut from a graph of a 0-100 run. It's supposed to show the pulling power of the car from a constant 30mph, surely?

Otherwise all the mags would just do one pull from 0-Vmax and cut all their interval acceleration times from that!


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

David.Yu said:


> I don't think true 30-100mph times should be cut from a graph of a 0-100 run. It's supposed to show the pulling power of the car from a constant 30mph, surely?
> 
> Otherwise all the mags would just do one pull from 0-Vmax and cut all their interval acceleration times from that!


David, is there a standard for it ? What gear would you start from ?


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

MarcR35GTR said:


> DAvid, is there a standard for it ? What gear would you start from ?


Don't think there is a standard, just start from a rolling 30mph. What does 1st top out at in a GT-R? 40mph? In which case that would be the fastest gear, especially with our gearbox that doesn't lose time. In a manual car, it would be quicker in 2nd.


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

ChuckUK said:


> This is an overlay of your plot and mine, it's rather bizarre as by 55mph you are travelling 5mph more than me. After this the curves are pretty much running parallel to each other which I don't understand, as power really starts to show effect at higher speeds. I then replotted from 55-100mph and did an overlay on yours, it seems you gain .3 below 55 and .3 above. My start was from 2nd as it was rolling, I'm guessing yours was from a 0-100 run so there maybe some 1st gear in there from you.


Chuck, I will have a go at a 2nd gear rolling start run at the weekend to compare further. Does the car change down if you go foot down in 2nd or do you do this in manual mode ?


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

I always drive in manual. I think a cut from a 0-100 would give you a better result TBH as your already carrying the momentum. I think I started at about 20mph and just floor it, didn't want to miss that 30 start point, to busy looking at the revs.

BTW guys, I'm not trying to argue the power/tq of a Stage 4 from either Litchfield or GTC just putting a perspective on what that performance gain is in the real world.


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

ChuckUK said:


> I always drive in manual. I think a cut from a 0-100 would give you a better result TBH as your already carrying the momentum. I think I started at about 20mph and just floor it, didn't want to miss that 30 start point, to busy looking at the revs.


I used automatic when i did most runs, and probably that one, not sure what difference it makes.


----------



## sumo69 (Mar 31, 2008)

MarcR35GTR said:


> I used automatic when i did most runs, and probably that one, not sure what difference it makes.


It shouldn't make any difference so long as your transmission is set to R.


----------



## ROG350Z (Jun 15, 2008)

Well I am currently in the north of Scotland and did the Inverness to Ullapool run with the new Iain Setup and oh my good lord it is incredible! Still running very rich and clouds of black smoke but not Iain's faul as we haven't had a chance to map out the richness yet and wanted it super safe for my blast up here. The noise, oh dear lord, the bellow on full throttle at 4,500 + is simply like Tom Jones has taken a micro plane cheese grater to his testicles then dipped them straight into Battery Acid. No other way to describe it. Cars diving to the left, indicators on to get out of the way (and left choking in my black soot wake haha). The drive in third and fourth is astonishing and the TC light is always on on bad surfaces even in R - always better to be safe than sorry with deer/sheep/tourists around.

I have to say that winding up the side of the Loch to Ullapool on full blast with two very hot hitch hiking ladies (I don't know how my luck works either) who didn't say much was immense. Sun streaming down the mountains and that noise! But they did say we were in Ullapool a whole lot quicker than they thought and would be the talk of the Youth Hostel that evening.

I am very happy and honestly Stage Five would be instant death up here. It does make you wonder about suspension and tyres though dammit. Other thing is my brakes or horrible. The Carbotech XP8, which I have never really liked the feel of, have no feel in first half inch of braking, squeak the whole time (under 30 MPH it is almost unbearable) and they 'stop' ok but no feel or confidence. AP RAcing disks all round so they should be fine but got lots of surface cracking all over the fronts now - should I be worried - surely don't need to replace them already as I am hardly a track monster on brakes? And before you ask they had a full total Brake Fluid replacement after Brunters.


----------



## barry P. (May 9, 2010)

I've noticed quite a few comments from people with stage 4 Ecutek tunes about the black smoke on acceleration, I have a similar stage of tune, ie injectors, intakes etc but do not see large quantities of smoke, tends to be a puff of grey on WOT. Does Iain run slightly richer on WOT to some of the other tuners or does the type of injector make a difference?, I'm using ID1000s and they seem nice and clean.


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

Barry we have all the maps to reduce the smoke and have been testing them long before they were released to other tuners. We have removed the smoke on our normal Stage 4 cars which have the standard down pipes and injectors. 

Roger's car had no CATs in the downpipes and requires a slightly different tune. We have finished the updates on our stage 1-6 maps but Stage 4 with downpipes is being worked on now as it is not as common.

I will be emailing some of our ProECU customers like Roger tonight with new revisions 

I do like to run the cars richer than most and to date we have not had one single engine problem 

Regards

Iain


----------



## C2 VXT (Feb 28, 2009)

Iain correct me if I am wrong, but when you were mapping my car yesterday. There was little or no visible smoke on WOT. 

I can't remember as I was holding on for dear life:bowdown1:

P.s on the way home, it pulled like a train and it was very smooth. And it doesn't sound to bad either :thumbsup:

Gents For reference my GTR has the stage 4 c/w miltek downpipes. 

Ian


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

Litchfield said:


> Barry we have all the maps to reduce the smoke and have been testing them long before they were released to other tuners. We have removed the smoke on our normal Stage 4 cars which have the standard down pipes and injectors.
> 
> Roger's car had no CATs in the downpipes and requires a slightly different tune. We have finished the updates on our stage 1-6 maps but Stage 4 with downpipes is being worked on now as it is not as common.
> 
> ...


Iain,

Will the "smokeless" maps be available to all your customers ? Will be nice not to look like a diesel when pushing it ;-)


----------



## sumo69 (Mar 31, 2008)

MarcR35GTR said:


> Iain,
> 
> Will the "smokeless" maps be available to all your customers ? Will be nice not to look like a diesel when pushing it ;-)


Yes but unless you have bought the ProTuner which allows remote map upgrades, you will have to have the update installed on your next visit.

Iain - any upgrades for Stage 2?

David


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

I was expecting mine to smoke a bit while pushing it round the track on Satuday. I've not had time to upload Iains "improved" stage 2 map in my MY11 yet.

But in the rear facing camera I couldn't see any smoke, even when giving it everything.

It's not that visable, it just soots up the back a bit over time.


----------



## barry P. (May 9, 2010)

Iain, have you noticed any difference betwen the different injector makes, either on "smoking" or power? I opted for the ID1000s when I upgraded mine and was wondering if they are worth the extra money?


----------



## LEO-RS (Mar 18, 2011)

The only true performance tests that count are done at recognised drag strips. Vbox/pbox is a good tool but there is so much manipulation in them. Everyone trying to outdo each other and it eventually ends up in cheating with different elevations being used. (It's human nature to try and outdo each other, no guarantee from a vbox on the slope used)

Someone that sets a benchmark will easily be beaten a day or 2 later by someone else finding a steeper hill to accelerate down.

When posting vbox runs, the elevation curve should also be plotted, if not, then the times are meaningless. The vbox 0-60 display can also be manipulated by setting the 1 foot rollout.

The only sure confirmed way is a dragstrip time.

This is an SVM650R car... (0-130.8mph in 11.366secs) *Confirmed*

http://www.crailraceway.co.uk/showcomp.php?RID=14&RUN=59&EVDate=2012-08-05

Vbox/pbox only a marker in the sand, Marc, you need to get yourself an official timeslip from 1 of the 4 available UK dragstrips otherwise any figures produced are questionable, that goes for anyone using a vbox/pbox. Get it confirmed. Vbox strapped to a GTR going down the side of Ben Nevis will surely get to 100 in less than 5 

I'm not blaming anyone of cheating but to prove any doubt, a slip is needed to backup the vbox. That way everyone knows that the test was regulated.


----------



## vxrcymru (Sep 29, 2009)

Litchfield said:


> Barry we have all the maps to reduce the smoke and have been testing them long before they were released to other tuners. We have removed the smoke on our normal Stage 4 cars which have the standard down pipes and injectors.
> 
> Roger's car had no CATs in the downpipes and requires a slightly different tune. We have finished the updates on our stage 1-6 maps but Stage 4 with downpipes is being worked on now as it is not as common.
> 
> ...


Ian,

What's the timescale for the stage 4 map with downpipes


----------



## spiceykam (Jul 6, 2012)

Keep seeing postings of Stage upgrades, I wish I could at least get mine to perhaps 600bhp, but Warranty Direct stated if I do it will invalidate the warranty. Maybe next year get the warranty changed to Lithcfields expensive I know, but at least they'll permit the increase in bhp


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

spiceykam said:


> Keep seeing postings of Stage upgrades, I wish I could at least get mine to perhaps 600bhp, but Warranty Direct stated if I do it will invalidate the warranty. Maybe next year get the warranty changed to Lithcfields expensive I know, but at least they'll permit the increase in bhp


That's interesting as they told me they covered mods if declared.


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

LEO-RS said:


> The only true performance tests that count are done at recognised drag strips. Vbox/pbox is a good tool but there is so much manipulation in them. Everyone trying to outdo each other and it eventually ends up in cheating with different elevations being used. (It's human nature to try and outdo each other, no guarantee from a vbox on the slope used)
> 
> Someone that sets a benchmark will easily be beaten a day or 2 later by someone else finding a steeper hill to accelerate down.
> 
> ...


I'm not interested in 1/4mile times, they only paint half the picture of real world performance. Vbox have be proven to be very accurate, sure wind speed and elevation can effect times, hence why it's best to go back and forth on the same piece of road. Roll outs are not an issue as it's a rolling start.


----------



## spiceykam (Jul 6, 2012)

Interesting, maybe I'll ask them and post their reply. If they say yes and we'll increase the premium that would be fine, only if it's not a silly inflated amount


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

LEO-RS said:


> The only true performance tests that count are done at recognised drag strips. Vbox/pbox is a good tool but there is so much manipulation in them. Everyone trying to outdo each other and it eventually ends up in cheating with different elevations being used. (It's human nature to try and outdo each other, no guarantee from a vbox on the slope used)
> 
> Someone that sets a benchmark will easily be beaten a day or 2 later by someone else finding a steeper hill to accelerate down.
> 
> ...


Leo, fully intend to do so, but playing with the vbox is great fun, and as you can plot the elevation can give a pretty good indication. I think on a dragstrip the biggest difference will depend on how good an individual launch is. I tend to think the rolling 30-130 is probably a better real world indicator.


----------



## sw20GTS (Jul 29, 2010)

Can you not embed GPS data into VBox logs? Doesn't have to be coordinates, elevation data would suffice.


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

sw20GTS said:


> Can you not embed GPS data into VBox logs? Doesn't have to be coordinates, elevation data would suffice.


Yes, the box logs it all.

But people tend to not add it when printing graphs.
Even the acceleration graph printed by LEO-RS a while back didn't include it, and he is the one saying it should be shown.


----------



## sw20GTS (Jul 29, 2010)

CT17 said:


> Yes, the box logs it all.
> 
> But people tend to not add it when printing graphs.
> Even the acceleration graph printed by LEO-RS a while back didn't include it, and he is the one saying it should be shown.


Ah nice...well if it is possible to only print elevation not no coordinates I don't see what harm can be done  I'm sure then it's possible to create something in Excel that negates elevation to show true values 

Yea...I'm a geek like that when it comes to data


----------



## LEO-RS (Mar 18, 2011)

CT17 said:


> Yes, the box logs it all.
> 
> But people tend to not add it when printing graphs.
> Even the acceleration graph printed by LEO-RS a while back didn't include it, and he is the one saying it should be shown.


True, however, I then started visiting the dragstrips just to put it to bed:thumbsup:

Top 10 leaderboard at Crail, headed by John Hanton obviously but look at positions 5 and 6 

Crail Raceway Drag Strip & Race Car Track Scotland

425bhp TTRS 11.371
650bhp GTR 11.366

Not even a hundredth of a second

The terminal speeds however paint a different picture, GTR a lot better 100+ hence the 8mph terminal speed difference.


----------



## LEO-RS (Mar 18, 2011)

ChuckUK said:


> I'm not interested in 1/4mile times, they only paint half the picture of real world performance. Vbox have be proven to be very accurate, sure wind speed and elevation can effect times, hence why it's best to go back and forth on the same piece of road. Roll outs are not an issue as it's a rolling start.


Yes, I agree but when discussing figures on a forum like this, it's best just to mention the quickest run. I mean, no one would intentionally run an acceleration test up hill would they

Too much manipulation in a vbox, sure the GPS can be plotted but sharing that file could also see you banged up in jail if passed to the boys in blue.

You should try a dragstrip, especially in a car like a GTR, they were built for it. Its criminal not to experience it actually. Give it a bash and compare Stage 4 Lichfield 1/4m times, that way there are no variables, no arguing, no manipulation, just a time slip:thumbsup:

I suspect a 650R car on a good day should break into the 10's easy, just tricky getting that perfect launch.

And Marc, yes, I agree 30-130 is real world, the Marham event is good for that, all verifiable, all comparable.


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

LEO-RS said:


> Give it a bash and compare Stage 4 Lichfield 1/4m times, that way there are no variables, no arguing, no manipulation, just a time slip:thumbsup:


There are loads of variables, 30-100 is way more accurate than a 1/4 mile time. Plus these aren't discussions about fastest times etc just comparing for information purposes, nothing more.

425bhp TTRS 11.371
650bhp GTR 11.366

You don't need more proof than that LOL


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

Agreed, 1/4 mile times vary a lot depending on the type of launch you get.
That's where things are often won or lost. For me you can lose half a second in the same car on the same day between runs.

Remove the driver element (mostly) and look at rolling figures like 30-130.


----------



## spiceykam (Jul 6, 2012)

Ok m8, I have just spoken to WarantyDirect and their Supervisor has declared that they do not cover cars that have been modified in terms of remapping, if anyone has been told they can will soon find out that their cover is now not valid. Sorry, if you've had it done then they have the ability to find out, just pray you don't have any issues, but then it doesn't make sense to pay this premium, you're better off having cover from a Warranty company that does actually cover such mods, that's if you feel you need warranty in the first place.


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

sw20GTS said:


> Ah nice...well if it is possible to only print elevation not no coordinates I don't see what harm can be done  I'm sure then it's possible to create something in Excel that negates elevation to show true values
> 
> Yea...I'm a geek like that when it comes to data


I will have a go tonight at creating a graph showing the elevation data as well, you can try to work out the adjustment factor from that if it floats your boat lol !


----------



## mickv (May 27, 2009)

ChuckUK said:


> There are loads of variables, 30-100 is way more accurate than a 1/4 mile time. Plus these aren't discussions about fastest times etc just comparing for information purposes, nothing more.
> 
> 425bhp TTRS 11.371
> 650bhp GTR 11.366
> ...


60ft times behind the above 1/4 miles show TTRS almost 0.25 sec quicker to 60ft, suggesting much better launch. Also, runs were on different days (GTR in August, TTRS in Feb) so apples and pears.


----------



## Sidious (Jul 14, 2006)

60-100 mph in 3.7 seconds with just standard 480 HP GTR?

I see around 5.2 seconds from magazine road tests.


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

mickv said:


> 60ft times behind the above 1/4 miles show TTRS almost 0.25 sec quicker to 60ft, suggesting much better launch. Also, runs were on different days (GTR in August, TTRS in Feb) so apples and pears.


Yup, pointless comparison if they're on different days. 

I'd also question if the GTR had 650bhp, as I doubt the owner would be running race fuel. More like 550bhp on a hot summers day...


----------



## LEO-RS (Mar 18, 2011)

Nope, I'm afraid your wrong Anders, 550bhp GTR's trap 124-125, to trap 131 you're needing minimum of 650. The other GTRs in the list show a lot slower trap speeds which proves how much extra power over stock it was running. 

Also, hot summers day? Haha, what in Fife in Scotland? 20c max. 

Stickier launch surface in August than that of February, yes apples and pears comparison but nevertheless a leaderboard all the same, same track, same elevation etc. I'm not suggesting my car is 650bhp GTR quick, that car obviously struggled with launch and should have been around the 10.9-11.0 mark with a 131 terminal.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

What really matters, more than anything discussed about is that my car can theoretically get into the 10s.


Woo hoo!


----------



## robsm (Jul 22, 2008)

Adamantium said:


> What really matters, more than anything discussed about is that my car can theoretically get into the 10s.
> 
> 
> Woo hoo!


You'll easily get 10.5 or less.

I still don't understand how some US guys are getting 10s flat with stock turbo's.

that 11.3 is very slow, must have been terrible launch.

Adam, can you make jap show finale?


----------



## Henry 145 (Jul 15, 2009)

Collected my car today from Iain who has updated the Stage 4 and fitted some Forge goodies like BOV's...car feels even faster and just love this tune!

Also had Eibach spacers fitted which makes car look sweet and new suspension fitted which is far more comfortable.

Iain and his team are truly legends and look after my car sooooo well!!!


----------



## 7341SR (May 29, 2008)

robsm said:


> You'll easily get 10.5 or less.
> 
> I still don't understand how some US guys are getting 10s flat with stock turbo's.
> 
> ...


Ok my 11.3 was very slow, used LC5 with various options on/off etc etc. Crail was better with the crap start surface!

Bit of an assumption suggesting easily 10.5 or less, no history!


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

LEO-RS said:


> Nope, I'm afraid your wrong Anders, 550bhp GTR's trap 124-125, to trap 131 you're needing minimum of 650. The other GTRs in the list show a lot slower trap speeds which proves how much extra power over stock it was running.
> 
> Also, hot summers day? Haha, what in Fife in Scotland? 20c max.
> 
> Stickier launch surface in August than that of February, yes apples and pears comparison but nevertheless a leaderboard all the same, same track, same elevation etc. I'm not suggesting my car is 650bhp GTR quick, that car obviously struggled with launch and should have been around the 10.9-11.0 mark with a 131 terminal.


Then his gtr was running E85 or race fuel, stock turbos don't go to 650bhp on pump. Well done for setting the same time as gtr running E85.


----------



## 7341SR (May 29, 2008)

Anders_R35 said:


> Then his gtr was running E85 or race fuel, stock turbos don't go to 650bhp on pump. Well done for setting the same time as gtr running E85.


Was running v power, SVM 650R, never been dynoed, just run.
Can only compare with other GTR's running on same day on same track at same time. JH was awesome! 
Bit of fine tuningt, v power, better launch, cold weather MY target is 10's

Not sure I want to spend the other 7-10k to hit 700+

What do 750R's run on quarters, will it help much on track or better spending the money on instruction?


----------



## LEO-RS (Mar 18, 2011)

I think US drag times should be taken with a pinch of salt, keep comparisons to UK dragstrips.

I think with a 131 terminal the car is making good power, but checking the 60ft launch of 1.9 is a little tame. Perhaps tyre pressures, perhaps tyre wear, perhaps tyre temperature or just even down to launch being too aggressive. The power is there, the terminal speed is there, with a decent launch (hard at Crail I know but JH managed it same day) then 131mph at the beams is easily a 10sec car. (all the time shows is you were struggling for grip initially until it hooked up)

7341SR...ultimate Scottish street car event is soon, temps are starting to cool down now, I'm sure your car will crack a 10. I posted a vid a few weeks back of the ultimate drag race, GTR, Aventador,mclaren etc, the MY12 GTR with 545bhp posted a 125 at the line, your car with 131 at the line is clearly a very strong car.

I do agree, you need to get experience at these things, it's too easy quoting figures from across the pond and thinking that's what is normal. At Crail, stock MY10 cars are 11.8-12.0 cars, Infact, the same goes for Santapod. The yanks will have you believe that low 11's are available. 

Get out and try these cars out guys, they were built for drag strips


----------



## robsm (Jul 22, 2008)

7341SR said:


> Was running v power, SVM 650R, never been dynoed, just run.
> Can only compare with other GTR's running on same day on same track at same time. JH was awesome!
> Bit of fine tuningt, v power, better launch, cold weather MY target is 10's
> 
> ...


I've not run slower than 10.6 with 750R. It should go faster with the right weather and track prep.


----------



## 7341SR (May 29, 2008)

robsm said:


> I've not run slower than 10.6 with 750R. It should go faster with the right weather and track prep.


Thanks for the update, what are your terminal's like at 10.6 or better?

Might have to treat myself for Christmas!


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

sw20GTS said:


> Ah nice...well if it is possible to only print elevation not no coordinates I don't see what harm can be done  I'm sure then it's possible to create something in Excel that negates elevation to show true values
> 
> Yea...I'm a geek like that when it comes to data


Struggling to print graph with elevation, and running out of time till tomorrow. But here are some figures from it.

0-100 6.6 secs 0.60 3.0secs Start Elevation 597.5ft, Elevation at 60mph 595.5 Distance 87ft, Elevation at 100mph 582ft Distance travelled 567ft.

Will be interested what adjustment factor you can calculate from that ? Will post graph tomorrow, and if nice try some 30-130s !


----------



## vxrcymru (Sep 29, 2009)

robsm said:


> I've not run slower than 10.6 with 750R. It should go faster with the right weather and track prep.


So one could say a 650R car is a 11.0 second car and a 750R is a 10.5 second car? quite a difference over a quarter mile.


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

vxrcymru said:


> So one could say a 650R car is a 11.0 second car and a 750R is a 10.5 second car? quite a difference over a quarter mile.


How many car lengths do you reckon


----------



## vxrcymru (Sep 29, 2009)

MarcR35GTR said:


> How many car lengths do you reckon


Im no expert but the difference between 10.5 and 11 secs over a quarter mile is massive, if you think the 2012 GTR with 545 did a 11.1 and the Lambo Aventador did a 10.8 thats only 0.3 of a difference but if you look at the gap between them on the drag strip video on here its quite significant. Easily 5 car lengths at only 0.3 secs between them.

If you could pull regular 10.5s with a 750R build, that is quite some car.....

It would be interesting to see if other 750s on here have done any drag times?????


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

Sorry for the delay manic Friday 

Barry, I have not seen any real difference between the ID1000s or our Bosch 1,100cc injectors. They are both modified Bosch injectors and use a different nozel designs but both perform very well. I have not tuned as many ID1000s with our revised maps but I sent another Ecutek tuner a Stage 5 base file with the injector changes and he used a gas analyser to check the settings (which didn’t need changing) and he had no smoke with turbos, downpipes and ID1000s 

I think any difference in soot will be down to the calibration of the injectors in the software rather than the hardware themselves. We will soon have some new injector designs to test which may improve things a little as well.

Marc, the new maps are available to all customers as a free update. Stage 1-3 maps have also changed slightly but it is Stage 4 (larger injectors) that sees the most benefit. We then tweak each map to suit the individual car/owner.

C2 VXT’s stage 4 cars was mapped after Roger’s Stage 4 GTR and has no obvious soot but the subtle calibration changes for our Stage 4 with downpipes map is a recent update.

Really pleased you like the update Henry, nice to meet you at last 

We have been using these new injector maps for quite some time but like everything they lead onto other changes and Ecutek work so there is no real end to the development at the moment. 

We are currently testing a number of very trick new ECU features that so far work amazingly well :thumbsup: I have been using this new Ecutek software on my car and a few others for a couple of months now and it will be a significant update. There are a few bugs to iron out and currently Ecutek’s focus is on the GT86/BRZ project we have but I’m hoping this will be finished at the end of next week and they will be back onto the GTR full time again 

In terms of performance testing after dyno runs I agree with Chuck that 30-130mph is a very good benchmark of a normal road car. Drag racing at the higher level seems (I say seems as we have never done it) dependant on the use of sticky tyres, weight reduction and race fuel. That would explain some of the quicker times in the US on standard turbos. The standard turbos will only give circa 650bhp on race fuel so any drop in times has to come from other changes.

Regards

Iain


----------



## LEO-RS (Mar 18, 2011)

MarcR35GTR said:


> Struggling to print graph with elevation, and running out of time till tomorrow. But here are some figures from it.
> 
> 0-100 6.6 secs 0.60 3.0secs Start Elevation 597.5ft, Elevation at 60mph 595.5 Distance 87ft, Elevation at 100mph 582ft Distance travelled 567ft.
> 
> Will be interested what adjustment factor you can calculate from that ? Will post graph tomorrow, and if nice try some 30-130s !


You drop 15.5ft (4.7m) in 567ft (172.8m) so its definitely showing a downward slope. Granted, It's not a massive amount, 4.7/173 = 2.72% downward slope but an advantage regardless and this will show in your times.


----------



## LEO-RS (Mar 18, 2011)

Professor Matt on here has run a [email protected] 135mph on stock turbos running E85 and stripped out interior. Staggering time :clap:

No idea on power output but has to be somewhere between 650-700hp I would have thought? 135mph is going some. If 650R is producing 131mph terminals, Matt's car has to have more power than that with a 135.

How much do the 650R and 750R packages produce? Is the clue in the name? I hear of many others saying the stock turbos wont go beyond 630 though? E85 obviously helps with that but does 650R not equal 650 on 99 octane or is that being optimistic? Dyno plots from 650R cars?


----------



## Tin (Aug 15, 2010)

LEO-RS said:


> How much do the 650R and 750R packages produce? Is the clue in the name? I hear of many others saying the stock turbos wont go beyond 630 though? E85 obviously helps with that but does 650R not equal 650 on 99 octane or is that being optimistic? Dyno plots from 650R cars?


I thought the numbers quoted by most tuners, were using race fuel. Think its around 30hp less on 99ron (give or take).


----------



## vxrcymru (Sep 29, 2009)

650 R otherwise known as stage 4 is around 620 and stage 5 or 750R is 720 ish both on 99 Ron


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

Tin, we quote our power figures based on 99 Octance Vpower. Stage 4 610-620bhp and Stage 5 750bhp.

Regards

Iain


----------



## sw20GTS (Jul 29, 2010)

Litchfield said:


> Sorry for the delay manic Friday
> 
> Barry, I have not seen any real difference between the ID1000s or our Bosch 1,100cc injectors. They are both modified Bosch injectors and use a different nozel designs but both perform very well. I have not tuned as many ID1000s with our revised maps but I sent another Ecutek tuner a Stage 5 base file with the injector changes and he used a gas analyser to check the settings (which didn’t need changing) and he had no smoke with turbos, downpipes and ID1000s
> 
> ...


Sounds very promising! Loving the continuous updates and dedication shown here. I am seriously considering getting myself the cable


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Jump from stage 4 to 5 certainly feels like over 100bhp from the butt dyno.

Will test properly when work calms down.


----------



## C2 VXT (Feb 28, 2009)

At Vmax200 Afterburner today, my stage 4+ hit a consistent terminal off 195mph (fastest GTR of the day) and only 5mph behind an Aventador. So thanks to Iain and his team for producing such a beast, which ran impeccably:thumbsup:

Video links to follow


----------



## thunderball (Nov 28, 2011)

C2 VXT said:


> At Vmax200 Afterburner today, my stage 4+ hit a consistent terminal off 195mph (fastest GTR of the day) and only 5mph behind an Aventador. So thanks to Iain and his team for producing such a beast, which ran impeccably:thumbsup:
> 
> Video links to follow


Had to miss yesterday's meet - how many GT-R's there? I heard there was a McClaren too, how did you fair against that?


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

Had a go at a 0-100-0 today, not easy and wasn't up as early as i should have been so much busier and harder to do. However here is the graph including height and distance, launch wasn't the best so 0-60 bit slow at 3.2 , 0-100 6.8, 100-0 5.2 had a slight lock up so could do better.


----------



## ROG350Z (Jun 15, 2008)

C2 VXT said:


> At Vmax200 Afterburner today, my stage 4+ hit a consistent terminal off 195mph (fastest GTR of the day) and only 5mph behind an Aventador. So thanks to Iain and his team for producing such a beast, which ran impeccably:thumbsup:
> 
> Video links to follow


Awesome - mine feels tremendous too and looking forward to the smoke tweak (as Iain said I had to dash off before we really had time to nail it and was one of the first Stage Four with downpipes so always experimentation). She ran beautifully all the way to north of Scotland and back doing 1,000 miles in a week and never missed a beat. Sounds incredible at the same time. 

195 (VBox certified or indicated?) over what distance is VMax (2 miles?) - love to give that a whirl as sounds like mega fun.

Looking forward to Iain's next big update - ECUTek really rolling them out - as soon as they stop play with the damn Scooby ;-)


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

thunderball said:


> Had to miss yesterday's meet - how many GT-R's there? I heard there was a McClaren too, how did you fair against that?


Yes very interested in how your stage 4 did against the various competition


----------



## C2 VXT (Feb 28, 2009)

I haven't seen the results yet, but as soon as I receive them I will post them. What I can tell you is, I smoked the following off the line, to the bend and over the line. :smokin:

BMW M5 V10 (Unsure if standard)
997 Turbo (Unsure if standard)
Audi RS6 V10 (740 Bhp)
MY12 GTR (standard)
MY10 GTR (Lichfield Stage 4)
And various others.

My major scalp of the day, was the car that eventually achieved the highest terminal speed (206mph) a Ford GT - Mirage 720 (Bhp). I left him on the line and finished quite a few car lengths ahead of him, but his terminal was 11 mph up on mine.

My only 'loss' of the day, was against a 997 Turbo, with a rumoured 740 bhp, now that could shift.....

Rog all terminal speeds were recorded with beam's across the track (@ 1.6 miles). The indicated speed on my speedo with my first run was 200mph and I was timed at 189mph (Breaking her in gently). I didn't bother looking at the speedo after that.

I also logged some data files with the Ecutek, which I have sent too Iain for analysis, so it will be interesting to see what they reveal.

Note: On all the runs I had a passenger. Also with the petrol tank nearly empty or full and no matter which side of the track I used made no difference, as I couldn't go faster than 195mph (about 7000rpm)


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

C2 VXT said:


> I haven't seen the results yet, but as soon as I receive them I will post them. What I can tell you is, I smoked the following off the line, to the bend and over the line. :smokin:
> 
> BMW M5 V10 (Unsure if standard)
> 997 Turbo (Unsure if standard)
> ...


Did you ever get you results from this ?


----------



## C2 VXT (Feb 28, 2009)

MarcR35GTR said:


> Did you ever get you results from this ?


No nothing yet. I keep an eye on the VMAX200 website most days for an update. 

The results from VMAX 'Stealth' which was held in May haven't been posted yet

To say how much you pay, its disappointing that you have to wait this long to see the end results.


----------



## Impossible (May 11, 2011)

you say you beat a stage 4 as well. can you comment by how much so we can get an idea of the difference between a stage 4 and 4.5(downpipes I'm guessing is the difference)


----------



## C2 VXT (Feb 28, 2009)

Impossible said:


> you say you beat a stage 4 as well. can you comment by how much so we can get an idea of the difference between a stage 4 and 4.5(downpipes I'm guessing is the difference)


Roughly 2/3 car lengths ahead.

And mine sounded loads better


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

I have just been sent a link to a Video of one of our Stage 4 cars on a airfield against a Standard 2012. Our customer didn't use the launch control 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w03CT7mB7C4&feature=share
(not sure why the embed option didn't work?)

Regards

Iain


----------



## saucyboy (Nov 1, 2009)

Hi mate, webber was showing his Litcho stage 4 off on this thread :bowdown1:

http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/170623-day-runway-yesterday.html

Certainly makes me want to rob a bank so I can go for sone upgrades :chuckle:


----------



## C2 VXT (Feb 28, 2009)

Litchfield said:


> I have just been sent a link to a Video of one of our Stage 4 cars on a airfield against a Standard 2012. Our customer didn't use the launch control
> 
> Abersoch 2012 GTR Stock 530BHP v LICHFIELD 630BHP v MIDDLEHURST M16 650BHP - YouTube
> (not sure why the embed option didn't work?)
> ...


Iain that was my mate Nige who rang you earlier, enquiring about your stage 4. After being smoked in his MY12 with Y pipe. He hasn't had too much grief:chuckle:


----------



## Protegimus (Aug 31, 2011)

Unbelievable how far ahead the Stage 4+ is compared to the 2012, suppose the additional torque makes all the difference!

Middlehurst M16's were purportedly 550BHP with the following mod's:
Nismo ECU with increased performance
Y-pipe

Protegimus


----------



## SamboGrove (Jun 27, 2010)

saucyboy said:


> Certainly makes me want to rob a bank so I can go for sone upgrades :chuckle:


I can provide get away driving if necessary for a fee. Been looking at stage IV and some adv-1 wheels and need funds! :chuckle:


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

I wasn't surprised how the stage 4 went compared to a MY12.
Sure the 12 gets off the line quicker, but once rolling it's over. More than ten percent more power and more torque is only going to go one way in a straight foot down run...


----------



## Protegimus (Aug 31, 2011)

Yeah, be good to see footage from one of the other cars as around 3.5s in as the MY12 hits 3rd gear, it is already three car lengths down on the M-16 and both were launched.

Protegimus


----------



## ROG350Z (Jun 15, 2008)

Protegimus said:


> Yeah, be good to see footage from one of the other cars as around 3.5s in as the MY12 hits 3rd gear, it is already three car lengths down on the M-16 and both were launched.
> 
> Protegimus


It is amazing how the Stage4/4.5 pulls once going and never lets up - installing my latest update map from Iain (fabulous service getting the latest tweaks although I have to remain impartial and say Ben L does the same!) for my St4 with downpipes ready for Sunday at Silverstone.

Looking forward to hopefully not getting thrown off and being the best sounding car there.


----------



## C2 VXT (Feb 28, 2009)

C2 VXT said:


> I haven't seen the results yet, but as soon as I receive them I will post them. What I can tell you is, I smoked the following off the line, to the bend and over the line. :smokin:
> 
> BMW M5 V10 (Unsure if standard)
> 997 Turbo (Unsure if standard)
> ...


Finally the results have been posted (on Pistonheads VMAX 200) my car is referenced below as "Black GTR"  not bad for a 'mildly' tuned Datsun 

206 Mirage GT 720 Bhp (I left this standing off the line and ultimately beat over the line)
205 Stattler 997Turbo (This was running about 740 bhp)
203 Aventador
198 SL600
195 Black GTR
195 Corvette
192 Lamborghini Superlegerra
192 Audi RS6 V10 (This was running about 740 bhp)
192 Evolve E60 M5
191 Blue Audi RS4
191 9E 997TT
190 BMW M6
189 Audi TTRS (green)
189 GTR
187 Corvette z06
185 Porsche 991S
187 Mercedes SLS
186 Mercedes E55
184 Lamborghini Murcielago
183 Mercedes CLS55
178 TVR Cerbera
170 Mercedes SLK55
169 Audi S4 Cab
169 Maserati Gransport
169 BMW M5
168 Porsche 996 C4S
167 BMW M3 CSL
165 Corrado R32
163 Porsche 993 C4S
160 BMW 335i
158 Jaguar XKR
156 Mercedes C63
155 Porsche Cayenne Turbo


----------



## Kabz r35 Gtr (Sep 27, 2012)

I'm going for svm 650r this week and can't wait to feel the different from stage 2.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Stage 2 Cobb or ecutek?


----------



## Kabz r35 Gtr (Sep 27, 2012)

Adamantium said:


> Stage 2 Cobb or ecutek?


It's Cobb I'm running


----------



## spiceykam (Jul 6, 2012)

Cobb, I did speak to someone about ECUTEK and they advised me on using ECUTEK maps, as there were a lot more options and cheaper. I'm under the impression after reading various postings the two are as good as each other.


----------



## Johnny G (Aug 10, 2012)

I'm guessing an FMIC would help here, as the AIT's would be getting quite high on a run like that?


----------



## ACspeedtech (Aug 25, 2011)

With our 'european' temperatures, the stock intercoolers do work, sub 20 psi and 650hp of flow they cope well, even on track/sprint and top end, the aero on the car does well to force air through.
One of my customers was clocked with a calibrated police radar gun at 200.3mph on that runway last year with just the X1 pack (full custom exhaust, panel fiters, cobb custom remap and big balls) (balls not included)


----------



## mags993tt (Feb 3, 2011)

New user of the performance box and was having a play with it over the weekend on a stock MY12. Great piece of kit as it is so uninvolved to set up.

Was analysing the logged data but found it is difficult to extract the custom acceleration times. For example if I want to find the 30-70's from a long run then for some reason the software looks at the first 30mph recorded and then looks for the next 70 and so on..rather than looking for 70 and working back to the last 30. So it isn't actually analysing the data properly as using that method it completely ignores any good 30-70's in say a launch run that is in the data. It looks at the last time you were doing 30mph, ignores the fact you may subsequently have stopped to launch and hit 30mph again during the launch and then tells you how long between first time hit 30 to first time hit 70. I simply want to be able to analyse a whole trip in the car in one go with the software accurately checking for times between two custom speeds.

Has anyone found a way around this without extracting to excel and doing it there?


----------



## LEO-RS (Mar 18, 2011)

Not quite sure I understand.

You load in your file, click on accel results, click on custom, select the range and Bob's your uncle, every 30-70 run within the file will be displayed. If there are 10 x 0-150 runs and you want to find 30-70, it will bring up the 10 x 30-70 from those 0-150 runs.


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

As Leo-RS says, it's quite easy using the supplied software to custom set and search for any runs you like.


----------



## mags993tt (Feb 3, 2011)

LEO-RS said:


> Not quite sure I understand.
> 
> You load in your file, click on accel results, click on custom, select the range and Bob's your uncle, every 30-70 run within the file will be displayed. If there are 10 x 0-150 runs and you want to find 30-70, it will bring up the 10 x 30-70 from those 0-150 runs.


Hmmm..that's not happening for me...I am clicking on the accel results, click on custom, sticking in 30-70 and it is taking the first 30mph it finds and telling me how long it is taking to the next 70mph (even if that data between the first 30 and next 70 covers a hundred fluctuations in speed above and below 30mph). It then calls that the first run and then looks for the next 30mph and does the same. I had 3 launches going over 70 and it didn't pick out even one of those due to the fact that it is looking at the first occurrence of the first speed and then the time to hit the second speed rather than look at the second speed and work back to the first speed (which would give every occurrence of the 30-70 run). So if I had hit 70mph then not gone over 30mph before the next launch I would have gotten the 30-70 run time in that launch through the custom accel input method. Is there a way to change that so it works like yours and gives every 30-70 time?


----------



## ChuckUK (Jan 1, 2009)

Select the bad data on the graph and cutting it out works for me.


----------



## LEO-RS (Mar 18, 2011)

Yep, as above, sometimes there is a glitch but this is easily rectified by cutting out the bad segment. In other words use the edit data function and cut before or after each run


----------



## mags993tt (Feb 3, 2011)

ok thanks for the tips. Not sure it's just bad data as I can see a consistent methodology in how it's calculating and google search threw up a couple of similar questions but no answer. Wll ask racelogic and report back in case it is some kind of setting they can fall into which may be of benefit if someone else's does the same.

Didn't manage to get much data yet but FWIW Stock MY12 3.2 0-60 and 7.2 0-100 with 1ft roll out with launch and not very ideal conditions.


----------



## mags993tt (Feb 3, 2011)

Race logic got back very quickly and helpfully to say following:

"This software (Performance tools - the one that comes with Performance box) does not have a reset function, so once the test condition has been recognised, it will run until the end condition is met. "

So it's not being caused by bad data. It's the way the software works which is a pain if you just want it to do the hard work and find all your best times from a long run. They then went on to say:

"Our software package VBOX Tools has a built in reset, that will discount tests that have started, then fallen back below the start condition threshold. If I have understood correctly, this may solve the issues you have been experiencing.

Whilst VBOX Tools is usually reserved for VBOX users, it is currently not password protected on our download server so you can download a free copy using this link. For your reference, the software manual can be downloaded from here. You will want to use the report generator function to calculate acceleration test data."

So, in theory, no more need to eyeball and manually cut or edit data from a long run to ensure all the best times are captured


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

turn off one foot roll out.


----------



## mags993tt (Feb 3, 2011)

Adamantium said:


> turn off one foot roll out.


It doesn't make any difference to the data itself - only the displayed time on the Pbox from what I can see and the diff is consistently 0.21s for the first foot from my not very big cross section of three launches on same surface using pbox.

So add 0.21s to the above times to include the first foot if that is what you mean.

Also should have said had 3/4 tank fuel and approx 160kg of driver/passenger, 3 degc air temp, very very fine drizzle ground did not appear wet, Dunlop run flats at 1.9Bar, no tyre warm up before hand, ground flat.

I really want to get some more data before the car goes in for mods but time is an issue.

edit to say R, C, R on VDC, Automatic changes and no noticeable wheelspin except in first


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

am only suggesting it so that times are comparable to those posted by others, and standard across the board.

Plus if you go for the most pessimistic times, no one can make excuses/discount your results when you post the numbers.


----------



## mags993tt (Feb 3, 2011)

Adamantium said:


> am only suggesting it so that times are comparable to those posted by others, and standard across the board.
> 
> Plus if you go for the most pessimistic times, no one can make excuses/discount your results when you post the numbers.


Ah got it. Is there an "official" place to post up any results or just this thread?


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

mags993tt said:


> It doesn't make any difference to the data itself - only the displayed time on the Pbox from what I can see and the diff is consistently 0.21s for the first foot from my not very big cross section of three launches on same surface using pbox.
> 
> So add 0.21s to the above times to include the first foot if that is what you mean.
> 
> ...


I think you will be able to take 0.3 off that with warm tires, and dry ground. Still first real world standard MY12 times i have seen posted.


----------



## mags993tt (Feb 3, 2011)

MarcR35GTR said:


> I think you will be able to take 0.3 off that with warm tires, and dry ground. Still first real world standard MY12 times i have seen posted.


Agree the conditions were not ideal for 0-? but I just got my performance box so had to use it :chuckle: So think the 60-100 cut was the most representitive and I think the 4.0s result was to be expected for a MY12? Sounds about right?

Need to get more data if time and conditions allow. Be good if there was a dedicated place to compare the data as there are so many variables from tyres to ECU type etc.


----------



## MarcR35GTR (Oct 17, 2010)

mags993tt said:


> Agree the conditions were not ideal for 0-? but I just got my performance box so had to use it :chuckle: So think the 60-100 cut was the most representitive and I think the 4.0s result was to be expected for a MY12? Sounds about right?
> 
> Need to get more data if time and conditions allow. Be good if there was a dedicated place to compare the data as there are so many variables from tyres to ECU type etc.


60-100 of 4.0 sounds about right I was getting between 3.4 and 3.6 on my MY10 Stage 4. Looking forward to some better weather to try again now at stage 4.5


----------



## Ndwgolf (Jan 4, 2013)

Can someone give me the link to what a stage 4 consists of.........thanks


----------



## TomS (Mar 21, 2012)

Ndwgolf said:


> Can someone give me the link to what a stage 4 consists of.........thanks


Litchfield - Nissan GTR Performance Pack Upgrades - Litchfield Motors


----------



## Ndwgolf (Jan 4, 2013)

TomS said:


> Litchfield - Nissan GTR Performance Pack Upgrades - Litchfield Motors


Thanks Bro


----------



## shinra (Sep 22, 2017)

Ndwgolf said:


> Thanks Bro


I have a Stage 4 Nissan GTR R35 2010 Black Edition and I can tell you it is two and a bit pages of modifications at around £22000.

Worth it? Yes. Fully.


----------



## TurboSam (May 1, 2017)

shinra said:


> I have a Stage 4 Nissan GTR R35 2010 Black Edition and I can tell you it is two and a bit pages of modifications at around £22000.
> 
> Worth it? Yes. Fully.


Woah that's an old thread....

Anyway 22k ? did you have full engine + gearbox forged rebuild ?

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk


----------



## james_barker (Nov 17, 2016)

shinra said:


> I have a Stage 4 Nissan GTR R35 2010 Black Edition and I can tell you it is two and a bit pages of modifications at around £22000.
> 
> Worth it? Yes. Fully.


Wtf are you talking about?! stage 4 is exhaust, larger injectors and a remap to achieve around 620hp. Sure whatever you spent your money on is good but it sure ain't standard stage 4!

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


----------



## Stealth69 (Jan 6, 2005)

james_barker said:


> Wtf are you talking about?! stage 4 is exhaust, larger injectors and a remap to achieve around 620hp. Sure whatever you spent your money on is good but it sure ain't standard stage 4!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


OR they saw him coming!!  

I think there are too many 0's


----------



## andyevo (Jun 13, 2017)

shinra said:


> I have a Stage 4 Nissan GTR R35 2010 Black Edition and I can tell you it is two and a bit pages of modifications at around £22000.
> 
> Worth it? Yes. Fully.


Umm typo error with the zeros I think. :flame:


----------



## shinra (Sep 22, 2017)

I should of been more specific. 

The car went to Litchfield and had £21,234 worth of work done, including Stage 4 tuning, servicing, new parts etc.

I have posted below the invoices so people can see the costs of parts:


----------



## james_barker (Nov 17, 2016)

shinra said:


> I should of been more specific.
> 
> The car went to Litchfield and had £21,234 worth of work done, including Stage 4 tuning, servicing, new parts etc.
> 
> I have posted below the invoices so people can see the costs of parts:


Ouch!

Did something expensive break, or did you just fancy some upgrading? 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


----------



## simGTR (Aug 5, 2017)

Did that include shipping from Spain?


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

Just went in for a service and stage 4 tune - Litchfield seem to have a good salesman


----------



## shinra (Sep 22, 2017)

terry lloyd said:


> Just went in for a service and stage 4 tune - Litchfield seem to have a good salesman


Well the good news is that I bought this vehicle second hand and the work was done to the vehicle at around the 64000km mark. I spoke with Neil at Litchfield who, without the VIN, described my vehicle, previous owners name and all the work and that it was a very nice vehicle. I asked if there was previous damage etc, but there was not.

Look through the invoice, there are new wheels, tyres, rotors, heads, pads....effectively a new car accept the engine, chassis and seats


----------

