# 600bhp enough for 10 second quarter mile?



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

I'm from the States, so the quarter mile is something we use as a power metric outside of a dyno here. I know it's only one part of the vehicles overall performance, but it's the one I'm most personally familiar with. I'm having my car worked on by The GTR Shop/Dave Warrener and was curious as to if 600bhp was enough good enough for 10 second quarter mile/13x mph trap times (all things being equal of course)? I looked using the search, but it doesn't seem like there's a lot of info to tie together for quarter mile times based on the power output. Also, I think there's some difference between our wheel horsepower in the states and the brake horsepower in the UK? I may be incorrect on that but I thought there was. Thanks in advance for any input.


----------



## SkylineUSA (Jun 29, 2001)

Yes.


----------



## r32Rich (Apr 5, 2014)

I've got 500bhp and managed a 11.7

It was on a old air strip so might be a little less on a better surface


----------



## J13ME (Apr 24, 2015)

We class bhp as at the flywheel (so no transmission loss) and wheel horse power is what it puts on the road! 

Give me 5 mins and I will work out what percentage difference there is!


----------



## J13ME (Apr 24, 2015)

My transmission loss was 26.9 percent..

So what you call 600 wheel horse power would be 761 horse power to us guys!


----------



## Bolle (Feb 8, 2005)

Here is a chart.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

@Bolle - Thanks for the chart. I've seen that before. I looked for a similar one that depicted bhp as the output figure but haven't been able to find one, since that's how the UK measures power output to the best of my knowledge.

@J13ME - Thanks for the info. Gives me something to think about. 600bhp doesn't seem to be that much considering this information. Or maybe I'm being unrealistic.


----------



## nick the tubman (Jun 28, 2006)

great chart - but I would be amazed if you could get any where near sub 10 with 600hp unless the whole car is made of plastic and has a sequential/dog box in it...???


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

nick the tubman said:


> great chart - but I would be amazed if you could get any where near sub 10 with 600hp unless the whole car is made of plastic and has a sequential/dog box in it...???


I was mainly look at solid 10 second quarter mile times, 10.5-10.7 on 600bhp. But I am not exactly sure how it equates into whp from bhp. Also, I really have no idea how accurate that chart really is.


----------



## SkylineUSA (Jun 29, 2001)

I would not get wrapped up in 1/4 times. Build the car to drive. 

What is your engine build like?


----------



## bkvj (Feb 13, 2006)

SkylineUSA said:


> I would not get wrapped up in 1/4 times. Build the car to drive.
> 
> What is your engine build like?


+1

People often think they'll build the shit, but lacking focus in other. IMO the best cars are well thought out packages. 


Though if you just want to chase 1/4 mile numbers, guess there's not much else.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

SkylineUSA said:


> I would not get wrapped up in 1/4 times. Build the car to drive.
> 
> What is your engine build like?


Like I said, it's something that's rather important to me overall. I know I shouldn't get too wrapped up in it, but that was the goal when building the car so it's important to me personally. 

Here are the specs that Dave sent me directly:

"build and instal 2.7l RB26DETT with powerpack upgrade 3. Uprated fueling system, NISMO injectors, garret 28/60 turbos, adjustable actuators, standalone ecu system with tuner software, 2.7cc conversion with oversized forged pistons and i beam rods, uprated crank and rod bearings, N1 oil pump, cylinder head overhaul, port and match turbo, splitpipe induction, nismo fpr, uprated twinplate clutch, Maf delete option. Rotational Mass balance."

If I missed anything, let me know.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

bkvj said:


> +1
> 
> People often think they'll build the shit, but lacking focus in other. IMO the best cars are well thought out packages.
> 
> ...


I was building to enjoy the car and the drive itself. But I still wanted to it to meet my expectations of "fast", so I use quarter mile times. I have no doubt the car will excellent to drive overall. I was just curious about the numbers and the appropriate conversions. Still looking for more answers, as only one person has had a firm "yes" regarding it. Granted this will be my biggest car endeavor to date so what do I know haha. :chuckle::chuckle::chuckle:


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

You missed a Supertec Spline Drive oil pump kit 

I wouldn't use an N1 pump on any medium or high spec engine.


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

Agreed we have seen that so many times!



bkvj said:


> +1
> 
> People often think they'll build the shit, but lacking focus in other. IMO the best cars are well thought out packages.
> 
> ...


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

minesskyline said:


> Like I said, it's something that's rather important to me overall. I know I shouldn't get too wrapped up in it, but that was the goal when building the car so it's important to me personally.
> 
> Here are the specs that Dave sent me directly:
> 
> ...




Who sent you that spec? I can tell you that Nismo injectors, biggest they do 600cc will be at their max at 600bhp. An N1 pump is not enough. The supplied actuators with the GT2860 don't work so well after 1.3-1.4 bar, they don't have enough tension in them. Drop me a PM if you are serious about an engine build would be happy to talk you through your requirements.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

FRRACER said:


> Agreed we have seen that so many times!


I think I have made it balanced so far. But it's just one thing that matters to me. Just a goal I had in mind when building the car.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

FRRACER said:


> Who sent you that spec? I can tell you that Nismo injectors, biggest they do 600cc will be at their max at 600bhp. An N1 pump is not enough. The supplied actuators with the GT2860 don't work so well after 1.3-1.4 bar, they don't have enough tension in them. Drop me a PM if you are serious about an engine build would be happy to talk you through your requirements.


In my OP, I mentioned that Dave from the The GTR Shop spec'd the build.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

FRRACER said:


> Who sent you that spec? I can tell you that Nismo injectors, biggest they do 600cc will be at their max at 600bhp. An N1 pump is not enough. The supplied actuators with the GT2860 don't work so well after 1.3-1.4 bar, they don't have enough tension in them. Drop me a PM if you are serious about an engine build would be happy to talk you through your requirements.


I would PM you but I am unable to do so. Not sure why... I will try to figure it out.


----------



## nick the tubman (Jun 28, 2006)

Highly unlikely that spec will get you into the 10`s sorry. 
my 33 was 1,325kgs, was running 2860ss turbos with a lot of special bits and 880cc injectors, cams, uprated fuel and oil system, etc etc ... massive spec and I only got into the 11`s.


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

You can reach me via facebook.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

nick the tubman said:


> Highly unlikely that spec will get you into the 10`s sorry.
> my 33 was 1,325kgs, was running 2860ss turbos with a lot of special bits and 880cc injectors, cams, uprated fuel and oil system, etc etc ... massive spec and I only got into the 11`s.


I appreciate your feedback. Do you remember what bhp your car was making? I'd like to use it as a reference if possible.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

FRRACER said:


> You can reach me via facebook.


I sent you an email. I don't have a faceook, womp womp.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

FRRACER said:


> You can reach me via facebook.


Sent PM.


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

minesskyline said:


> In my OP, I mentioned that Dave from the The GTR Shop spec'd the build.


Apologies didn't see that I should have read from the start my bad


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

If you are only really interested in standing quarter times then I would have thought you need an ecu which can manage launch control .
as to the -5s mine ran fine at 1.5 bar with standard actuators and 600 atf is achievable with your spec although I tend to agree with previous comments about the injectors ,I'd have gone for 700s


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

Just got into 10s with a best of 10.9

http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/405993-supertec-3-engine.html


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

RSVFOUR said:


> If you are only really interested in standing quarter times then I would have thought you need an ecu which can manage launch control .
> as to the -5s mine ran fine at 1.5 bar with standard actuators and 600 atf is achievable with your spec although I tend to agree with previous comments about the injectors ,I'd have gone for 700s


I do have a controller, I just didn't mention it before. I'll talk to David about the injectors to make sure I can properly hit my goals as the motor is definitely capable to my knowledge. Thanks again for your input.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

FRRACER said:


> Just got into 10s with a best of 10.9
> 
> http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/405993-supertec-3-engine.html


That spec seems very similar to mine. I'm thinking that this might be doable afterall. Thanks for that spec sheet FRRACER. I'll speak to David about this more since the car is nearly complete at this point.


----------



## MeisterR (Jul 19, 2008)

One thing with these car is that you have to know how to launch them.
It isn't just step on the gas and it will run 10's.

Bog on the launch? no 10's
Lot of wheel spin? no 10's
Miss a shift? no 10's
Shifted too slow? no 10's

I almost achieved a 10's on the run that my engine blew up (an injector wire broke).
But at best I would say that would be around 10.8 run.

I was running a big single with around 700bhp flywheel, so that gives you an idea of real world engine power and ET down the strip.

Jerrick


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

minesskyline said:


> That spec seems very similar to mine. I'm thinking that this might be doable afterall. Thanks for that spec sheet FRRACER. I'll speak to David about this more since the car is nearly complete at this point.


Many differences, look at the cams were using, oil pump etc. Your N1 pump would loath any revs. RB2.6 being a short stroke engine are designed to rev and it would be a shame to be limited to 7200 rpm in fear of breaking an oil pump hear by going to 8k or just over. At worst you can go for a Nismo pump which uses an all steel gear. What cams are you going to use?


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

MeisterR said:


> One thing with these car is that you have to know how to launch them.
> It isn't just step on the gas and it will run 10's.
> 
> Bog on the launch? no 10's
> ...


I see your points regarding the driving part of the equation. My issue is not so much the driving part, as I will undoubtedly learn the car from the ground up, but moreso "Can this car's power get me to where I want to be, all other things considered being equal?". Thanks for the input on your build. That definitely helps put some perspective on things for me.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

FRRACER said:


> Many differences, look at the cams were using, oil pump etc. Your N1 pump would loath any revs. RB2.6 being a short stroke engine are designed to rev and it would be a shame to be limited to 7200 rpm in fear of breaking an oil pump hear by going to 8k or just over. At worst you can go for a Nismo pump which uses an all steel gear. What cams are you going to use?


Right, I understand where you're coming from. I'll bring this up to Dave and get his opinion on it as well. As far as I can tell, the N1 pump issue is still on-going based on everything I've read regarding the subject but I appreciate your two cents regarding it.


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

minesskyline said:


> Can this car's power get me to where I want to be, all other things considered being equal?


Obviously all other things can never be considered equal but the answer is yes, if you have 600bhp at the fly and a standard weight car; it is just enough power to be able to run a 10.xx - Suspension/tyres/launch/gear changes etc would have to be spot on as ET is more of a reflection on traction than power.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

matt j said:


> Obviously all other things can never be considered equal but the answer is yes, if you have 600bhp at the fly and a standard weight car; it is just enough power to be able to run a 10.xx - Suspension/tyres/launch/gear changes etc would have to be spot on as ET is more of a reflection on traction than power.


Right, I understand. Thanks for your feedback.


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

minesskyline said:


> Right, I understand where you're coming from. I'll bring this up to Dave and get his opinion on it as well. As far as I can tell, the N1 pump issue is still on-going based on everything I've read regarding the subject but I appreciate your two cents regarding it.


I think the N1 pump situation is very clear. Supposedly there were fakes kicking around 2007-2009. In any case would you use a oil pump with sintered gears in a 600bhp plus engine? I know power does not kill the oil pump more so the revs, but I would be wanting to use all 8k rpm and some on this kind of setup with say Tomei type B cams which will make power generally up to the 8k, but then if you go to the trouble of spending 7-8k on an engine at least do the right thing an at minimum buy a Nismo oil pump with steel gears. Anyone who offers an N1 pump on a forged rebuilt engine is clearly not with it.


----------



## alexcrosse (May 7, 2014)

why would you not just put NZEfi 1000cc EV14 injectors in and be done with it?


----------



## JTJUDGE (Nov 21, 2011)

qtr mile times to me is like how hot your bird is. The faster you are = the better looking your bird is in petrol head terms


so having a really good qtr mile time makes you a champ in my eyes


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

JTJUDGE said:


> qtr mile times to me is like how hot your bird is. The faster you are = the better looking your bird is in petrol head terms
> 
> 
> so having a really good qtr mile time makes you a champ in my eyes


Someone who understands


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

alexcrosse said:


> why would you not just put NZEfi 1000cc EV14 injectors in and be done with it?


I will definitely make that suggestion. It's possible I have the wrong info but I will double check. Thanks for that.


----------



## petrolhe4d (May 9, 2008)

J13ME said:


> My transmission loss was 26.9 percent..
> 
> So what you call 600 wheel horse power would be 761 horse power to us guys!


This raises an interesting point about trans loss - well it does if you're a bit nerdy like me. Trying to work out a theoretical transmission loss in order to convert flywheel power to wheel or vice versa is a pointless exercise as there's too many variables - gear wear, oil used and general age and type of trans all makes a difference as would the temperature from one day to the next. The only real way is to measure the flywheel power and then install the engine and measure the wheel power. It's just a LOT easier on the whole to dyno an engine in a car than out.

My Stagea makes 600bhp at the wheels (or hubs to be precise as it was measured on a Dynapack) tuned by Abbey. They always say, when pressed, that they reckon that's 650 at the flywheel but from everything I've seen a trans loss of less than 10% seems highly optimistic. Although the tyres would add more and they weren't in the mix I'd expect it to be more like 20% at best. Whatever it is 600 at the flywheel is definitely nothing like 600 at the wheels!


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

petrolhe4d said:


> This raises an interesting point about trans loss - well it does if you're a bit nerdy like me. Trying to work out a theoretical transmission loss in order to convert flywheel power to wheel or vice versa is a pointless exercise as there's too many variables - gear wear, oil used and general age and type of trans all makes a difference as would the temperature from one day to the next. The only real way is to measure the flywheel power and then install the engine and measure the wheel power. It's just a LOT easier on the whole to dyno an engine in a car than out.
> 
> My Stagea makes 600bhp at the wheels (or hubs to be precise as it was measured on a Dynapack) tuned by Abbey. They always say, when pressed, that they reckon that's 650 at the flywheel but from everything I've seen a trans loss of less than 10% seems highly optimistic. Although the tyres would add more and they weren't in the mix I'd expect it to be more like 20% at best. Whatever it is 600 at the flywheel is definitely nothing like 600 at the wheels!


Well, that brings up an interesting topic. When you guys in the UK or outside of the states do dynos, are the figures still listed as bhp as the convention or is it then considered to be whp? If a car is dyno'd in the UK, it would make sense that the convention would be whp, but I usually only hear you guys talk about bhp so I'm still curious.


----------



## petrolhe4d (May 9, 2008)

A good question!

As you no doubt know using strict terms bhp is power from the end of the crankshaft only (also shaft hp) called brake as it's measured by braking or applying load to the shaft. So bhp should just be used for no trans loss readings whereas the power recorded at the wheels on a dyno is, as you say, whp.

Of course most people don't realise the strict definitions so use the term bhp for everything but you're right, most aftermarket tuning is whp and only manufacturers can afford to measure bhp.


----------



## Supertec (Jun 5, 2014)

I would say one more significant thing. When we were testing our Supertec #3 engine in bnr32 on drag strip (concrete ground - former military air field) we had a car similar to ours by results. It did 11.0, 11.1 and so on. But when he took his road tyres off and put hoosiers, he immediately started making 10.3, 10.4 like a gun. Tyres make huge difference in 1/4 mile times. We used Potenza S02 without any heating to get 10.92. But the guy behind the wheel was a real pro. He dumped from reds and switched gears flawlessly. We tried to improve results by heating tyres and 3rd gear let go immediately. The other guy had OS Giken set in his gearbox and it took abuse from hoosiers just fine. Take this thing into consideration.

As to power loss in transmission we used 18%. But personally I think 15-16% is more fair on bnr32.

Andrey


----------



## petrolhe4d (May 9, 2008)

Interesting - I was wondering if one could make 10s on street tyres. Obviously just about...


----------



## maddison (May 31, 2012)

FRRACER said:


> Anyone who offers an N1 pump on a forged rebuilt engine is clearly not with it.


Every engine builder and skyline tuner I've spoken to have all advised to use the N1 pump and said it's their default oil pump on any forged build.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

Supertec said:


> I would say one more significant thing. When we were testing our Supertec #3 engine in bnr32 on drag strip (concrete ground - former military air field) we had a car similar to ours by results. It did 11.0, 11.1 and so on. But when he took his road tyres off and put hoosiers, he immediately started making 10.3, 10.4 like a gun. Tyres make huge difference in 1/4 mile times. We used Potenza S02 without any heating to get 10.92. But the guy behind the wheel was a real pro. He dumped from reds and switched gears flawlessly. We tried to improve results by heating tyres and 3rd gear let go immediately. The other guy had OS Giken set in his gearbox and it took abuse from hoosiers just fine. Take this thing into consideration.
> 
> As to power loss in transmission we used 18%. But personally I think 15-16% is more fair on bnr32.
> 
> Andrey


That's actually quite impressive. Definitely gives some food for thought on the subject. I guess the gearbox abuse is something I will do my best to avoid. It seems to be the failing gear for this standard box. Thanks for the heads up and the info.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

maddison said:


> Every engine builder and skyline tuner I've spoken to have all advised to use the N1 pump and said it's their default oil pump on any forged build.


I've heard opposing viewpoints on this. At this point, I'll let the experts figure it out. I just wanted to know if the bhp figure was enough to do what I expected!


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

maddison said:


> Every engine builder and skyline tuner I've spoken to have all advised to use the N1 pump and said it's their default oil pump on any forged build.


Every Skyline tuner in the UK you will find says not to buy a spline drive kit, in fact a few years ago when I wanted to get my engine rebuild I was told an N1 will do, I was not convinced. I ended up buying a Reimax steel gear which has severe wobble and poor clearance and potentially a ticking time bomb.

We looked at the Spline drive solution and over the past year and a half we have supplied over 150 kits globally and people are happy with it in engines from stock output to 1200bhp drag setups in various pump configs, N1, Nismo, OEM, JUN, Greddy and Tomei. 

It gives the customers a peace of mind knowing that they have a strong hardened steel gear (instead of a sintered gear) for the oil pump and its not a design that is known to fail. I am not surprised there seem to be lots of RB engines that are pegged to 7500rpm.

Some further reading for you 

http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/270049-spline-drive-oil-pump-gears.html


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

minesskyline said:


> I've heard opposing viewpoints on this. At this point, I'll let the experts figure it out. I just wanted to know if the bhp figure was enough to do what I expected!


Revs, hitting the limited, poor lower end balance that kills the pump gears, but you have a short stroke engine that is designed to rev so why be limited to 7500 rpm limit?


----------



## Supertec (Jun 5, 2014)

minesskyline said:


> I've heard opposing viewpoints on this. At this point, I'll let the experts figure it out. I just wanted to know if the bhp figure was enough to do what I expected!


The die hard drag racer who drove our car said the best it can get on a perfect day, dry surface, etc is about 10.8 on these Potenzas. Perfect start, excellent gear changes, everything on top... perfect scenario. Not for average person.
But he was impressed that stock looking full interior car with air conditioner "accelerates that insane". An average driver will have probably around 11.3 or worse.

As to N1 oil pumps. We have a club of nuts drag racers but we don't like "korch" cars (dragsters), so all cars are road ones with interriors, ACs, Eton audio and etc. So around 15 cars. In the early 2000s we all had N1 oil pumps and all of them failed. Every single one. Now most use Tomei and some JUN, nothing else. If you are going to dump from reds, hit limiter and heat tyres, N1 will crack, that I can tell you for sure.

It's not a marketing advice. Buy whatever pump you want, with spline or flat, but not N1. It's a disaster.

Andrey


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

Supertec said:


> The die hard drag racer who drove our car said the best it can get on a perfect day, dry surface, etc is about 10.8 on these Potenzas. Perfect start, excellent gear changes, everything on top... perfect scenario. Not for average person.
> But he was impressed that stock looking full interior car with air conditioner "accelerates that insane". An average driver will have probably around 11.3 or worse.
> 
> As to N1 oil pumps. We have a club of nuts drag racers but we don't like "korch" cars (dragsters), so all cars are road ones with interriors, ACs, Eton audio and etc. So around 15 cars. In the early 2000s we all had N1 oil pumps and all of them failed. Every single one. Now most use Tomei and some JUN, nothing else. If you are going to dump from reds, hit limiter and heat tyres, N1 will crack, that I can tell you for sure.
> ...


That still seems like a pretty good time. That's good to know. Thanks for the info. As for the N1 pump stuff, I appreciate the feedback. I have definitely seen some threads regarding them having issues in the past.


----------



## f5twister (Feb 5, 2013)

See it like this you build a expensive engine and you are going to save on the most essential part of the engine if it breaks youre engine will break.

so spend some more and dont make the oil pump the unsafest part of youre engine


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

I wonder why the tuners Maddison mentioned make the oil pump the weakest part of the engine? :chuckle:


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

So is the consensus 600bhp is good for 10's? That seems to be the case from replies here. Now, the next big question: What would it take power wise to get into the 9's? :chuckle::chuckle::chuckle:


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

minesskyline said:


> So is the consensus 600bhp is good for 10's? That seems to be the case from replies here. Now, the next big question: What would it take power wise to get into the 9's? :chuckle::chuckle::chuckle:


The first 9 I ever ran (In fact I ran 6 back to back 9s with the best being 9.85 at 143) was around 850-900ATW. The car is very heavy though with driver and fluids tipping the scales just over 1800kg. You could do it with less power if you have less weight, a standard weight car would need a good 700ATW I reckon; and again, everything in the run would have to be spot on.


----------



## BOB GTR34 (Apr 29, 2013)

matt j said:


> The first 9 I ever ran (In fact I ran 6 back to back 9s with the best being 9.85 at 143) was around 850-900ATW. The car is very heavy though with driver and fluids tipping the scales just over 1800kg. You could do it with less power if you have less weight, a standard weight car would need a good 700ATW I reckon; and again, everything in the run would have to be spot on.


Heres your 9.85 Run Matt, Already looking forward to 2016 Santa Pod Events with the ET Team


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NZg1xKJhfA&list=FLVR5dXGkJNcOdVfL_OnUVOg

My general conversation with my tuner is " I'll have whatever matt J has done to his R33". Only problem my pockets don't go that deep. Amazing set up Matt Hats off to you & Exclusive Tuning for all the work & time invested. 

You could go faster but it would mean stripping all the inside out and i know you like the 'road legal look rather than a fully stripped interior and straight line car ,But fingers crossed 2016 you'll knock that 9.85 1/4mile .

OR

Get Ethan to do the 1/4mile im sure he's lighter than you  :chuckle:


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

BOB GTR34 said:


> Heres your 9.85 Run Matt, Already looking forward to 2016 Santa Pod Events with the ET Team
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NZg1xKJhfA&list=FLVR5dXGkJNcOdVfL_OnUVOg
> ...


Geez, that thing hauls. Sweet R33 Matt. Maybe one day I'll go that fast lol. :bowdown1:


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

BOB GTR34 said:


> Heres your 9.85 Run Matt, Already looking forward to 2016 Santa Pod Events with the ET Team
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NZg1xKJhfA&list=FLVR5dXGkJNcOdVfL_OnUVOg
> ...


Just to add, I've only ever run low boost and the only run with nitrous was logged at 9.201 seconds to 154.6mph - there was plently left in the old girl, that's for sure!


----------



## maddison (May 31, 2012)

FRRACER said:


> I wonder why the tuners Maddison mentioned make the oil pump the weakest part of the engine? :chuckle:


I don't buy into it myself. I can't see any engine builder let alone every engine builder i've spoken to, purposely building an engine with a very weak link, it's not in their interests to as if they keep building engines that fail, they'll soon run out of work. Nor can I see Nissan making a pump and continue to make a pump that isn't up to the job.
It would be good if an engine builder that fits the pumps comments and gives their opinion.


----------



## markM3 (Jan 7, 2008)

My engine builder wanted to put an N1 pump in, said I would rather use a standard one. Told him to order a nismo pump at 3x the price of an n1 with its shitty sintered metal that is weaker than standard pump.


----------



## f5twister (Feb 5, 2013)

to be honest i think some do it to make the price look less, and most customers dont know anything anyway.


----------



## f5twister (Feb 5, 2013)

or maybe its the must be cheap mentality from everyone that the save on it


----------



## Supertec (Jun 5, 2014)

f5twister said:


> or maybe its the must be cheap mentality from everyone that the save on it


That "cheap" becomes very expensive later.


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

markM3 said:


> My engine builder wanted to put an N1 pump in, said I would rather use a standard one. Told him to order a nismo pump at 3x the price of an n1 with its shitty sintered metal that is weaker than standard pump.


Mark you felt the spline drive gears with your hands quality bit of engineering no? 

I think your bottom end had already been completed by that time iirc?


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

f5twister said:


> or maybe its the must be cheap mentality from everyone that the save on it


It's not the cheap mentality because engine rebuild costs here go into 7-8k range for a fully forged setup. They just skimp on the pump and advise people to go N1


----------



## f5twister (Feb 5, 2013)

very weird they do the same here in the netherlands.


----------



## keithmac (Mar 1, 2014)

alexcrosse said:


> why would you not just put NZEfi 1000cc EV14 injectors in and be done with it?


Irun these in my GTO-TT and they are a godsend, well worth the money!.

Worth noting I got them at around 930cc/min at 3 bar fuel rail pressure (run twin Walbro 255's). Think for 1000cc/min you will have to run 3.5 to 4 bar?.

Excellent injector, excellent response compared with the PTE 1200cc low impedance injectors I had in beforehand .


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

maddison said:


> I don't buy into it myself. I can't see any engine builder let alone every engine builder i've spoken to, purposely building an engine with a very weak link, it's not in their interests to as if they keep building engines that fail, they'll soon run out of work. Nor can I see Nissan making a pump and continue to make a pump that isn't up to the job.
> It would be good if an engine builder that fits the pumps comments and gives their opinion.


This was my thought as well, but what do I know.


----------



## markM3 (Jan 7, 2008)

FRRACER said:


> Mark you felt the spline drive gears with your hands quality bit of engineering no?
> 
> I think your bottom end had already been completed by that time iirc?


Indeed Younes. For anyone who drags their gtr or uses high revs it would be good insurance.


----------



## nailsgtr600 (Aug 2, 2007)

I don't think 600hp would be enough in road trim, ie.. on pump fuel, road tyres, full weight etc, with my r33 I ran 19'' 265/30 tyres, pump fuel, track coilovers, rwd and did a 10.76 with a standard h pattern at around 700-750hp

look at the termnals as they will be a decent indication, if id of put standard suspension on, sticky tyres, sequential, flat shift, proper 4wd, and done a 1.5 60ft id of been around a 9.8-9.9 with my terminals, but the tyres takes it away from being a road car in my eyes.. toyo triple 888 tyres are prob your best tyres that you could run everyday but getting into the 1.5 60fts is a big ask on a full weight car! 

(but work off the launch and terminals, this will be the best indication..) youd need a 125-128 for a 10second with a very decent launch)


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

750bhp isn't enough to crack 9s in a full weight R33.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

nailsgtr600 said:


> I don't think 600hp would be enough in road trim, ie.. on pump fuel, road tyres, full weight etc, with my r33 I ran 19'' 265/30 tyres, pump fuel, track coilovers, rwd and did a 10.76 with a standard h pattern at around 700-750hp
> 
> look at the termnals as they will be a decent indication, if id of put standard suspension on, sticky tyres, sequential, flat shift, proper 4wd, and done a 1.5 60ft id of been around a 9.8-9.9 with my terminals, but the tyres takes it away from being a road car in my eyes.. toyo triple 888 tyres are prob your best tyres that you could run everyday but getting into the 1.5 60fts is a big ask on a full weight car!
> 
> (but work off the launch and terminals, this will be the best indication..) youd need a 125-128 for a 10second with a very decent launch)


Right, I know tires are very important to achieving the e.t. I was more curious if the power was enough. When you say hp, do you mean bhp or motor hp? I still haven't wrapped my head fully around how you guys in the UK determine bhp/hp/whp really lol. It's kind of confusing to me since we simply use power at the wheels here (whp).


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

matt j said:


> 750bhp isn't enough to crack 9s in a full weight R33.


What about a full-weight R32? Aren't they lighter than the R33's? How much power do you think would be needed to hit the 9's assuming good tires/launch/etc?


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

Forget chasing 9 seconds a 600bhp R32 will blow most cars away and around corners will destroy all those American muscle cars. Just enjoy the car and be happy with it!


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

FRRACER said:


> Forget chasing 9 seconds a 600bhp R32 will blow most cars away and around corners will destroy all those American muscle cars. Just enjoy the car and be happy with it!


Haha, I feel you. Just curious. :chuckle:


----------



## nailsgtr600 (Aug 2, 2007)

minesskyline said:


> What about a full-weight R32? Aren't they lighter than the R33's? How much power do you think would be needed to hit the 9's assuming good tires/launch/etc?



I'd say you'd do a 9 sec quarter with 750hp in a r32 if you can get into the 1.4 - 1.5 60fts...! In my opinion you'd be well into the 9's


----------



## nailsgtr600 (Aug 2, 2007)

matt j said:


> 750bhp isn't enough to crack 9s in a full weight R33.


If I'd of got into the 1.4-1-5 60fts Matt id def of been knocking on a 9's door..! 
I'm not saying gettin into them 60fts would of been easy but I def had the power with the quarter terminal and the 171.5 on my limiter in 6th in the km! 

Matt what's the weight of a r33 Gtr?


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

nailsgtr600 said:


> I'd say you'd do a 9 sec quarter with 750hp in a r32 if you can get into the 1.4 - 1.5 60fts...! In my opinion you'd be well into the 9's


When you say 'hp', are you referring to motor (hp), flywheel (bhp) or wheel (whp)?


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

nailsgtr600 said:


> If I'd of got into the 1.4-1-5 60fts Matt id def of been knocking on a 9's door..!
> I'm not saying gettin into them 60fts would of been easy but I def had the power with the quarter terminal and the 171.5 on my limiter in 6th in the km!


I did a 1.58 60ft from memory and 9.93 at 141 and lifted off early on the km and ran 175, logs showed I was doing 183 when I lifted – confirmed by the timing slip.
I think you might have been pushing low 10s but not 9s going from what I saw.



nailsgtr600 said:


> Matt what's the weight of a r33 Gtr?


My car with driver and liquids was just tipping the scales at over 1800Kg when we weighed it.

Rich, you keep saying 700-750 BHP in your 'full weight' R33 but either your car wasn't full UK weight (1620Kg Dry) or you had more power with the traps you were running.
What did your car weigh Rich? Even at 1700Kg inc Fuel and Driver you’d need more than 700ATW which is more than you’re claiming so it just doesn’t add up to me.

I’ve always been open and shared my findings, I was never chasing kudos or in competition with anyone hence running as a private entry.
At TOTB when you ran your 10.76, I was running somewhere around 850+ATW at 1.5Bar when I ran 9.85 at 143.
The same settings were used at Santa Pod and the logs showed we would have run 9.4 if the input shaft hadn't failed – result was 9.85 at 134.

Traction wasn't great at TOTB this year and I only managed 9.93 at 141 (still at just 1.5Bar) we turned the nitrous on (as I’d never used it before and wanted the opportunity to see the difference) as the weather was turning and she ran 9.201 to 154.6 - no idea what the official time would have been but I've shown the 2 runs overlaid so nobody can question the results; although having said that, you did.

That's 0.7 seconds difference on a crap surface so that’s equivalent to an 8.7 at the Pod IMHO hence why I was quite sure I could pop an 8 at the Pod on a perfect run.


----------



## David (Apr 25, 2003)

Matt I am sure Andy Barnes ran a 9 second quarter in his r34 ichiban, that was full weight and I seem to remember he was running gt2530's so he can't have had much more than 600 bhp.


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

David said:


> Matt I am sure Andy Barnes ran a 9 second quarter in his r34 ichiban, that was full weight and I seem to remember he was running gt2530's so he can't have had much more than 600 bhp.


Andy ran the 9 with 2835s and 688ATW from what I read David? 
The best 9 was 9.68 and that was because they just let the turbos boost until they were out of poof. It's a lot of weight to go fast in but the imports are already some 40+Kgs lighter than the UK cars.


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

Just to add as well; there's a lot of mystery to that claim and the evidence never appeared when it was questioned.


----------



## Simonh (May 24, 2002)

David said:


> Matt I am sure Andy Barnes ran a 9 second quarter in his r34 ichiban, that was full weight and I seem to remember he was running gt2530's so he can't have had much more than 600 bhp.


I don't recall ichiban being a full weight car at all


----------



## bkvj (Feb 13, 2006)

Suspension setup has a lot to do with it at this point, too. 

Kiesa's R34 had around 800hp and at best ran a 10.2, I think. Being an F1 driver I'm sure he knows how to launch the thing properly. His car was much more focused towards track driving though. If he had drag focused suspension setup he should be much quicker in the 1/4 mile.


----------



## JoshThePonce (Jan 15, 2014)

Just out of interest, these are the figures I pulled on my first ever time down Santa Pod in my R32 GTR. From this can anyone tell me the rough BHP i'm running? Theoretically I should be running around the 500bhp mark but i'm thinking more like somewhere between 400-450


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

What does the car weigh with you and fuel?

Taking a kerb weight of 1430Kg and an allowance of 70Kg for the driver, a rough calc is 407bhp.

I've always found this to be fairly accurate:
http://www.wallaceracing.com/et-hp-mph.php


----------



## UnderDriven (Jul 9, 2015)

With that trap speed somewhere around 400-425 at the motor, If you can peg a 1.7 60' then you would have had an 11.9-12.0 1/4 mile


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

matt j said:


> Just to add as well; there's a lot of mystery to that claim and the evidence never appeared when it was questioned.


Seems to be the case with power figures in general and what they're actually capable of. I'm thinking of compiling a list of reputable cars and their speeds/power/weight to use as a sheet to give some idea. But I'm going to keep the power metric the same so only power at the actually wheels. The bhp figure is too confusing imho.


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

JoshThePonce said:


> Just out of interest, these are the figures I pulled on my first ever time down Santa Pod in my R32 GTR. From this can anyone tell me the rough BHP i'm running? Theoretically I should be running around the 500bhp mark but i'm thinking more like somewhere between 400-450


Similar to mine in some respects when it was making 358bhp but yours is guess is more like 400-425bhp


----------



## David (Apr 25, 2003)

matt j said:


> Andy ran the 9 with 2835s and 688ATW from what I read David?
> The best 9 was 9.68 and that was because they just let the turbos boost until they were out of poof. It's a lot of weight to go fast in but the imports are already some 40+Kgs lighter than the UK cars.


Yeah I think I was wrong on that I can remember a lot of discussion about it at a time but he did several 9's in that car.

Still seems quite abit quicker than your car with significantly less power and no sequential. (unless I am wrong on that as well,but it was sold with a 5 speed) With your power I thought you would be into the eights (but that's not the topic of this discussion)


----------



## David (Apr 25, 2003)

Simonh said:


> I don't recall ichiban being a full weight car at all


Are you thinking of Gajin, the r34 as I remember it just had a bolt in cage and some bucket seats, no stripped interior light weight doors ect


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

David said:


> Still seems quite abit quicker than your car with significantly less power and no sequential. (unless I am wrong on that as well,but it was sold with a 5 speed) With your power I thought you would be into the eights (but that's not the topic of this discussion)


You're a very well educated man David, I'm sure therefore you can appreciate what everyone else appears to be missing which is the weight of the vehicles.

I really am in dismay at a lot of people on here, just because my car ran a certain power figure on a dyno, why does everyone seem to think that's the power I'm automatically running at the track? I've not used full power anywhere other than they dyno, I've limited the car to 1.5Bar on both pump and race gas in order to get everything else working together, getting the technology to work well doesn't just happen overnight but we're working through it and ironing it out in a methodical manner.

I've overlaid 2 graphs, back to back runs from TOTB, one was a 9.93 officially timed and the other was the nitrous overlay - it's almost a second quicker through the gears and shows I shut the throttle at 9.201 seconds to 155mph.

That's 1800Kg to 155mph in 9.2 seconds - simple question, what power does that take? (All at just 1.5Bar boost )


----------



## nailsgtr600 (Aug 2, 2007)

matt j said:


> I did a 1.58 60ft from memory and 9.93 at 141 and lifted off early on the km and ran 175, logs showed I was doing 183 when I lifted – confirmed by the timing slip.
> I think you might have been pushing low 10s but not 9s going from what I saw.
> 
> 
> ...






my car weighed around 1710kg with me in it, that was the day after totb matt with me out of the car, with a quarter of a tank of fuel, I ran a full tank at totb so it was 1750kg on the day!

I have a printout from Scooby clinic saying i was running 740hp at 1.6-1.7bar of boost, (but was in fifth as it wouldn't get traction.. and a dyno dynamics) 

I honestly think if I had a box like yours matt, race fuel your tyres and 60fts id be around your times at totb, to get your 9 you was 3mph trap speed quicker with race fuel, your box and sticky tyres.. so everything was there apart from the launch, (and that's where it counts) 

yours is set up nearly perfect for launch, your box changes quicker than a 35 and is perfect every run (which is a credit to you) 

wind it up and get it to the pod before you break it (or whatever your doing) 

if you can run all that power matt you'll easily get into the 8's with the setup you've got! 

so in my eyes 600hp will get you into the 10's in a perfectly set up 32 with ease!


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

nailsgtr600 said:


> I have a printout from Scooby clinic saying i was running 740hp at 1.6-1.7bar of boost, (but was in fifth as it wouldn't get traction.. and a dyno dynamics)


Like I said all along Rich, no way a full weight 750bhp R33 would crack 9s.


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

nailsgtr600 said:


> I honestly think if I had a box like yours matt, race fuel your tyres and 60fts id be around your times at totb, to get your 9 you was 3mph trap speed quicker with race fuel, your box and sticky tyres.. so everything was there apart from the launch, (and that's where it counts)


Rich, you had a sequential and '1000'bhp on pump fuel, why is your best time only 10.76? Why aren't you trapping much faster and why didn't you run 9s even when you had a sequential box and race fuel? It's a rhetorical question btw.



nailsgtr600 said:


> yours is set up nearly perfect for launch, your box changes quicker than a 35 and is perfect every run (which is a credit to you)


Thanks but I just keep reading that as a bit of a sugar coated insult in the context of your replies. I get it mate, you don't think my car had the power and your own results 'prove it'; even though our cars were totally different in so many ways.



nailsgtr600 said:


> wind it up and get it to the pod before you break it (or whatever your doing)


I'm not in competition with you or anyone else; why should I risk damaging my engine when all I'm doing is my own thing and trying to learn as I go along? Whatever I'm doing or have already done should be no concern of yours, I've never tried to undermine any of your achievements so why do you constantly attempt to do so with mine?



nailsgtr600 said:


> if you can run all that power matt you'll easily get into the 8's with the setup you've got!


Try answering the question Rich, what power does it take to get a 9.2 at 155mph in an 1800kg car?

Are you still going to use the excuse that it wasn't an officially timed run so my data logs are meaningless?

For anyone interested; 2 runs from TOTB this year, the coloured traces are the [email protected] and the black is the nitrous run - not officialy timed but the logs show 9.201 to 154.6mph before I lifted so it could in theory be argued that the run would have been less than 9.2...












nailsgtr600 said:


> so in my eyes 600hp will get you into the 10's in a perfectly set up 32 with ease!


600hp will be just on the limit but as I've said 600bhp, like the OP asked, is not enough as I've said all along.


----------



## nailsgtr600 (Aug 2, 2007)

matt j said:


> Rich, you had a sequential and '1000'bhp on pump fuel, why is your best time only 10.76? Why aren't you trapping much faster and why didn't you run 9s even when you had a sequential box and race fuel? It's a rhetorical question btw.
> 
> ive never run race fuel map nor mapped my car on anything other than road fuel. and only ever ran 1.7 bar the first year with the a full tank or I hit fuel cut due to the twin in tank pumps being shite which was around 740hp,
> 
> ...


what you've done matt is excellent, you don't need to prove to me or anyone else, drag racing is an addiction, glad you can keep in under control!


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

here we go again always a few ^ who keep trying to ridicule Matts car and it's achievements... Life must be so boring that some people have nothing better to do


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

nailsgtr600 said:


> around 700hp with a 300hp of nos?


So 700hp (same setting as [email protected]) when you claim to have more power yet ran slower in a lighter car?
Can you keep them goal posts in one place for a while, I'm getting dizzy now. :chuckle:



nailsgtr600 said:


> my logs show ive done a 10.1 to 145 matt but that doesn't mean I can say ive done this until its timed officially mate..


That's very impressive in a full weight trim (1750Kg) R33, street tyres, H pattern, pump fuel and just 700hp. From memory with 700hp my terminals were much less and even with the gearbox, I didn't manage 10.1.
Logs show you a lot mate but I don't need to tell you how to suck eggs.



nailsgtr600 said:


> this is where we disagree, so lets say 650flywheel hp


I'm not the one disagreeing though Rich, you've been countering my statements with a measurement taken at the wheels which is not what the OP was asking at all.


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

nailsgtr600 said:


> my logs show ive done a 10.1 to 145 matt but that doesn't mean I can say ive done this until its timed officially mate..


That's around 915bhp by the way.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

matt j said:


> So 700hp (same setting as [email protected]) when you claim to have more power yet ran slower in a lighter car?
> Can you keep them goal posts in one place for a while, I'm getting dizzy now. :chuckle:
> 
> 
> ...


I only asked bhp because it's the power figure you guys are most familiar with (I think) and it was what I was quoted by Dave at the GTR Shop for the kind of power I was going to make. Matt, I super appreciate your input and your car is nuts to boot. Really great stuff. Honestly, I appreciate all the feedback here. It's good to read for someone who doesn't know these cars all that well.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

matt j said:


> 600hp will be just on the limit but as I've said 600bhp, like the OP asked, is not enough as I've said all along.


The first figure (600hp), are you referring to whp or motor hp? If the former, 600whp is enough to get into the 10's, but 600bhp is not, correct?


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

Normally in the UK when we quote power it's at the flywheel/crank. So if my engine is 650bhp I would be meaning crank. Unless I say 650 at the hubs or whp.


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

FRRACER said:


> Normally in the UK when we quote power it's at the flywheel/crank. So if my engine is 650bhp I would be meaning crank. Unless I say 650 at the hubs or whp.


Right on. I was reading Matt's and David's convo and they're using hp as the power metric. So not sure exactly what they referring to. Possible I totally missed something though.


----------



## AlexJ (Apr 3, 2003)

People on here are pretty casual about the strict differences between bhp and hp. There isn't much confusion between wheel hp and "at the fly", peole understand the difference they just aren't pedantic about it.

Something else to consider on an r32 you also need to check if you are talking rwhp and 4whp as you can run a 32 in rwd on the dyno which you can't do with the 33/34.


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

minesskyline said:


> I only asked bhp because it's the power figure you guys are most familiar with (I think) and it was what I was quoted by Dave at the GTR Shop for the kind of power I was going to make. Matt, I super appreciate your input and your car is nuts to boot. Really great stuff. Honestly, I appreciate all the feedback here. It's good to read for someone who doesn't know these cars all that well.


BHP is an arbitrary figure given by a machine that 'calculates' non-linear losses and aims to produce accuracy. To me, it's just a tuning reference at best and bragging rights down the pub.

HP is measured without losses.

Or in other words:


Google said:


> Brake horsepower (bhp) is the measure of an engine's horsepower before the loss in power caused by the gearbox and drive train. Brake horse power is the power delivered directly to and measured at the engine's crankshaft minus the frictional losses in transmission whereas Horsepower (hp) does not include losses.


The old percentage losses is another argument as they are as said, non-linear. 

Why I'm getting a little bent out of shape is because Rich keeps following me around and stating that his car had less power yet achieved similar results to my car; so my power claim must be incorrect.

So here's Rich's comments which already have holes in them:

His claim following TOTB:


nailsgtr600 said:


> Speak to mark Gilliam, it ran in rwd all weekend! On a standard box at around 700bhp! I drove there & drove home! The engine will make a 1000 if I wanted to push it hard! But atm until I can afford to push the engine, and repair the box I'm over the moon with its performance in rwd!
> Regards rich


And his claim in this thread:


nailsgtr600 said:


> I have a printout from Scooby clinic saying i was running 740hp at 1.6-1.7bar of boost, (but was in fifth as it wouldn't get traction.. and a dyno dynamics)


Now that quite a swing in power and still not achieving the same terminals as my car but with my gearbox and tyres, he's confident he would have been running 9s. Fair play, 90bhp more than your original claim will go a long way to helping...

Anyway, it always helps to get your story straight before attempting to shoot holes into someone else's - which just happen to be proven on a dyno, proven on the drag strip, proven on a globally recognised chart and also proven on a recognised calculator. 

Next we'll be arguing the laws of physics :bowdown1:

So to reiterate, as Rich's claim now confirms, there's no way a full weight R33 car run 9s with 750bhp.


----------



## Theskycankill (Apr 27, 2015)

Found these quotes from the best RB Drag racer on the Planet !




R.I.P.S NZ said:


> 600whp might just get you into the 10's on street tyres or well into the 10's on DOT drag tyres. Lee's over stock weight R33 gtr (R.I.P.S UK001) needed just over 700whp to run a 10.7 although in poor weather conditions. Alot comes down to the track, driver and how the power is delivered, its all very well having 700whp, but if its a laggy top end only motor and you have a stock gearbox your probably not going to get a 10. A well setup 600whp with good response and torque will get a 10 far easier with a stock box. Good luck :thumbsup:





R.I.P.S NZ said:


> To give you an idea of how unlikely it is, lets say the car and driver weigh 1400kg (about right for a pretty stripped R32 GTR with a 80kg driver)
> 
> 1400kg and 400whp (about 500bhp)= 11.1 @ 119
> 1400kg and 450whp (about 550bhp)= 10.8 @ 124
> ...


----------



## minesskyline (Jan 22, 2015)

Theskycankill said:


> Found these quotes from the best RB Drag racer on the Planet !


Good info, Theskycankill. I totally missed RIPS' reply to this thread. And that other info is good to have as well. That seems very straightforward.


----------



## nailsgtr600 (Aug 2, 2007)

matt j said:


> BHP is an arbitrary figure given by a machine that 'calculates' non-linear losses and aims to produce accuracy. To me, it's just a tuning reference at best and bragging rights down the pub.
> 
> HP is measured without losses.
> 
> ...


matt ive gone off facts and figures.. my car was doing 3mph less terminals to yours on pump not race fuel like yours.. all be it 50 or 100kg lighter, rob at rips says openly in my thread its def a 9sec car if I get it launched well, it did 171.5mph in a km on the limiter in 6th, your result was 174 or 175mph on the day which was recorded on race was it not? 

im not following you around all im saying is I thinks 10's is do able in a r32 or 33,
cus I believe 9's where doable with around 700 hp in mine!


anyway matt ive got work to do, if you want to talk to me you've got my number, im not pulling any holes in your car so stop thinking this.. 

ill try to call you later to discuss! 

Regards Rich


----------



## Theskycankill (Apr 27, 2015)

nailsgtr600 said:


> cus I believe 9's where doable with around 700 hp in mine!


I'm sorry but that statement is so pointless.

All you ever say about your car is "if I had that sequential box,"if I had ran race fuel,if I had drag tyres,end of the day you didn't !

You built a "1000hp on pump fuel GT-R" to run what a 650 hp R32 could run..PMSL
:chuckle::chuckle::wavey:


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

nailsgtr600 said:


> my car was doing 3mph less terminals to yours on pump not race fuel like yours.. all be it 50 or 100kg lighter


Rich your best was 137mph and mine was 143mph on the day.




nailsgtr600 said:


> its def a 9sec car if I get it launched well, it did 171.5mph in a km on the limiter in 6th, your result was 174 or 175mph on the day which was recorded on race was it not?


I ran one sighting run on the Sunday with 16psi MT streets on, it had just started raining and the wing mirrors folded in at 183mph, I simply lifted and coasted across the line. As my underwear turned a mid shade of brown, I decided it was definitely time to change the tyres for the new Bridgestones I had with me.

In fact, I'm pretty sure I have the run logged on my laptop, again I can post it; I have nothing to hide.




nailsgtr600 said:


> I believe 9's where doable with around 700 hp in mine!


No mate, you claimed you had "700bhp" and could run 9s, now it appears you're changing the engineering units to suit.

Tell you what Rich, lets just put this to bed; I will accept that with the theoretical perfect run and 700ATW Hp (not 700bhp), it should technically be possible with a full weight R33 to 'just' pip into the 9s at 137mph. Will you now accept that it takes nearly 200WHP more to do it carrying over 1800Kg to 143mph?




nailsgtr600 said:


> ill try to call you later to discuss!
> 
> Regards Rich


I wouldn't bother calling mate, there's no signal out here in the middle of the Caspian Sea.


----------



## petrolhe4d (May 9, 2008)

FRRACER said:


> Normally in the UK when we quote power it's at the flywheel/crank. So if my engine is 650bhp I would be meaning crank. Unless I say 650 at the hubs or whp.


Yep, so bhp for flywheel and whp for at the wheels. But like I said, it's impossible to reliably convert between the two so one is stuck with whatever the measurement was at the time. Had the engine built and tuned on an engine dyno then you're stuck with bhp. Have it tuned on a rolling road and one is stuck with whp.


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

I don't think we should get too hung up of whether it's 600 crank HP or wheel HP. You could have own car which is wheel and one car which is crank and if the two are setup and mapped different in real world there is every chance the one with lesser power ie crank HP would be a much better overall car with good response and drivability than a balls out 600 wheel HP car.


----------



## Satansbodyguard (Oct 29, 2007)

Motive dvd did a video diary of the build stages of this


Motive Garage Project Budget Supercar











Nigel opcorn:


----------



## matt j (Oct 19, 2001)

Satansbodyguard said:


> Motive dvd did a video diary of the build stages of this
> 
> 
> Motive Garage Project Budget Supercar
> ...


Not far off what I've been saying all along, it's not 600bhp though :chuckle:


----------



## Satansbodyguard (Oct 29, 2007)

matt j said:


> Not far off what I've been saying all along, it's not 600bhp though :chuckle:


The gearing on the motive jet 014 GTR is also different than standard R32 as it runs an R34GTR 6 speed gearbox 

Nigel :thumbsup:


----------

