350z 15psi vs 06 viper VIDEO
10-16-2006, 08:05 PM
#201
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i dunno, I own a supercharged 350Z making 430ish whp and I'm really not convinced that the best way to go fast in this car is to do nothing but add more hp.
I've seen really good drivers with 400-410whp single turbos pull off a 11.9 with MT ET streets, and I've seen guys with 530whp twin turbos pull off 11.3's. That's not a huge difference in trap time IMO given the power difference
Some of the guys in brazil have pulled off 10's with 500-something or so whp, but I forget what it was
BigBri went to the drag strip with his drag radials and supposivly 700+whp and pulled off a 11.7 @ 130-something as he fishtailed all the way down the track.
IMO the 350Z just isn't a mind blowing drag car. Whoever mentioned that they shine on the highway is absolutely 100% correct. Their gearing and aerodynamics make it pretty competitive at that sort of thing when you start getting some real power in it. They also don't do all that bad at autox and road courses.
a stock 2003 or 2004 Z will lap the nurburing in 8:26, while a C5 vette does it in 8:40 even though the vette is clearly faster in a straight line.
But anyway, I firmly believe there's a lot to making a car hook and go fast than just hp. No 3.5 liter V6 will ever compare to a big 5.7, 6, or 7 litter V8 in terms of having a broad powerband. The Z has so many things about its design that hinder it in the 1/4 mile, but help it with other things.
The short gearing is really short because the engine is not super powerful. Yet if you put in a 2006 Z06 transmission, the gears would be too tall and make low end torque suck HARD - especially so when the Z is has a turbo with lower compression, test pipes, big exhaust, cams, etc. The low end would just suck. It doesn't have V8 power to power it down low at 1500 rpms. Yet with the short gearing, it just causes wheel spin and too much shifting for the 1/4 mile.
then there's the suspension. The springs are way too stiff for good drag racing, the wheels are too big (to support big brake kits), the rear differencial moves around too much, the axels are not very thick. The frame is heavy, but serves the purpose of not flexing much and also helps crash ratings with its design. Also, for its size and weight, the tires the car come with stock are undersized. Certain 2006 models offer 265mm tires in the rear now, but before that 235 and 245 was what the Z came in.
It just doesn't launch well. There's a lot of things that someone would have to undo from the car's design to make it really better at strictly the 1/4 mile.
Road and Track once did a comparison with a 400hp C6 Z51 vs a more expensive Porsche Carrera with 355 hp and like 100 lbs heavier yet they had VERY similar 0-60 and 1/4 mile times with the edge going to the C6 mainly because the porsche's design allowed it to get really good traction at launch
The Z gets a bad wrap from lots of crowds because it doesn't excel at any one thing very well but instead does everything decently ok. For $30k brand new, it handles pretty well, the chassis and steering communicates to the driver reasonably well, it has ok accelleration, it looks subjectivly nice, it sounds unique compared to other sports cars, it's reliable, it actually brakes VERY well with 60-0 and 80-0 stops, the interior is mostly plastics, but they are well designed to resemble more of a cockpit, most people like the shifter. Even the auto transmission isn't that bad - very fast shifts and has manual mode. This is a tough crowd of people here towards the Z, but your average person on the street thinks the Z looks and sounds nice. And when they sit in it, they say "hey this is kinda cool" with how everything is layed out. If you took an S2000 and corvette and merged them into a car, you'd get a 350Z.
I dunno, everyone gets so worked up over their own car being the best thing out there. When you drive or own a few different cars and drive different ones daily though, you start realizing it isn't really a big deal cause different cars are fun in different ways. There's been guys with 2 or 3 700+whp muscle cars who went out and bought a lotus elise and have done nothing but RAVE about how awesome of a car is, saying it has changed their entire outlook on what a sports car is as they take spiral highway ramps at 60-70mph while their LS1 or muscle car would do it at 35-45mph and start to feel spooky. The Z is just somewhere in between those two extremes
The LS1 cars will always be one of the best 1/4 mile platforms to mod and make faster in a straight line. IMO it's easier to improve it in all areas a medium amount than to change it into something it wasn't designed to do very well
I still enjoy my Z though, but it's entertaining to watch people bicker over their cars in the fashion of
"my kid can beat up your kid"
"oh yeah, well my kid is smarter than your kid!"
"being smart doesn't matter much if you're knocked out"
"matters if I sue your *** and put you in prison"
etc
etc
etc
I've seen really good drivers with 400-410whp single turbos pull off a 11.9 with MT ET streets, and I've seen guys with 530whp twin turbos pull off 11.3's. That's not a huge difference in trap time IMO given the power difference
Some of the guys in brazil have pulled off 10's with 500-something or so whp, but I forget what it was
BigBri went to the drag strip with his drag radials and supposivly 700+whp and pulled off a 11.7 @ 130-something as he fishtailed all the way down the track.
IMO the 350Z just isn't a mind blowing drag car. Whoever mentioned that they shine on the highway is absolutely 100% correct. Their gearing and aerodynamics make it pretty competitive at that sort of thing when you start getting some real power in it. They also don't do all that bad at autox and road courses.
a stock 2003 or 2004 Z will lap the nurburing in 8:26, while a C5 vette does it in 8:40 even though the vette is clearly faster in a straight line.
But anyway, I firmly believe there's a lot to making a car hook and go fast than just hp. No 3.5 liter V6 will ever compare to a big 5.7, 6, or 7 litter V8 in terms of having a broad powerband. The Z has so many things about its design that hinder it in the 1/4 mile, but help it with other things.
The short gearing is really short because the engine is not super powerful. Yet if you put in a 2006 Z06 transmission, the gears would be too tall and make low end torque suck HARD - especially so when the Z is has a turbo with lower compression, test pipes, big exhaust, cams, etc. The low end would just suck. It doesn't have V8 power to power it down low at 1500 rpms. Yet with the short gearing, it just causes wheel spin and too much shifting for the 1/4 mile.
then there's the suspension. The springs are way too stiff for good drag racing, the wheels are too big (to support big brake kits), the rear differencial moves around too much, the axels are not very thick. The frame is heavy, but serves the purpose of not flexing much and also helps crash ratings with its design. Also, for its size and weight, the tires the car come with stock are undersized. Certain 2006 models offer 265mm tires in the rear now, but before that 235 and 245 was what the Z came in.
It just doesn't launch well. There's a lot of things that someone would have to undo from the car's design to make it really better at strictly the 1/4 mile.
Road and Track once did a comparison with a 400hp C6 Z51 vs a more expensive Porsche Carrera with 355 hp and like 100 lbs heavier yet they had VERY similar 0-60 and 1/4 mile times with the edge going to the C6 mainly because the porsche's design allowed it to get really good traction at launch
The Z gets a bad wrap from lots of crowds because it doesn't excel at any one thing very well but instead does everything decently ok. For $30k brand new, it handles pretty well, the chassis and steering communicates to the driver reasonably well, it has ok accelleration, it looks subjectivly nice, it sounds unique compared to other sports cars, it's reliable, it actually brakes VERY well with 60-0 and 80-0 stops, the interior is mostly plastics, but they are well designed to resemble more of a cockpit, most people like the shifter. Even the auto transmission isn't that bad - very fast shifts and has manual mode. This is a tough crowd of people here towards the Z, but your average person on the street thinks the Z looks and sounds nice. And when they sit in it, they say "hey this is kinda cool" with how everything is layed out. If you took an S2000 and corvette and merged them into a car, you'd get a 350Z.
I dunno, everyone gets so worked up over their own car being the best thing out there. When you drive or own a few different cars and drive different ones daily though, you start realizing it isn't really a big deal cause different cars are fun in different ways. There's been guys with 2 or 3 700+whp muscle cars who went out and bought a lotus elise and have done nothing but RAVE about how awesome of a car is, saying it has changed their entire outlook on what a sports car is as they take spiral highway ramps at 60-70mph while their LS1 or muscle car would do it at 35-45mph and start to feel spooky. The Z is just somewhere in between those two extremes
The LS1 cars will always be one of the best 1/4 mile platforms to mod and make faster in a straight line. IMO it's easier to improve it in all areas a medium amount than to change it into something it wasn't designed to do very well
I still enjoy my Z though, but it's entertaining to watch people bicker over their cars in the fashion of
"my kid can beat up your kid"
"oh yeah, well my kid is smarter than your kid!"
"being smart doesn't matter much if you're knocked out"
"matters if I sue your *** and put you in prison"
etc
etc
etc
Last edited by sentry65; 10-16-2006 at 08:31 PM.
10-16-2006, 10:04 PM
#202
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: nyc
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sentry65
a stock 2003 or 2004 Z will lap the nurburing in 8:26, while a C5 vette does it in 8:40 even though the vette is clearly faster in a straight line.
Last edited by Car RamRod; 10-17-2006 at 10:38 AM.
10-17-2006, 01:21 AM
#204
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Car RamRod
show me some legit proof of this and I will gladly retract the bs flag.well the only place I've found anyone reproduce the numbers is here:
http://forums.streetfire.net/showthread.php?t=1359
it's quoted here on streetfire, but the times didn't come from streetfire
they're not exactly scientific, but it's almost impossible for most things to truely be scientific with car lap times anyway
10-17-2006, 02:05 AM
#207
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2006
Location: south jersey
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Car RamRod
show me some legit proof of this and I will gladly retract the bs flag.no f'in way it beat a c5 vette around the track. my sister owns a 03 350z(i drove across the country with it nj to 250 miles short of the pacific(about 3.5k miles bone stock auto)... and it does handle pretty well(almost as good as my full suspension 84), but the acceleration in stock form is nothing compared to an ls1 corvette, especailly top end. once the 350z hit 90 it ran out of steam-modified might be a whole different story but stock the 350z is dogs$@# slow on topend, it still accelrated after 90 but it would be like me in my camaro if i was dragging a few telephone polls.
if you have proof, i still will think the info is fishy -as i know the performance of both an ls1 and the 350z.and given the corvette is no slouch in the handling dept.
i must admit i do like the 350z alot more then most people on here though. its all around fun to drive,nice roomy interior(im 6'4" and i fit very confortably in one- has even more room then my ss)responsive handling and best of all compared to a camaro is the brakes. the term can of worms only applies to the camaro after tapping the brakes on the 350z. only thing i found it really didnt like- alot of wind(the thing wanders to no end in windy area's) best term for its power would be zippy, its not an onslaught of power like the ls1. just revs fast and goes till you hit the brick wall at 90. biggest thing i dont like about the 350z is all the ricers thinking its the best car ever invented, besides a skyline,supra etc (you know the fastest car's like ever man) etc. saying a stock 350z would smoke my ls1 by buslenghts (where in reality the ls1 is the faster of the two bone stock)
... but i guess thats why everyone calls them ricers there dumber then the term there named after.
10-17-2006, 05:02 AM
#208
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well I suppose I could be wrong, but according to the times I posted the 8:40 was done by a 4 speed auto C5 and the 8:26 was done by a track model 2003 350Z. I suppose a 5 speed C5 would do better.
I'm not sure how else to supply proof. Should we all take a trip to europe and watch people do lap times back to back or something? I suppose someone should ask Horst von Saurma, of sport auto magazine since he contributed a lot of the times - unless he's making them all up for the fun of it or something
on a side note, if anyone got the new car and driver mag, the comparison track article where the 2006 track Z did a lap in 3:12.5 with a top speed of 78.5mph while the C6 Z51 did it in 1:09.2 with a top speed of 79.9mph.
well, I dunno I can only assume the C5 is slower than the C6. Even with that factored in I'd conclude that the lap times might be similar between a C5 and 350Z on a road course - or at least on courses like the Nurburing where the C5 only gets to really open up and make use of it's 350hp towards the end of the track on the long straight
otherwise the only advantage I've ever really felt the regular C5 had over the 350Z in terms of handling was that it has wider and stickier tires stock
and a 2006 Z vs a 2003 Z are going to post almost identical times. Even though a 2006 Z has 13 more hp, 14 less torque, and 400rpm higher redline, it also has 120 lbs more weight to carry.
I'm not sure how else to supply proof. Should we all take a trip to europe and watch people do lap times back to back or something? I suppose someone should ask Horst von Saurma, of sport auto magazine since he contributed a lot of the times - unless he's making them all up for the fun of it or something
6:59 --- Ferrari 312T, Niki Lauda, German GP, training (1975)
7:06 --- Ferrari 312T, Clay Regazzoni, German GP, race (1975)
*1.2m longer circuit than standard Nordschleife
6:11 --- Porsche 956, Group C, Stefan Bellof, training (1983)
6:26 --- Porsche 956, Group C, Stefan Bellof, race (1983)
6:41 --- Porsche 956, Group C, Derek Bell
7:50 --- BMW X5 Le Mans V12, Hans Stuck (2001)
*0.232 km longer than current, standard Nordschleife
7:06 --- BMW M3 GTR, 24hrs, test session, Jörg Müller (2003)
7:18.1-- Donkervoort D8 RS (12/2004)
7:19 --- Radical SR3 Turbo (2003), >>> Link
7:20* -- Opel Astra DTM V8 Coupe, set-up for 24hrs race (sport auto 2003) *estimated
7:25 --- Alzen Motorsport Porsche 996, 24hrs race, Uwe Alzen
7:28 --- Porsche Carrera GT, Walther Röhrl, Autobild July 2004 >>> Link
7:32.4 -- Porsche Carrera GT, definitive time by Horst Von Saurma
7:32.5 - Gemballa Porsche GTR 600 EVO, Wolfgang Kaufmann (2001) >>> Link
7:36 --- Porsche Carrera GT, factory test driver Walther Röhrl (2002)
7:40* -- Porsche Carrera GT, *estimated time on cold and partially wet track (2003)
7:40 --- Mercedes Benz McLaren SLR, Klaus Ludwig, Autobild July 2004 >>> Link
7:42 --- Radical 1500 SR3 (2002)
7:43 --- 2006 Corvette Z06
7:43 --- TechArt GT Street (2001)
7:43 --- Porsche 996 911 GT3 RS, factory test driver Walter Rohrl, MOTOR Magazine
7:43.5 - Lamborghini Murcielago (Autocar magazine, 2002)
7:44 --- Pagani Zonda C12S (07/2003)
7:45 --- Gemballa Porsche GTR 600 (12/2000)
7:46 --- Porsche 996 GT2
7:46 --- SHK Porsche 993 GT2, 652 PS (1999)
7:47 --- Porsche 996 GT3 RS, 381PS (996) (2004)
7:49 --- Porsche 996 GT3 Cup
7:50 --- BMW E46 M3 CSL (08/2003)
7:50 --- Blitz Supra, 750 PS, Herbert Schürg (1997)
7:50 --- Honda RC30, Helmut Daehne (1993)
7:50 --- Lamborghini Murcielago (06/2002)
7:52 --- Gemballa Porsche 911 Le Mans (1995)
7:52 --- Lamborghini Gallardo E-Gear (12/2003)
7:52 --- Mercedes Benz SLR McLaren (06/2004)
7:54 --- Porsche GT3 (996) (2003)
7:55 --- Caterham R500 Superlight (2002)
7:56 --- Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale (02/2004)
7:56 --- Porsche 996 Turbo
7:56 --- Honda NSX-R - Motoharu Kurosawa, Best MOTORing
7:56 --- Chevrolet Corvette CE Z06 >>> link
7:56 --- Chevrolet Corvette C6 (tested by Dave Hill)
7:57 --- Lotec Porsche 993 Turbo, 600 PS, racing suspension
7:59 --- Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (Performance Chassis) (Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:02 --- Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (Sport PASM setting) (Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:03 --- Porsche 996 GT3 (1999)
8:04 --- Lamborghini Diablo GT (07/2000)
8:05 --- Ferrari 575M Maranello F1 (12/2002)
8:05 --- Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (Normal PASM setting)(Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:06 --- Mercedes Benz SL55 AMG
8:06 --- Caterham 7 Superlight R, Robert Nearn
8:06 --- Subaru Impreza Sti spec C - Motoharu Kurosawa, Best MOTORing
8:07 --- Ferrari 550 Maranello (06/1998)
8:09 --- Honda NSX-R 3.2 (08/2002)
8:09 --- Ferrari 360 Modena (10/1999)
8:09 --- Lamborghini Diablo SV (no ABS?)
8:10 --- Chrysler Viper GTS, 411PS, UK-Spec, no ABS (10/1997)
8:10 --- Donkervoort D8 180R
8:11 --- Mitsubishi Lancer EVO IX (video here)
8:12 --- Mercedes Benz SL55 AMG (04/2002)
8:12 --- Porsche 993 Turbo
8:13 --- Lotus Esprit Sport 350, 354 PS (05/1999)
8:13 --- Dodge Viper SRT-10, 506 PS (10/2004)
8:13 --- BMW M5 (E60) (12/2004)
8:15 --- Ruf 911 CTR 2, 520 PS
8:15*-- Holden GTS (2000), *estimated
8:15 --- Porsche 911 Carrera 2 (997) (Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:16 --- AC-Schnitzer E36 M3 CLS II, 350 PS (11/1997)
8:16 --- AC Schnitzer Z4 V8 Topster (01/2005)
8:17 --- Aston Martin Vanquish (2003)
8:17 --- Porsche 996 C2
8:18 --- BMW Z8, 400 PS (08/2000)
8:18 --- Chevrolet Corvette Z05 Commemorative Edition, 344 PS (09/2003)
8:18 --- Ferrari F355 (06/1997)
8:20 --- Audi RS6 (2002)
8:22 --- BMW E46 M3 (12/2000)
8:22 --- BMW M Coupe, 321 PS (10/1998)
8:22 --- Mercedes-Benz C55 (07/2004)
8:23 --- Aston Martin DB7 GT (2003)
8:23 --- Porsche 996 Carrera 4
8:24 --- Subaru Impreza WRX STi (2004)
8:25 --- Audi RS4 375 HP
8:25 --- Callaway C12
8:25 --- Mitsubishi Carisma GT Evo VI (11/1999)
8:25 --- Mitsubishi Carisma GT Evo VII (11/2002)
8:26 --- Mercedes Benz SLK 32 AMG (05/2001)
8:26 --- Nissan 350Z (2003)
8:28 --- BMW M5, 400 PS(also confirmed by Motor Commodore magazine, 2000)
8:28 --- Nissan Skyline GTR, 277 PS
8:28 --- Porsche 993 Carrera 2
8:29 --- Mercedes Benz CLK 55 AMG (05/2000)
8:29 --- Audi S4 4.2 Avant (11/2003)
8:30 --- Maserati Coupé Cambiocorsa (10/2002)
8:31 --- Ferrari F355 GTS, 380 PS
8:32 --- BMW M Roadster, 321 PS (09/1997)
8:32 --- BMW Z4 3.0 SMG (05/2003)
8:32 --- Porsche Boxster S
8:32 --- Volkswagen Golf R32
8:34 --- Acura NSX, 276 PS
8:34 --- BMW Z3 Coupé 3.0i, 231 PS (04/2001)
8:35 --- BMW M3 Coupe, 321 PS
8:35 --- Brabus-Mercedes Benz C V8 Sportcoupé (02/2002)
8:35 --- BMW 130i >>> Link
8:36 --- BMW E36 M3 EVO, 321 PS
8:36 --- Alpina-BMW B3 3.3 Coupé (07/1999)
8:37 --- Maserati 3200GT (2002)
8:37 --- Mercedes Benz C32 AMG (09/2001)
8:37 --- Nissan Skyline GTR V-Spec, 350 PS
8:37 --- Subaru Impreza GT Turbo
8:37 --- Honda NSX 3.0 (07/1991)
8:38 --- Honda NSX 3.2 (08/1997)
8:38 --- Mercedes Benz SL500 (12/2001)
8:38 --- Porsche 996 Carrera, 296 PS
8:38 --- Brabus-Mercedes Benz CLK 5.8 (12/1998)
8:39 --- Honda S2000 (01/2000)
8:39 --- Morgan Aero 8 (04/2003)
8:40 --- Holden GTS, on an in and out lap (2000)
8:40 --- Chevrolet Corvette C5 Targa Automatic (07/1997)
8:41 --- Aston Martin DB7 (1999)
8:41 --- Audi S3, 210 PS (06/1999)
8:42 --- Audi S4, 265 PS (08/1998)
8:42 --- Lotus Exige (11/2000)
8:43 --- Honda Integra Type R (12/2000)
8:44 --- Chevrolet Corvette C5
8:45 --- Chevrolet Corvette, 339 PS, automatic
8:46 --- Porsche 993 Carrera S, 285 PS
8:47 --- Honda Civic Type-R, 200 PS (11/2001)
8:49 --- Jaguar XKR Coupe (07/1998)
8:49 --- Renault Clio Sport V6
8:49 --- Audi TT 1.8T quattro Coupé, 225 PS (11/1998)
8:50* -- Mercedes Benz E55 AMG (2000)
8:51 --- Mercedes Benz C43 AMG (02/1998)
8:52 --- Mercedes Benz CLK 430
8:58 --- Lotus Esprit Turbo SE (07/1991)
9:09 --- Volkswagen Golf V6 4Motion
References:
All times in bold print were tested by Horst von Saurma, sport auto magazine
7:06 --- Ferrari 312T, Clay Regazzoni, German GP, race (1975)
*1.2m longer circuit than standard Nordschleife
6:11 --- Porsche 956, Group C, Stefan Bellof, training (1983)
6:26 --- Porsche 956, Group C, Stefan Bellof, race (1983)
6:41 --- Porsche 956, Group C, Derek Bell
7:50 --- BMW X5 Le Mans V12, Hans Stuck (2001)
*0.232 km longer than current, standard Nordschleife
7:06 --- BMW M3 GTR, 24hrs, test session, Jörg Müller (2003)
7:18.1-- Donkervoort D8 RS (12/2004)
7:19 --- Radical SR3 Turbo (2003), >>> Link
7:20* -- Opel Astra DTM V8 Coupe, set-up for 24hrs race (sport auto 2003) *estimated
7:25 --- Alzen Motorsport Porsche 996, 24hrs race, Uwe Alzen
7:28 --- Porsche Carrera GT, Walther Röhrl, Autobild July 2004 >>> Link
7:32.4 -- Porsche Carrera GT, definitive time by Horst Von Saurma
7:32.5 - Gemballa Porsche GTR 600 EVO, Wolfgang Kaufmann (2001) >>> Link
7:36 --- Porsche Carrera GT, factory test driver Walther Röhrl (2002)
7:40* -- Porsche Carrera GT, *estimated time on cold and partially wet track (2003)
7:40 --- Mercedes Benz McLaren SLR, Klaus Ludwig, Autobild July 2004 >>> Link
7:42 --- Radical 1500 SR3 (2002)
7:43 --- 2006 Corvette Z06
7:43 --- TechArt GT Street (2001)
7:43 --- Porsche 996 911 GT3 RS, factory test driver Walter Rohrl, MOTOR Magazine
7:43.5 - Lamborghini Murcielago (Autocar magazine, 2002)
7:44 --- Pagani Zonda C12S (07/2003)
7:45 --- Gemballa Porsche GTR 600 (12/2000)
7:46 --- Porsche 996 GT2
7:46 --- SHK Porsche 993 GT2, 652 PS (1999)
7:47 --- Porsche 996 GT3 RS, 381PS (996) (2004)
7:49 --- Porsche 996 GT3 Cup
7:50 --- BMW E46 M3 CSL (08/2003)
7:50 --- Blitz Supra, 750 PS, Herbert Schürg (1997)
7:50 --- Honda RC30, Helmut Daehne (1993)
7:50 --- Lamborghini Murcielago (06/2002)
7:52 --- Gemballa Porsche 911 Le Mans (1995)
7:52 --- Lamborghini Gallardo E-Gear (12/2003)
7:52 --- Mercedes Benz SLR McLaren (06/2004)
7:54 --- Porsche GT3 (996) (2003)
7:55 --- Caterham R500 Superlight (2002)
7:56 --- Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale (02/2004)
7:56 --- Porsche 996 Turbo
7:56 --- Honda NSX-R - Motoharu Kurosawa, Best MOTORing
7:56 --- Chevrolet Corvette CE Z06 >>> link
7:56 --- Chevrolet Corvette C6 (tested by Dave Hill)
7:57 --- Lotec Porsche 993 Turbo, 600 PS, racing suspension
7:59 --- Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (Performance Chassis) (Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:02 --- Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (Sport PASM setting) (Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:03 --- Porsche 996 GT3 (1999)
8:04 --- Lamborghini Diablo GT (07/2000)
8:05 --- Ferrari 575M Maranello F1 (12/2002)
8:05 --- Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (Normal PASM setting)(Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:06 --- Mercedes Benz SL55 AMG
8:06 --- Caterham 7 Superlight R, Robert Nearn
8:06 --- Subaru Impreza Sti spec C - Motoharu Kurosawa, Best MOTORing
8:07 --- Ferrari 550 Maranello (06/1998)
8:09 --- Honda NSX-R 3.2 (08/2002)
8:09 --- Ferrari 360 Modena (10/1999)
8:09 --- Lamborghini Diablo SV (no ABS?)
8:10 --- Chrysler Viper GTS, 411PS, UK-Spec, no ABS (10/1997)
8:10 --- Donkervoort D8 180R
8:11 --- Mitsubishi Lancer EVO IX (video here)
8:12 --- Mercedes Benz SL55 AMG (04/2002)
8:12 --- Porsche 993 Turbo
8:13 --- Lotus Esprit Sport 350, 354 PS (05/1999)
8:13 --- Dodge Viper SRT-10, 506 PS (10/2004)
8:13 --- BMW M5 (E60) (12/2004)
8:15 --- Ruf 911 CTR 2, 520 PS
8:15*-- Holden GTS (2000), *estimated
8:15 --- Porsche 911 Carrera 2 (997) (Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:16 --- AC-Schnitzer E36 M3 CLS II, 350 PS (11/1997)
8:16 --- AC Schnitzer Z4 V8 Topster (01/2005)
8:17 --- Aston Martin Vanquish (2003)
8:17 --- Porsche 996 C2
8:18 --- BMW Z8, 400 PS (08/2000)
8:18 --- Chevrolet Corvette Z05 Commemorative Edition, 344 PS (09/2003)
8:18 --- Ferrari F355 (06/1997)
8:20 --- Audi RS6 (2002)
8:22 --- BMW E46 M3 (12/2000)
8:22 --- BMW M Coupe, 321 PS (10/1998)
8:22 --- Mercedes-Benz C55 (07/2004)
8:23 --- Aston Martin DB7 GT (2003)
8:23 --- Porsche 996 Carrera 4
8:24 --- Subaru Impreza WRX STi (2004)
8:25 --- Audi RS4 375 HP
8:25 --- Callaway C12
8:25 --- Mitsubishi Carisma GT Evo VI (11/1999)
8:25 --- Mitsubishi Carisma GT Evo VII (11/2002)
8:26 --- Mercedes Benz SLK 32 AMG (05/2001)
8:26 --- Nissan 350Z (2003)
8:28 --- BMW M5, 400 PS(also confirmed by Motor Commodore magazine, 2000)
8:28 --- Nissan Skyline GTR, 277 PS
8:28 --- Porsche 993 Carrera 2
8:29 --- Mercedes Benz CLK 55 AMG (05/2000)
8:29 --- Audi S4 4.2 Avant (11/2003)
8:30 --- Maserati Coupé Cambiocorsa (10/2002)
8:31 --- Ferrari F355 GTS, 380 PS
8:32 --- BMW M Roadster, 321 PS (09/1997)
8:32 --- BMW Z4 3.0 SMG (05/2003)
8:32 --- Porsche Boxster S
8:32 --- Volkswagen Golf R32
8:34 --- Acura NSX, 276 PS
8:34 --- BMW Z3 Coupé 3.0i, 231 PS (04/2001)
8:35 --- BMW M3 Coupe, 321 PS
8:35 --- Brabus-Mercedes Benz C V8 Sportcoupé (02/2002)
8:35 --- BMW 130i >>> Link
8:36 --- BMW E36 M3 EVO, 321 PS
8:36 --- Alpina-BMW B3 3.3 Coupé (07/1999)
8:37 --- Maserati 3200GT (2002)
8:37 --- Mercedes Benz C32 AMG (09/2001)
8:37 --- Nissan Skyline GTR V-Spec, 350 PS
8:37 --- Subaru Impreza GT Turbo
8:37 --- Honda NSX 3.0 (07/1991)
8:38 --- Honda NSX 3.2 (08/1997)
8:38 --- Mercedes Benz SL500 (12/2001)
8:38 --- Porsche 996 Carrera, 296 PS
8:38 --- Brabus-Mercedes Benz CLK 5.8 (12/1998)
8:39 --- Honda S2000 (01/2000)
8:39 --- Morgan Aero 8 (04/2003)
8:40 --- Holden GTS, on an in and out lap (2000)
8:40 --- Chevrolet Corvette C5 Targa Automatic (07/1997)
8:41 --- Aston Martin DB7 (1999)
8:41 --- Audi S3, 210 PS (06/1999)
8:42 --- Audi S4, 265 PS (08/1998)
8:42 --- Lotus Exige (11/2000)
8:43 --- Honda Integra Type R (12/2000)
8:44 --- Chevrolet Corvette C5
8:45 --- Chevrolet Corvette, 339 PS, automatic
8:46 --- Porsche 993 Carrera S, 285 PS
8:47 --- Honda Civic Type-R, 200 PS (11/2001)
8:49 --- Jaguar XKR Coupe (07/1998)
8:49 --- Renault Clio Sport V6
8:49 --- Audi TT 1.8T quattro Coupé, 225 PS (11/1998)
8:50* -- Mercedes Benz E55 AMG (2000)
8:51 --- Mercedes Benz C43 AMG (02/1998)
8:52 --- Mercedes Benz CLK 430
8:58 --- Lotus Esprit Turbo SE (07/1991)
9:09 --- Volkswagen Golf V6 4Motion
References:
All times in bold print were tested by Horst von Saurma, sport auto magazine
on a side note, if anyone got the new car and driver mag, the comparison track article where the 2006 track Z did a lap in 3:12.5 with a top speed of 78.5mph while the C6 Z51 did it in 1:09.2 with a top speed of 79.9mph.
well, I dunno I can only assume the C5 is slower than the C6. Even with that factored in I'd conclude that the lap times might be similar between a C5 and 350Z on a road course - or at least on courses like the Nurburing where the C5 only gets to really open up and make use of it's 350hp towards the end of the track on the long straight
otherwise the only advantage I've ever really felt the regular C5 had over the 350Z in terms of handling was that it has wider and stickier tires stock
and a 2006 Z vs a 2003 Z are going to post almost identical times. Even though a 2006 Z has 13 more hp, 14 less torque, and 400rpm higher redline, it also has 120 lbs more weight to carry.
10-17-2006, 07:10 AM
#209
TECH Addict
Originally Posted by sentry65
well I suppose I could be wrong, but according to the times I posted the 8:40 was done by a 4 speed auto C5 and the 8:26 was done by a track model 2003 350Z. I suppose a 5 speed C5 would do better.
I'm not sure how else to supply proof. Should we all take a trip to europe and watch people do lap times back to back or something? I suppose someone should ask Horst von Saurma, of sport auto magazine since he contributed a lot of the times - unless he's making them all up for the fun of it or something
on a side note, if anyone got the new car and driver mag, the comparison track article where the 2006 track Z did a lap in 3:12.5 with a top speed of 78.5mph while the C6 Z51 did it in 1:09.2 with a top speed of 79.9mph.
well, I dunno I can only assume the C5 is slower than the C6. Even with that factored in I'd conclude that the lap times might be similar between a C5 and 350Z on a road course - or at least on courses like the Nurburing where the C5 only gets to really open up and make use of it's 350hp towards the end of the track on the long straight
otherwise the only advantage I've ever really felt the regular C5 had over the 350Z in terms of handling was that it has wider and stickier tires stock
and a 2006 Z vs a 2003 Z are going to post almost identical times. Even though a 2006 Z has 13 more hp, 14 less torque, and 400rpm higher redline, it also has 120 lbs more weight to carry.
I'm not sure how else to supply proof. Should we all take a trip to europe and watch people do lap times back to back or something? I suppose someone should ask Horst von Saurma, of sport auto magazine since he contributed a lot of the times - unless he's making them all up for the fun of it or something
on a side note, if anyone got the new car and driver mag, the comparison track article where the 2006 track Z did a lap in 3:12.5 with a top speed of 78.5mph while the C6 Z51 did it in 1:09.2 with a top speed of 79.9mph.
well, I dunno I can only assume the C5 is slower than the C6. Even with that factored in I'd conclude that the lap times might be similar between a C5 and 350Z on a road course - or at least on courses like the Nurburing where the C5 only gets to really open up and make use of it's 350hp towards the end of the track on the long straight
otherwise the only advantage I've ever really felt the regular C5 had over the 350Z in terms of handling was that it has wider and stickier tires stock
and a 2006 Z vs a 2003 Z are going to post almost identical times. Even though a 2006 Z has 13 more hp, 14 less torque, and 400rpm higher redline, it also has 120 lbs more weight to carry.
Also as the ring is in a forest, conditions and weather play a big factor. So a damp track with heavy traffic will produce slower lap times than a dry track with light traffic.
Also what is a "Track" spec 350z???
Another thing what spec/mods did it have? Nissan tried this years back with the R32 Skyline and tried to claim the production car record for the ring despite the fact they used slicks, a pretty significant mod.
Originally Posted by Top Gear
In order to qualify for the power laps board, a car must be road legal, and be a car. For this reason the F1 car (0.59.0), Aston Martin DBR9 (1.08.6) and Sea Harrier (0.31.2) do not appear.
Power lap times
Koenigsegg CCX (With Top Gear spoiler) 1.17.6
Pagani Zonda F 1.18.4
Maserati MC12 1.18.9
Ferrari F60 Enzo 1.19.0
Ariel Atom 1.19.5
Porsche Carerra GT 1.19.8
Koenigsegg CCX 1.20.4
Ascari KZ1 1.20.7
Mercedes McLaren SLR 1.20.9
Ford GT 1.21.9
Ferrari 360 CS 1.22.3
Porsche GT3 RS 1.22.3
Corvette Z06 1.22.4
Noble M15 1.22.5
Murcielago 1.23.7
Zonda 1.23.8
Koenigsegg 1.23.9
Prodrive P2 1.24.3
TVR Sagaris 1.24.6
Mitsubishi Evo FQ400 1.24.8
TVR Tuscan 1.24.8
Noble 1.25.0
Lotus Exige S 1.25.1
Lamborghini Gallardo Spyder 1.25.7
Lamborghini Gallardo 1.25.8
BMW Z4 M 1.26.0
Porsche Cayman 1.26.2
Lotus Exige 1.26.4
Chevrolet Corvette 1.26.8
Mercedes CLS 55 AMG 1.26.9
Porsche 911 GT3 1.27.2
TVR 350C 1.27.5
BMW M3 CSL 1.28.0
Marcos TSO GT2 1.28.2
Dodge Viper SRT-10 1.28.5
MG SV 1.28.6
Porsche 911 Carrera S 1.28.9 (very wet)
Mitsubishi Evo VIII 1.28.9
BMW Alpine Z8 1.29.0
Mercedes CL65 1.29
Alfa 3.7 GTA 1.30.0
Subaru Impreza STI 1.30.1
Vauxhall Monaro VXR 1.30.1
Aston Martin DB7 GT 1.30.4
Golf R32 1.30.4
Audi S4 1.30.9
Porsche 911 turbo 1.31.0
Vauxhall VX 220 turbo 1.31.3
Honda NSX Type R 1.31.6
BMW M3 1.31.8
Nissan 350Z 1.31.8
Mazda RX8 1.31.8
BMW 535d 1.31.8
BMW 130 1.31.9
Ford Focus RS 1.32.2
Mazda 6 MPS 1.32.2
Power lap times
Koenigsegg CCX (With Top Gear spoiler) 1.17.6
Pagani Zonda F 1.18.4
Maserati MC12 1.18.9
Ferrari F60 Enzo 1.19.0
Ariel Atom 1.19.5
Porsche Carerra GT 1.19.8
Koenigsegg CCX 1.20.4
Ascari KZ1 1.20.7
Mercedes McLaren SLR 1.20.9
Ford GT 1.21.9
Ferrari 360 CS 1.22.3
Porsche GT3 RS 1.22.3
Corvette Z06 1.22.4
Noble M15 1.22.5
Murcielago 1.23.7
Zonda 1.23.8
Koenigsegg 1.23.9
Prodrive P2 1.24.3
TVR Sagaris 1.24.6
Mitsubishi Evo FQ400 1.24.8
TVR Tuscan 1.24.8
Noble 1.25.0
Lotus Exige S 1.25.1
Lamborghini Gallardo Spyder 1.25.7
Lamborghini Gallardo 1.25.8
BMW Z4 M 1.26.0
Porsche Cayman 1.26.2
Lotus Exige 1.26.4
Chevrolet Corvette 1.26.8
Mercedes CLS 55 AMG 1.26.9
Porsche 911 GT3 1.27.2
TVR 350C 1.27.5
BMW M3 CSL 1.28.0
Marcos TSO GT2 1.28.2
Dodge Viper SRT-10 1.28.5
MG SV 1.28.6
Porsche 911 Carrera S 1.28.9 (very wet)
Mitsubishi Evo VIII 1.28.9
BMW Alpine Z8 1.29.0
Mercedes CL65 1.29
Alfa 3.7 GTA 1.30.0
Subaru Impreza STI 1.30.1
Vauxhall Monaro VXR 1.30.1
Aston Martin DB7 GT 1.30.4
Golf R32 1.30.4
Audi S4 1.30.9
Porsche 911 turbo 1.31.0
Vauxhall VX 220 turbo 1.31.3
Honda NSX Type R 1.31.6
BMW M3 1.31.8
Nissan 350Z 1.31.8
Mazda RX8 1.31.8
BMW 535d 1.31.8
BMW 130 1.31.9
Ford Focus RS 1.32.2
Mazda 6 MPS 1.32.2
10-17-2006, 10:37 AM
#210
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: nyc
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sentry65
well the only place I've found anyone reproduce the numbers is here:
http://forums.streetfire.net/showthread.php?t=1359
it's quoted here on streetfire, but the times didn't come from streetfire
they're not exactly scientific, but it's almost impossible for most things to truely be scientific with car lap times anyway
http://forums.streetfire.net/showthread.php?t=1359
it's quoted here on streetfire, but the times didn't come from streetfire
they're not exactly scientific, but it's almost impossible for most things to truely be scientific with car lap times anyway
10-17-2006, 11:02 AM
#211
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
track model might not be something that's released in europe - it might fall under a different name. Mainly it has brembo brakes and rays lightweight wheels and a few other things
so now that the BS flag is down on the 8:40 time on the vette being auto and non z51, how much faster does everyone think it'd be with a 5 speed manual and z51? like 20 seconds faster?
so now that the BS flag is down on the 8:40 time on the vette being auto and non z51, how much faster does everyone think it'd be with a 5 speed manual and z51? like 20 seconds faster?
10-17-2006, 01:15 PM
#212
Staging Lane
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: SW Suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sentry65
track model might not be something that's released in europe - it might fall under a different name. Mainly it has brembo brakes and rays lightweight wheels and a few other things
so now that the BS flag is down on the 8:40 time on the vette being auto and non z51, how much faster does everyone think it'd be with a 5 speed manual and z51? like 20 seconds faster?
so now that the BS flag is down on the 8:40 time on the vette being auto and non z51, how much faster does everyone think it'd be with a 5 speed manual and z51? like 20 seconds faster?
10-17-2006, 01:25 PM
#213
Originally Posted by 2000 Tran Zam
haha, have you looked at my sig 
But if you did that than you did it so you can run FI setup. There's a big difference. I assume your using a low compression setup for that turbo. I don't blame you. But the average guy building isn't looking for low compression. I see allot of people pusshing 470-500 without a 90/90 setup. It seems it's all in how radical of a cam you go.
10-17-2006, 02:10 PM
#214
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ahwatukee, Az
Posts: 2,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wickedwarlock
ROFL, nope. But after I checked it.
But if you did that than you did it so you can run FI setup. There's a big difference. I assume your using a low compression setup for that turbo. I don't blame you. But the average guy building isn't looking for low compression. I see allot of people pusshing 470-500 without a 90/90 setup. It seems it's all in how radical of a cam you go.
But if you did that than you did it so you can run FI setup. There's a big difference. I assume your using a low compression setup for that turbo. I don't blame you. But the average guy building isn't looking for low compression. I see allot of people pusshing 470-500 without a 90/90 setup. It seems it's all in how radical of a cam you go.
my old heads/cam setup like 2 years ago was 425 rwhp and 408 rwtq.
that was with katech stage 2 heads, 78mm lsx intake through cheap pacesetter headers and a 224 cam.
I was just speaking from experience. Now im running a 236/230 cam in my 408.
10-17-2006, 02:10 PM
#215
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ahwatukee, Az
Posts: 2,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wickedwarlock
ROFL, nope. But after I checked it.
But if you did that than you did it so you can run FI setup. There's a big difference. I assume your using a low compression setup for that turbo. I don't blame you. But the average guy building isn't looking for low compression. I see allot of people pusshing 470-500 without a 90/90 setup. It seems it's all in how radical of a cam you go.
But if you did that than you did it so you can run FI setup. There's a big difference. I assume your using a low compression setup for that turbo. I don't blame you. But the average guy building isn't looking for low compression. I see allot of people pusshing 470-500 without a 90/90 setup. It seems it's all in how radical of a cam you go.
Ya, your gonna need 260+duration cams to even think about touching 470 without a 90/90 setup, and some bad *** heads too.
10-17-2006, 03:27 PM
#217
Originally Posted by sentry65
track model might not be something that's released in europe - it might fall under a different name. Mainly it has brembo brakes and rays lightweight wheels and a few other things
so now that the BS flag is down on the 8:40 time on the vette being auto and non z51, how much faster does everyone think it'd be with a 5 speed manual and z51? like 20 seconds faster?
so now that the BS flag is down on the 8:40 time on the vette being auto and non z51, how much faster does everyone think it'd be with a 5 speed manual and z51? like 20 seconds faster?
10-17-2006, 03:54 PM
#218
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
that's right, forgot C5's are 6 speeds
even if a C5 is 20 seconds faster than 8:40, that's still barely faster than a 350Z around that course - 1.2% faster around that track (500 seconds vs 506 seconds)
I suppose I should mention that I test drove a stock enthusiast 2005 350Z back in april and thought it felt slow as hell after driving my modded supercharged Z
even if a C5 is 20 seconds faster than 8:40, that's still barely faster than a 350Z around that course - 1.2% faster around that track (500 seconds vs 506 seconds)
I suppose I should mention that I test drove a stock enthusiast 2005 350Z back in april and thought it felt slow as hell after driving my modded supercharged Z
10-17-2006, 04:00 PM
#219
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Iranndia
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sentry65
that's right, forgot C5's are 6 speeds
even if a C5 is 20 seconds faster than 8:40, that's still barely faster than a 350Z around that course - 1.2% faster around that track (500 seconds vs 506 seconds)
I suppose I should mention that I test drove a stock enthusiast 2005 350Z back in april and thought it felt slow as hell after driving my modded supercharged Z
even if a C5 is 20 seconds faster than 8:40, that's still barely faster than a 350Z around that course - 1.2% faster around that track (500 seconds vs 506 seconds)
I suppose I should mention that I test drove a stock enthusiast 2005 350Z back in april and thought it felt slow as hell after driving my modded supercharged Z
10-17-2006, 04:09 PM
#220
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1 second IS a lot of distance, but when you're talking about a 8+ minute course, it's less of a big deal than it'd be doing a lap at willow springs or something
like if you were racing from coast to coast on in the US where it'd take a few days. 1 second would still be a bunch of car lenths, but it'd almost be negligible in the whole picture
but yeah, "Ask any racer, any real racer. It doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile; winning's winning"
and no one has any times of a 6 speed Z51 lapping the nurburing...for all we know it's only 10 seconds faster than 8:40
like if you were racing from coast to coast on in the US where it'd take a few days. 1 second would still be a bunch of car lenths, but it'd almost be negligible in the whole picture
but yeah, "Ask any racer, any real racer. It doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile; winning's winning"
and no one has any times of a 6 speed Z51 lapping the nurburing...for all we know it's only 10 seconds faster than 8:40
Last edited by sentry65; 10-17-2006 at 04:15 PM.