Zeddophile Posted July 7, 2008 Posted July 7, 2008 The offending article: Having seen that, I want to get my rangie out at Sandown now! Might have a bit too much bodyroll with the amount of lift it has though Quote
ZD44TT Posted July 10, 2008 Posted July 10, 2008 Just goes to show how potent the old Z is on a track. Their definately fun because their such a challenge to drive on the track. But I wouldn't call them 'potent' because their no distinticed advantanges for tracking a S30 platform over other later platforms. If anything the torsional flex is quite significant in the old chassis. just thought i'd seperate the 'cool' factor from the 'reality' aspects..........hehehhe. . Quote
Scando Posted July 10, 2008 Posted July 10, 2008 Their definately fun because their such a challenge to drive on the track. But I wouldn't call them 'potent' because their no distinticed advantanges for tracking a S30 platform over other later platforms. If anything the torsional flex is quite significant in the old chassis. just thought i'd seperate the 'cool' factor from the 'reality' aspects..........hehehhe. . They do have an advantage over lots of other chassis in their weight distribution. They put the power to the ground exceptionally well. As for chassis flex, nothing a cage doesn't fix Quote
BenZed Posted July 10, 2008 Author Posted July 10, 2008 The braces in my car definitely help, it felt a lot better than my last Zed in that regard. Sorry Phil Quote
620Z Posted July 10, 2008 Posted July 10, 2008 I'd love to take my Turbo Territory around that track and see what it would do. 1.35 for a Landcruiser is pretty good if that time is correct. Plenty of Zeds going slower than that around Sandown. Quote
BenZed Posted July 10, 2008 Author Posted July 10, 2008 I'd love to take my Turbo Territory around that track and see what it would do. 1.35 for a Landcruiser is pretty good if that time is correct. Plenty of Zeds going slower than that around Sandown. That Landy had 400kW+ at the wheels and Porsche brakes, its best time was a 1:29. Might want to turn the boost up on the Territory Quote
ZD44TT Posted July 10, 2008 Posted July 10, 2008 i know your going to hate this questions but i have to ask Ben. are you going to wake some flares on your beast? hey didn't know you run the upgarage gig out west as well. good stuff. Quote
BenZed Posted July 10, 2008 Author Posted July 10, 2008 i know your going to hate this questions but i have to ask Ben. are you going to wake some flares on your beast? I have thought about it, but I spent so much time fixing the rear guards I really don't want to drill holes in them. Besides, the Watanabes fit really well now. Ask me again in a year and I might have a different answer though... Quote
620Z Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 Ha Ha yeah your right Ben. If that thing had 400klw and those brakes then the Territory wouldn't have a hope. 1.29 is pretty darn good especially when you look at the tyres he is running. Good on him. I am almost sold on there AWD's now. Well a performance one anyway. Quote
Brabham Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 Hi Benzed, Just wondering what kind of preparation you do on baremetal sections before you paint them. The problem I have is that after I paint metal areas I have repaired they rust again after about 2 years. Do you use any kind of rust inhibiting paint or other treatments before you spray on the final coat? Thanks. Quote
harry Posted July 24, 2008 Posted July 24, 2008 gday ben i was wondering what the price tag on the stroker crank alone also your using the same manafold as the carb with injectors fitted and ports matched right ? Quote
harry Posted July 24, 2008 Posted July 24, 2008 gday ben i was wondering the price tag on the stroker crank also is have you ponder the idea of a duel injector setup with plenum props on the Z though its good to see em still powering round Quote
BenZed Posted July 24, 2008 Author Posted July 24, 2008 gday ben i was wondering what the price tag on the stroker crank alone also your using the same manafold as the carb with injectors fitted and ports matched right ? SWR can supply a crank, prices vary a bit. The injectors are mounted in the throttle bodies, so the OER manifold can be used for carbs too. Quote
BenZed Posted July 24, 2008 Author Posted July 24, 2008 gday ben i was wondering the price tag on the stroker crank also is have you ponder the idea of a duel injector setup with plenum props on the Z though its good to see em still powering round A plenum defeats the purpose of 6-throttles, might as well use one big one. Dual injectors per cylinder? Not much point when single injectors can be sourced to support 1000hp. Quote
Hunter Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Could you post a few pics of your 12 camping heater set-up, you have on your front demisters? This could be a cheap fast fix for my current project. Quote
zb Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Wow, what an extremely impressive engine. 113 horsepower per litre at only 6700rpm. For a two valve engine designed in the sixties this is phenomenal. It is interesting to compare some other 2 valve engines from race and rally cars of the same era. Lancia Stratos - 107hp/l @7800rpm (Group 4 rally car) Porsche 911sc - 96hp/l @7600rpm (Group 4 rally car) Ferrari 308gtb - 103hp/l @8000rpm (Group 4 rally car) Datsun 160J - 95hp/l @7600rpm (Group 4 rally car) Repco Brabham 740 - 115hp/l @8200rpm (1967 F1 engine) Outperforming the nissan works team by nearly 20hp/l at almost 1000 revs less... Quote
ZD44TT Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Wow, what an extremely impressive engine. 113 horsepower per litre at only 6700rpm. For a two valve engine designed in the sixties this is phenomenal. It is interesting to compare some other 2 valve engines from race and rally cars of the same era. Lancia Stratos - 107hp/l @7800rpm (Group 4 rally car) Porsche 911sc - 96hp/l @7600rpm (Group 4 rally car) Ferrari 308gtb - 103hp/l @8000rpm (Group 4 rally car) Datsun 160J - 95hp/l @7600rpm (Group 4 rally car) Repco Brabham 740 - 115hp/l @8200rpm (1967 F1 engine) Outperforming the nissan works team by nearly 20hp/l at almost 1000 revs less... is it me or theres sarcasm in this post?........hehehhehe ......... Quote
redrbzed Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Yes, very interesting numbers. If you use the 1/4 mile exit speed (104 MPH) and car weight (2300 lb) and plug them into the Moroso power speed calculator you get a power figure of 200HP. Which I think is closer to the real value. Quote
DevilZ Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Yes, very interesting numbers. If you use the 1/4 mile exit speed (104 MPH) and car weight (2300 lb) and plug them into the Moroso power speed calculator you get a power figure of 200HP. Which I think is closer to the real value. For comparison I've got a 3.1L stroker with 6 throttle body injection and am making 165RWKW's at about 6500rpm. That figures taken from EFI Dynamics during tuning on a Dyno Dynamics dyno. The dyno wasn't in 'shoot out mode' which usually reads higher then normal. I'm running mixer style headers rather then tuned length to give better low down torque. I have a 3.7 dif ratio and the car will accelerate from 50km\h in fifth on very steep uphill roads. The car really does come on hard from around 3500-4000rpm. I'm running a 74 degree cam. Having said that my engine is very wel spec'd out and I've spent a lot of time collecting parts for it from all over the world. Having had otherfast cars like STi's and things the 165RWKW's feels very accurate. When I saw Ben's 200RWKW figure I was fairly suprised, even given that his running 3.2L and tuned length headers. To achieve 200RWKW I would have thought it would need something like a 78 degree cam and to make that power at about 8000rpm. I guess it depends on what dyno you run on and what calibration factors you have dialed in but with 200RWKW comming on at 4000rpm I would think it would be faster then a 12.8 quater mile. For comparison my friends r33 gtst ran a 13 flat with a catback exhaust, front mount, 12psi boost off a stock turbo, cusco lsd, rock solid drift suspension and bald stock tyres. I'll have to take my Z for a quater mile pass soon to compare. Quote
NZeder Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 200RWKW is doable my last 240z 3.2l had 186RWKW and I know of 3.0 with more not bad for triple carb cars either, with no EFI in sight or large cam's either I might add. Quote
DevilZ Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 200RWKW is doable my last 240z 3.2l had 186RWKW and I know of 3.0 with more not bad for triple carb cars either, with no EFI in sight or large cam's either I might add. That's because you guys in NZ do dyno runs on sheep power not horse power!!! LOL Quote
Mr240z Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 That's because you guys in NZ do dyno runs on sheep power not horse power!!! LOL Classic, But your looking for trouble..........sheep power......LOL..... Quote
NZeder Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 off topic guys and you have more sheep than us. But what is up with the brown/red colour they are our girls are nice and white Quote
redrbzed Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Just to add to this, when I first fitted the RB26 it made 210 rwkW running 15 pound boost. The car did a 11.8 second 1/4 mile at 118 MPH, and it weighed about 1200Kg with driver. So I would expect Bens car to be a little quicker given the lower weight. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.