A&Q about 350Z
Q:
Guys are from MS by the way.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
Post Edited (Jan 8, 12:42pm)
A:
that z is cut.
A:
I've only ridden in 2 cars that had 600hp+, and neither of them took very long to get to 150mph+, especially from a roll. I don't see how a 600hp 350z wouldn't dominate a neon high end on the basis of superior aerodynamics alone. From a dead stop, whole different ball game, but from a 45 roll they have to be hitting 130-140 in the 10 seconds or so they race.
19[TT]91
My TT beauty is gone.
2[00]2 Honda 954RR
Suzuki 1200 S; sportscar eater
19[I4]94 Integra GSR Sedan
Long live the Z...
aka SAHTT
A:
check this one out... 350z halfway through
A:
Zlover easily because thats a 500+whp neon thats lighter then the 350z by about 400lbs.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
cville, I would have guessed that. However, aerodynamic efficiency does not have weight as a variable. If it did, sportbikes would do 280mph instead of barely hitting 180mph with 180hp. Just HP [no tq] vs drag.
19[TT]91
My TT beauty is gone.
2[00]2 Honda 954RR
Suzuki 1200 S; sportscar eater
19[I4]94 Integra GSR Sedan
Long live the Z...
aka SAHTT
A:
So until 100, maybe even 120 [like a drag race], the neon's at best mediocre aero's vs the z's excellet ones wouldn't be too much of an issue, but that relationship literally increases in importance at an exponential rate the faster the cars go.
19[TT]91
My TT beauty is gone.
2[00]2 Honda 954RR
Suzuki 1200 S; sportscar eater
19[I4]94 Integra GSR Sedan
Long live the Z...
aka SAHTT
A:
Oh ok I got where you're comming from now. But, looking into the drag coefficients for the two cars might be a good idea cause the SRT 4 was missfiring the whole race due to spark blowout. So the 350z might have won this time around but when round three happens in a couple days or so id be putting my money on the neon. So whats that say about aerodynamics? It says one of two things actually they arent as important as people think in a 45-130ish mph race or the neon has better aerodynamics then givien credit for.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
Drag coefficient for the neon .35
Drag coefficient for the 350z .30
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
Does the SRT have a better DC than a regular one? With them being that close, it isn't that crucial except for maybe a top speed test.
19[TT]91
My TT beauty is gone.
2[00]2 Honda 954RR
Suzuki 1200 S; sportscar eater
19[I4]94 Integra GSR Sedan
Long live the Z...
aka SAHTT
A:
Yeah I guess the SRT has a much better DC then the regular one. You put the DC's pretty close put the HP kinda close and then factor in the weight difference it makes for a good run.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
That Z aint 615, what bs
A:
Actually grazehell it is.
EDIT: and for fun grazehell how do you know its not?
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
Post Edited (Jan 8, 2:51pm)
A:
If I heard right in the video, it said the 350Z was pulling 24 psi with TTs?
Vinny Ten's 350Z runs 33 psi of boost in a stock bodied (3000 lb.) 350Z. It had apprxox 1500 whp an they are using 325/50/15 BFG drag radials.. back in Oct. 2004. I posted a video on this website where it ran a qtr. time of a 8.33 @176 mph...on a wet track. The 350 Z broke loose waaaay down the track, got out of it's lane, almost hits the wall in the other lane, but still ran a 8.4 sec. qtr mile.
A 350Z should pull more than 615 whp at 24 psi. with a good TT setup. APS TT 350Zs with 16 psi pull 700 wheel hp - over 800 hp at the engine. Something does not quite add up correctly here.
A:
Ever thought about the size of the turbos being used? 300zxTT's at 16psi would be pulling about 340-360rwhp. Now tell me going by your theory that isnt possible but thats the way it works. Not everyone uses the same size turbos. For gods sake people the video isnt some BS drawn up by people.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
if that Z was 615hp and so lame then that SRT4 was a jiga watt of hp and had a flux capacitor then?
A:
Grazehell, ahh whats wrong cant take it that maybe some 4 bangers make power to? Dear god havent you read anything in this thread that SRT4 Neon has over 500hp not to mention the fact it weighs less and oh yeah need I remind you even if it was stock for stock that Neon would roast the 350z. Now go crawl back under your rock rejoin your little world of "no way possible can a 4 banger keep up with a 600hp 350z." You would probably die if I showed you a Honda running a 10sec 1/4mile wouldnt you?
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
Post Edited (Jan 8, 3:33pm)
A:
cville300zx are you a ricer??
1986 silver 300ZX,nothing done to it........yet
A:
Yeah im a ricer. Gah you caught me.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
cville300zx I did not bring up anything about a "4 banger" you ricer retard. I said the SRT 4 has a flux capacitor and I accept the fact that it will beat anything.
A:
LOL, dude I posted a video said what the two cars had and you cant except the fact the neon kept up. You obviously dont understand sarcasim either cause the last thing I am is a ricer. Now a 500+hp SRT4 vs a 615hp 350z is a good run thats all it boils down to. The fact you cant believe a 500+hp SRT4 can keep up with a 615HP 350z just shows your ignorance its simple power to weight ratio elementary crap. Id except that from a Fbody guy but not a Zowner.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
EDIT: double post.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
Post Edited (Jan 8, 3:41pm)
A:
you see that 350z did not even put up much of a fight(sorry it did not). If it was something like weight I am expecting to see the 350z get walked but the srt after just took off right before the video ends.
A:
What do you mean the 350z beat the SRT4 the second run. So I dont see how thats not putting up a fight. The first run its obvious he let out of it.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
read that again I did not say the 350Z beat the srt4!!!!!!!!! I said in other words the 350Z put up a lame fight going up against a car that was less hp(if you say the SRT4 was 500hp) and less heavy. I was expecting to see them neck on neck and then the SRT4 starts pulling away but at the end of the video the SRT4 just seems to take off.
A:
I said the 350z beat the SRT4 because it did. The SRT4 pulled away at the end because the 350z let off. When you let out of the gas at about 130mph and another car going almost the same speed is sitll accelerating they seem to fly past you.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
jelly beans are overrated.
A:
Exactly, jelly bellys are better.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
Is it just me or is the 350Z detonating like crazy right after each upshift?
-- Next Up: SCCA ITR 300ZX --
A:
yea. that motor will last about a day.
A:
>Guys are from MS by the way.
Is that Minnesota?
A:
Nah Mississippi but I said that I was going off of the location of my friend who knows these guys, correct that to theyre in FL but damn close to MS.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
No, I think it is Mississippi.
-Zanioed '03 Le Mans Sunset Touring Coupe w/ Nav.
A:
>APS TT 350Zs with 16 psi pull 700 wheel hp - over 800 hp at the engine
With just the APS kit? I think these numbers are totally wacked wrong.. I don't know of any turbo car that pulls 800 crank hp at 16 psi, except maybe a twin turbo F50 (a la Carmack), but the displacement is much higher than a VQ.
A:
FOR THE LAST TIME [jk, there will be many more times]
THE SAME PSI IN A DIFFERENT TURBO SETUP CAN CREATE C-O-M-P-L-E-T-E-L-Y DIFFERENT HORSEPOWER LEVELS.
I don't like using all caps, but this is exceptionally irritating.
PSI DOESN'T MEAN SH*T FOR OUTPUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There are evo's and civics boosting 40psi barely making 400hp!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
19[TT]91
My TT beauty is gone.
2[00]2 Honda 954RR
Suzuki 1200 S; sportscar eater
19[I4]94 Integra GSR Sedan
Long live the Z...
aka SAHTT
A:
^^and that is a true story
93 z32 convertible=pearl white, 5 speed
jwt pop-charger, hks hypers, asp underdrive pulley
86 z31 na=super white, 5 speed
A:
No I said APS TT 350Zs can run that kind (800 engine HP) of power. I did not say that they had only the TT kit and nothing else for that power level. For that power level you have to maximize air flow all the way through the engine and get rid of all major air restriction bottle necks. As I will describe below. I have posted about this before. Nothing new. Although a good many are running well over 500 wheel horsepower which translates to over 600 hp at engine with the APS TT kit and several accessories on stock engine internals. Those accessories would be the APS exhaust, APS plenum, and APS test pipes. Tuan at GRD has been running well over 500 wheel hp which is well over 600 engine hp for about 30,000 miles now with no problemos. As have others.
I am going to stay conservative with at about 450 to 500 wheel hp which is about 540 to approx. 602 engine hp at 11.5 psi with the APS TT kit, 2.5 inch exhaust and test pipes, and APS Tall boy plenum. I will stay with the stock engine internals till I can afford to build the bottom of the engine and go for bigger power. My beefing up my tranny project took longer than expected - winter set in at my installer, Genesis Racing Development near Chicago, so now I will try to get there when the weather eases in late March or early April.
There is a lot more in the standard APS TT kit itself than just TTs. The stock kit includes the APS Twin High Flow Cold Air Intake System, a much upgraded fuel system with hi performance fuel pump, larger fuel injectors, and fuel return system. It also includes a massive intercooler. Add to that in the kit are a unichip engine management system that piggybacks our ECU, shielded crank angle sensor wire, and oversize oil pan with cooling vents. And of course the newest technology Garrett GT series twin ball bearing, oil lubricated, and water cooled turbochargers. These babies are capable of 41 lbs of air per minute each or 82 lbs of air per minute combined if you turn them lose to 16 psi. And they are billed, by Garrett, as the fastest spooling turbos on the planet. Boost is strong from 2500 rpms on.
The APS twin turbos flow enough air to get you to 800 flywheel hp at 16 psi. To get to 800 engine hp, first of all APS recommends that you go with better forged pistons and rods if going above 400 hp to the wheels for max engine longevity. The engine build does not give more power, just a stronger bottom end of the engine for forced induction. Having said that, note as written above, many are going well beyond 500 wheel hp on stock 350Z engine internals. But anyway, specifically to get to the 800 hp. That is the kit, which includes in the kit more than just TTs as noted above. And add to the kit also APS tall boy plenum, 2.5 inch true dual exhaust, and 2.5 inch test pipes. And add to that cams, and some head work. At somewhere around 700 engine hp, APS recommends upgrading the fuel system further still, which they have available. Read about how that upgraded fuel system hooks into the hi performance plenum at the website below.
Better still for that kid of power it would be better to substitute the brand new monster APS 3 inch exhaust and 3.5 inch test pipes instead of the 2.5 inch exhaust and test pipes above. The 2.5 inch exhaust and test pipes are part of the package to 800 hp, but if you are going for that much power, I would go with the new monster 3 inch exhaust and 3.5 inch test pipes.
Note on the website below, at the bottom of the page it says, "...the twin turbochargers utilized in the APS Intercooled Twin Turbo system deliver superior low to mid RPM engine power but with a higher power potential of up to 800 flywheel horsepower ". Up near the top of that same page it states that "In fact, with a built engine, how about 800 hp air flow capacity at just 16 psi of turbocharger boost pressure!"
Note that Vinny Ten is getting like 1500 hp to the wheels on his stock bodied 350Z drag car which has lot of the 350Z engine stock. Even the plenum is the stock 350Z plenum! He told me that personally; that is not heresay. He has different pistons and rods (Carrillo H Beam) and is running 30 to 33 psi boost with twin turbos. I posted his video on this website just over a year ago. I am sure you have heard of Vinny Ten, the famous Mr. Supra, who now builds 350Z engines. He is arguably the best import engine builder in the country. I’ll post a bit of his resume if you want or check google.
Post Edited (Jan 8, 11:08pm)
A:
z32dood, I think I know which post you are talking about. For the first 90% of it, there were posts with complex equations figuring out the relationship, with your thinking in mind. However, in the end, it was decided in my favor. I'm not going to redo all of it but I believe the missing link was the actual velocity of the air in the system. Same temps, same actual PSI, but larger turbos create more velocity. That is the simple explanation anyhow.
I don't need to explain it because I know I'm right. Unlike most, I have firsthand experience dealing with it many, many times. We'd take the exact same car and only replace the turbo. Not even adjust the fuel, and the bigger [that's a lazy way of putting the turbo that produces more power] turbo produces more power at a lower PSI. Honda guys aren't near as finicky as z32 guys, because their entire junkyard setup consists of a couple grand in easy to replace junk yard parts.
19[TT]91
My TT beauty is gone.
2[00]2 Honda 954RR
Suzuki 1200 S; sportscar eater
19[I4]94 Integra GSR Sedan
Long live the Z...
aka SAHTT
A:
In air-breathing propulsion, the highest efficiency powerplants move "large" quantities of air at "low" speeds. These are relative generalizations, but they get the point across.
A turbojet is a high performance aircraft engine that moves relatively small amounts of air at extremely high velocities. A turboprop uses a turbojet as its power source, but moves large quantities of air at lower speeds with the turbojet driving a large propeller that moves the air. A turboprop is much more efficient than a turbojet.
A turbocharger that moves a certain amount of air at lower boost pressure will be more efficient than a turbocharger that moves the same amount of air at higher pressure. With higher turbocharger efficiency comes higher potential engine power for a given engine.
As a made up example, that is why "bigger" more efficient turbochargers allow 500 HP to be made at 15 psi, while "smaller" less efficient turbos allow 500 HP to be made at 25 psi. Maybe that helps the discussion a little.
-- Next Up: SCCA ITR 300ZX --
A:
Hi zlover57. No my post was in response to z32dOOd wanting more info about how 16 psi got to 800 flywheel hp. Not anything you'd said. And the answer is yeah, it takes a LOT of air flow work in addition to the turbochargers to get to 800 hp. ANY and all bottle necks in air flow from the air filter to the gases coming out of the exhaust tip have to be eliminated or greatly reduced to get to that kind of power. I am going no where near than power level anytime soon, whew!
No I made a comment about the 24 psi in the 350Z in the video making 615 hp (don't remember if it said it was wheel vs. flywheel hp) not being a lot for 24 psi. I meant that the turbos must not be sized optimally, and or they were out of their efficiency range, and or all the other restrictions in the air flow from the intake to the exhaust were not being properly addressed. Which is why I made the comment, as an exampe, that properly set up, an APS twin turbo system can make 800 engine hp in a 350Z at only 16 psi. It is because of the massive 82 lb per minute air flow these turbos provide at 16 psi along with all other restrictions from the intake to the exhaust being properly addressed. Actually I am not saying their results are bad, 615 hp is a lot of power, I'm just saying it can be done better. I think most of us are saying the same thing about more air flow equals more power rather than just going by the psi.
I agree with you Z32dOOd, cmcniel, and others who discuss that psi is not nearly as important as air flow for forced induction. That is why I talk about the APS turbos in terms of 82 lb per minute air flow instead of psi as much. Of course psi is a good rule of thumb, but it is like most of you are saying, the amount of air you are flowing is what creates power. Not how much pressure it is under.
This is very simplistic, but I think it makes a good and relevant point. It is kinda like a garden hose. You can have a big garden hose and lets say it is flowing a lot of water but at a pretty weak pressure as you might expect. Now let's put a smaller spout at the end of the hose and make it shoot the water out the end of the hose with a lot more pressure. Hell you can then spray the water out a long way because it is under more pressure or psi. But when you do that, the total water flow is LESS through the hose. I can remember at the age of 5 my older teenaged brother won a bet in proving that to me. Now lets put an even smaller spout at the end of the hose. Guess what, we can now spray the water even farther because it is under more psi. But again, the total flow of water is actually less than the larger spout which had less psi and a lot less than the original water flow through the hose with no spout which also had even less psi. More psi in one setup resulted in less water flow compared to another setup with less psi. It is the total air flow in forced induction that helps you make more power when you add in more gas at the correct A/F ratio.
Post Edited (Jan 9, 12:50pm)
A:
Here is a real world example of my last post from 1991. When I had my old mitsu eclipse turbo. Ok, at first, I put on the HKS electronic valve controller that let me run the pure stock turbo from the stock boost of 11 psi up to 15 psi. That is all I did at that time except I also added the HKS max flow exhaust. With just those 2 changes my hp at the flywheel went up from 195 hp stock(11 psi) to approx. 250 hp (15 psi). That felt real good and was very noticeable. That took me from very low 15 second qtr mile times down to about 14.4 sec. with the same awd launch. Pretty cool at the time. This was back in 1991. But pretty soon it felt slow as $hit!. So I got the HKS programmed fuel computer which allowed me to control the fuel injectors under boost and I kept the same stock fuel injectors. Now there is no point in running more boost at that point with my factory mitsu turbo. That (15 psi) was the top of its efficiency range. Yes, you can run more psi with it, but you are not gaining any more hp and you are really just over spooling the turbo and heating up the air more and you'll run a bit slower under more psi. And you will destroy your turbo pretty damn quick. So no point in running more than 15 psi . What to do? You want more airflow. So at that point I had the factory turbo modified to what turbo performance center (an HKS Pro Series dealer) called a "max flow turbo" upgrade to the turbo. Same turbine wheel but a larger compressor wheel. And other things in the turbo were modified to get more air flow through the housing and such. Most of you are thinking, good move but the larger compressor wheel will give you more turbo lag and that is BAD. Wrong, the upgrade did a lot of things to get the turbo to spool up quicker, including ball bearings and perfectly balancing the turbo. Most of the things done, turbo performance center would not tell you because they were a trade secret. So I got more psi, more air flow at the same psi, FASTER spool up, and a much higher turbo efficiency range. Only now at this point did it help to bore out the NON metered part of the mass air sensor for more flow. I did this myself to strict specs from HKS while the turbo was being upgraded 10 feet away. The end result was more airflow through the (unmetered part of the) mass air sensor, more flow through the turbo which was upgraded so that it's efficiency range was now up to 22 psi. Whew! And the HKS programmed fuel computer piggy backed onto the factory ecu to control air fuel ratio. I had the correct chip inside it for the max flow turbo, modified air mass sensor, and the factory fuel injectors. So I also had to pull it apart and set this channel to open, that channel closed, this button to “on” that button to “off” ect. ect. according to what HKS stated for my setup. Then there was a dial that we used to slightly richen and lean out the system for fine tuning.
Ok now with this setup, I was running approx. 325 to 340 flywheel hp at 20 psi. that translated to consistent 13.2 sec. qtr. mile times at 103 mph (the awd gives you a terrific launch, but a slower top end in the qtr. as most of you know).
My point in all this is: With the factory turbo, I got more power going up from stock 11 psi to 15 psi to the tune of 55 more hp. I could have run it up to 20 psi, but that would have resulted in LESS power because the air flow through the turbo and the whole system was restrictive and outside the stock turbo's efficiency range. So at 20 psi I would have flowed a little more air but MUCH hotter air (more hot less dense air equals less power) with the result of getting LESS than 250 hp and burning up my stock turbo as a side effect. I did not do that for obvious reasons. BUT, instead, with the right modifications to increase air flow at the MAS and the turbo, and the turbo upgrade itself, I could run the same 20 psi and get 325 to 340 hp. Same 20 psi both times, but up to 90 more hp. Why? Because the air flow was much more and cooler (more dense) in the latter even though the 20 psi was the same for both. My qtr. times dropped from 14.4 sec to 13.2 sec. Top end in the qtr. went form 96 or 97 mph to 103 mph. Same 20 psi boost in both cases but far different results from the same 20 psi. In real world terms, running a 13.2 sec. qtr. separates you from a whole lot of cars compared to a 14.4 sec. qtr. back in 1991. Gosh the stock Corvettes back then had 245 hp. The stock mustang GTs had 215 to something like 225 hp. I had 100 (or more) greater hp, better traction (awd), and less weight than the stock mustang, camaros, and corvettes. The Mustangs, Camaros, and Corvettes that previously - when I was pure stock - that were competitive with me or beating me....I could now spot them a couple of lights at the drag strip and let them jump off the line first. I could then launch after they did, overtake them from behind, and then pass and leave them for dead. 1.2 sec. faster is an eternity in a drag race and a whole different kettle of beans, altogether.
The same air flow principles apply to our 350Zs and forced induction. But the turbos are much more advanced now than in the early 90s. First thing we did at turbo performance center back then, was upgrade the Z32 TTs similarly to my turbo upgrade. As most of you know, Z32 TTs could be, were, and still are modified into fire breathing monsters! My friend had a Z32 TT back in 1991 that we modified similarly to my 340 HP turbo eclipse. I could jump him off the line with the awd, and stay ahead easily through 2 nd gear. When the Z32 TT and I hit 3rd gear and the boost spiked, the Z32 TT caught me and left me for dead. He was mid 12s and I was low 13s. Hey, the Z32 TT was what I wanted, but could not afford at the time, alas. When yer hot yer hot!
Post Edited (Jan 9, 1:05pm)
A:
I think we are all basically in agreement that air flow per minute is a lot more important to power output than psi with forced induction, but we are just saying it in different ways.
A:
>air flow per minute is a lot more important to power output than psi with forced induction
Agreed. Someone pointed out to me that there is a book called "Maximum Boost" that discusses these very points, and is "the bible" on turbocharging.
A:
More Power: makes sense to me... thx...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Chrome Silver '03 Touring -MT-
C.F. Nismo Wing
Shorty Antenna (Stolen!!! Thanks alot!)
Kicker Solo Baric L7 1200w
I don't think, I know...
Well, I don't think you know either
A:
To think great tech information came from a street racing video. Suprised no one commented about the 350z's A/F ratio though.
Currently parting out 1990 300zx TT.
A:
I could try but I can't guarantee it.
"All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence and then success is sure,"Mark Twain.
A:
Hey zlover57 and staticivi03, thanks for the support. I've learned a lot from you guys as well. Tire/wheel combos and offsets drive me nuts sometimes. Among other things I need tech advice on.
Post Edited (Jan 11, 10:03am)