Bitching about a 4g in a 3000GT

[IPD]

600hp in a 3500lb car...is slow. I'm easily over 650whp and over 700wtq in a 3200lb car and I consider that slow. Cars are coming with 500-600hp from the factory these days. 600 just isn't a lot anymore.

600+WHP in a RWD car is just stupid. Unless you've dedicated it to doing nothing but being at the track all day long, that's a stupidly high HP figure for putting through 2 wheels. I can only assume you are talking about your C6 (that was the last car in a LONG line of them that I saw you buy)...in which case, I stand by my statement.

600 AWHP in a 3500lbs car isn't slow at all. 650RWHP in 3200lbs is only slow because you can't race from less than 50MPH.

[AudibleSilence]

600+WHP in a RWD car is just stupid. Unless you've dedicated it to doing nothing but being at the track all day long, that's a stupidly high HP figure for putting through 2 wheels. I can only assume you are talking about your C6 (that was the last car in a LONG line of them that I saw you buy)...in which case, I stand by my statement.

600 AWHP in a 3500lbs car isn't slow at all. 650RWHP in 3200lbs is only slow because you can't race from less than 50MPH.

That's what drag radials are for...

Can't race from less than 50mph with 6xxrwhp eh? That doesn't make sense...there are plenty of 600-1,000rwhp cars that are daily driven (at least here in Texas). I don't race from a dig because it would simply stress out my drivetrain. I "could" but eh..

What does it matter, my car is slow....because sub 7xxwhp isn't much anymore.

p.s. This is Rene's car:



It makes 1,444RWHP ... Enjoy.

[familyMAN]

I didn't fail to understand the RPM/Trans post, I didn't get why he thought he needed to rev a 6G that high to make power. If he was talking about the 4G then sure, it needs to rev that high to make equivalent power. Personally my car shifts into 4th and 5th on a flat out run and I cringe every time. It went into 5th at 160...I puckered.

Like I said man, I think it's a cool swap but I think in terms of performance it's going to be meh.

It's not that you have to rev the 6g to make power. The point was being made by someone was related to auto drag racing. If you make a ton of power at 6 or 7k in a 6g auto you'll have the power to trap say 145mph but you'll need ~9000 rpms to get you there in 3rd or some monster 28" tires.

[AudibleSilence]

It's not that you have to rev the 6g to make power. The point was being made by someone was related to auto drag racing. If you make a ton of power at 6 or 7k in a 6g auto you'll have the power to trap say 140mph but you'll need 8500 rpms to get you there in 3rd or some monster 28" tires.

Why wouldn't you just run a bit more tire, upgrade the valvetrain, and reset the shift points in the ecu?

[mehrshadvr4]

6g72 reves to 8500 no problem. Maybe not with the shitty crank but Matt reved his car to 8500rpm with that massive stroker. He could do 9k rpm but the trans won't shift. How do you think Nelson trapped 170mph with 26" tires?

[donniekak]

Alan is free to do what he wants..it's his forum. I am not displeased with moderation when it is fair. To only keep the "Cool build bro!" posts and kill any post about the performance (positives and negatives) is basically bullshit. But oh well. This platform has been dying for a while, I think the fact that someone made a 3s into a DSM is the final nail in the coffin.



I didn't fail to understand the RPM/Trans post, I didn't get why he thought he needed to rev a 6G that high to make power. If he was talking about the 4G then sure, it needs to rev that high to make equivalent power. Personally my car shifts into 4th and 5th on a flat out run and I cringe every time. It went into 5th at 160...I puckered.

Like I said man, I think it's a cool swap but I think in terms of performance it's going to be meh.

It's an AUTOMATIC! He has 3 gears to use under power. He needs high rpm if he wants to go fast. His 6g72 build he pulled out was AUTOMATIC.

Just for reference. I raced a built stroker gsxr1000 in an auto, and was even with him at the 1/8, now on the back end, he put some distance on me.

For people that don't know about racing. When you set up a 1/4 mile car, you want the gearing, and power to max out, right at the traps. If your car has enough power to trap 140, gear it so you hit the limiter at 141.

[AudibleSilence]

6g72 reves to 8500 no problem. Maybe not with the shitty crank but Matt reved his car to 8500rpm with that massive stroker. He could do 9k rpm but the trans won't shift. How do you think Nelson trapped 170mph with 26" tires?

[Chris@Rvengeperformance]

you guys read the internet too much if you think it is easy to make power at 9000-10000 on a 6G series engine. Nelson is pretty much the only one making power beyond 9000. There just has not be enough R&D. It isn't as simple as getting the engine to turn that fast.

[Chris@Rvengeperformance]

1) You don't know what my standards are...so don't speak as if you do.
2) The R34 GT-R is a big girl, but she also had one of the most sophisticated AWD systems ever put into a production car to make up for it. This car doesn't. How you put the power down is just as important as how and when you make it.
3) We could compare torque curves in the RB20 vs. the 4G for shits and giggles. No...wait...I don't actually care enough to.



No, but there's a reason so many people do... No one said he said the 6G engine was crap, if anything these DSM fanbois have been the ones saying that. I and a few others just think this doesn't make sense from a pure performance aspect.

It's a smaller engine with a less favorable torque curve in a heavier car than what it was built for. From a pure "Wow he did it" point of view that's pretty cool! From a "I wanna go fast point of view" no...no this is actually the reverse of what you should do.



600hp in a 3500lb car...is slow. I'm easily over 650whp and over 700wtq in a 3200lb car and I consider that slow. Cars are coming with 500-600hp from the factory these days. 600 just isn't a lot anymore.

I don't really care what your standards are, I'm just using the R34 as an example of a small displacement heavy car performing well. You have posted a few times that I can remember in the last few years and just about every post I've seen is to bash someone or post an animated gif. I'm not sure why you feel you are the authority on everything 3/s related because you've sold a lot of them.

[AudibleSilence]

I don't really care what your standards are, I'm just using the R34 as an example of a small displacement heavy car performing well. You have posted a few times that I can remember in the last few years and just about every post I've seen is to bash someone or post an animated gif. I'm not sure why you feel you are the authority on everything 3/s related because you've sold a lot of them.

It's usually because some old school member points me in this direction as part of a "what the f!?!" kind of deal, which was the case here. I don't recall bashing anyone, nor do I recall you having such thin skin. Sorry you have a problem with me, but it really is YOUR problem.


On the R34, it's not an apples to apples comparison. The GT-R historically makes great power and has a sophisticated 4WD (*edit) system to make up for the added weight. It was a poor example on your part.