Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Just wanted to say well done to Andy Nicholls (ANR) for his 2x 10 sec 1/4s today at Santa Pod.
He may have done more than this, but I only saw 4 runs - one was 15 odd due to him getting a by, and one was 14 something when he had a problem in the final. The other 2 were solid 10s (10.8 IIRC)
Any car making 10s 1/4s is mightily impressive, but a FWD car doing it...
Nice one.
I think there a few fast VW Golf's in Europe running in the 10's! The Storm developments R32 engined mk2 is running around 650bhp, so that has to be a fast runner when tested id say!
Yeah, i mean in terms of outright power, running 147 terminals needs pretty much 1000bhp(whether thats with or without gas). Its then harnessing that power.
Yeah, its more the terminals that impress me. 147 mph!!! crazy fast
When you look at last yrs TOTB winners with their quoted hp figures against terminal speed, that Civic must have alot of power:
A Paul Johnson Fiesta RS Turbo 11.86s 124mph 450hp
B Dee Ireland Calder Toyota Supra Turbo 10.62s 139mph 900+ hp
C Keith Cowie Skyline R32 GTR 9.40s 156mph 1000+ hp
MarkCoupe wrote:Nah, 147 mph is way way over 650. Andy was doing circa 140s at 700hp+200gas
It is definitely not over 700hp PLUS gas!!
The turbo he is running is not big enough to flow over 700hp.
It's close though.
The revs allowing near enough 11k when needed will certainly make use of the large turbo.
An awesome piece of kit, but he seems to be having issues with his new box. He's warped a few block too.
Mightly impressive, a thinner driver would probably help somewhat though, without trying to be nasty.
K series headgasket repair from £270
ZR T16 turbo conversion from £870
ZS 180 Timing belts, water pump and thermostat housing from £535
MOT and service £80 www.AMWmotorsport.co.uk
bendjunkie wrote:
The revs allowing near enough 11k when needed will certainly make use of the large turbo.
11k?
Whoever told you that?
The turbo in it doesn't - IMO - flow enough to run over 700hp.
If it takes 11k to make 700hp then it is making very poor use of it!
bendjunkie wrote:
The revs allowing near enough 11k when needed will certainly make use of the large turbo.
11k?
Whoever told you that?
The turbo in it doesn't - IMO - flow enough to run over 700hp.
If it takes 11k to make 700hp then it is making very poor use of it!
We have it on good authority that it revs to 11,000rpm. IMO I think Andy is almost at the peak of fwd 1/4 mile ability. Although I hope when he finally gets to grips with the new box he can break into the 9's. It makes you wonder though how hard it must be pilot that thing to a 10's 1/4,as having driven a few rwd cars capable of 13's 1/4's a few years back was a handful so his must be a nightmare. and +1 with Bendjunkie a slimmer driver would be good for at least 1 second.
Microcheck facilty available for all Rovers call call 07594171330
bendjunkie wrote:
The revs allowing near enough 11k when needed will certainly make use of the large turbo.
11k?
Whoever told you that?
The turbo in it doesn't - IMO - flow enough to run over 700hp.
If it takes 11k to make 700hp then it is making very poor use of it!
We have it on good authority that it revs to 11,000rpm. IMO I think Andy is almost at the peak of fwd 1/4 mile ability. Although I hope when he finally gets to grips with the new box he can break into the 9's. It makes you wonder though how hard it must be pilot that thing to a 10's 1/4,as having driven a few rwd cars capable of 13's 1/4's a few years back was a handful so his must be a nightmare. and +1 with Bendjunkie a slimmer driver would be good for at least 1 second.
That authority being Andy himself no doubt.
That means it will pull 2nd gear to over 100mph, 3rd to 147mph (so only 1 gear change needed).
Also, do you know the maximum piston speed at 11000rpm when a 2.0 engine is taken into consideration? I do!
Let's just say that with a piston that could take boost and gas we would be picking bits of Rover 200 up for weeks.
Sorry, but no way.
Some of the most efficient 2.0 Turbo engines don't rev that high with massively more efficient heads than the T16.
bendjunkie wrote:
The revs allowing near enough 11k when needed will certainly make use of the large turbo.
11k?
Whoever told you that?
The turbo in it doesn't - IMO - flow enough to run over 700hp.
If it takes 11k to make 700hp then it is making very poor use of it!
I never said it goes to 11k through ever gear, nor did I say it hit 700bhp, and certainly didn't say it needed the revs to make the power, but yes, then engine is capableof hitting the revs, working for AET turbo's I'm sure the turbo will be perfect for the job he intends it for. He's moved on to a dog box now I believe, so the gears could be anything, knowing andy, these will have been custom too. The engine uses a 1 off set pistons, 1off set of rods and a 1off crank as well as some 1off cams designed specifically for the job. There's not much of this car that's an off the shelf item from any supplier, or even a modified version of their design.
K series headgasket repair from £270
ZR T16 turbo conversion from £870
ZS 180 Timing belts, water pump and thermostat housing from £535
MOT and service £80 www.AMWmotorsport.co.uk
vi turbo wrote:well as said in my opinion if you have to rev it to 11k to get 700hp its not very efficient
i would have gone down the 4g63 route on a 2.3 stroker kit and gt42r and think they rev them to 8500 and make more than 700hp
it would have been alot cheaper
john
But then you have to realise the longer stroke crank makes for higher piston speed. Keeping the stroke short and increasing the bore is better for this kind of use, but then you risk bore warp, but when the car is trailered to the strip, it's the least of worries. Remember, it's not all about the peak power, it's about using the power and spreading the power in the most efficient way for the job, raising the rev limit will allow the large turbo to be spooled up and in the power band, with selected lower gearing this would make use of first gear, ready for second to kick in.
BANG, off he goes.
K series headgasket repair from £270
ZR T16 turbo conversion from £870
ZS 180 Timing belts, water pump and thermostat housing from £535
MOT and service £80 www.AMWmotorsport.co.uk
Some important points to note:
-I suspect it is NOT a longer stroke crank. I have my reasons for this, and I suspect you would think the same if you gave it some consideration.
-Certain other engines with less room between bores and much higher HP outputs (and lighter blocks) don't suffer "warp"
-The car in question is launched in 2nd gear.
-11k RPM is seriously unlikely - again, consider piston acceleration and relative forces on bearings/journals. Unless the pistons are carbon, this is almost certainly NOT true.
I said a shorted stroke.
He has suffered block warp before. Fact.
Are you sure your not on about his old box? Tbh, I don't know much about his new box. That's why I didn't state any gearing as fact. He's even after trying to get a triple plate clutch in there, this may well be reason behind the new box with custom shafts.
Grant, I am only passing on infomation, argue with it as you may, he's still going to beat you down the strip. :-p
K series headgasket repair from £270
ZR T16 turbo conversion from £870
ZS 180 Timing belts, water pump and thermostat housing from £535
MOT and service £80 www.AMWmotorsport.co.uk
Also, grant, we know of an exhaust maker who makes manifolds for bike engines (I can't remember which bikes, possibly CBR's) with T3 turbo flanges, that supposedly push upwards of 700bhp (with/without nos). I'll get some more info of the revs involved.
K series headgasket repair from £270
ZR T16 turbo conversion from £870
ZS 180 Timing belts, water pump and thermostat housing from £535
MOT and service £80 www.AMWmotorsport.co.uk
