Toad's Lifeline - Saxo Cup front suspension purchased! - Page 70 - Saxperience

rushy_23 · 16th June 2009, 09:22

Just pinched that picture Toadus and stuck it on the PFC forum. They want you to come back and say HIIIIII!

Looks great btw. Amazing how much this car has come together lately.

Toad · 16th June 2009, 12:56

Chars Rush. By PFC do you mean PGTi? It's been that long since I've been on there, have they changed their name?

I'll defo go back on there. Just didn't want to turn up with a shed still after like 2 years, ha!

It's nice to get some positive comments from you Rush. You're normally tough as nails with my car. Obviously I'm doing something right for a change...

I'm going to get the front bumper re-sprayed along with the front wings. That will remove a lot of nasty chips too! I will get both front arches refitted correctly, and door dents removed at the same time. Basically, I made such a hash of the original intakes, the paint is all completely scratched, so even fitting the new posh CF intakes, I won't be able to hide the damage.

Lot's of work on the cards... New suspension just around the corner. 275lbs springs ftw!

Toad · 18th June 2009, 19:40

Just for some fun...

My car has *apparently* around 160bhp. It weighs (with no fuel) 750kg. According to www.letstorquebhp.com, it should perform something like this:

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 160
Weight without Driver (KG) : 750
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 216.76
0 - 60 (Secs) : 5.47
0 - 100 (Secs) : 14.01
60 - 100 (Secs) : 8.54
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 13.91
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 99.63
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 13.71
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 101.46

They state that their calculator is fairly accurate, to a few tenths of a second. What do you recon? Discuss...

Ashleyp · 18th June 2009, 19:44

i reckon thats a seriously nice set of figures man, would still be over 200bhp per tonne with some fuel and you?

Toad · 18th June 2009, 19:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashleyp

i reckon thats a seriously nice set of figures man, would still be over 200bhp per tonne with some fuel and you?

Thanks, but I'd need to stop a lot of this

for that to happen.

Barry123 · 18th June 2009, 19:53

Their calculator is bollocks.

Ryan^p · 18th June 2009, 19:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by adsayer

Their calculator is bollocks.

HAHA my feelings to.

Barry123 · 18th June 2009, 19:55

Errrr dude. How do propose to drive a car with no driver and no fuel???? Lol

Toad · 18th June 2009, 20:01

Remote control and fumes?

For whatever reason, their calculator doesn't want you to put the weight in with the driver. Beats me...

Toad · 18th June 2009, 20:03

Just a small point. If most VTS' with fast road cams do times around 14.6 est. With my car being 200kgs less than standard, why couldn't I do it in under 14 seconds?

Barry123 · 18th June 2009, 20:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toad

Just a small point. If most VTS' with fast road cams do times around 14.6 est. With my car being 200kgs less than standard, why couldn't I do it in under 14 seconds?

14 seconds to 100mph? or a quarter mile dude?

I thought cammed VTS were 0-100 in 18 or so seconds...

Ryan^p · 18th June 2009, 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toad

Just a small point. If most VTS' with fast road cams do times around 14.6 est. With my car being 200kgs less than standard, why couldn't I do it in under 14 seconds?

its the 0-60 where they seem miles off, not taking into account gearing/traction etc...

I mean mine is something silly like 4.85 to 60... Yeah right.

Barry123 · 18th June 2009, 20:34

right I've spent the best part of 8 or so hours putting together a Saxo Drag Simulation in Excel, if I'd realised that I only needed to consider weight and power I could've saved myself a lot of arseing about it.

I've factored in, torque profile, engine-clutch-wheel inertia, weight of car and driver and wheels, drag coefficient, frontal area, gear ratio's wheel radius, wheel drag, gear shift times, wheel circumference speed factor etc etc

Toad · 18th June 2009, 22:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by adsayer

right I've spent the best part of 8 or so hours putting together a Saxo Drag Simulation in Excel, if I'd realised that I only needed to consider weight and power I could've saved myself a lot of arseing about it.

I've factored in, torque profile, engine-clutch-wheel inertia, weight of car and driver and wheels, drag coefficient, frontal area, gear ratio's wheel radius, wheel drag, gear shift times, wheel circumference speed factor etc etc

Ok, and the results?

Barry123 · 18th June 2009, 22:35

It's wrong.

Barry123 · 18th June 2009, 22:36

actually it's spot on (100%) with top speed, acceleration is still too optimistic which I suspect is either the silly power figures mine made on the austec rollers or the inertia's are out. I'm going back to austec for the 3rd time, hopefully beginning of next month... this time make sure they do it right and give me an AFR.

Mieran · 18th June 2009, 22:37

Those figures are optimistic.

If you're heavy there is no way you can get to 60 that quick lol

Toad · 18th June 2009, 22:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

its the 0-60 where they seem miles off, not taking into account gearing/traction etc...

I mean mine is something silly like 4.85 to 60... Yeah right.

Hmm. 0 - 60 is always going to the most useless figure as it's so dependant on traction.

Predator_R32^p · 18th June 2009, 22:38

Finally seen your car in the flesh at FCS hotel, must say she looks so sweet

Toad · 18th June 2009, 22:41

If I change the weight on that calculator tool to my standard weight, I get these results:

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 160
Weight without Driver (KG) : 950
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 171.12
0 - 60 (Secs) : 6.45
0 - 100 (Secs) : 17.01
60 - 100 (Secs) : 10.56
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 14.89
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 93.57
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 14.69
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 95.23

That's about normal isn't it? I don't feel you guys are giving the weight difference its recognition perhaps?