OK. Remember Car Test? That super accurate little car simulation app? Well, I plugged in the numbers that CT gave us about the car after the SC installed. HEre is what I found:

I added 13% to the numbers that CT gave us.

HP Wheels HP Crank Torque Wheels Torque Crank
1400 53 60 199 225
1500 60 67 208 235
1600 66 75 216 245
1800 79 89 229 259
2000 90 102 236 266
2200 101 114 242 274
2400 111 125 244 276
2500 117 132 245 277
2600 122 138 247 279
2800 134 151 251 284
3000 140 158 246 278
3200 152 172 250 282
3400 163 184 252 284
3500 170 192 255 288
3600 176 199 257 291
3800 185 209 256 290
4000 192 217 252 284
4200 208 235 260 294
4400 217 245 260 293
4500 242 273 259 292
4600 266 301 258 291
4800 236 267 259 292
5000 259 293 273 308
5200 267 302 270 305
5400 274 310 266 301
5500 274 310 262 296
5600 274 310 257 291
5800 274 310 248 280
6000 276 312 242 274
6200 280 316 238 268
6400 287 324 236 266
6500 291 328 235 265
6600 294 332 234 264
6800 299 338 231 261


The best method to launch is by dumping the clutch from 1200 rpm. Times are:

0-60 in 4.93 seconds
0-100 in 12.5
1/4 mile in 13.56 at 104.9 mph
Top speed id 166 mph

Very dissapointing 1/4 mile time.

Changing the tires to 245/30/17
0-60 in 4.8 seconds
0-100 in 12.2
1/4 mile in 13.55 at 105.7 mph
Top speed lost 1 mph (more drag from tires)


And from then on, enlarging the tires would get more drag and times were worse.

 

test

 

That is V8 LS1 range..

 

Could run my Dyno with 235/40/18? just wanted to know what is my best 1/4 mile.
Thanks..

 

Numbers come out almost identical to first set of numbers. With stock tires. Interesting.

Let me restart my laptop. It wont capture any more screen shots for some reason. DOS sucks.

 

Nice job Gavrill. Wow, upper 4s !!!

 

what if we add a 50 shot of juice

 

245/30 - 17 ????

 

that is the 1/4 i expected

 

Hold on. I know what you are thinking. I am still playing around.

 

nice

 

Nice

 

"And from then on, enlarging the tires would get more drag and times were worse."

There is generally three types of losses:

1. Aerodynamic drag -- lift and drag forces on open-wheelers (Needs to be compensated for in higher speed closed fender vehicles where the high pressure from the front of the tire needs to be "managed" in regards to total underbody flow control.) (there is more, but…)

2. Coefficient of friction and loading (compound related along with contact patch area). (This will be non-linear with respect to load, but should have a static or other “qualified” value.)

3. Deformation losses of the sidewall. Given identical tires, with diameters within 1% (or so), the wider tire will have a smaller front-to-rear contact patch. As the side-to-side width increases toward infinity, the front-to-rear patch size decreases towards zero. This assumes that the diameters and total area of ground contact area remain constant. The net effect -- with an infinitely wide tire -- is to have a front-to-rear contact patch that looks like a perfectly round circle sitting on a tangent line with (single point of contact when looking from the side view).

 

Correct. Prasitic loses was what I meant to write (midnight when I was writing). :P

 

so it takes a whole second to get from 100 mph to 104 mph?

sidemarker

 

It is shifting from 3rd to 4th.

 

this is on a machine, on the street the best method is not to dump from 1200 cuz i have i/e/h and i hop until about 4500k then i get traction and shift second and spin again. The best method is to feather

 

Thats not bad...but a little dissappointing for a S/Ced CL-S. What kinda boost does the stock unit put out??? I though it was like 3-4 psi. If so, you can gain a lot of hp by swapping the pulley for a smaller one and playing with the FMU.

 

True. That is how the stock 6 speed I drove did too.

 

I think it is more like 5.5 psi but no intercooler.

 

S/Ced Maximas can run ~10 PSI without driveabilty issues. I would think the CL-S could do the same.

 

whats the compression on the max, ours is 10.5:1, high compression=low boost

 

Its close to that I believe. I cant remember the exact number though.

 

the maxima has a published c.r. of 10:1.

comptech is being conservative in their tuning of the s/c package for the honda v6s.

allow some more time for folks to get their hands on these kits and you'll almost certainly see additional perfomance wrung out. remember the max v6 has been around quite a while and forced induction options have been available for it for nearly forever in aftermarket terms, so development is quite a bit further along for those engines.

 

What if we fudge the numbers a little bit and add 15% instead of 13% to the numbers CT gave us?

Also what happened at 4600 rpm that caused torque and hp to increase so much from 4400 rpm but yet drop down again at 4800 rpm?

 

in my opinon I'd rather go with the Comptech S/C(which I know also has the Comptech Icebox)
than running a CAI(like AEM),Comptech or OBX headers and Comptech or HKS exhast.

you'll gain about 10-15 more hp if you go S/C vs CAI,header and pipe.


now I don't think the stock automatic will take the S/C and headers cause thats about 100 extra HP and it has trouble some people report with stock parts

 

the guy from comptech with the supercharged 6 speed that came to our west coast meet said that they are making an intercooler and will be out next year. then we could up the boost to 8-10psi

 

i don't know if stock pistons will take 10 lbs of boost even with a intercooler

 

I assume that is a typo: prasitic == parasitic.

The wider tires should show a lower ET and higher MPH.

 

Yes. Parasitic. Sorry. EricL, you're killing man

 

Comparing boost levels on different cars is irrelavant from what I know about forced feeding.

To figure out how much air enters the intake you need to use the cfm measurement if I remember correctly. Not psi. PSI measures pressure in a given environment. If the dimensions of that environment change, then PSI is irrelevant. So if the Maxima has a smaller overall intaka/plumbing, etc then although it runs at higher PSI, it does not necassarily mean that there is more air pushed by the SC. Scalbert, am I right?