ALFAGTV6.COM

[kterkkila]

Here's some 80-120 results from Finnish alfa forum discussion. I thought this would be interesting for this forum also.



The values on green background are average wheel powers on the rpm range used. These are as accurate as the values used for calculation. Then the values on orange backround are estimated average engine powers, using for 20% losses. The last values with red backround are further estimations for engine peak power, estimating it's 10% over the average. These two, orange and especially red backround values have much higher uncertainty for sure. The bolded values are the most trusted stock car values.

The procedure goes like this

1. Look for as level road as possible
2. Make acceleration from 60 to 130 km/h (be sure not to broke a law..)
3. Start time at 80km/h and stop at 120km/h
4. Repeat it three times in both directions
5. If you didn't use a datalogger, then determine the driving speed error by GPS receiver in example
6. Scale your car weight in same condition, including the driver fuel all other parts

Then you can compare the time and weight to other cars on list. If I have nothing else to do, I might count your performance and add on the list someday.

[Mats]

Quite an impressive list!

Why 80-120?

[kterkkila]

It's a good compromise in many ways, but not the best for all cars. If the car have so good power to weight ratio that the 80-120 km/h goes under 5 sec, then the error on acceleration time may get too high, depending on the tools. Then I would suggest higher speeds (on closed test area of cource). Ones I calculated the power for 911 GT3, and the reasonable speed was something like from 80 to 160 km/h. The result was near to what it should be.

[la_strega_nera]

I completely wouldn't have expected a 12valve 164 to be that quick...

[kterkkila]

That jeQQ's car is faster than it should, but Sik's car is more like expected. The fast one was mine before sold it to jeQQ. It was performing so well that I checked the engine number, but it wasn't QV engine either. If I would still have it, would probably open it to see what it has eaten

[kterkkila]

Some interesting cars added to list. Please note that some of those don't fullfill all the accuracy criteries on measurement side, especially those with question mark on leftmost column..

[fastcar]

Here You can find my measure taken 2 years ago just after I have installed and initially programmed the GoTech Pro. Now I did it 13.17 but still on a moderate setup (so now maybe I'm close to the 3.2 sec marking I measured once with a GTech accelerometer).

On this chart You can find 3.42 for 80-120. My car weights 1360 kg with me on the board and one hundred less when empty. With 12" rollout the logged data covers the official timing 13.76@167 on the record and 13.77@166 in the timing system. The trap speed difference based on the fact that the official timing measures an average of the last 20 meters while the data logging uses the actual speed at the end of the quarter mile. The data measured by G-force based device corrected by an enhanced high precision GPS unit.

As You can see from the green line I was able to put 220 HP to the ground.

[kterkkila]

Chart updated. How much hp's do you expect from the engine?

[marco/hamburg]

during my first setting drive with the new Ecu 2007,
80-120 approximately 3 sec
car weight with me: 1140 kg
hp at that time astimad: 260Hp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moI9kF6MLTM



later when I was finished with the settings, the engine reached at the Dyno 280 Hp






greeting
marco

[kterkkila]

Marco, I added the result on the list, but at that speed range the accuracy of the stated time is critical. Also road inclinations and speedometer errors are important. 0.2s error in time would mean ca. 15hp here, thus higher speed range is suggested. Anyway, the car is fast