Nissan 370Z Dynoed
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:14
280ps = 276.86whp 31.47km = 227.62 wtq 
http://coloradoautomotiveenthusiasts.com/forums/
Nissan 370Z Dynoed
http://coloradoautomotiveenthusiasts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3520
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:14
Very nice!
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:14
I'm a bit lost.. lol. Is that yours Robert? Good numbers either way!
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:14
Colombia28 wrote:I'm a bit lost.. lol. Is that yours Robert? Good numbers either way!
LOL No. Found it on the net and thought I'd share. I'm considering getting one and doing a bolt-on N/A build for a daily. Although the GTR is floating in the back of my mind also. I still have about 1.5 yrs before I buy another car for myself.
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:14
Robert_K wrote:LOL No. Found it on the net and thought I'd share. I'm considering getting one and doing a bolt-on N/A build for a daily. Although the GTR is floating in the back of my mind also. I still have about 1.5 yrs before I buy another car for myself.
Ah now it makes more sense.. lol. Another Z for a daily would be sweet. Would really make you appreciate the insane power yours has now! But a GTR would also be very cool! Hard choice.
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:14
Colombia28 wrote:Ah now it makes more sense.. lol. Another Z for a daily would be sweet. Would really make you appreciate the insane power yours has now! But a GTR would also be very cool! Hard choice.
I know! >3200lbs N/A, 330+hp RWD for $30k or 3800+lbs, TT, 480+hp AWD for $75+k.
Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:14
Only 227 torque? Are you sure that's converted right? (Not saying you did the math) If so that's a disappointment...at least the HP curve is a nice straight line though.
Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:14
My math could be wrong. 
Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:14
Ranger wrote:Only 227 torque? Are you sure that's converted right? (Not saying you did the math) If so that's a disappointment...at least the HP curve is a nice straight line though.
I don't see how that's a disappointment... the car is rated at 270 ft-lbs of torque at the crank... assuming an approximate 15% drivetrain loss, that's about in line with what I would expect on a wheel/hub dyno.
270 x 0.15= 40. 270 - 40= 230.
^^^Sounds about right to me, give or take a few ft-lbs. Just my $.02
Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:14
No, you're right, 226...oh well. I wonder if it will still feel as torque-y as the 350Z.
Edit: It's a disappointment because it has so much less torque than horsepower, while the VQ35 in the 350Z has an excellent HP to TQ ratio. Hell, my stock G35 had the same amount of torque. I mean, I know a slight displacement change isn't going to bump the HP up that much, and I know it's a higher revving motor...ah well I think I'm complaining about nothing now.
Edit: It's a disappointment because it has so much less torque than horsepower, while the VQ35 in the 350Z has an excellent HP to TQ ratio. Hell, my stock G35 had the same amount of torque. I mean, I know a slight displacement change isn't going to bump the HP up that much, and I know it's a higher revving motor...ah well I think I'm complaining about nothing now.