cobalt

They are autos, what a shame.

mark kibort

this is normal. 100% of max torque, doesnt matter. its as close to 100% of the max hp is what you want. forget about torque. youre not looking at the right torque number anyway, as that is only found if you look at vehicle speed and gear ratios. did you mean to say, that if you climb to high in the rpms you loose torque or what you said, Power???? the correct answer should be loosing torque, which is ok. if torque falls at a 45 degree angle on the curve, HP is flat. (did you know this?) You want to be at max or near max hp for as much of the time as possible.

so, the you may be at max torque at 3500rpm (call it 450ftlbs x 3500rpm, which is 300hp) this means to the wheels, in 3rd gear (call it 4.2:1 or something) 1890ftlbs. while if you put it in 2nd gear 5.9:1 you could get 2360ft-lbs at only 400ftlbs at the engine at 5000rpm and 380hp.
its not that complicated, just a lot of multiplication. the point is, in this case, not dropping down a gear cost you 20-25 % of your acceleration forces!

so, you dont "loose " power if you climb into the rpms and get close ,or closer to max HP. you always will win, even though intuitively, you may think you wont.

something to consider next time!

MK

Jim Nowak

HP = tq * RPM/5252. Torque is the only number that matters. HP is just a measure of torque at a given rpm. Of course, gearing is a torque multiplier and does help with acceleration.

blau928

hey randy,

kill this thread before these guys start going at it again...! quick...!

cobalt

You most likely are correct. It has been a long day and I am not thinking clearly. ALthough it has always been argued that the torque is what gets the car moving and the hp is what gives you top end.

I achieve max hp at 5200 rpm and it falls off 10% to redline. Max torque is achieved at 3500rpm and falls off at 45 degrees at 5400 rpm.

I guess I need to be more clear by loosing power, I ment more along the lines of loosing useable power or traction, the 295 PS2's spin easily when dropping 2 gears and punching it making it very hard to keep control. By the seat of the pants feel it is pushing just as hard at the lower rpms without loss of traction as it is by downshifting and I don't loose the time in shifting. I may be totally wrong. Then again, I didn't think it was more than an SL 55 to begin with. (which it may have been ) The turbo has quite a bit of punch so long as boost is on full and it doesn't take long to get to redline like the 928 engine does. (remember their lazy just joking)

I have always used the downshift method on all other cars the turbo is a bit of a handful to begin with and attempting a full 2 gear drop is abusive.Besides it achieved the end results needed. I am sure you are correct but I don't think I would gain much of anything if I am fighting the car with spinning wheels or even worse if the rev limiter cuts in because the wheels have spun and caused me to shoot into the red.

I still think that the MB's are over rated and if you notice most of the 1/4 times on these SL's and E55's are also using NOX.

Jim Nowak

You will need to run in the low 8.0 second range to 100 mph to come close to a mid 11 second 1/4 mile.

Jim Nowak

The SL 65 in the drag video I posted was not using NOX. Where did you pull that bit of information? However, since you mentioned, here is what an E55 AMG using a dry 65 hp shot of nitrous ran: http://www.whitisconsulting.com/videos/11.13sgmp.wmv Over rated?

944kid

Hey, lots of 928s are auto, and I think they are still great cars(all electrical problems aside )

And to whoever said 5sp auto, you are correct.

Cameron

Tony,

I am about 25 minutes to the Galeria Mall from work. About 40 minutes from home. I know that Sab would probably join us as well. There is another chap named Craig who works in Fort Laud. I would invite him also. So we might be five! Is this a sure thing for next Friday, or do you need to reconfirm?

Lookin' fwd to it if it happens.

Cameron

Sebastian,

Come to think of it, maybe Steve would join us as well. 1/2 dozen is a nice round number.

Normy

You-did-what-?

Damn! There's a story from Bithlo, Florida about an SL with a biturbo V12 that ran completely stock with completely stock tires consistent 12.4 quarters out there- all the gear-heads with their hemis and WRX-STI's were hovering around this car! They say that that car really comes on strong later in the race, which means after the first 1/8 mile.

Slipping belt hell! That was a good show-

N

cobalt

The stock 3.6 turbo runs 0-100 in 9.5 seconds and a 1/4 in 12.5 s at 360 hp there are many articles attesting to that. I was just using the numbers I had an actual record of achieving the one time I had a chance to use the Gtech meter. That was with slipping tires on an uphill grade and a really bad launch with 0-20 mph taking 1.8 seconds which was pathetic. I was only running about 370 hp at the time and .8 bar boost and an intake leak. The car is considerably faster than stock now with the added Hp and PS2 tires. The single turbo cars pull much stronger after the first 1/8 mile than the TT's which is why it achieves identical 0-100 times with much lower 0-60 numbers. I am sure the car can break the 9 second mark to 100, how much below that is impossible to tell without a meter. If the stock 996TT can do a 1/4 in 12.4 seconds and the 3.6T in stock trim has nearly identical 0-100 and 1/4 numbers to a stock 993TT and 996TT with less Hp. Mid 11 seconds may be optomistic but high 11's to 12.0 s should be obtainable based on the increased HP and torque. I have had the turbo up against cars rated with more HP and 12.0 second 1/4 times in each case it has easily gained ground, although this is mostly from rolling starts or 60-130 runs.

I cannot view the link shown using Firefox my comment about most of the runs I have seen posted are using NOX. Not a big fan of the stuff personally. The best time I have seen observed for the SL65 is 12 seconds at 122 mph. Now I am reading stock configuration showing 12.4 1/4's which I know my car can do in stock form.

I admit it may have been an SL55 rebadged as an SL 65 which would explain the large gap. I know the SL 500 is a pig as my GTS or Cayenne Turbo can trounce them without a probem.

Jim Nowak

The SL 65 was running consistent 11.4's and the E55 on a 65 shot of NOS ran an 11.13 1/4 mile. The Sl 65 with an amateur at the wheel can run 11's so the 12.4's you are seeing are probably Mercedes factory specs that are way too conservative much like the hp ratings ofn their forced induction engines.

Normy, he must have been running the stock Conti crap tires and spinning his tires all the way down the strip. Those cars are truly lightning fast and can consistently beat many of the fastest sports cars in the world in a straight line. The tq and hp are truly sick for a such a luxo cruiser.

Sab

I'm in. I'll let Steve know as well.
I got smoked twice by an SL 55 and S55 before I installed the SC. I would love to try now with the extra power...

Normy

-Yeah, I believe it.

Now...if only I could afford one-!



N