My Automatic G-tech run.. 16@88.5
06-02-2004, 05:03 PM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
My Automatic G-tech run.. 16@88.5
Since seing someone post their horrible automatic G-tech run, I figured that they were wrong. So I did what every curious man did and went out to buy a G-tech. It showed up today, and I decided to test it out and see how good I could get. One thing to know about the G-tech, is that it is very touchy. If you try to brake rev before acceleration, the accelerometer will be activated, and it will be all f-ed up. So, this is a straight off the line acceleration, with my expertise of mastering the shift time. I shifted perfectly at the right time, and it showed a pretty good run.
I wish I could get a time with doing a neutral slam into drive, but I tried it @ 2k rpm; and the damn G-tech activated to early. I will try it a couple more times (this is the only one that actually worked of my first 11 runs). They all just either started too early, or to late. I am putting the Full Greddy exhaust on this weekend, along with the RE intake. I will post follow-up charts on those. I WILL get under 8 & 16 seconds by this weekend!
I need to change the vehicle weight though, my car is heavier than that, it is an auto, and I weigh 205.
Troy J.
[URL=http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid119/pa06f793e6c7cf993348ba494b19dbea8/f86ddb5e.jpg.orig.jpg]
I wish I could get a time with doing a neutral slam into drive, but I tried it @ 2k rpm; and the damn G-tech activated to early. I will try it a couple more times (this is the only one that actually worked of my first 11 runs). They all just either started too early, or to late. I am putting the Full Greddy exhaust on this weekend, along with the RE intake. I will post follow-up charts on those. I WILL get under 8 & 16 seconds by this weekend!
I need to change the vehicle weight though, my car is heavier than that, it is an auto, and I weigh 205. Troy J.
[URL=http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid119/pa06f793e6c7cf993348ba494b19dbea8/f86ddb5e.jpg.orig.jpg]Last edited by JeupRX-8; 06-02-2004 at 05:20 PM.
06-03-2004, 11:02 AM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06-03-2004, 02:36 PM
#4
Stuck in a love triangle
Good job. Has yourcar been flashed yet? Thosenumbers seem muchmore realistic than the ones 14s4doorNA got. About thebrake rev though -- when I brake rev it doesntlet me go over 2500 rpm and when I release the brakes from that RPM Ive noticedthats theres barely enough of a difference in the takeoff anyway soI dont even bother w/that anymore. Also just soyou know it is already possible to get below 8 and 16 w/the neutral slam b/c that manuever givesyou a noticeably faster take off unlike the brake rev. I would perform it more often if I wasntafraid of destroying my transmission.
AnywayI really hope yourexhaust and intake havea significant effect on your times. If it getsyour 60 much closerto 7.5 Ill consider doingthe same to my car. Hey Ican dream cant I?
Ohby theway next time I dont thinkyou should sendthe pictures to image station andlink to them. Just attachthem right here to your post. Does itsay the max horsepower was at 6843 RPM? I thoughtit was supposed to be closerto 7200. Alsoisnt that 123 whp figure yougot from the dyno a little surprising? Thats over 35% loss from thefactory rated 197 bhp.
AnywayI really hope yourexhaust and intake havea significant effect on your times. If it getsyour 60 much closerto 7.5 Ill consider doingthe same to my car. Hey Ican dream cant I?
Ohby theway next time I dont thinkyou should sendthe pictures to image station andlink to them. Just attachthem right here to your post. Does itsay the max horsepower was at 6843 RPM? I thoughtit was supposed to be closerto 7200. Alsoisnt that 123 whp figure yougot from the dyno a little surprising? Thats over 35% loss from thefactory rated 197 bhp.
Last edited by JeRKy 8 Owner; 06-03-2004 at 03:01 PM.
06-03-2004, 06:50 PM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
My car has no flashes on it. In regards to the whp, the 6-speed only got 148 whp on the g-tech. Torque was roughly the same. I don' t think that is too bad considering only 20 whp diferance between the two. They claim a 40 whp differance.
Troy J.
Troy J.
Last edited by JeupRX-8; 06-03-2004 at 07:12 PM.
06-04-2004, 11:59 AM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: san antonio, texas
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jeup post some runs after the exhaust and intake....I want to chenge the exhaust on mine is an a/t can pls install the Greaddy fitst and do some runs with it so we can see if theres any improvement... thanks////////
06-05-2004, 12:18 PM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Here we go!
Okay,
RE intake, Greddy cat-back, B&B midpipe
Here is a comparison of the two's #'s, the modded is column 2.
60 ft: 2.696 2.572
330 ft: 7.032 6.764
1/8 mi: 10.507s @ 71.79 mph 10.105s @ 78.90 mph
1000 ft: 13.512s 12.752s
1/4 : 16.064@ 88.55 mph ????
0-60: 8.196s 7.678s!!!!!!!!!!!
The 1/4 mile will be posted, along with graphs of the hp/tq. All I can say is that the tq gained more than the hp after all these mods. Tq. gain alone, just form the intake was 7whp, which equates to 11 bhp. Hp gained a little under 20whp, and gained a little over that.
It pulls like a mother now.
Troy Jeup.
Okay,
RE intake, Greddy cat-back, B&B midpipe
Here is a comparison of the two's #'s, the modded is column 2.
60 ft: 2.696 2.572
330 ft: 7.032 6.764
1/8 mi: 10.507s @ 71.79 mph 10.105s @ 78.90 mph
1000 ft: 13.512s 12.752s
1/4 : 16.064@ 88.55 mph ????
0-60: 8.196s 7.678s!!!!!!!!!!!
The 1/4 mile will be posted, along with graphs of the hp/tq. All I can say is that the tq gained more than the hp after all these mods. Tq. gain alone, just form the intake was 7whp, which equates to 11 bhp. Hp gained a little under 20whp, and gained a little over that.
It pulls like a mother now.
Troy Jeup.
06-05-2004, 12:21 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4286678351
This is a link to my imagestation account. Please just view them, and don't modify any images or cancel anything. I am doing this so everyone can see the graphs full size.
This is a link to my imagestation account. Please just view them, and don't modify any images or cancel anything. I am doing this so everyone can see the graphs full size.
06-05-2004, 12:57 PM
#11
Registered
Join Date: May 2004
Location: santa fe springs, california
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Jeup, what was the total price on all those mods? And are there anymore future performance mods ure planning on? I have an A/T too and wanna get it to be as fast a M/T stock. (is that possible, lol)
PS: Can the A/T peel out?...Cuz i cant get mine to do it
PS: Can the A/T peel out?...Cuz i cant get mine to do it
06-05-2004, 03:10 PM
#12
Stuck in a love triangle
You dontknow how to attach the images to your post? Its really easyman. Youjust click Browse and find the image andthen send the post. I reallydont want to join any public siteand get my email spammed. Iguess Ill just have to take your wordfor it.
06-05-2004, 08:34 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMO if you had the M flash it would even be better. i had mine flashed to M last week and there is a huge diffrence for the automatic IMO. i also want to get my AT faster and thought most of the engine uogrades on here only benifited the MT . thanks for the post, since i am not engine savy. i will start looking into what the AT guys are doing . us lonely AT guys are around LOVE MY AT at the strip on the beachs a AT is a must
LOVE MY AT at the strip on the beachs a AT is a must
Last edited by EatMyBanana; 06-05-2004 at 08:55 PM.
06-11-2004, 01:54 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still find it odd how all you automatic guys keep working and posting Quarter mile times when it's OBVIOUS that if you were to drive manual you would have better launch, more power, stronger trannies and more potential.
Basically you guys are running the same times that a manual MAZDA 3 would.
The sacrifice you guys made in power nonetheless gave you convenience of never having to work to get the car to move. Anyhow, more power to you.
Basically you guys are running the same times that a manual MAZDA 3 would.
The sacrifice you guys made in power nonetheless gave you convenience of never having to work to get the car to move. Anyhow, more power to you.
06-11-2004, 05:11 PM
#16
Stuck in a love triangle
A stick Mazda 3 runs 16s for quarter mile too? **** man that would make me a lot more disappointed w/my automatic if itwerent for the factthat I didnt buyit for performance
06-12-2004, 10:07 AM
#17
Level 5 of The Pyramid
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by JeupRX-8
The 1/4 mile will be posted, along with graphs of the hp/tq. All I can say is that the tq gained more than the hp after all these mods. Tq. gain alone, just form the intake was 7whp, which equates to 11 bhp. Hp gained a little under 20whp, and gained a little over that.
The 1/4 mile will be posted, along with graphs of the hp/tq. All I can say is that the tq gained more than the hp after all these mods. Tq. gain alone, just form the intake was 7whp, which equates to 11 bhp. Hp gained a little under 20whp, and gained a little over that.
With a G-tech?
Yeah, I'm sure it has exact drivetrain loss numbers for every car..
john
06-22-2004, 02:46 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: @ The Lonley Position
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I ran the "horrible" times he was referring to. First of all I want to congratulate you on the great times and your efforts. I have a question. What size rims do you have? If you have the 16s then your G-tech results would make more sense, because smaller rims make your gearing more agressive, and reduce your rotational mass as well. I stated in my original thread that I feel the car is capable of 15s. I also explained that I have the GT package with 18s and heavier brakes as well as a full tank of gas and tools in the car. I weigh 180 lbs. At the time of my run the engine had very few miles on it and it was before my M-flash. I am going to do it again with 1/4 tank of gas, all junk removed from the car now with my M-flash and the engine more broken in. I am hoping to get a low 16.
Dude how on earth did you get an 8.1 sec 0-60 with the same shitty launch that got me 9.3 (shifting 1-2 like a champ)?????
You must have the 16 inch rims or your G-tech is off. As you mentioned yourself it is very sensitive device. Any way keep up the good work and keep us posted and please tell me more because I am shocked. I beleive the AT has a strong 15 sec pull and some run better that others (especially the base models). I got every single option (incl. spare tire) besides navigation and 6-CD changer. But the AT has a horrible launch and slow soft shifts. Hmm. I am puzzed. Also from what I read on Racing Beat's web-site the RX8 gains less than 10 hp from any brand full intake and exhaust. Maybe some of us Miami guys can get together and run our cars.....
Dude how on earth did you get an 8.1 sec 0-60 with the same shitty launch that got me 9.3 (shifting 1-2 like a champ)?????
You must have the 16 inch rims or your G-tech is off. As you mentioned yourself it is very sensitive device. Any way keep up the good work and keep us posted and please tell me more because I am shocked. I beleive the AT has a strong 15 sec pull and some run better that others (especially the base models). I got every single option (incl. spare tire) besides navigation and 6-CD changer. But the AT has a horrible launch and slow soft shifts. Hmm. I am puzzed. Also from what I read on Racing Beat's web-site the RX8 gains less than 10 hp from any brand full intake and exhaust. Maybe some of us Miami guys can get together and run our cars.....
06-22-2004, 09:04 PM
#21
Stuck in a love triangle
14s4doorna-- Jeup definitely has 18s b/c hes got a touring package Rx8. Regardless even ifhe did his runs w/less than 1/4 tank full on 16s w/an empty trunk I highly doubtyour spare tire kit wouldmake your AT an entire second slower than his. I alsobelieve that one of your gtechs is off. Im hoping its yours and not his but honestly it wouldnt surprise me atall if it ended up being his.
06-23-2004, 12:16 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool. Well I am glad he just ran that time and I hope it is accurate. I just ran a 13.89 @ 106.5 mph in my FD with my 240 lb friend in the passenger seat. I am only mentioning that because I just did that an hour ago and I am pretty excited. Good night
06-23-2004, 09:52 AM
#23
Who is this Navy guy?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DFW
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rim size will not effect anything. Overall tire diameter will.
The RX-8 with the 225/55R16's or with 225/45R18's give you the same overall tire diameter. There may be a .1" - .2" difference between the two sizes depending on the tire manufacturer. That will not change the results for the testing being accomplished as stated in this post.
The RX-8 with the 225/55R16's or with 225/45R18's give you the same overall tire diameter. There may be a .1" - .2" difference between the two sizes depending on the tire manufacturer. That will not change the results for the testing being accomplished as stated in this post.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jasonrxeight
RX-8's For Sale/Wanted
2
09-30-2015 01:53 PM
Von Walker
New Member Forum
1
09-13-2015 03:54 PM
