Hussein's 1998 V70 Xr : The Force Awakens

[lookforjoe]

yeah you do have more shifts in there, but on the other hand the gearing is a bit shorter so you gain back some of the time you lose during shifts.

I am sure AWD sucks up a good deal of performance but its really very far off what I would expect still. A stock 300 crank S60R AWD will be doing 14-15 second 62-124s.

Weight does matter, but less so once up to speed. The higher the speed the more its about aero less about weight.

FWIW the best time I ever did in the 850 on a cold winter night was 7.8 seconds GPS verified. But thats unusually fast - similar to a murcielago or 997tt. The M56 4.45 gearing is perfect for that (1 shift) and it was cold out. Still it was with less than 400whp.

If you could have an actual 300 awhp getting to the ground I would expect 10-11 second runs.

Thanks for your input, JC, I appreciate it. Looking over logs from the last couple of weeks, 60-120, 11-12secs seems about the best I've achieved. I'll have to work on that. :D

[Johann]

If you could have an actual 300 awhp getting to the ground I would expect 10-11 second runs.

Yes and no.. My V70R was dyno'd 400+ crank HP at the time and it did 100-200 in 12 seconds. AWD, one shift near 150. Weight near 3750 lb on paper. Actual probably some 220 lb more.

Focus RS spec is 350 crank HP and it does 12 but closer to 13 seconds. FWD/LSD, two shifts at 140 and 180. It also does 3320 lb on the scale instead of 3000 lb on paper.

Best time with the red 850 with GT30 was just under 11 seconds. No clue about the power but I wonder if it ever reached 300 whp. Short 4.45 M56 with LSD. No rear bench seat and empty trunk, Sparco driver seat. All other interior bits still in place.

H is running AWD, car is heavy. Maybe add a second for his bad AWD choice.. :D

[JCviggen]

Well I did mention a real 300 awhp 300 awhp would beat 300 fwhp all else being equal because the losses to accelerate the rear wheels are included though it does mean the first needs considerably more at the crank.

V70 XC 98 should be about 200 kgs more than a similar 850. Very considerable, but the handicap reduces as speeds go up. Its more of a penalty for 0-60 than at 100+ mph.

I see chipped S60R doing somewhere in the 13 second area, they are also heavy, AWD and not quite 300 at the wheels.

lets say 12 seconds @ 300 then Of course he should have more than that..

Edited June 2, 2011 by JCviggen

[trolling69]

very nice.

Good Work..... clean finish.... something i need to do on the s80.

And how much did the remap for ecu cost you?

How is it? any better specs?

And where you do it, website or some shop?

THANKS AK

[BlackT5]

very nice.

Good Work..... clean finish.... something i need to do on the s80.

And how much did the remap for ecu cost you?

How is it? any better specs?

And where you do it, website or some shop?

THANKS AK

He is using Turbo-Tuner which is not currently available for newer models 1999 on.

[lookforjoe]

Well I did mention a real 300 awhp 300 awhp would beat 300 fwhp all else being equal because the losses to accelerate the rear wheels are included though it does mean the first needs considerably more at the crank.

V70 XC 98 should be about 200 kgs more than a similar 850. Very considerable, but the handicap reduces as speeds go up. Its more of a penalty for 0-60 than at 100+ mph.

I see chipped S60R doing somewhere in the 13 second area, they are also heavy, AWD and not quite 300 at the wheels.

lets say 12 seconds @ 300 then Of course he should have more than that..

I went back over the Carlisle dyno logs - and 60-121 (4th gear, no shifts) times were 7.62 sec @ 18psi and 7.12 sec @ 22psi. It really sucks that the AWD makes that much of a difference, but I'd still prefer to keep it intact. Haven't had the opportunity to do any clean pulls as of yet. I've been pulling still more timing from the high load areas of the map.

[JCviggen]

Cant compare on the dyno, it takes almost twice the time on the road depending on dyno. Dynojet would probably only take 5 secs No wind resistance, no weight to move etc. Would be interesting to see how much quicker it is FWD on the road, I would think something like 1.5 seconds maybe.

Edited June 6, 2011 by JCviggen

[EricF]

Hmm, I like reading about you guys with real world data and more interesting hardware setups posting quantified performance numbers

Almost makes me want to dust off the 850 and try it out. However I think my coolant temps will rise beyond comfort by 120. They already hit 98C on a full third gear pull, bet they get over 100 at the sensor with some 4th gear involvement. That means even hotter around the cylinder tops...

Makes me wonder, how do you guys do with your temps? I know Hussein runs a much cooler t-stat (thanks for the info, one day will get it for myself ). Does everyone else go to a lower t-stat as well? Seems like good insurance if you can tune for any cold enrichment you may encounter.

[fischmama]

Hmm, I like reading about you guys with real world data and more interesting hardware setups posting quantified performance numbers

Almost makes me want to dust off the 850 and try it out. However I think my coolant temps will rise beyond comfort by 120. They already hit 98C on a full third gear pull, bet they get over 100 at the sensor with some 4th gear involvement. That means even hotter around the cylinder tops...

Makes me wonder, how do you guys do with your temps? I know Hussein runs a much cooler t-stat (thanks for the info, one day will get it for myself ). Does everyone else go to a lower t-stat as well? Seems like good insurance if you can tune for any cold enrichment you may encounter.

I'm running a colder T-Stat as well. Same temp as Hussain I believe (gotta double check). So far its been good, I can actually see the needle drop abit on a cold night just cruising. I have not tuned for it and I don't think its needed at least not for a 180F T-stat (82C). The engine will be up to temp at least if its over 40F outside. I would not run it in the winter.

[fischmama]

Hey Hussain,

Do you ever have any issues with your AVC-R that it reads RPMs wrong, as in I get lots of spikes in the upper ranges. I did one pull yesterday to 6500 and the AVC-R reported 8500 as peak. I wonder if the cable is picking up interfeerence somewhere or if the smoothing on the device is just not good enough. I don't think I had this issue all the time.

[lookforjoe]

Hey Hussain,

Do you ever have any issues with your AVC-R that it reads RPMs wrong, as in I get lots of spikes in the upper ranges. I did one pull yesterday to 6500 and the AVC-R reported 8500 as peak. I wonder if the cable is picking up interfeerence somewhere or if the smoothing on the device is just not good enough. I don't think I had this issue all the time.

No, no rpm reporting issues. I tapped into the feed to the tach in the left A pillar junction.

I had to lower the NE points to prevent/reduce spiking in all gears with the hybrid 20g/60-1compressor, but that was more of an issue on levels immediately following shifts, not on extended pulls

[fischmama]

No, no rpm reporting issues. I tapped into the feed to the tach in the left A pillar junction.

I had to lower the NE points to prevent/reduce spiking in all gears with the hybrid 20g/60-1compressor, but that was more of an issue on levels immediately following shifts, not on extended pulls

I probably have some interference. I tapped it directly at the coil in the engine bay. I'll check my cable this weekend.

[550]

You must, I don't have any issues either. Justus, that could be some of your settings as well

[Jardon]

Hi JC

That was flat. It is MUCH slower in AWD. Substantial timing pull compared to FWD must be a big factor. Not sure the M66 gearing helps either. What is the weight difference between sedan & AWD wagon, I wonder - I'll look it up for comparison. Don't have many 60-120 logs for comparison, unfortunately. I'm having trouble finding the space to acquire them. Ambient temps are now also in the high '80's - intake temps around 100º don't help, I'm sure. I need to finish hooking up the IAT for data logging.

Apologies for not reading all this thread but I just logged in for the first time in a while - nice looking car and not many big power AWD's. Are you running any sort of water/methanol injection? With a modest (quite small really) Radtec intercooler and simple Aquamist kit running 80:20 Methanol/Water through a 1mm jet my IAT's are ~3C below ambient. Running my 19t at a peak of 21psi (falling to 17psi at 6000 rpm) we achieve significantly more ignition advance than this before the ecu pulls timing - though I wonder if we have higher octane fuel in the UK?

I haven't reliably timed a 60-120mph run but 60-100 (GPS) takes 5.6 secs at an ambient of 70F - that a full tank and no passengers (1750kg). My fuelling is now low 11's under load rather than high 10's (lower IAT's have helped) but we have repeatedly added advance from 3000 to 7500 rpm with incremental improvements in 60-100 times each time. I have tried running leaner (high 11's to low 12's) with a consequently softer advance curve but in my application performance was much flatter.

[BlackT5]

Apologies for not reading all this thread but I just logged in for the first time in a while - nice looking car and not many big power AWD's. Are you running any sort of water/methanol injection? With a modest (quite small really) Radtec intercooler and simple Aquamist kit running 80:20 Methanol/Water through a 1mm jet my IAT's are ~3C below ambient. Running my 19t at a peak of 21psi (falling to 17psi at 6000 rpm) we achieve significantly more ignition advance than this before the ecu pulls timing - though I wonder if we have higher octane fuel in the UK?

I haven't reliably timed a 60-120mph run but 60-100 (GPS) takes 5.6 secs at an ambient of 70F - that a full tank and no passengers (1750kg). My fuelling is now low 11's under load rather than high 10's (lower IAT's have helped) but we have repeatedly added advance from 3000 to 7500 rpm with incremental improvements in 60-100 times each time. I have tried running leaner (high 11's to low 12's) with a consequently softer advance curve but in my application performance was much flatter.

What is your timing like at 7k under full boost/load. You using TT?