Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 02:35 pm, by: Edward Salem(Sydeward)
Hey guys, just had my account approved today, looking forward to being part of this site.
at the moment im planning on purchasing a soarer, on paper ill admit the soarer looks spot on, but the thing thats worrying me at the moment is the variation in stats published about them, in particular the 0-100km/h and 1/4 mile times.
some websites that ive visited suggest STOCK 1991/2+ SC400's run in at 7s / ~15s, which imo is what id expect from a V8 1600KG car that pumps out 190kW.
Other websites however claim the soarer can only run in at 8.9s / 16.5s, which is a HUGE variation from the other suggested times, and in my opinion quite slow (my AU6 will out do it at 0-100 at 8s)
ive seen a few clips on youtube PROVING that stock SC400's can indeed run in at 7s 0-100, and ive researched the differences between the UZZ30/1/2 and from what i can see, and from what other soarer owners have told me there shouldnt be any performance difference at all.
I have heard, however that the Soarer 4.0GTL is fitted with more electronics, and thus draws more power / weighs more, could this where teh 8.9s stat has been derived from?
Electric windows / mirrors / cd / cruise control is enough for me, is it safe to say that a 1991 SC400 4.0L GT would run at 7s / 15.6s???
I know theres a few soarer owners around here lol so im hoping you might help clear up this mis understanding for me.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 03:37 pm, by: Peter Nitschke(Pen)
Get the GT. A clean one will do the times you mention.
31's are only a tad slower - a bit heavier mainly. 32's are where you get into 16.5 second runs, mainly from the extra weight and driving the hydraulic suspension pump.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 03:47 pm, by: Edward Salem(Sydeward)
thats exactly what i needed to know!!! ive been hunting this information down for the last few nites (hardly had any sleep haha) thankyou for the help, and thankyou for saving my sleep!
more eager than ever to get my soarer. see you all in the forums,
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 04:56 pm, by: Ali Yazici(Wa_ali)
Yeah usually there shouldn't be a huge difference in performance wise unless you're going for the king of the road UZZ32 Going by the figures you've said, that sounds about right.
I personally have never run my self, but being on the forum almost 4 hours+ a day, i have read of many people that have been running in the 15's down the 1/4 strip. All in all, 31's the way to go if you want performance and luxury without going over the top.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 05:52 pm, by: Edward Salem(Sydeward)
hahah im like... i wonder why hes asking... hmm
nice car mate, nice times too, from my research most GT4.0 run at around 7.5s, some around low 7's.... didnt you mention on youtube that some minor work had been done however?
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 05:57 pm, by: Mike Beck(Gold_40gt)
Just a BFI thats 1/2 done, The intake snorkel has been removed and the front section of the airbox removed with a jigg saw and sanded
Works great, looks tidy & sounds superb - looking forward to sealing it off with side and top lids so only cold air goes in - should be even better then!
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 06:23 pm, by: Mike Beck(Gold_40gt)
Err, the video of the 0-62mph run got around 6.8s,
The video of the 1/4 mile drag had a slower start of just over 7 seconds and got the 15.4s....
If I got a 6.8 second start on the 1/4 mile run the end trap time would have been much less than the 15.4 seconds, probably closer to 15 flat or just over
So basically your right just a bit of confusion there
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 08:21 pm, by: Steven Anderson(Cusscuss)
i ran a 15.13 @ 93mph, stock UZZ31 with the rear mufflers removed and the kickdown cable all the way to hard. It is a well looked after car so it was nice to know it is indeed healthy, either that or the mufflers really are that restrictive. If a UZZ31 is not in the 15's then there is a serious problem with either the driver or the car.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 08:48 pm, by: Mike Beck(Gold_40gt)
Speaking of the kick down cable, I had a fiddle with mine the other day, I put it hard as it would go. Wow pretty snappy gear changes, kicks down WAY quicker and does feel quicker but its horrible for slow cruising speeds, the changes are far to jerky!
On the other hand I then adjusted it to pretty much as soft as it would go, and wow, the changes were so smooth it was fantastic! This plus the fresher trans fluid makes it run beautifully - What I like is how it doesnt kick down suddenly it stays in a low gear or just drops one lower so you build up speed more progressively - Personally I prefer it this way - Feels just as fast and It suits my driving style more, plus its better on the equipment as theres less strain and it doesn't jerk the gearbox all around so Ive left it like this...
Once the exhaust is done Ill adjust it again to see how it reacts with the exhaust, another thing I may do one day is test 0-XXkm/h or whatever with the cable hard and soft to see what the difference is between them, obviously it would have to be done a few times to make it fair test & with a special timer like one of those G-Timers made my passport Anyone tested this before?
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 09:00 pm, by: Maurice Diggler(Mau_rice)
Edward, if you are interested in 0-100kph and 1/4 mile stuff, don't waste your time with a V8 Soarer, it will only disappoint you in that regard, if you want straight line performance, get a TT
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 09:31 pm, by: Mike Beck(Gold_40gt)
Dont say that! Haha
I love the performance of my V8, what I like most about my 4.0GT is that It can stay in a low gear at low speeds and have the torque to get up and go effortlessly with out requiring to kick down a gear or two - its been even better since adjusting the Kickdown cable...
But you are right, a TT does have excellent straight line performance for little money spent compared to the V8s, you would get better times easily - However both suit different purposes and each have their pros/cons.........
...but I wont go into that as its been discussed many times across the hole forum!
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 11:15 pm, by: Edward Salem(Sydeward)
hey nice find there ray could you send one to eddies@ausi.com as well hehe
btw maurice you have a point, but a few factors im considering in my choice are rego / insurance / fuel consumption, and in each way the TT is going to set me back more than the V8. Ofcourse im not buying a soarer for its fantastic fuel consumption, but imo performance wise there isnt really a big difference, 7s to 100 is fast enough for me, if i need more grunt ill chuck on a supercharger down the track. at stock though id be willing to bet that a V8 would come in very close in a quater mile run due to its top end grunt and perhaps smoke it afterwards.
i think its more of a personal thing than a matter of Turbo Vs V8. Turbo = fast acceleration, lots of cheap potential, V8 = cheaper to run, faster top end performance and more noise!