95 Q45T Time Slips

[AZhitman]

Last post... I don't think the 92 had sodium-filled valves. Just 90-91.

[911/Q45]

Does anyone make a light weight flywheel for the Q45, that would lower E.T.s a little

The Q doesn't really have a flywheel, the torque converter acts as one. Manual trans cars have flywheels.

[1992Q45A]

LOL ok...

I know what my old stock 91 was capable of. I saw it race against a ton of cars. I know what my 94 is capable of. I don't know what my 92 is capable of, as I've yet to drive it really

I can tell you my STOCK 91 had no problems with high 90s trap cars on the freeway...

Timeslips don't bother me. M3/Mustang/etc etc owners used to say the same

How could you keep up when you run a 95 in the 1/4 and I run a 99???

Well I did. I don't lie. My own results in my 91 are what I'm going off of.

Q45tech HIMSELF has said a 91 with JWT ECU runs a 14.7@97-98.

That's what your car runs rob. This isn't an issue of time slips. It's an issue of known performance.

As for your car running harder, I really doubt it. I doubt it mainly because I am putting headers on my car as well. Since 90-93s run harder, with equal mods, it's of no suprise my car will run harder.

I use your timeslips my racing experience, my driving experience with my 91 and 94 too base my opinion.

I'll bet you a dinner at a fine restaurant here and in Miami, the 90-93 is always faster, given equal mods.

Palmers car ran high 90s in the traps, and Q45tech himself says a Q45 with JWT runs what your car does. Except your car has WAY more mods done to it. I don't care either way, but the facts are obvious. A stock 2nd gen runs 2 mph in the trap less then a stock 1st gen. That 2mph will be the same in mods. So your 97 will be my 99. Just like it always has been.

Lastly, this is all for fun. Don't want this turning into a supra thing.

[PoorManQ45]

The Q doesn't really have a flywheel, the torque converter acts as one. Manual trans cars have flywheels.

How can you have an engine without a Flywheel?

[PoorManQ45]

One way that you can use to break into the 13s is to new torque converter with stall speed of around 3.3k-4k.

This along with a drag type suspension and possibly slicks would be a sure fire way to lower your E.T.s.

Also, add another 100HP and you can lift the front end.

I know that these mods would make the Q a drag strip only car, but I'm sayin, that will make you go fast

[rsiwicki]

Headers will not come as easily as you think for your car.....you need more than just yourself to make it cost effective for yourself as there is no jig built so mine have to come off the car be copied and then put back on again....which requires down time for my car but I can work something out when I travel again for 2+ weeks at a time in November/December

Yes....the 90-93 Q's due run stronger naturally and that is something that I will not argue, but you had said that the 94-95's can't get into the high 90's even with lots of mods for which I did.

I want time slips as from personal experience....talk is just that....talk. Comparing time slips to other cars is not what I am after....I want to see time slips from other Q's only and then we can see really what is up with performance numbers and see after all my mods if my car is really performing all that much better. For all I know Palmers car may have ran the high 99 trap speed when it was 50 degrees out for which I think my car could do as well if it was 50 degrees vs. 86 degrees with high Miami humidity the nights I ran. I know what Q45tech as repeatedly said about the 14.6-7 @96-97mph...I have seen it too many times, but I would like to see a real time slip to back this figure up. I would like to think that with all the Q guys here saying how quick our cars are that we would have at least 1 time slip from a 90-93 Q45 posted on here...but there is not one time slip in the 2+ years of archives on this board.

By no means is my car comparable or better than anybody elses car here since I have so many mods to it...I would really like to see some more time slips to see just how well my car is performing compared to the other Q's. Just look at oxs1's 1/8 time slips for his 90-93 Q....I am about 0.5 secs quicker in the 1/8. This is why when you or somebody else has time slips then we can talk more...otherwise there is nothing to compare my car to except the repeatedly stated Q45tech numbers which I don't really doubt, but I would like the time slips to compare all the various ET points...such as 60' , 330', 1/8, etc.

[QShip]

Yes....the 90-93 Q's due run stronger naturally and that is something that I will not argue, but you had said that the 94-95's can't get into the high 90's even with lots of mods for which I did.

The 90 and very early 91 Q's run harder then the others. These were the ones made during the first 16 months of production.

[Q45tech]

My 14.7/96 numbers [from like 1994 were for cold conditions 45F] [in Florida lived in Palm Harbour] just after Stromung loud exhaust, JWT ecu, installed NOT HOT as you ran.

I estimate your zero to 80 times [10.2 from 1/8 mile] as almost 0.8 second better than stock 90 Q at equal HOT temperatures.

Did some rough stopwatch times over weekend [90F] at 1100 feet AMSL and I am down by 0.7-0.8 seconds to 80 mph at 10.9-11.1 seconds.But the engine now has 267,000 miles [220,000 more than 1994] [hot idle compression is nearing low spec and horrendous until it warms up] and back to stock exhaust and intake still JWT ecu.

Have you returned to oem manifolds/EGR cats to get rid of Sulfur smell? Would be nice to data log the 1st>2nd shift to see if it is 0.5 secs or 0.85 secs like mine. Have assume Level 10 did improve it.

[rsiwicki]

Thanks Dennis for posting the additional information on the 1/4 ET's and I will run my car once it cools off down here to see what I got under cooler conditions. I guess that your 14.7/96 mph is about as good as it gets for our Q's with your setup(ECU/exhaust/etc) being that you have a 90 model and ran it at 45F?

I am still working on getting the OEM secondary CAT's. I have bought a used set (110K) OEM exhaust manifolds and have the $35 EGR tube from Joe sitting in my closet along with my wonderful 4.08 project. Once I get the OEM secondary cats or maybe just go with some aftermarket secondary cats I will return it to its normal self. I am waiting to get everything first including my 4.08 fixed before going back to the shop to get it all put back together again which should be about another month for me to get all the parts I need.

Funny thing is that the car does not stink anymore and I can't figure out why. I noticed it stop stinking about a month ago and had the car's inside detailed to get rid of the smell and the car still smells good without any funny order. I guess there was some sort of chemical/sulfur reaction going on initially with the sound absorbtion material inside the mufflers and it is now all burned off like you had said earlier?

I am sure your car's engine is very tired after 267,000 well maintained miles and I know my car's miles are fast approaching as well with 145K and counting but I will be retiring the car to be a second car within the next year so the life should be extended a little longer.

[AZhitman]

One thing Rob has gotten through all his trials and tribulations with this Q (aside from a damn fast 95) is an honorary Master's Degree in Q45 performance.

Few of us would have been so patient...

Can't WAIT for cooler weather - We have a track event here in October, should be down in the high 80's by then. :rolleyes

[1992Q45A]

What's up with this track event?

We need to get all the AZ guys there.

[1992Q45A]

I don't care to get into a bickering match. I've owned a 91, I drive a 94 daily, and I own a 92 which I am restoring.

Back when I still had my 91, I remember driving my first 94. It was a beautiful Silver 94T at a volvo dealer. I think it had 70k or so miles. I was really excited to drive it, I enjoyed the styling updates, loved the spoiler and the bbs wheels (both of which my 91 lacked)

I'll never forget the disappointment of that secondary RPM rush. You can say whatver you want, I've owned both, and drive a 94 now. The 94 is significantly slower then my 91 was. I've raced a few cars, and they spanked me. That would have never happened in my 91.

Even if my car runs a 91 in the 1/4 mile, I will still ALWAYS consider the 90-93 the clear performance car amongst the two.

Rob your car is impressive, and I'm sure your 1/4 mile times would be even better with cooler air.

Fact still remains the 90-93 is always faster then the 94. Nothing changes this. Doesn't matter how much anyone wants the 94 to be faster, it just isn't. So you have to mod your car to just to get to an equal level of a 90-93. There is no arguement, this is the way it is. You can discount all the experiences I had racing my 91, that's fine. Nobody believed me back in the day, except the people I had in my car. I know my Q behaved like a 99 1/4 trap car above 70+. I probably had one of the first 16 months of production Qs. Maybe my 92 wont even be as fast, since it weighs more, and other conditions. Don't know don't care, but I'm still going to defend the first gen to my grave

[1992Q45A]

Lame as it may sound my friends and myself would get into my 91Q back in the day (when I was 17-18) and drive around every weekend. We would cruise around for hours at a time, sometimes putting hundreds of miles on the car, just looking for a race. Yea it was stupid, yea it was dangerous, and yea it was fun. I raced probably a half dozen cars every weekend on the streets of phx/scottsdale. Timeslips be damned, I know what my car was capable of. I don't care about 1/4 mph, it tells a very limited story, of an actual cars performance.

Anyway some of my best memories of my youth were driving around looking for someone to floor it against in my q. It is what it is. I won 80% of the races in my Q, and had I done it in my stock 94, I would have lost 80% of the races. I know the cars performance well, I've taken it to the absolute limit.

I have only driven a Y33 one time, but that one time I took it to 145 MPH, in a race against an E320 merc benz. That one race was enough for me to know what the car is capable of, and how it performs in all speed ranges.

That's how I judge a car.

[Altiman94]

I was under the impression that these cars ran 14.7's stock. I didnt know they were only low 16/high 15 second cars. with that known, those are some great improvements there.

[1992Q45A]

Rob saw some significant improvements. When he ran his stock Q in the 1/4, it ran slower then a stock 94. So if you take into account that, he made huge improvements

Generally accepted times

90-93

6.7-7.0 0-60 15.0-15.3 1/4

94-95

7.5-7.9 0-60 15.5-16.0 1/4

This has been published in countless magazines. The 94s are generally .5 slower then comparable 90-93s

[Altiman94]

Based on what owners say about these cars being so fast, I thought they'd atleast be mid 14's.

[maxnix]

Ok, does anybody make a lightweight flywheel for the Q or one for any other car that would fit on the Q?

Hmmm....PoorMan wants a $1500 drive shaft?

As 911/Q45 has said, torque converter = no flywheel.

[AZhitman]

Ryan's last 3 posts are spot-on.

Unfortunately, most 90-93's have been poorly maintained and are not good representatives of the species.

Track event in October is SCO Nights at Firebird - Should be a good time. We do indeed need more NICO reps out there!

[1992Q45A]

Based on what owners say about these cars being so fast, I thought they'd atleast be mid 14's.

Altiman, what if you were cruising in a 91Q. Say your car ran at best a 15.0@95

Say for instance a E36 M3 pulls up to you. This car is capable of a 14.2@99

Let's say you're both going 75 or so. Let's say you both floor it, and race until 130 or so. The M3 doesn't pull one inch on you. Are you going to be suprised your 15.0 second two ton sedan didnt lose an inch to a low 14 second high 90 trap car?

I sure was. I didn't buy my 91 because I wanted a drag racer. I bought it because I've always loved infinitis. The fact I kept defeating faster 1/4 mile cars, led me to one conclusion. 1/4s don't mean much when it comes to freeway speed. The Q is slow off the line.

When you have the two ton beast up to speed, it's a whole different story. The original Qs were deadly quick on the high end.

I learned other interesting things to. Like a 540i would CRUSH an M3 on the freeway. M3 fan boys never admitted to my car being quicker, and they would never admit a 540 would be faster. They would go off their 1/4 miles and thats it.

My real world testing found out tons of interesting things accel times never revealed.

[rsiwicki]

Ryan....your last statement is explained well (don't get a big head now ).

If I am running 0-60 @ 6.7secs and 1/4 @ 14.6 then I subtract 0.7 secs off the 0-60 time and I can run with any 0-60 @ 6.0 secs and 1/4 @ 13.9 sec car from 60mph onward.

BTW...this just so happens to be what the XJR runs...13.8 @104mph with mid 5.5 0-60 and explains why a XJR the other day could not shake me from 80mph to 120mph....the damn thing was quick as soon as he hammered it but I caught up very quickly and fished the bad boy back right next to me.....although my heart still desires the Jag in all aspects....even if it does have its "booing" club

[AZhitman]

Ryan - Brilliant post. Must have copied it from somewhere (j/k LOL)

Absolutely true - Look NO further than my repeated kills of a new LS430, and occasional bouts with other cars in the 14-sec. club (on the freeway) to see that the Q is in a VERY exclusive class from 60-100, and even fewer of THOSE cars are equipped to play on the 130-150 mph playground.

1/4 mile times in the 15's for a 4200-lb car are very respectable, and like Ryan said, 1/4 mile ain't everything.

[1992Q45A]

Ryan....your last statement is explained well (don't get a big head now ).

If I am running 0-60 @ 6.7secs and 1/4 @ 14.6 then I subtract 0.7 secs off the 0-60 time and I can run with any 0-60 @ 6.0 secs and 1/4 @ 13.9 sec car from 60mph onward.

BTW...this just so happens to be what the XJR runs...13.8 @104mph with mid 5.5 0-60 and explains why a XJR the other day could not shake me from 80mph to 120mph....the damn thing was quick as soon as he hammered it but I caught up very quickly and fished the bad boy back right next to me.....although my heart still desires the Jag in all aspects....even if it does have its "booing" club

THAT IS WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT. I now know your car is outrageously fast.

I think we have to basically subtract times off of our cars. I think I was looking at this wrong. Your car is much faster then your 1/4 indicates. Just like my 91 was. You have taken it to a new level.

if you can run with xjrs, you should be happy. Yea we dont have the off the line powa, but you just experienced what I did. it sure is great

I am now satisfied with your cars performance, its better thenI ever could have expected

I was falling victim to what I was complaining about. I was just looking at your cars 1/4 performance. As i said that doesn't tell the story witht he Qs. Same rule applies with yours

I'm really really happy to here an XJR couldnt pull from you during a freeway race. That means you have essentially a higher 13 second car with 100+ traps at freeway speeds.

This is great Rob. Congrats, you should have a whole sep threat dedicated to this.

Rob KING of all 94+s

[psychic_mechanic]

The thing you are calling a "flywheel" on any automatic equipped car is called a "flexplate". A flexplate serves two functions- a place to mount the ring gear so your starter starts the car, and if gives you place to mount the torque converter which is what acts as a "flywheel" in an automatic car.

If you guys want to break 100, try getting some slicks for the track. Put them on light weight rims and make them just a tad taller than your street tires.

[1992Q45A]

I was only disappointed in Robs car, because I forgot the Q factor.

Robs car is just like any other Q. The 1/4 doesn't tell the whole story. I now Fear Robs car

[1992Q45A]

Rob,

You going to dyno your car soon?

[90Q45blue]

I'm going to do my best to put this 90-93 v. 94-95 argument to rest this fall. My 91Q has 38k on the engine so we should be seeing the best possible stock performance if I run a 1/4 correct?

Nick

[1992Q45A]

There is no debate. I was only being harsh on Robs car because I didn't factor in the Q equation

If an XJR didn't pull on Rob, it means robs car is just like my 91. much much much faster then the 1/4 indicates.

I was going to much off the 1/4. I guess I expected all those mods to make a bigger difference in the 1/4.. and if you look at his stock 1/4 mile time, it actually did. Like all Qs though the 1/4 is basically a worthless indicator. It may even be MORE worthless now that he has mods. The mods have quantified his mods, more so then the 1/4 indiciates.

XJR performance on the freeway? fuggin awesome

[90Q45blue]

Bottom line is you're never gonna get great 1/4 times in the Q because it's so darn heavy and takes so much hp/torque to get it off the line quickly.

However, the Q can dust most cars out there at freeway speeds.

Nick

[rsiwicki]

dyno will come as soon as I find a mustang or something or other dyno that Q45tech says is the real deal......for now it is just my butt dyno and I have no idea what the thing is doing, but it pulls really nice and strong all the way to redline....I don't get that 4,000 rpm rush, but I don't get the 6,000rpm drop off either.

Nick....Please feel free to provide us some 1/4 times. I/we can still benefit from your 1/4 times as I would really like to see the 0-1/8 and 1/8-1/4 differences....that is basically telling me your speeds from low 70's to mid 90's....which is a real nice 20mph sprint that is what the Q is know for....from 70mph on. I would really like to see how my Q compares to others from the 1/8 to 1/4 which is after our Q's are already moving down the road.

[90Q45blue]

We don't have an 1/4 tracks in Lawrence, but I think we have them in KC. At the very least I can hopefully video tape it and time it that way.

Nick