Good news for the celica!!!

[fastwhipyo]

check out this web site and compare the GTS celica to almost any car out there, its pretty cool, you can tell where the GTS pulls and where it lags, it shows the times every 10 MPH, to give you a good idea of when your doin good and when you need to make up for doin bad.


http://www.maitreg.com/Cars/performance/models.asp


most important, check out the GTS vs RSX S, hehehe, celi wins, not to mention a 98 5 speed mustang GT

[maztur]

I'm not going to read the whole site, but where is this information coming from? Did he personally test this himself, or did he use mathematical equations to figure out theoritically what 0-30, 0-40, etc etc ? What determines soft/hard launch? Are ALL of these statistics done on the same track during the same day? Various altitudes, temperatures, track conditions, etc etc can affect performance dramatically.

Take that into consideration ...

[larryd]

i dunno where it gets its #s from but its pretty neat..

[CheezeFrog]

Originally posted by maztur
I'm not going to read the whole site, but where is this information coming from? Did he personally test this himself, or did he use mathematical equations to figure out theoritically what 0-30, 0-40, etc etc ? What determines soft/hard launch? Are ALL of these statistics done on the same track during the same day? Various altitudes, temperatures, track conditions, etc etc can affect performance dramatically.

Take that into consideration ... From the looks of it, he just plugged in Mfg HP rating, weight, and gear ratios.

[upperjames]

I don't think it's accurate at all....well.....some are close but if you look at the Z24's top speed, it claims that it does 127mph. The reality is, they're governed at 110mph or so. 10mph is a big difference. It's neat though.

[fastwhipyo]

If he used equations to figure it out he did an excelent job, becuase all the times i looked at made perfect sense, if you look at the GTS 30-60 time, its worse than the RSX, which makes sense, because unless your an experienced driver with the GTS you wouldnt know to shift at 8300 RPM's to keep it in lift, so my guess is he tested them somehow, either that, or figured out all the gear ratio's, HP/TQ at the wheels, weights and everything you need to know to figure this out and did some amazing calculating (doubfully) If you also notice, the celica makes up all the lost time from the 1-2 shift in third gear, it pulls on the RSX hard in third to bring it back in the lead, which is exactly what a race with an rsx should be, it has the tq to pull it through the shift under lift, unlike the GTS. I was really impressed with how well it would stand up to all those cars, it takes a 328i, a audi TT, mustang GT (98), and even goes head to head with a type r, everything on that site adds up pretty well dont you think? O ya, you can also see the comeback in 3rd against the ITR, it loses time in 2nd, but pulls back in 3rd and 4th to break even at the finish, technically the R has 15 more hp, weighs about 200 lbs more, and is lacking the extra speed in the tranny, so times should be about equal. I wish they would do all those times over with the same car and an Injen CAI, TRD exaust, SS, and a pully kit, Id like to see the difference those make. What would you guys estimate the difference to be? O ya dont forget the trap time it posted, this thing hauls ass after it gets goin.

[fastwhipyo]

Ok, just got the inside scoop, the guy who runs the site is basically a computer nerd who loves cars. He has some type of software that he uses to calcuate times using a huge array of statistics. Like traction (wheel width/AWD), gear ratios, weights, RPM redlines, HP/TQ and most important power bands. So basically this is what the cars are capable of if drivin with perfect launches and good shift times. But as you can see its pretty accurate, he nailed the 1-2 shift delay obvioulsy, the times show that. This shows how people are running times around 14.8 without perfect everything, cuase we shift at 8300 to make up for long 2nd gear ( or is it a short first on? haha) It may not be perfect but i bet its damn close, Pretty cool if you ask me

[larryd]

i think the data might be from car test..

[CheezeFrog]

O ya, you can also see the comeback in 3rd against the ITR, it loses time in 2nd, but pulls back in 3rd and 4th to break even at the finish, technically the R has 15 more hp, weighs about 200 lbs more, and is lacking the extra speed in the tranny, so times should be about equal.Exactly. That's what led me to believe that all the times were calculated. An ITR weighs an actual ~2520lbs. It looks like he plugged in the advertised weight of 2700lbs(?). A quick look at all the guys who have run signifigantly quicker than 14.8 in stock ITR's supports this.

[cjbaldw]

Well, I can pretty much guarantee he's using a program similar to cartest.exe if it's not actually the program he is using. I have the very same program and I've used it several times to play around with HP and TQ numbers as well as launch RPM's, higher redlines, etc. It's a cool program, the version I have is a DOS program, I think there is a windows GUI based program as well. Check out:

www.cartest2000.com

Download the test version at:

www.cartest2000.com/data/cartest.exe

Fool around with it and you'll see how he generates the numbers on his website...:)

[KleeftonSi]

Does this program factor in gearing and computes the torque curve as well? Does it use Wheel horsepower or Manufacturer's advertised flywheel horsepower? I dont' know.

If not this program isn't foolproof.

It's pretty neat the way it is presented but there are some inconsistencies. Look hard and you will find them.

[larryd]

actually i believe that car test does do all that.. its a pretty neat little package..

[t2000gts]

what the...according to this program the GTS is right behind a RSX-R (not RSX-S) in a quarter even after being half a second slower to 60! of course the RSX-R is pulling away by the end of the quarter mile nonetheless, about 1mph faster trap.

from what i was told, this guy factored in weight, hp, torque, tire/traction, powerband, redline, etc. I dunno if he did drivetrain loss though. but it sounds about right generally (i'm pretty sure it's off on the Type Rs by a little).

it's not gonna be accurate, impossible for it to be, but it's fun. :D

from lookin at the Si, looks like it's plagued by bad tires and ok gearing, but has the power right (trap was 89).

[t2000gts]

also, they posted lap times for some tracks...

since when is the 1987 Buick Regal Grand National GNX so 'quick'?

BTW, the GTS beat out the ITR by a second on Laguna Seca and almost half a second on Indianopolis... :D but got beat by the ITR by 2 seconds on Circuit de La Sarthe (LeMans), and by about 1-1.5 seconds on Alabama Intnl. Motor Speedway.

on Adelaide Intl. Circuit, the GTS was behind the S2000 by .3 seconds got the ITR by 1.4 seconds and got the RSX-S by 2.6, and the Civic Si by 3.9...whoa. :eek:

bottom of this page: http://www.maitreg.com/Cars/performance/index.asp

[celicuzrule]

since when is the 1987 Buick Regal Grand National GNX so 'quick'?

Isn't that the year when they had v6 turbo's, and are very modable?

[Slade_Templar]

um, that motor they use was advertised at 301 flywheel HP, but when dynoed it netted 330 RWHP. That thing will beat the **** out of any new celica(hell just about everything else included if modded), i dont care what it has done to it unless its that drag celica.

[RACERGTS2000]

Yes the Buick is a 3.8 turbo and Ive have taken a ride in one and they are fast very fast.

[discoz]

A little too theoretical.... but good otherwise.