Wow... RX-7 w/ RB26DETT FS on Ebay.
03-23-2010, 09:18 AM
#7
Moderator
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 20,647
Total Cats: 3,009
I'm sure it is quick and all, but I'm going to be picky for a minute. For the amount of money and time he's got in it he sure does have a shitty exhaust manifold. 45* straight angles with no bends? I've seen first time creations on this forum made by unskilled welders that at least had smooth radius bends. It's not like they weren't in his budget.
And I think he should be making a lot more power than that at 38psi on race gas with that turbo. Somewhere he is losing efficiency. My friend's RB26 tuned up from 19psi to 24psi on pump gas and went from 608whp to 733whp on a pair of older inefficient turbos. That is 125hp increase from a 5psi change. I'm thinking that jumping up another 14psi, plus running a more efficient turbo, plus being able to run more aggressive timing on race gas should net you a little more than 143whp more. Something is holding him back a little, IMO.
But that's just me being picky and a little curious as to why. I'll never spend that much on a car again and I'm sure it goes like hell.
And I think he should be making a lot more power than that at 38psi on race gas with that turbo. Somewhere he is losing efficiency. My friend's RB26 tuned up from 19psi to 24psi on pump gas and went from 608whp to 733whp on a pair of older inefficient turbos. That is 125hp increase from a 5psi change. I'm thinking that jumping up another 14psi, plus running a more efficient turbo, plus being able to run more aggressive timing on race gas should net you a little more than 143whp more. Something is holding him back a little, IMO.
But that's just me being picky and a little curious as to why. I'll never spend that much on a car again and I'm sure it goes like hell.
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 10:19 AM
#10
What I saw that I did not like, was the fact that the fuel cell and pumps were not isolated from the driver. What track would he be driving that on? That maybe the reason he has no time slips.
Just think how much those pumps would spray the compartment with fuel in the event of a crash.
Just think how much those pumps would spray the compartment with fuel in the event of a crash.
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 10:32 AM
#11
What I saw that I did not like, was the fact that the fuel cell and pumps were not isolated from the driver. What track would he be driving that on? That maybe the reason he has no time slips.
Just think how much those pumps would spray the compartment with fuel in the event of a crash.
Just think how much those pumps would spray the compartment with fuel in the event of a crash.
Maybe because hard-parkers and dyno queens don't have to follow rules ?
Car was clearly built for popping eyes...not numbers.
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 01:22 PM
#13
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 5,155
Total Cats: 406
Its just a show car
Also, I ******* HATE photograph editing like this.
I dont know why this **** is popular. Any real photographer will tell you its a joke. Not to mention is not even a well composed shot.
Also, I ******* HATE photograph editing like this.
I dont know why this **** is popular. Any real photographer will tell you its a joke. Not to mention is not even a well composed shot.
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 02:04 PM
#15
Elite Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,642
Total Cats: 36
The arches are sort of a cool idea, reminiscent of the old Lemans Capri RS2600s. The thing is, those cars were boxy family sedans and without a complete rebody they will never be as graceful looking at a stock FD. So the blocky arches worked well for them. They just ugly the FD up in a big way. If they just took the time to blend them back in they would look pretty cool. The exhaust is not salvageable, nor is that hatch. It takes a special kind of idiot to ruin a car as good looking as an FD. At leats they did not put a wing the car will never use on there. That would have been ricey.
Reply
0
0
