0-60 in 4.98....1/8 mile in 8.6.... 1/4 mile in 13.35
07-02-08 | 11:54 AM
#16
Thread Starter
Lexus Champion
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 2
From: Ga
07-02-08 | 01:11 PM
#17
ohh sorry. I weigh 215 pounds. I have the spare tire, tools, and jack in the back, nothing else. That makes me wonder, I should take those out, see what happens. Whenever i go to the track i definitely will.
Oh that also reminds me that I am running on stock FUEL (I just got the car last week and I havent filled it up yet), so im guessing the dealership put something like 89 octane or 91 on it..
Should I try 93 on it, whenever I fill it up???? does that make any difference on this car???
Oh that also reminds me that I am running on stock FUEL (I just got the car last week and I havent filled it up yet), so im guessing the dealership put something like 89 octane or 91 on it..
Should I try 93 on it, whenever I fill it up???? does that make any difference on this car???
Putting in higher octane won't make a difference. Putting in lower octane WILL, but not one you'd want.
07-02-08 | 03:05 PM
#18
The car is programmed for 91. Anything higher won't do any good at all. The car has no idea what kind of gas is in it, it just knows the max timing advance it's programmed for... which it needs 91 to be able to do without knock.
You could put 100 octane in there and it'd run no better than it does on 91. (worse if you don't check the label and end up with leaded 100 :P)
Now, if for some weird reason, your local stations vary in what they sell as premium, with some offering 91 and some offering 93, then there's certainly no harm in using the 93... but if it costs any more you're wasting money.
But I agree about running a lower fuel level, a full tank is a lot of weight you don't need at the track (or at the pseudo track if using a G-tech or similar self timing device)
You could put 100 octane in there and it'd run no better than it does on 91. (worse if you don't check the label and end up with leaded 100 :P)
Now, if for some weird reason, your local stations vary in what they sell as premium, with some offering 91 and some offering 93, then there's certainly no harm in using the 93... but if it costs any more you're wasting money.
But I agree about running a lower fuel level, a full tank is a lot of weight you don't need at the track (or at the pseudo track if using a G-tech or similar self timing device)
07-02-08 | 03:53 PM
#19
Lexus Test Driver
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 1
From: ca
Today I pluged my vector FX 2 (measures hp, 0-60, 1/8 mile and 1/4 mile) on my car, IS350... I set the weight including myself.....I went to a flat road that is in the middle of nowhere and did couple of runs. temperature was 72 degrees. My car is completly stock...
It was so easy to lauch a ATX car, after having a FWD 5-speed manual hehe.
these are the numbers that I got:
RUN#1
estimated WHP: 270 (this is an estimate of WHP, dont go crazy on me)
0-60: 4.98 sec
1/8 mile: 8.6 sec
1/4 mile: 13.35 sec
RUN #2
I sucked, I tried to powerbrake higher than 2k rpm and the wheels just spun..
so i ended up with 0-60 of 5.4..........1/4 mile of 14.00
I was very surprised with these numbers (run #1 obviously). these are definitely better than I expected. specially the 1/4 mile time, which I thought it was going to be 13.9 (according to edmunds.com)...I was also surprised because these are very very close to my friends C55 AMG
I read the Road and Track ad which stated 4.9 sec from 0-60 for the IS350...I posted a message on they board asking them how to launch the car... they turned of the traction control as well as the VSC, and put the car on ECT mode, and powerbraked.... so thats what i did...
After these numbers I am even more in love with my car, I will be getting tanabe exhaust and fsport intake soon, We will see how that works.
I have used this device (vector FX2) on 2 G35's, C55 AMG, bmw 325, mazda 6, rx-8, and my bros pathfinder.. and I got me very close numbers to stated internet figures... It takes into account the drag coefficient, the vehicle weight and cargo weight, and more... to measure horsepower to the wheels, it feels how much your car pulls (gmeter), how much does it weigh, and the drag coefficient. This gives it a break HP... It takes off 15% BHP on FWD and RWD cars (you have to set it)....for example the 306 hp of the IS350 minus 15% (46) equals 260 Wheel horsepower (vector said 270. give it a break)
What do you guys think???
It was so easy to lauch a ATX car, after having a FWD 5-speed manual hehe.
these are the numbers that I got:
RUN#1
estimated WHP: 270 (this is an estimate of WHP, dont go crazy on me)
0-60: 4.98 sec
1/8 mile: 8.6 sec
1/4 mile: 13.35 sec
RUN #2
I sucked, I tried to powerbrake higher than 2k rpm and the wheels just spun..
so i ended up with 0-60 of 5.4..........1/4 mile of 14.00
I was very surprised with these numbers (run #1 obviously). these are definitely better than I expected. specially the 1/4 mile time, which I thought it was going to be 13.9 (according to edmunds.com)...I was also surprised because these are very very close to my friends C55 AMG
I read the Road and Track ad which stated 4.9 sec from 0-60 for the IS350...I posted a message on they board asking them how to launch the car... they turned of the traction control as well as the VSC, and put the car on ECT mode, and powerbraked.... so thats what i did...
After these numbers I am even more in love with my car, I will be getting tanabe exhaust and fsport intake soon, We will see how that works.
I have used this device (vector FX2) on 2 G35's, C55 AMG, bmw 325, mazda 6, rx-8, and my bros pathfinder.. and I got me very close numbers to stated internet figures... It takes into account the drag coefficient, the vehicle weight and cargo weight, and more... to measure horsepower to the wheels, it feels how much your car pulls (gmeter), how much does it weigh, and the drag coefficient. This gives it a break HP... It takes off 15% BHP on FWD and RWD cars (you have to set it)....for example the 306 hp of the IS350 minus 15% (46) equals 260 Wheel horsepower (vector said 270. give it a break)
What do you guys think???
07-02-08 | 06:21 PM
#22
Thread Starter
Lexus Champion
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 2
From: Ga
I set it to weight: 3750.... [the car weighs 3530 plus 220(me) equals 3750]
and drag coefficient I left it default. according to the Lexus web page it is .28.......I forgot to change that.
The drag coeficient and weight is only used to measure the WHP. It does not use this to measure any of these times...
and drag coefficient I left it default. according to the Lexus web page it is .28.......I forgot to change that.
The drag coeficient and weight is only used to measure the WHP. It does not use this to measure any of these times...
Last edited by juice14; 07-02-08 at 07:37 PM.
07-02-08 | 07:36 PM
#23
Thread Starter
Lexus Champion
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 2
From: Ga
The car is programmed for 91. Anything higher won't do any good at all. The car has no idea what kind of gas is in it, it just knows the max timing advance it's programmed for... which it needs 91 to be able to do without knock.
You could put 100 octane in there and it'd run no better than it does on 91. (worse if you don't check the label and end up with leaded 100 :P)
Now, if for some weird reason, your local stations vary in what they sell as premium, with some offering 91 and some offering 93, then there's certainly no harm in using the 93... but if it costs any more you're wasting money.
But I agree about running a lower fuel level, a full tank is a lot of weight you don't need at the track (or at the pseudo track if using a G-tech or similar self timing device)
You could put 100 octane in there and it'd run no better than it does on 91. (worse if you don't check the label and end up with leaded 100 :P)
Now, if for some weird reason, your local stations vary in what they sell as premium, with some offering 91 and some offering 93, then there's certainly no harm in using the 93... but if it costs any more you're wasting money.
But I agree about running a lower fuel level, a full tank is a lot of weight you don't need at the track (or at the pseudo track if using a G-tech or similar self timing device)
Before I say anythign here is something VERY VERY interesting for all fo us.....
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...remium_feature
07-03-08 | 07:37 AM
#24
Before I say anythign here is something VERY VERY interesting for all fo us.....
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...remium_feature
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...remium_feature
(though in my opinion they don't sufficiently address the potential long term problems running regular in a car programmed for premium...they just mention the power loss)
07-08-08 | 06:19 AM
#27
I don't think it's fair to round your 4.98 down to 4.9. That's a solid 5.0 in my book. You should also be running the same road in each direction to average the results since their is no way the road is perfectly flat and level.
07-08-08 | 10:14 AM
#28
Driver School Candidate
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
From: OK
07-08-08 | 12:28 PM
#30
Thread Starter
Lexus Champion
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 2
From: Ga
I also went to the track with both cars and with the device and the Vector FX was never more than .1 of a sec away from the track's time.
That said, means that the range on this time could be from 4.88 to 5.08....
Also I did run a 4.92 a couple of days ago, I havent said anything because I didnt go the whole 1/4 mile so just posting a 0-60 time would be almost pointless for this topic.
Last edited by juice14; 07-08-08 at 12:31 PM.