caymandive

iTrader: (2)

I don't think you need to do much to get a 5 second or under 0-60. I ran a 13.6@101 and that is equivalant to about a 5 second 0-60 run and I wasn't even weight reduced.

The guy from Canada ran a 13.3@104 and that is def sub 5 second territory.
1. Remove the spare/jack
2. Weight about 160lbs or less
3. 1/4 tank of gas
4. Intake LMS or JOEZ
5. Launch with Traction Control off
6. ECT power mode

It's that easy. Shifts perfectly everytime. This automatic tranny is amazing and doesn't lose much power through its drivetrain. 14% loss is awesome. This car must be making more power than 306 because 14% is almost unheard of in a auto tranny.

AlterZgo

Use slicks, fully disable any traction control, brake torque, and launch and that should yield sub 5.0 sec 0-60s.

caymandive

iTrader: (2)

Anyone know how much the spare tire weighs off hand? I don't feel like pulling it out and weighing tonight, but someone asked and I was like I have no idea. 20lbs?

combfilter

iTrader: (3)

I think right about 25lbs. It's not much. I took mine out sunday on the way to the track and it felt about as much as my turntable which weighs the same. maybe 30lbs.

oh and I bet money that RoRo's 350 is now an under 5 second 350. **** caymandive. I bet you are damn close to 5.2 on your good runs. Didn't one of you guys get a 1.9xx on your 60'?????

jman-is350

This suggestion should do the trick and also, take it to the track at <55F temperature and you are there.

caymandive

iTrader: (2)

I haven't seen anyone hit a 1.9xx except for RoRo. My closest to 1.9's is a 2.024 60'. I am pretty sure that anyone who runs drag radials on this car should be able to hit consistent 1.9's.

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

Where did you get that Supra number? All the magazine tests I saw for the 6 speed put it well in the 4's. Car & Driver put their first '93 0-60 in 4.6 and quarter miled it in 13.1 at 109 mph.

They did get slower over the years, and a few of us believe that particular '93 was a ringer, but they do weigh quite a bit less than the IS350 (my IS weighed 3620 with about a half tank of fuel, and my Supra weighed 3415 with a quarter tank) and generally dyno'd much better than they should have (mine dyno'd 330 whp on a Dynojet with cats, stock air filter, and decent fuel.)

The IS needs a diet if it is going to get into the 4's. You'll be very hard pressed to get significantly more from the engine without compromising noise, so the only things left are shorter gearing and lighter weight.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

lightweight is the best tuning a car can get, which can defeat the best of engine tuning

ToothDoc

The IS already does 5.1 stock with good launch. I've tested mine many times and it ranges from 5.1 to 5.5 depending on how heavy of fuel load, the temp, and how much wheel spin I get at launch.

Irishman06

survey says:

(bzzzz) Oooo, soo sorry. Lighter, in a race car, is better, because it allows you to control WHERE you want the weight you DO have.
By locating the majority of the downward force* of the vehicle as closely together as possible (towards the middle of the car, where the big heavy things like engines and drivers sit), you can lower the rotational inertia of the car, which gives you the handling properties of the cars you mentioned.
Using the suspension, you can control then where that downward force interacts with the ground: cornering forces and downward forces are DIRECTLY proportional, in general: more weight on the tire = higher normal force = higher friction force. The more you push down with your hand on a table, for example, the harder it is to slide your hand across the table.
I put a * next to downward force, because weight isn't always the only component, on high end racecars (and even high end sports cars these days), you actually have aerodynamic downforce being generated "pushing" the car onto the road. Why would engineers go through so much effort to add what is essentially weight to a car?

I've driven a car that had too little weight: a Formula SAE car. With driver, it weighed under 650 lbs, and made almost 85 horsepower at the wheels. If you ever put even the slightest bit too much throttle into it (on extra-soft race slicks, no less), you'd light those suckers faster than a chain smoker could light his next cancer stick. I don't think its a very big coincidence that the biggest drivers at FSAE schools are typically the fastest: they've inherently got an extra 50-60 lbs of normal force to work with, and sometimes more.

starstreak

So how does the 335i get 4.6? Isn't that about the same size and weight as the IS? Or is the TQ that much better on the BMW that it gets pulling alot faster?

javyLSU

iTrader: (21)

Twin turbos, tuned to provide boost at different RPM ranges.

Javier

Irishman06

Weight distribution. The BMW puts more weight over the rear wheels, which gives a higher normal force, which means a better hookup, etc. This allows it to handle the higher torque of the motor, which combined with (I'll bet) different gearing, means faster times.

CWS

Just find a 1/4 run that's down a steep hill. That'll work.

LexFather

Most BMWs have 50/50 weight distribution. So does the Lexus IS and GS, very close to 50/50.

You want weight over the rear wheels, think 911!