Best stock S2000 time I have seen is 13.8, so 13.6 seems a little optimistic. But I can totally see a SC S2000 hang with a M5. a .8 sec drop in the 1/4 is not unrealistic, and I have heard some people on this board do 13 flats/high 12's so should be a good race. They are claiming 340 hp at the crank on a 2800 lb. car vs. 396 on a 4000 lb. car. Sounds like a good race to me.

 

cvuplay,

C32 eh?? have you thought about the SLK 32 AMG? now that is a pretty dam fast car.. i think it can hit high 12's or very low 13's.. with a trap of atleast 107+. still not as good as a Z06, but dam pretty close especially for an auto.

 

When I ordered the C32 last July (the waiting list was only 10 people deep, but the dealer was getting (1) C32 a month) - I did think about the SLK32, briefly. However, I am keeping the S2000, so I decided to go with the sedan. The fastest C32 time I've seen posted on http://www.c32life.com is 13.07 @ 107 mph. Not too bad for a stock autobox.

BTW: The next gen M5 is supposed to have a 500+ HP V-10. I guess they have to keep up with MBZ's 476HP SL55.



[QUOTE]Originally posted by bayarea408
[B]cvuplay,

 

I don't really know what to tell you guys... I'm by no means a very experienced drag racer nor am I an automotive expert and I could care less what you believe. I'm an automotive enthusiast that likes fast cars... what else can I say. My last couple of cars (Eclipse and the S2) were both putting down somewhere in the neighborhood of 330-350 WHP and I haven't really been to the track more than a dozen times. I have logged many more hours street racing but I think overall I'm a pretty good driver. I've always had cars that seemed to fair better than most others like them. I'm not out to prove anything to anyone just getting tired of all the 'experts' telling people what is possible and what ain't. I heard all kinds of crap when I first started talking about turbocharging the S from all the experts here... then when it was finished I took more crap from the 'experts' here. Then I realized... who cars? I certainly don't, I enjoy my cars and that's what counts. By the way... I was using the term 'experts' in a sarcastic manner. Oh yeah... one more thing. I'm not wasting my time proving anything to this forum... already been there and done that. I proved some dyno numbers I claimed (not even on my car) and then it was an 'optimistic dyno'... guess everything must just be better in Florida.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by derryck
[B]I don't really know what to tell you guys... I'm by no means a very experienced drag racer nor am I an automotive expert and I could care less what you believe.

 

I think you would do everyone a huge favor by posting the 104mph timeslip. It's not meant to be an attack or anything negative at all. You have already done a huge service to the S2000 community by developing the speedcraft turbo.

In fact I guarantee you that timeslip would spread like wildfire and become the new "bragging right" to an excellent stock S2000 performance.

Thanks

 

13.6 @ 106 mph...is total BS! (Stock)
112 plus mph...a scanned time slip could do wonders for credibility.
Not to take anything away from the run between the two. Good run!

 

13.6x is actually possible with good driving technique and a good warmup of the tires. A guy around here was able to do a 13.70 @ about 102 mph with a slight burn out which I refused to do so 13.6X which is a hair away is possible. However trapping 106 mph is totaly impossible in a stock car as it would indicate the car had about 280-290 HP or a weighed about 2400 pounds.

As I said before, ETs are very driver dependant but trap speeds are more dependant on conditions and power vs weight vs gearing vs aerodynamicty vs traction... You can't expect someone to trap 6-7 mph more than average unless they have nitrous or heavy mods.

Even a timeslip wouldn't be enough to convince me, only a video would showing that the car is completely stock. There is no magic when it comes to the physics of acceleration.

BTW, most guys with the SC were trapping 106-109 MPH and that is an additional 100 HP, do the calculations and you will see why 106 is IMPOSSIBLE from a stock car putting out around 200-215 at the wheels.

 

[QUOTE]Even a timeslip wouldn't be enough to convince me, only a video would showing that the car is completely stock. There is no magic when it comes to the physics of acceleration.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by derryck
[B]