Very Nice 405 and 505 City racing videos from Over here in the States
  • Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    Tadpole
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    NC United States
    Posts
    23

    Very Nice 405 and 505 City racing videos from Over here in the States

    These are videos that my brothers friends have made with his 505 turbo and 405 Mi16. They are really good videos of the cars smoking Integras, Cobras and all other kinds of cars. <a href="http://WWW.Warzone.org" target="_blank">WWW.Warzone.org</a>

    Advertisement
    Phatty405

  2. #2
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    173
    They're great man. I got them ages ago and loved ever minute. Two things is was surprised at
    1) the speed of the 505 turbo, man that thing hauls ARSE
    2) that a MR2 can keep up with the Mi16

    I love the sound of the Mi16, beautiful sounding engine. Do you know what modifications it's had, cause I want an engine that sounds like that.

    My fave vid is the one against the riced-up Honda Civic Coupe. Man I thought chromes and a bodykit where worth 50bhp more, guess not. lol
    One the 405's in 2nd it's ALL over

    Great stuff.

    Izza

  3. #3
    Tadpole
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    NC United States
    Posts
    23
    Heck Yea the 505 can haul some serious arse. He got it in California, for a couple thousand dollars. It is 220hp front wheel drive. I love the sound of all Peugeots, especially the 405.
    I own an 89 405 Mi16 myself and i love it, its so fun to go out and destroy those riced out hondas to end your day.
    Phatty405

  4. #4
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    533
    The 505 a 220hp FWD, uhm I take it you mean the 405, in which case what he done to crank 220 horse out it?

  5. #5
    nJm
    nJm is offline
    Guru nJm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,930
    Yeah, I think he would have to have done some serious re-working to turn a 505 into front wheel drive tongue
    Nick
    1983 Peugeot 505 GR


    "All of its cars from the 1.1 litre 205 through the ugly duckling 309 to the 2.2 litre 505 GTi had a rightness and a righteousness about them that turned every humdrum drive into a journey. Someone, I once wrote, in the bowels of Peugeot understands handling and how a chassis should feel." - Jeremy Clarkson

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    64
    Anybody got some good video's of Mi16's, especially with good engine/exhaust sounds?

    PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE,
    They seem to be rare as all shit on the net.
    Peugeot...
    ...The True Lion

  7. #7
    Tadpole
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    NC United States
    Posts
    23
    Hey Louis, No i am not mistaken, the 505 is turbo and 220 hp, rear wheel drive not front (My Bad) and not 4WD, The owner is my brothers friend Jonathon Mccury, Thanks
    Phatty405

  8. #8
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,334
    Doug C:
    Hey Louis, No i am not mistaken, the 505 is turbo and 220 hp, rear wheel drive not front (My Bad) and not 4WD, The owner is my brothers friend Jonathon Mccury, Thanks
    What mods were done to the 505? I thought Joe Grubbs said it was a standard N9TEA (i.e. 180hp).

    Dave
    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  9. #9
    1000+ Posts Mike Tippett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Posts
    1,749
    I hate to be a skeptic, but Mr. McCurry has claimed that his "stock" 505 Turbo will go over 160 MPH and creams M3, S4, C43 etc. in acceleration.

    Unfortunately, every road test I've ever seen of the 180 HP Turbo and 200 HP kit shows top end being something around 130-135 MPH and 1/4 mile times of about 15.7 s.

    I calculate that to make a US model 505 Turbo go 160 MPH (Cd=0.41, S=2.05 sq.m) would require something over 350 HP.

    There is something of a mystery at work here...
    1966 Peugeot 404 Coupé Injection post-restoration reassembly underway!
    Register your 404: https://recensement.leclub404.com/submit.php

  10. #10
    Tadpole
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3
    Uh, Mr. Tippet is good at confusing data and stories I see, still.

    My "stock" 505 Turbo sedan is called Blackie. Its a '89 with ZF 4speed auto tranny, Torsen limited slip differential, Teves ABS system, running bone stock, not modified in one single way. It is the nicest 505 of any kind I or anyone else has ever seen (in the US at least). It is in perfect condition inside and has about 115,000 miles on it (still not done breaking in). Everything has been tuned to perfection using Peugeot's factory manual (not the Haynes manual) by Joe Grubbs, so it can use the label TBG (Tuned By Grubbs), as these cars tend to be much much faster than an identical car that hasn't been "Tuned By Grubbs." Its top speed is 160mph, not a tenth more or less. It runs factory tire pressures, factory suspension, and Michelin Pilot XGT V4 tires (which kick ass). Yes it will beat the **** out of a BMW M3 (haven't tried the newest M3 but I doubt it as its a serious beast compared to the older one), it will out accelerate and outstop an Audi S4 with ease, and it will also beat a AMG C43 Benz from 80-130mph and then outstop it too. Joe Grubbs used to work at the local Audi/Porsche/Jaguar dealership and so we have tested lots of so-called "performance" cars side-by-side against a well-tuned 505Turbo and it does really well against them. Its 1/4 mile was best at 98mph, I can't remember the time. 0-60 best was under 6 seconds.

    I also have a 505 Turbo 5speed sedan that has been modified a little. <grin> We originally called it Crackie, later after its mods we sometimes call it the "Danielson Car." It is a '88 with a US-specific body package (which is pretty much a lack of a body kit of any sort compared to other world market offerings) which is totally different than the '89 505 Turbo. My '88 also has Teves ABS but no Torsen differential. It has a Danielson head & camshaft, no muffler (straight pipe instead), Bosch 804 injectors (flow more than stock), and runs 1.15Bar of boost. It has been TBG'd more so than Blackie. This car is scary fast-it will peg rev limiter in 5th gear very easily at 166mph. It hits rev limiter in 4th gear harder than it used to (when stock) in 2nd gear, rev limiter in 4th BTW is 142mph, rev limiter in 2nd gear is only 64(?)mph. It is UNSAFE AS HELL to drive since even in 5th gear, meandering along at a mere 70mph, if you accidentally dip into the throttle to much the back end will break loose real quick, but is easily controllable. 170mph would not be difficult in this car. I don't drive it cause I'm scared, and would never ever EVER even consider starting it up in the wet.

    Before the Danielson Car, I had another stock '88 505 Turbo 5speed sedan Joe "tweaked" a little for me. All we did was turn the boost up to about 1Bar. It had fuel injectors on it for 9PSI of boost (which were LESS than stock should have been for a '88). It also had a straight pipe instead of a muffler. I beat all kinds of cars in it, highly modded Stangs & Camaros, Porsches, BMWs, Corvettes, and all sorts of ricers if I was bored. On a cold night, it ran the 1/4 mile in 14.4 @ 104mph. It was tested at 264HP going to the road, which is what counts (not horsepower at the crank, which would be much higher). We were trying to "finish off" the already-cracked head so we could install the Danielson head & camshaft in it. It took a long ass time but it finally worked.

    Hope that clears up a few little "claims" I supposedly made. What the unknowing Mr. Tippet does not understand (that some of you will) is that Horsepower and Torque aren't really what counts, its the overall powerband and torque curves combined with the gearing. The reason the 505 Turbo is able to perform so much better than similarly (or higher) powered cars is because it has a MUCH MUCH flatter torque curve. Its peak torque is sustained accross a HUGE RPM range (like ~3000), instead of for about 20RPM. This means that over time you are averaging a shitload more power being pounded out onto the road than other higher-powered cars can if they don't have as flat of a curve. If you are accelerating, you aren't staying at any given RPM for very long (hopefully) and so most cars are only in their "powerband" for a short period of time since their "powerband" is so short, whereas the 505 Turbo's "powerband" lasts WAY WAY longer. It might not be putting quite as much power to the pavement at a specific (and short-lived) RPM, but over time it averages a TON more power to the pavement. Maybe I have confused the situation even more, hope not.

    Jonathan McCurry.

    BTW, Blackie is the only Turbo of mine that has ever been in any videos, and I don't think I was actually driving it during most of the videos, ok, maybe during the donuts.

  11. #11
    1000+ Posts Mike Tippett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Posts
    1,749
    I still am amazed that among all of the 505 Turbos ever tested by any magazine in the world, none have been able to even come close to your acceleration claims for your stock car.

    Were their test drivers chimpanzees?

    So I am reluctantly forced to conclude that they are right and you are wrong, Mr. McCurry!
    1966 Peugeot 404 Coupé Injection post-restoration reassembly underway!
    Register your 404: https://recensement.leclub404.com/submit.php

  12. #12
    Tadpole
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3
    Maybe the car wasn't broken in, or they ran 87octane gasoline (instead of required 91), who knows, who cares. The car does it, and it is stock, bone stock. A flatter torque curve will allow you to outaccelerate cars with much higher peak power outputs, if their powerband isn't as flat.

    Maybe others can see past your posts and ignorance, especially since you have never ever driven or ridden in a Turbo.

    My car does what it does, repeatedly, so do all my other 505 Turbos, and my friends' that have also been "Tuned By Grubbs." He is not a magical mechanic like you once suggested, but simply follows Peugeot's manual (not Haynes) to the letter, then we go drive it, hard.

    The only way I can make my car as slow as the magazine testers (which you obviously have not read all magazine tests) is to not powerbrake the automatic and to have the boost pressure turned down much lower. When I first got all my Turbos (and my friends too) the cars were more inline with the figures you are thinking of, but this was with boost pressure at about half what it should be, timing way off, mixture messed up, TPS mis-adjusted, etc. I have never driven a 505 Turbo brand new, and probably never will, so I can't comment on how they perform as the magazine testers got to drive them, but I can tell you that every 505 Turbo has that capability, if tuned properly. Obviously older Turbo models had less power output because of less boost pressure and so their times & performance figures were not as good, but they are still better today than the magazine testers were able to achieve.

    Personally, I think it has something to do with the fact that after 130,000 miles the engine is not even finished "breaking-in" as the cylinder walls still have a definite cross-hatch pattern on them, from original machining over a decade ago. Maybe the engines produced way less power before they "broke-in" very good like when brand new. Who knows.

  13. #13
    1000+ Posts Mike Tippett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Posts
    1,749
    Please, humour me Jon, send us the road tests done by some magazine - ANY magazine - that shows that a bone stock 505 180 HP Turbo is anywhere near as fast as you say it is.

    Jon, you wrote that I haven't seen the right road tests, come on then, let's see them, right here, right now!

    I tell you what, you post your 160 MPH + 14.5 second 1/4 mile 505 Turbo tests here and I'll post all of mine which say it's a quick, comfortable car, but more like a 130 MPH, 15.7 second 1/4 mile car, not an S4-killer.

    Make sure the test results you post are properly referenced so everyone can check the sources for themselves...
    1966 Peugeot 404 Coupé Injection post-restoration reassembly underway!
    Register your 404: https://recensement.leclub404.com/submit.php

  14. #14
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    533
    Lol. Dude, I would like to believe you but this sounds like a load of shit.

    Show us some 1/4 ET slip sheets and I might believe you.

  15. #15
    Tadpole
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3
    Why don't we forget about magazines, since we cannot get a brand new 505 Turbo and so will not be able to reproduce their test subject (the brand new 505 Turbo).

    Instead, why don't you go for a ride (if you aren't scared to go that fast), bring your own boost gage, factory Peugeot manual, and any other test equipment you like including radar gun (if you don't trust mine), and you will not ever doubt how fast it is. In fact, if the local officials are out at that time, we can see if they will "race" us with their 159mph top speed Chevy (shit) Camaro patrol cars, since I know they cannot "hang" and they have a repeatedly tested (meaning actual) top speed of 159mph.

    I don't have a scanner, and have never subscribed to car magazines. I have seen those tests over the years in different places and have no idea where they are. The only magazines I have are the electronic copies you sent me via email.

    You could even drive down that special Canadian model 405 DL Sportwagon and we could race it against Blackie or any of my other Turbos. You should be able to do pretty good in it since it can beat a new BMW X5. Maybe it wasn't broken in yet either and your Sportwagon is, at least I should hope it is with as many miles as you have abused it (remember your pre-warranty expiration cooling system test? hahahhahaha).

  16. #16
    1000+ Posts Mike Tippett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Posts
    1,749
    Jon,

    You clearly did not get the fact that I would have been JOKING if I said my 405 (note, again: it's not a wagon!!) is faster than a BMW X5. The relative acceleration of differently-loaded vehicles in the cut and thrust of mountain road traffic as I experienced and described is hardly an absolute claim. Yes, I kept the X5 behind me, but driver skill and anticipation plays a large role in these circumstances. Anyway, nowhere did I say my 110 HP 405 would outdrag an X5. Outhandle, yes. Outdrag, no! Sorry that this posting on Peugeot-L confused you and riled you up so much wink

    That's the difference between you and me, I say my car will do about actual 200 km/h in perfect conditions (about 10 km/h faster than Peugeot claims) and you say yours will do 260, which is a cool 50 km/h faster than Peugeot says it is.

    So I see that you have no magazines that show the massive speed you allege, so we may safely conclude that you don't have any such thing. Too bad.

    I'd be pleased to drive your car at its top speed, which would not scare me as I've cruised at up to 210 km/h many times while driving in Germany over the past 22 years.

    I don't know if you're convincing anyone, but we really want to believe you ;-)

    <small>[ 24 April 2002, 12:02 PM: Message edited by: Mike Tippett ]</small>
    1966 Peugeot 404 Coupé Injection post-restoration reassembly underway!
    Register your 404: https://recensement.leclub404.com/submit.php

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Cary, NC USA
    Posts
    67
    This is nice and heated! I love it!!!

    For what it's worth... I have not witnessed many of the feats that Jonathan has claimed, and many times I'll raise an eyebrow and say "Um, really?" with a smirk.

    However, everytime I ride with this guy I am truly amazed and wonder how in the hell these cars were driven by automotive journalists in the past. From what I've seen, it appears that Peugeot did a very inconsistent tuning job on these cars at the factory--I don't think they followed their own procedures (which are *very* time consuming), instead they simply got the cars running using very preliminary adjustments and then kicked them out the door (and onto the boat for export models). Just setting the boost pressure requires several test drives...

    But anyway I have witnessed this car slowly overtaking a Mercedes-Benz AMG C43 at high speed (over 100 MPH). We then followed the guy into his apartment complex, and he had nothing but praise for the mystery black sedan that edged him out ("Is that one of them Alfa Romantics?")

    A US spec Audi S4 (248bhp) is very easy to outrun--we have compared several to "blackie" and it is plainly obvious that Blackie simply gets more power to the road and over a longer period of time. I am a factory trained Audi tech, thus I have driven many of these cars. Trust me, the S4 is not a supercar... If you really drive the balls off of it and hit every gear just right, you might be able to eek a 0-60 in 5.5 seconds. It shouldn't seem like a miraculous occurence to outrun one.

    I have also witnessed Blackie outrunning a US spec BMW M3. The car looked to be a '97 or '98 model. Note that these cars are about on par with a new S4 in performance.

    I have never seen Blackie do 160 MPH... but I have actually witnessed it at a peak velocity of 152 MPH. This was the only time I was in the car during a top speed run. It was an empty stretch of new highway which had a series of very gentle rolling hills. Given more time on a very straight and flat piece of road, I could imagine the car building up a little more speed. Our speed dropped to about 143 MPH by the time we reached the top of some of the hills.

    The 1989 US spec 505 Turbo sedan has a Cx of 0.38. The other '89 sedans were 0.37... the trunk (boot) mounted wing added some additional drag. This information was obtained from a Canadian publication called "The 1989 New car book"--which covered all 1989 North American market cars.

    And another thing--why all the bullying and pessimism? Why would someone thousands of miles away blatantly lie about the performance of a car--to *other* enthusiasts?? Maybe someone could tell me why it's such a big deal to some people. I fail to see the logic in assuming that someone is lying, when only very few people have actually garnered the appropriate and pertinent facts with which to make such an assumption. Unless you know for sure--that is, driven or measured this car's actual performance and state of tune, it makes sense that only neutral opinions and comments should be expressed.

    -Joe G.

  18. #18
    1000+ Posts Mike Tippett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Posts
    1,749
    Joe,

    Just a quick question - was the 152 MPH you "observed" on the car's speedometer? wink

    "Top speed" is only legitimate if timed over a measured distance on level ground or on a banked circuit, in two directions to remove the effects of wind. That's how European magazines and car manufacturers measure it, not to mention all sanctioning speed record bodies...

    Fortunately, in Europe, the Autobahnen and other superhighways have km markers, so getting a REAL speed reading is easy (and it's remarkable how inaccurate some speedos are - virtually always optimistic, by the way - at higher speeds). The last 405 with VDO gauges I had in Europe read about 5% fast at speeds around 160...and a 505 GTI Danielson with Veglia gauges tested by Echappement in September 1982 had a 10% over-reading speedometer eek!

    A Daf 55 could probably do 250 km/h down an 8%hill with a tailwind, owing to its CVT drivetrain. Does that make it a fast car? wink

    For anyone who is still interested in the topic behind this pissing match , I thought I'd reproduce some of the 505 Turbo performance figures here, both from Peugeot and some independent magazines. I gather this model (505 Turbo) was not sold Down Under due to its not being available in RHD.

    From Peugeot brochures:

    1985 French model 505 Turbo Injection, 160 HP:
    Cd: 0.37
    0-100 km/h: 8.6 seconds
    s.s. 400 m: 16.2 seconds
    Top speed: 205 km/h

    1987 French model 505 Turbo Injection, 180 HP:
    0-100 km/h: 8.4 seconds
    s.s. 400 m: 16.0 seconds
    Top speed: 210 km/h

    From contemporary magazines:

    1983 model 505 Turbo, 150 HP, without intercooler, tested in 2 degrees C weather (L'Auto-Journal 15 March 1983):
    0-100 km/h 8.7 seconds
    s.s. 400 m: 15.6 s
    Top speed: 200 km/h
    Maximum fuel consumption: 39.9 L/100 km @ 200 km/h

    (these first generation press test fleet cars were later revealed to have been seriously tweaked, partially explaining why the fuel consumption was so ferocious).

    Sport-Auto, August 1984:
    160 HP intercooled 505 Turbo Injection:
    0-100 km/h: 9.1 seconds
    s.s. 400 m: 16.0 seconds
    Top speed: 205 km/h

    Sport-Auto, August 1984:
    200 HP Peugeot Talbot Sport Kit 505 Turbo Injection:
    0-100 km/h: 8.3 seconds
    s.s. 400 m: 15.7 seconds
    Top Speed: 218 km/h

    Sport-Auto, November 1985:
    180 HP 505 Turbo Injection:
    0-100 km/h: 9.1 seconds
    s.s. 400 m: 16.1 seconds
    Top speed: 209 km/h
    (the testers sarcastically noted that they'd ALMOST achieved the acceleration times of the 1983 "150 HP" car with the 180 HP version. This particular model seemed to be somewhat down on Peugeot's claims for the 505 T180, so I'd be inclined to accept Peugeot's claims as being representative).

    Also of interest: the European market 0-100 km/h (62.09 MPH) claimed time of 8.4 seconds coincides well with the US claimed 0-60 MPH times of 7.9 seconds for the 180 HP version. Also, remember that 400 m is 9.3 metres short of 1/4 mile, making these 400 times appear faster if you're comparing them to 1/4 mile times.

    About the drag coefficient, I know that the initial 505 design was 0.41, a disappointment after the 0.39 of the 504. Peugeot cleaned up the detailing on the front end of the car around the Euro headlights (large rubber gaskets sealing the light apertures and around the grille), directed underhood airflow better and put a redesigned bumper/spoiler unit on the front. Collectively, these measures reduced the Cd to 0.37. I seriously doubt that the US/Canadian model 505 had the lower Cd, because of the massive bumpers, the goofy headlights (designed for 1983, pre-dating the Euro Cd upgrades). Daniel Héraud's 1987 Road Report lists a Cd of 0.44(!) for the 505 sedan. A rear wing should lower the Cd of the car, if it's designed properly; on the 405 MI16, the wing knocks 0.01 off the Cd.

    If Mr. McCurry has any contemporary magazine tests to reproduce here for all to see, I'd be very interested.
    1966 Peugeot 404 Coupé Injection post-restoration reassembly underway!
    Register your 404: https://recensement.leclub404.com/submit.php

  19. #19
    Fellow Frogger! DTwo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    770

    Default

    Hmmmm

    This is a wierd and interesting thread.....

    I suppose if you wind the boost up/put in a larger turbo (that can sustain the raised boost), add a larger intercooler and the car didn't instantly blow all it's pipes/headgasket or melt a piston....6s 0-100km is possible in just about any "good" 2lt turbo car. eg...like just about any turbo grey import....tho they have considerably "better" designed engines than the simca? sorced turbo engine used in the 505s

    "blacky" must be one of those rare "blessed" cars to come from the factory with everything just right to achieve these things stock.....especially with an _auto_!!!

    I want to believe.....I really do

    actually, what i really want is for the turbo 505s to be here in Australia so I can mess with a few myself, I imagine Mr Murat would have a bit of fun with them too!

    The turbos didn't fit in RHD models cause of the brake booster or something? no?......who needs a brake booster anyway?....never bothered my minis
    ________
    Medical marijuana
    Last edited by DTwo; 22nd August 2011 at 02:10 AM.

  20. #20
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,334
    Mike Tippett:

    Also of interest: the European market 0-100 km/h (62.09 MPH) claimed time of 8.4 seconds coincides well with the US claimed 0-60 MPH times of 7.9 seconds for the 180 HP version. Also, remember that 400 m is 9.3 metres short of 1/4 mile, making these 400 times appear faster if you're comparing them to 1/4 mile times.

    About the drag coefficient, I know that the initial 505 design was 0.41, a disappointment after the 0.39 of the 504. Peugeot cleaned up the detailing on the front end of the car around the Euro headlights (large rubber gaskets sealing the light apertures and around the grille), directed underhood airflow better and put a redesigned bumper/spoiler unit on the front. Collectively, these measures reduced the Cd to 0.37. I seriously doubt that the US/Canadian model 505 had the lower Cd, because of the massive bumpers, the goofy headlights (designed for 1983, pre-dating the Euro Cd upgrades). Daniel Héraud's 1987 Road Report lists a Cd of 0.44(!) for the 505 sedan. A rear wing should lower the Cd of the car, if it's designed properly; on the 405 MI16, the wing knocks 0.01 off the Cd.

    If Mr. McCurry has any contemporary magazine tests to reproduce here for all to see, I'd be very interested.
    I'm surprised that the US spec 505 Turbo could match the Euro acceleration times considering that it is approx 90kg heavier.

    I'm also very suprised that the M116 spoiler lowers the CD. I thought the only spoilers that lowered the CD were the ones that they put on the back of station wagons to force the air around the corner of the top of the tail gate to fill up the "dead spot" and partially eliminate the low pressure area that usually resides there.

    Dave
    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  21. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Cary, NC USA
    Posts
    67
    Mike,

    I am fully and intimately (nice word choices, huh?) aware of instrumentation inaccuracies. From my rants about my obsessive need for everything to be perfect, you should know that I make damn sure instrumentation is as accurate as possible.

    To this end, I have modified the needles and counterweights on the instruments in my own cars in order to achieve maximum accuracy. Yes, I am a little *too* picky sometimes.

    Anyway the 152 that I saw was verified by the engine speed, as indiciated by the pain-stakingly recalibrated tachometer. This was cross-verified by calculating an engine/vehicle speed reference point given the 205/60R15 tires, 3.889:1 final drive ratio, 0.73:1 4th gear ratio, and locked up torque converter (no slippage).

    So rest assured, I leave no detail untouched.

    And... I am also fully aware of the common methods that testers use in obtaining accleration and top speed on cars--including the "average" method which is a pseudo-correction for any slope the test course might have. I still doubt a new factory tuned car would accomplish what a fully broken-in and obscenely tuned one can.

    What I remember is that this car would attain a multi-verified 152 MPH until the road surface began to climb slight again. Speed would drop to apporximately 143, then gradually rise again as the road flattened out.

    By using a complex mental reasoning algorithm (or something like that), I can safely deduce that that car would indeed gain maybe a few more MPH if the road surface remained smooth and flat for a longer interval. I can't comment on "160 MPH" though... I admit it does seem a bit on the high side.

    Trust me, if I'm ever in doubt of something, I play conservative. I'm not one to exagerrate, ask anyone who has met me...

    When Jonathan called me up and asked "What's 6000 RPM in 4th gear?"... I calculated it was almost 160 (159.8xxx). I thought he was full o sh*t and insisted there must have been an error. Remember, I had not been on a top speed run in this car yet... I just tune the b!tches, I don't like insane speed. Later we took the aforementioned test drive so he could prove it--then there was no denying it for me... it seemed like there was a chance that he must have really hit 6000 RPM, or atleast very close to it. The Turbo and V6 series II speedometer in the US pegs at exactly 155 MPH.

    I have no idea what kind of slope there was on the 160 run, but he said the car held that speed for around a minute before he had to slow down... I can't think of any continuous hills around here that would be that long, so there must have been some genuine speed-holding strength at work here... Needless to say, I have thought of this and all the ancillary details over and over again and just conclude that it is truly amazing. Personally, I would have been impressed with a steady 140...

    I am aware of the various test figures for similarly rated 505 Turbos, and that was the kind of performance I would expect given the weight, drag coefficient, and advertised power/torque... but it seems they can do much more when time is taken to tune the engine. It sometimes takes me, an experienced tech, an hour or more to adjust the valves (not including the valve cover R&R)... that's how obsessive I am. Anything can be made better if you put some dedication behind it.

    The drag coefficient specs I quoted for an '89 505 in the US market came from an automotive journal, thus should hold the same merit as the various specs you have quoted. 1989+ US 505s have a very similar profile to 1986+ non-US 505s, except the valences tend to dip a little lower and there are actual side skirts. The valences protrude the same amount from the body, even though the US model retains the bumper shocks--actually an amazing feat.

    Still, 0.38 and 180bhp do not equal 150+ MPH... Logically, this either means the car is more aerodynamic that 0.38 (not likely), or it does more than 180bhp. I should add (if I haven't already), that my G-Tech accelerometer estimated 217 RWHP on Blackie. This is not a dynomometer of course, but it is a useful tool for *estimating* power. For reference, it measured ~105 FWHP on Jonathan's Mi16 just after he bought it. This jumped to 133 FWHP after a tune up. Sooo, the G-Tech seemed to prove itself as being not too terribly inaccurate.

    -Joe G.

  22. #22
    1000+ Posts Mike Tippett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Posts
    1,749
    XN6guy:
    Anyway the 152 that I saw was verified by the engine speed, as indiciated by the pain-stakingly recalibrated tachometer. This was cross-verified by calculating an engine/vehicle speed reference point given the 205/60R15 tires, 3.889:1 final drive ratio, 0.73:1 4th gear ratio, and locked up torque converter (no slippage).
    So, just to clarify, you did not measure the top speed with a stopwatch over a fixed distance, but relied instead on a recalibrated instrument (tacho) based on a THEORETICAL (calculated) vehicle speed to engine rpm ratio? Or did you measure the actual circumference of the car's rear tires? Did you try to measure the tire ciurcumference at speed too? That because the circumference gets a little - or a lot - larger at speed due to centrifugal force, actually LOWERING the rpm and increasing the theoretical speed...

    Well, my point is, time it over a fixed distance (preferably 5+ km), that's the only real way of measuring speed.
    1966 Peugeot 404 Coupé Injection post-restoration reassembly underway!
    Register your 404: https://recensement.leclub404.com/submit.php

  23. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Cary, NC USA
    Posts
    67
    True, the most accurate way to determine one's speed is to measure the exact time it takes to travel an exact distance...

    And in addition to your notes, a tire's circumference will decrease as the tread wears out.

    My calculations were based on the specs that Michelin provides for new tires. When this speed test was performed, the tires probably had around 3000-4000 miles on them. I remember because I changed his oil at the same time I mounted the new tires--and I know I changed the oil shortly after the speed run because I remember making sarcastic comments about how burned the oil was going to be (since we held WOT for so long).

    Heh heh... next time I'll drive alongside in my superfly 505 TD and try to get a measurement of the circumference at that speed. I've got to be easy on that XD2S's throttle though... don't want to embarass blackie! When I first bought that TD, I was able to peg the speedometer several times. Of course, it was an 85 MPH speedo... but anyway--

    -Joe G.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •