Yes, mid 12's should be no problem.

The Nitrous effectively adds timing, and the meth/water slows the burn, so they are a great pairing.

I set of denso u-groove one step colder plugs would be a good idea too.

Are you using any window switches/have you found a usable rpm signal source?

 

At your speed Sonoma is about 2-3 tenths slower than Sac Raceway. Slight incline at Sonoma (Sears Point) hurts times and MPH.

 

thanks for the Good info

I'll go to the flatter track next time

 

I haven't been able to find a good RPM source yet, so I am not sure what I will do. I did get a set of colder range plugs the last time I swapped them out (2 months ago) . It sucks as I am in Michigan on business for the next 2 weeks so I won't be able to play with it at all. On the bright side, I do plan on making a trip to RSR racing soon

 

You can try asking WhiteXkr. If you pay him for a few hours labor + parts, he might be willing to make something that will work for you.


Could I interest you in a bottle warmer and remote valve? I am going to sell my entire Nitrous system and am happy to sell parts separately

 

The remote valve yes, the bottle warmer prob not as I was thinking of using this:

Nano: Nitrous on Steroids!

 

Avos has no reason to prove anything to anyone... His TS setup has dyno'ed over 630hp and his clients have over 575 hp or more consistently... His personal 1/4 mile time or 0-60 are irrelevant as others have been in the 11's easily. Its pricey but honestly, its overall cheaper, more stable and less time consuming than going after small things here and there and adjusting things to account for engine mods...

 

Post #2 on this page https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/x...es-dyno-41275/
Here is his first dyno claiming 337 HP
Here is the first dyno I ever did on my car, it was bone stock back then.

The engine power has been calculated (about 17% drive train loss), it is of course the wheel power you should look at. But I need to add that the 17% drivetrain loss used is more to the truth than 20%.

The rwhp came to 327.9 uncorrected, and the din correction for the day was about 1.03 so acutally 337 rwhp (they only corrected the rule Power with this, and it was 86 degrees).

Dont' want to hyjack this thread either, only want to show you that my 4.0 engine (very similar to yours, though with some small differences as it is a AJ27 versus the AJ26) also has had a high output and without any modifications at the time. This doesn't mean that the modifications you have haven't brought you anything, as maybe your initial power output could have been lower.

Click the image to open in full size.
__________________
2000 XKR 600+ BHP
Twin-screw kit and LSD amongst others. Latest dyno 524 rwhp (631 HP / 750 NM), trying 700 HP next
Click here for Twin-Screw kit



He states his car is stock.

He gets reading of 337

Everyone else in the world gets 307

Proves his dyno read 10% too high

631-63 equals 568

Show 1 TS dyno or 1/4 mile that proves more than 568

 

Whitecatt,

Where do you get the 307 figure?

PrinceMarco is correct in that Avos's customers have all been getting the highest numbers. Steve M's 11.9 run proves no less than 550-575 HP. Dynos can lie very easily, but his 1/4 mile time removes all doubt.

In addition to the parts on Steve M's car, I believe avos has additional modifications which add additional power such as: modified cams which add more power, and his highest dyno was at 24 psi while running the required racing fuel, so he could have been running a lot more boost, so the 631 figure is definitely within the realm of possibility.

So I think the 631 could be credible, not that everyone wants to run racing fuel all the time, but credible for a one time dyno.

You have a point with the 337 stock claim though...since he says his car was bone stock, then the large anomaly could very well have been the measuring device. When I posted a questionable "stock" dyno, Avos was all over it.

With that, I am no longer interested in talking about this issue, since I'm seeing it only breeds angst on this board. I was trying to get Avos to show what his car can do, in fun, but this has turned into not fun. If someone questions my credibility, but only in a vague indirect way, and does not give any specific reasoning, then I'm going to take them to the carpet. I'm already seeing that in this thread. In the past, people have avoided confrontation because they are afraid of offending anyone. You might meditate on that a little. So Whitecatt, you can battle it out all you want, but I have no more interest in it. I will not comment on it any more.

Again, as in my first post in this thread "For the record, my aim is not to have made my car the fastest. It will never be as fast as even the slowest TS equipped car. If anyone wants the fastest, they must go the TS route."

If anyone wants to race me on a track, they can race me in the Pantera....and loose ... Badly! That is quite a bit faster than any street legal xjr or xkr that I have ever seen.

I myself am calling my xjr done. I've proven I've added 100 flywheel hp for less than $3500 cost to duplicate, and that middle of the road HP wise figure is good enough for me.

For the people who want more power, and are willing to pay the big bucks to play with the big boys, I say more power to them.

 

I have been only once on that specific dyno, and that was the highest recording.

All my other runs (60+) have been the same dyno in another place (closer to where I live), where on average at start my stock car made more in between 310-320 rwhp din corrected (I never look at the uncorrected figures).

This was also similar on that same dyno with other 4.0 R cars I had tested there. My latest 524 rwhp was on that same dyno, and that isn’t the max you can get with the kit, that is not holding it back…

Just as a side note, If you convert this 327 number you saw to SAE for the environmentals shown, you would get about 326 sae net rwhp, so still close to the average you seem to come up with.

So, my dyno is not reading 10% high, you are incorrect.

But good to mention, I could have gone back to that 1st dyno for a higher reading; my last run would have probably been there 540 rwhp then and 650 HP. But I wasn't doing the dynos for others (have you any idea how expensive this is here)? This was for me to see what I could get.

Now 636 HP is still around 524 rwhp (assuming a 17% drivetrain loss), I have shown you the dyno. This was with just 22-23 PSI, I have driven already with 24, which was a noticable improvement again, and there is even more to get.


So, I have given the facts, and If you don’t believe this than that’s your right!


Now shouldn’t you ask similar proof from WD to show an increase of 100rwhp? I haven’t seen anything yet, or have I missed something?

 

@WD,
I know it isn't a battle for you, and I am sorry that other people start questioning me here like this.
I also am in here for the fun, so lets continue that path

 

oops double post-reply below

 

I have to accept some of the responsibility for this as I have not always been as nice as I should have been in how I was asking. The tongue in cheek posts can come across meaner in print than intended, and therefore I must accept that I have therefore encouraged these more pointed attacks, or at the least made the ground more fertile for these personal attacks to sprout.

*Whitecatt, why the sudden interest in Avos anyways? What has he ever done to you? He and I have had our sparring, but it was usually over what I thought vs what he thought I could gain HP wise via pulleys, porting, intake vacuum reduction improvements , should I inject water/meth before or after the blower, etc. etc, and in the end who ended up being right but that was me, why are you going after him?

My proof of a 100 hp gain is clearly given in my 10.5 second 0-100 time as shown on the video in this thread. A 4200 lb car cannot reach those figures with anything less than 470 hp, especially since it was not a track type launch, only a rolling into the throttle launch on cold street tires. The lack of an articulated denial, or any articulated reasoning of these physics facts speaks volumes as to their validity.

AVOS: My proof of my approx +100 hp claim is also the undeniable fact that I've added + 8 psi of boost over stock. Do the math, +8 psi while not running hot must add approx 100 hp. If there is some way you even muse this is flawed thinking, please explain how this is possible.

The 1/4 mile track near me does not open up until March, and I will videotape and post a run there assuming the car and I are both still alive and well then.

This site http://www.torquestats.com/modified/...bmit=Calculate

gives these figures from a 0-100 mph performance
RWD - 470bhp & 1905kg
Power to Weight: 251 bhp/ton
0-60: 4.9
0-100: 10.7
60-100: 5.8
1/4 Mile ET: 12.84
1/4 Mile Terminal: 114
Dragstrip 1/4 Mile ET: 12.64
Dragstrip 1/4 Mile Terminal: 117

While this is only an estimate, I believe it is reasonably accurate. This says 10.7 0-100 and my video shows faster with that with a not fast launch.
My 0-60 times are also faster than 4.9.
I don't know if I can get a 12.64 at the track or not, only doing it can tell.

Whitecatt* 24 psi out of a TS is much more power than the same 24 psi from an eaton (if is even possible to get 24 from an eaton) because the temps are much colder so the charge is denser with more O2. Very significantly colder, and with significantly less parasitic drag. To put it bluntly, "You can't get there from here" with an eaton.

But you CAN add 100 hp for pretty cheap

 

Doing a homemade video of a run on the street looking at the speedo only is even further away from what I would understand taking good measurements, not to mention taking that as solid proof. So maybe all that is left is a good ¼ mile run, with environmental info. Nevertheless dyno info is always good to have.

I have learned from these more than 60 pulls what can influence the results and of course also what is something that works and what not with improvements. I took it at very small steps all the time, and learned, and moved on.


I still prefer a dyno, and at least a couple of runs, that gives more confidence about improvements. As stated earlier, I see issues with your 1st 270 rwhp run, so that with my experience can’t be used as a solid baseline run, but we have been there and discussed it.


So for me (and at least Whitecatt fomr what he states) you haven’t proven anything yet, but I wouldn’t be surprised if you could make about 75hp more, but again that remains to be seen in my book.



One more thing though, and here is a nice one for Whitecatt, its funny he mentioned 568 HP, I actually had this already as rwhp on the dyno:



We were completely surprised, and I have questioned these results with the dyno man even though he thought that this would be right. I knew I had made some big improvements, but it just didn’t add up for me. A couple days later he called me back, and found the issue. He had a new software release, and he didn’t calibrate the unit right afterwards. Here goes to show how important it is that you also check the dynos themselves. So I am confident about the numbers I have always presented (give or take, as its not an exact measure), we always try to make good honest runs, as that is what I am after for myself.

 

All stock 4.0 XJR with good engine and street tires runs 1/4mile 13.6-13.7.
All stock ( but with TS kit ) 4.0 XJR with good engine and street tires runs 1/4mile 12.3-12.4.
Same exhaust, cats, heads, cams, 75mm TB, 72mm MAF, 3" intake tube and stock filter, 150mm lower pulley and 3" upper one.

That's the difference - and it's BIG.

 

Rather than appear similarly to "mustbeDrunkCatt" I'll just wait to post my updated dyno and video of the 1/4 mile when the track re-opens. The video shows what it shows, which is a very solid performance of 0-100 mph from a non race type launch.

Avos I see you are again suggesting the "homemade" video is somehow false but not offering specifically how.

Avos, No matter how effective you may think in your mind doing your "ostrich impression" may be, the rest of us still see the video. Use a stop watch, see the boost gauge read a solid 18. You can claim NOS if you want, but the simple math of 18 psi still proves my case.

Again, please explain how adding + 8 psi only results in 75 hp. 75/8= 9.375. So your claim is that each lb of boost only ads 9.375 hp??

 

My friends and I are all laughing our ***** off.

Dyno= more proof than video?

Well then,

I see your dyno and raise you a story about a car my buddy once heard about!

 

More than 60 pulls but not a single run on any track, or a single run with A GTEK, riiiiight , wink

You are hiding something and anyone who reads this knows it.

What color is the sky in your world?

 

But who is Whitecatt? At least he has no experience with these cars.

 

Are the laws of physics different in these cars is the better question.