As above 400 bhp newage with simalar tourque 0-60, top speed ,1/4 mile, ballpark figuers thanks.

 

i'd say a tad slower that the 415 type 25 ?

 

think theres only one way to find out, i have a racelogic fitted and i cant get the figures from a standstill but thats down to me, ingear times are ok though for what ive got

 

Which New Age - Bugeye, Blobeye, Hawkeye? WRX or STi? I need to know the kerb weight before getting you some ballpark figures...

 

how you going to do that? car stats calculator?

 

Mine is a 420bhp spec-c and have done 0-60mph in 3.8, 0-100mph in 8.7 all on pump fuel,

 

Yeah mate .

I know it's not the final word in accuracy, but at least it'll give the OP something of a reference.

 

thats quick! where did you get figures? any additives to pump fuel?

 

also according to your plus profile you are using nos? what difference does this make?

 

I think around 1400 kg, thanks for replies.

 

400bhp; 1400kg; 4WD...

Power at Flywheel: 400bhp
Weight without Driver: 1400kg
Power to Weight Ratio : 290bhp/tonne
0 - 60mph: 3.67secs
0 - 100mph: 9.19secs
Drag Strip Quarter Mile: 11.87secs
Drag Strip Terminal Speed: 119mph

 

doubt you will get into the 11s with a newage running 400/ 400
my mate done a 12.2 with 450 / 400 bugeye , same as a 911 turbo

my blobeye was running 400 / 380 and best was 12.8,
did'nt get a great run as was hoping for maybe a 12.5 or 12.6

 

These figures were done on my racelogic driftbox and were done on normal v-power, i do use Nos but have only got a 1/4 mile time for that so far and thats 11.7 @ 120mph

 

My best 1/4 mile on v-power is 12.0 @ 113mph

 

Yes, I agree.

Just used a calculator to get rough figures, so the OP at least has some idea - despite the undoubted optimism of said figures

 

glad you posted this, i cant get anywhere near car stats claims, thought it was me

 

On the online calculator that I used, it does state "without driver" . So I assume they've worked it out as if there's NO driver (a phantom, lol) not in the car - which is patently daft - but at least it keeps everything equal, due <ahem> to people not all being the same weight. Obviously. So, instead, I'd simply add whatever your weight is to the car's kerb weight and enter that figure into the calculator, to get a more real-world result.

Also, another thing to consider is that these figures, just like car mag figures, are normally arrived at without an ounce of mechanical sympathy for the drivetrain - typically by sidestepping the clutch at very high RPMs (dependent on the best method for any particular car) - and dumping all the torque into the transmission <ouch> in one great big slug. Something most of us wouldn't want to do in our own pride and joy - unless you're some kind of automotive sadomasochist, and/or have very deep pockets, lol.

 

good points there, i just need mor power then to go fast

 

Can never have enough power

 

...And by NOT employing the best off-the-line method, I'm fairly confident that - at a stroke - you'd be instantly sullying your 0-60mph and 1/4m times, by adding at least 0.5s! Hence why most of us, when going out to figure our own cars (albeit rather unscientifically), invariably come away disappointed, to say the least.