BLACK 500 BHP CLASSIC
16 September 2013, 10:20 AM
#1
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: leeds
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BLACK 500 BHP CLASSIC
HAS ANYONE SEEN THE BLACK 96 CLASSIC 500 BHP WITH THE TWISTED KIT ON EBAY, HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK ITS WORTH THINKING OF MAKING A OFFER, 
16 September 2013, 06:25 PM
#9
I don't think it looks too bad....maybe worth an offer.
Says in add he has a 6 speed available.
Nothing wrong with a 2.0
Brakes will be fine with decent pads...
Says in add he has a 6 speed available.
Nothing wrong with a 2.0
Brakes will be fine with decent pads...
16 September 2013, 07:43 PM
#11
yeah but he is wanting top dollar for the car the 6sp should be included, and the 4pots are just rubbish, never felt safe in a fast car with those on. Typical ill thought through modifying, go for massive power and then realise you should have upgraded the brakes, gearbox and suspension first!
Looks like standard shocks to me too? Wouldnt want to be driving a 500hp car on standard shocks and brakes if im honest
Looks like standard shocks to me too? Wouldnt want to be driving a 500hp car on standard shocks and brakes if im honest
16 September 2013, 07:59 PM
#12
Too much for me to part with but not wildly overpriced.
I wouldn't want a 500hp classic on the road fullstop....
4 pot brembos can work fine with correct pads and discs....especially on the lighter classic.
And no I dont have brembos on mine....
I still say its worth a cheeky offer ....
I wouldn't want a 500hp classic on the road fullstop....
4 pot brembos can work fine with correct pads and discs....especially on the lighter classic.
And no I dont have brembos on mine....
I still say its worth a cheeky offer ....
Last edited by rooferman; 16 September 2013 at 08:01 PM.
16 September 2013, 08:50 PM
#15
if you desperately want 500hp you will wait for the right one or buy one similar and make it up to tht spec, i dont see the point in shelling out for a 7.2k car then spending another 2 - 3k on brakes and gearbox etc!
16 September 2013, 09:10 PM
#18
Show me a genuine 500 bhp car for less than 7k
Inc a syvecs , a built engine, rotated pipework, turbo etc...and then it needs a 6 speed, suspension and brakes....
Inc a syvecs , a built engine, rotated pipework, turbo etc...and then it needs a 6 speed, suspension and brakes....
16 September 2013, 09:24 PM
#22
Would rather have the sorted rb5 and slightly less power because it will **** all over the black one all dya long.
Was looking at the dyno graph on that black one too, no power until like 5-5.5k, must be a pig to drive. I have to say it just doesnt seem like a very well thought out car.
Was looking at the dyno graph on that black one too, no power until like 5-5.5k, must be a pig to drive. I have to say it just doesnt seem like a very well thought out car.
16 September 2013, 09:29 PM
#23
Maybe not....I would ruin the rb5 .. lol..
Your manifold in projects looks quality....are they expensive ?
I opted for rcm equal length after cracked gt spec unequals.
Your manifold in projects looks quality....are they expensive ?
I opted for rcm equal length after cracked gt spec unequals.
16 September 2013, 09:41 PM
#24
And the remap, not cheap in the slightest, but its ot this crap 304 stainless that rcm use its titanium steel, life time guaruntee etc and if I'm honest, the power figures speak for themselves!
16 September 2013, 09:53 PM
#25
The rcm stainless is fine for my application....only needed a twinscroll sump to fit and with over 100 launches 3/4 of a year competitive sprints and a few high speed offs it seems to be holding up well.
Manifold looks good though... maybe worth looking into for me.
Manifold looks good though... maybe worth looking into for me.
17 September 2013, 09:20 AM
#26
It is better than the rcm stuff as isnt a copy of an old/standard twin scroll design and has cad drawings and flow calculations etc. The fact i made 35hp more on low boost after 20k miles and 4 years since initial build shows how good it is!
304 stainless will break, turbo cars exceed the heat limit of 304 and and it becomes brittle and cracks, 321 wont do that
304 stainless will break, turbo cars exceed the heat limit of 304 and and it becomes brittle and cracks, 321 wont do that
17 September 2013, 10:55 AM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Wales
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would rather have the sorted rb5 and slightly less power because it will **** all over the black one all dya long.
Was looking at the dyno graph on that black one too, no power until like 5-5.5k, must be a pig to drive. I have to say it just doesnt seem like a very well thought out car.
Was looking at the dyno graph on that black one too, no power until like 5-5.5k, must be a pig to drive. I have to say it just doesnt seem like a very well thought out car.
My first thoughts exactly.
Super response and performance er... if you keep the rev counter north of 5.5K (in fact the serious power doesn't come in until 6K+ (and by then the torque's dropping away).
He also mentions track tyres, and that it has no Tax and is rarely used.
Looks like a track car to me, certainly not a daily driver.
Not my idea of a good buy but each to their own
17 September 2013, 10:59 AM
#28
It should be better as costs more.
The design of the unequal length headers at the collector is the main reason for failing not the grade of material in my understanding.
The equal length design addresses this problem.
I did look into having some inconel headers made for the ultimate product...
What was the increase in torque ?
Would be nice to test them back to back and not 4 years apart.
The design of the unequal length headers at the collector is the main reason for failing not the grade of material in my understanding.
The equal length design addresses this problem.
I did look into having some inconel headers made for the ultimate product...
What was the increase in torque ?
Would be nice to test them back to back and not 4 years apart.
17 September 2013, 11:11 AM
#30
It should be better as costs more.
The design of the unequal length headers at the collector is the main reason for failing not the grade of material in my understanding.
The equal length design addresses this problem.
I did look into having some inconel headers made for the ultimate product...
What was the increase in torque ?
Would be nice to test them back to back and not 4 years apart.
The design of the unequal length headers at the collector is the main reason for failing not the grade of material in my understanding.
The equal length design addresses this problem.
I did look into having some inconel headers made for the ultimate product...
What was the increase in torque ?
Would be nice to test them back to back and not 4 years apart.
look here - http://www.killerbmotorsport.com/index_files/Header.htm
I believe martyn saw 520ft/lb of torque at one point in the mapping, i am unsure though as i dont have the graphs to hand. Iam out of the efficiency range of my cams so the torque drops away rapidly at the top end.
Well back to back or not it is kind of irrelevant, the engine will have only lost power over 4 years and 20k miles, so the fact it made more after all the abuse it has had when the peak figure should be highest on the first map shows you all you need to know!