Stillen Supercharged Article - R & T
 

Here you go guys...enjoy! Great numbers!

2010 Stillen Nissan 370Z Review ? Stillen Performance Parts Make One Killer 370Z ? RoadandTrack.com

Nice article. However, it makes me a lot LESS interested in scraping together $6300 + installation charges to get the SC kit. 0-60 in 4.5s and 12.8s 113mph 1/4 mi? Not as impressive as I was expecting (although maybe I'm being unrealistic). The 1/4mi was my major disappointment...that's a marginal gain over the stock 370's time.

For the price of the kit and install along with all the other bolt-ons as well as the headache if you have problems, you should just buy a Cayman S.

Total is $8K dealer installed plus your powertrain warranty is voided, however the work is warranty for 1 yr. :ugh2:

yeah forreal,im hoping for waaaaaay better 1/4 mile times if my Z is being Force Fed,12.8 ? not worthh it.

shitty drivers fellas, didnt yall read the part where they said their stock time was a 5.3? and their stock 1/4 was 13.7 @103? they dropped 8/10s on their 0-60 and almost a full second in the 1/4, whats that mean? that guys running low 13's can run low 12's, put on some D/R's and the car will do 11's. Thats nothing to scoff at gentlemen.

Scoff scoff scoff :). I'll believe low 12s 1/4mi times with that kit when I see them published. And not with some tricked out Z running R-compounds.

ya gotta understand man, not too many cars running street tires are going to have fast 1/4 mile times, when you have that much power, all you're going to do is spin in the pit, you need stickier tires to launch harder, 500+ hp on the stockers is way too much for those tires to handle.

The times look pretty good to me. I don't know about the car having 500hp though. I'd like to see the dyno chart and what kind of dyno was being used to calculate this '500hp' and under what conditions. It's about on par with an E92 M3.

Considering we have people on this forum with bolt-ons running 12.8s@110...

That car should be running LOW 12s/HIGH 11s at around 116+MPH given the power its said to be making. Driver mod maybe?

Yeah.
Not going to buy it. The mustang GT 255 rubber--runs better times than that Stillen Z, supposedly with more torque and less horsepower.

The trap-speed does not back up a 500bhp claim. Not one bit.

The ET of 12.8 with the trap of 113 is right on for an FI car that makes most of its power in the top end of the RPM band on street-tires with a mild launch. The car is probably putting down around 375-385whp.

I must agree with this.... As Import Convert stated, we have bolt on guys running these numbers (almost). I bet this is a case of bad driving.....

Have you ever seen a C6 Z06 magazine time in the high-12's? That is the kind of hp/weight ratio we are talking here, nearly. Find me a C6 Z06 time/trap magazine-time within half a second and 5mph of that and I will buy it, until then--inflated numbers.

Better yet, find me a similar magazine-time AND trap for a GT500. It has tires just as narrow, or narrower, and similar power, with LOTS more weight.

I'm just not buying it. Not at all.

My S ran high 10's on street tires, Invo's at that. It can be done with proper driving.

Im sorry, but that is just straight pathetic even on street tires IMHO.

So...they gained 100whp.
FAIL.
1 second quicker, 10mph faster = 100whp.

Stock Z's dyno around 270. This one seems to be around 370.

432bhp...or roughly 70bhp less than advertised. Mazda did something similar once (RX8) and had to offer to buy back every one of the cars at the price the customer paid, if the customer chose to take the option.

whelp, I guess its time for the TT boys to man up and put down some times so we can do an accurate FI comparo yeah?

lets put this into perspective a bit, the 2010 GT500 makes 540bhp and 480ft/lbs, the 1/4 mile avg amongst all mags places it at a 12.5 second 1/4 mile, yes, its heavier, got it, but 3 tenths off, yall arent giving this car any credit whatsoever.

My concern as well. I'll probably FI after my factory warranty wears off.

I;ve seen 0-60 numbers fron 4.6 to 5.3. I just wouldn't put too much stock in one mag's numbrs especially since R&T already posted very slow (compared to average) numbers for the Z.

My 7 AT with bolt on's is quicker than the stillen Z and i ran those times on the stock 19 inch tires. It makes 320 RWHP. It almost went 12.7's and now i trap at just under 113 mph. (12.8009 ).
I would like to see the time slip.

Of course not, because the 2011 GT500 with 480rwhp and 3750# curb-weight (not counting driver) does the 1/4 in 12.1@119 or so. The 12.5@115 or whatever was the old 500bhp 3900# GT500. This "500bhp" Z with it's lighter weight and wider tires couldn't even match THAT.

Why are you always so negative and pessimistic on everything you post? The largest variable in the testing equation is the driver, not to mention whatever the quality of the road surface they test on is. That is not saying that is the reason for the numbers, but comparing a Mustang with a completely different rear suspension setup (tailored more towards straight line acceleration as well) to the Z is not the most direct comparison.

I call it like I see it. A 500bhp 3300# car should trap higher than 113mph. The fact that it even made it into the 12's tells me it had enough traction for better than a 113 trap if it's truly making 500bhp. The car is not making 500bhp. If you think it is, provide evidence. However, the magazine knocked around 1 second off and added 10mph trap speed--same driver/conditions. That is 100whp. That is 432bhp. May be off by 20, 30, 40bhp, but even so---it's not 500bhp.

need to see before and after dyno on the same car, on the same dyno..I really doubt that car is making 500 SAE HP..the numbers do not add up

Exactly, if I saw a something like a 120mph trap and a 13.5 second ET, I would give mad props to the CAR. It would be making around 500bhp or so. However, it's not the case. The ET and the trap work out exactly to around the low/mid 400's bhp. The new mustang GT turns almost identical times with a bit more weight and around 370whp. About what this car is producing when you also consider it turns the same time as the GT, and they gained 10mph over their OEM trap speed (OEM Z's dyno around 270, give/take 10)

EVERYTHING points to a 100bhp gain.

I don't know. I may not be the best drag racer, but my supercharged LS2 C6 ran the qtr in the same time with 114 trap speeds on street tires, and it had 515 to the wheels. It didn't have any traction, but it definitely had power.

Same here, I think If I optimized my car for drag racing I could run 11's. As it sits now id be somewhere in the mid 12's.

You can purchase and have the dealer install a stillen s/c for 8k?....

Yeah I highly doubt that Stillen is making 500hp. I never trusted their numbers...even with the Z33. IMO their 350Z supercharger was a joke. I wouldn't be surprised if this one dynojets at around 360whp - 370whp....on their own dyno its probably putting out more than 400 at the wheels causing all this '500hp' fiasco.

My dyno on a dynojet with the stillen tune was 377hp and it drives like **** with stillens tune. And that's after stillen has sent me eight different tunes that all suck. Stillen is full of bs don't believe the hype and don't buy this kit!

Oh I believe you! Been down that road before only with my Z33...GL

Looks like I was within 7whp. :ughdance:

agree....... well, sort of. I still think bad driving coupled with lack of HP... Whoever said this car was putting out 375, I have to agree.

The ET is bad driving/tires/suspension (for drag). The Trap is the 375 I predict.

You are probably correct, your numbers are all certainly in line with the performance the Stillen Z had shown. Judging from what I have seen regarding the Stillen supercharger kit, I highly doubt it is putting out anything more than what you indicated.

In fact, if the car is putting down the amount others on this forum are putting down with the supercharger kit, that is better than if they brought out their original press car which would have led to unrealistic performance.

500Hp ain't 500hp. It is all about the area under the curve or torque.
The peak power may indeed be correct based on the power obtain from a pressure ratio of 1.5.

:icon18: