Nisan Pulsar Turbo

[luthor1]

Ever-so dangerous to associate "I don't like the look of" with "it's slow".

4 cylinder, just-under 2000cc, single turbo, fuel injection, electronic management of ignition and injection, intercooler, 5 speed, Twin-cam, 16 valve... power potentional of over 250bhp per litre

You wouldn't know if I was referring to the MR2 or the Pulsar would you now

[Scotster]

Out of the box GTi-R pulsars aren't close to the likes of scooby's and evo's. On the 0-60 the WR1 scoob has them all beat hands down with a 4.1 60 using 315bhp (what a gearbox!!) and the transmission losses are terrible with the 4wd. Next would be the evo V with 280bhp and a 0-60 of 4.3, its faster than the 6 because its lighter with the alloy doors, roof etc much the same as the 6 tme without the gearbox.

GTi-R's can very easily make the same time by putting a bit of power in them. I've been in a proven 4.6sec 0-60 GTI-r which has just under 300bhp with standard box and not stripped out. Up till 80 i can almost keep up but after 90-100 i start to take him usually passing between 110 and 120. Now, take the same car, strip it out, lighten and balance everything and stick on some slicks and i reckon you could take a second off of that 60 time so i don't think its ridiculous somehow.

As already said its not a problem getting any car to do below 4 sec for 0-60 the problem is living with the car and the cost coz all it will be good for is the 1/4 and you will probably end up rebuilding it every 1000k depending on the engine not to mention slicks oil fuel etc.

Scott =op

[GIJOE90]

My mate used to have a Pulsar GtiR. He was running over 300bhp with water injection, bigger intercooler and 1.2bar of boost. It was flippin quick. My tubby only just started to pull away at top end revs in 3rd. Bit of a shed and things kept going wrong so it had to go.

Joe

[Gregg Harvey]

I know the guy who got the 0-60 as he is a member of another club and it is a serious car but has had major work done. I think it got 305 bhp on a rr day that I went to but wasn't running right. Another mate of mine has a 280 bhp one and it destroys everything! Great fun and the looks do grow on you... ish

Nothing like a 2 though!

[Hurstie1981]

Rally cars make 300bhp, they are limited. They do 0-100 in under 5 secs and weigh 1 tonne.

Earl, you are not correct, sorry.

Touring cars weigh 1 tonne, they are FWD!!! and do sub-4 to 60.

Again, your information is incorrect.

A lightweight internals, 300bhp stripped out Pulsar would indeed nudge under 4 secs.

Rally cars are also geared to max out at about 115mph in 6th!!! Its not just the power and weight, the gearing plays a large part!

[jimmy]

jap imports have 220 bhp as std uk cars a tad less but still at least 210 bhp in my experience. tunable as hell though and their SR20det lump is one of the most reliable about too

[Scotster]

I thought the engines were "suck it and see" some of them were reliable as hell and they couldn't be broken. Others if you even think about turning the ignition key they break down.

Scott =op

[rev3gt]

I had a pulsar before my mr2 mods included front mount (pace) hks evc5 super afr hybrid mongoose spf filter etc dyno proven 301 bhp (fly) but just over 200 atw (:shock: huge trans loss) when i got it. i found it fun but fragile the more research i did the more i disliked it.
the concept of the car was great but there is a tuning limit i think 300 fly without internals and had earnt nickname "chocolate gearbox" for a reason. best one i ever saw was yellow one in banzai with 434 bhp 379lb @1.55 bar but spec list was huge and had a long story about getting up to that power.
i had trouble with the car and was uncomfotable pushing it too hard so decided to get something else and with all honesty can say my mr2 with hks ic mongoose etc feels every bit as quick without upping boost,. and has greater build quality, tuning potential and performance imo.

mid 3 0/60 sounds hopefull i would be tempted to call the aa before attemting that in a pulsar myself

[shibby!]

I was up at Crail the other week,

In my standard(de-cat) rev 3 tubby, i ran a 14.2 1/4 in the wet.

Which was faster than all the pulsars. Bar 1 i think. They were all managing high 14 second 1/4's

Nick

[RichardPON]

I've got a Pulsar and a tubby, so I think I can make the comparison.

Staggeringly fast off the line. 300bhp a fly, 4.3 seconds to 60, and a 12 second 1/4 mile.

Look hideous - fast as fook!

[flyingbrick]

I havent read all of this, but i had one.

I think you guys call it a Prince? Over here they are called GTI-R's.

They are the biggest piece of crap performance car that you can buy. The engine is awesome, yes, but the chassis and everything else is a waste of time.

4wd in them is only good untill the clutch goes, the cv's go, or the gearbox goes.

They ARE NOT LIGHT. They weigh as much as a WRX for goodness sake.

The chassis is flimsy and absolutely horrible. I now have a 1990 JDM turbo hardtop mr2 and its a much much better car in so many ways.

-nathan

[swin]

guy down the road from me has one running 314bhp with nos
its quick very quick but round corners it handles like a piano(never drove one myself his words )

[RickXSi]

They go like bloody stink.

Look at one from a standing start launch, then watch a tiger doing the same on a wildlife program. Just the same.

Weak 'boxes though.

[Scotster]

They go like bloody stink.

Look at one from a standing start launch, then watch a tiger doing the same on a wildlife program. Just the same.

Weak 'boxes though.

Have you seen their standard 0-60 times? Not impressive to say the least. Standard 220 prezza does it in 5.2. In fact the GTI-r is probably one of the slowest 0-60 4wd cars in the 220ish range.

Scott =op

[flyingbrick]

guy down the road from me has one running 314bhp with nos
its quick very quick but round corners it handles like a piano(never drove one myself his words )

They are incredibly nose heavy. When people were trying to rally them they were scared to get airborne because they dig the nose in on landing..

Because they are so nose heavy they understeer TERRIBLY.

-nathan

[flyingbrick]

They go like bloody stink.

Look at one from a standing start launch, then watch a tiger doing the same on a wildlife program. Just the same.

Weak 'boxes though.

You are an IDIOT if you launch a GTI-R. You will fry the clutch, smash the gearbox, rear diff, and bend the bracket that supports the middle of teh driveshaft.

Also, when launched nicely an mr2 will only loose a foot or two off the launch to a 4wd (my opinion after watching my friends 12.7 1/4 mile car racing STI's and stuff at the strip)

[flyingbrick]

They go like bloody stink.

Look at one from a standing start launch, then watch a tiger doing the same on a wildlife program. Just the same.

Weak 'boxes though.

Have you seen their standard 0-60 times? Not impressive to say the least. Standard 220 prezza does it in 5.2. In fact the GTI-r is probably one of the slowest 0-60 4wd cars in the 220ish range.

Scott =op

My GTI-R on (god knows what) psi used to absolutely own STI's and WRX's. they ARE quite fast in a straight line while everything holds together.
They are supposed to do 5.5 0-100 standard which isnt slow at all.

-nathan

[Scotster]

They go like bloody stink.

Look at one from a standing start launch, then watch a tiger doing the same on a wildlife program. Just the same.

Weak 'boxes though.

Have you seen their standard 0-60 times? Not impressive to say the least. Standard 220 prezza does it in 5.2. In fact the GTI-r is probably one of the slowest 0-60 4wd cars in the 220ish range.

Scott =op

My GTI-R on (god knows what) psi used to absolutely own STI's and WRX's. they ARE quite fast in a straight line while everything holds together.
They are supposed to do 5.5 0-100 standard which isnt slow at all.

-nathan

5.5 0-100??? What KM's?? They don't do anywhere near 0-100 mph in 5.5.

As i said, in standard form they are not fast for the type of car they are. Is there any other 4wd hatch thats slower 0-60 with the same bhp or is it the slowest of the range? Only one i can think of is the cossie but i can't remember its 0-60 time. Make it non standard and it can beat any car in the world, which stands for every other car in the world. You can tune a car to almost limitless potential but where it matters is in like for like comparison. You say you would own sti's but i would bet they had less power than your car. Same goes with the tubby. After 60 i can beat most of my mates cars (their 4wd cars usually beat me to 60) without any hassle. Not because my car is a faster car but because it has been tuned to be faster.

Out of the showroom gives you the figures you need to determin whether a car is fast or not. 276 bhp scoob 5.20-60 fast, evo 5 & 6 280bhp 4.4 0-60 fast, out of the showroom i would class the gti-r as being pretty slow in comparison. Granted if you up the boost and give it 300bhp it will hold its own but not until you are putting out higher bhp figures or you have a better gear ratio than your competitor.

Scott =op

[Scotster]

I just realised how that looks. I am not meaning that i think the pulsar is slow, very far from it. I think it is a VERY fast car, especially under 100mph. I am mearly stating that for the power there are faster cars and a lot more stable ones too.

BTW i think the official time was 5.4 for the 60 but i cant be sure. I know there is a 8.7sec beast flying around but it has over 1000bhp

Scott =op

[flyingbrick]

hehe. it was 5.5 to 100 KPH, or 60mph.

Car was standard except for the boost ( it was freeboosting for a few months, the 3sgte wouldnt have survived that)

I didnt time it to 60mph while it was freeboosting- wish i had. It was still insanely fast on 16psi.

All listed 0-100kph times that i have seen for the car are 5.5s to 100kph standard.

But the cars still xxxx.

-nathan