dyno lies....

[ArthurPE]

Arthur, once again you get your facts wrong. I challenged you on this before and you did not have an answer then, as you don't now.

I post on the quite a few sections on this forum. Apart from defending the indefensible and in vile manner, what else is your contribution?

The carbon issue is closed in your mind, and only in yours.

BTW, can we use Kgs rather than lbs?

I'll let others review your post history and draw their own conclusion, I've stated mine...

deposits: same, I'll let the facts explain my position, not 'feelings'

doesn't matter when it's converted to a %, that's why people use %, it's dimensionless

but again you digress, obscure and redirect...without a germane comment

~50% power difference, yet ~ the same speeds
how????

[ArthurPE]

lunch time boys!

got a shining Imola 270 HP deposit generator waiting for me
I hope it's fast enough to get out of its own path!!!

[Sims]

Arthur, once again you get your facts wrong. I challenged you on this before and you did not have an answer then, as you don't now.

I post on the quite a few sections on this forum. Apart from defending the indefensible and in vile manner, what else is your contribution?

The carbon issue is closed in your mind, and only in yours.

BTW, can we use Kgs rather than lbs?

I'll let others review your post history and draw their own conclusion, I've stated mine...

Your conclusions should be based on facts, and that is where you have difficulty on this and all issues. Everytime you are challenged, you duck and dive.

Do check my 1st post - is it on Carbon? Should you not check (it's so easy to do so) before you make statements on this or any subject.

[dlextreme1977]

let's use your incorrect weights...
and the following actual delivered wheel powers
RS4 270 (370 - 100 in losses) numerous UK crank dynos and many MAHA loss measurments
M3 375 (per rototest and many other dynos, plus it makes sense, 414 HP with a 10% loss, LW driveline, 2wd)

RS4 3630 (I wish my car weighed 3600 lbs, lol)/270 = 13.5 lb/HP or 74 HP/1000 lb
M3 3520/375 ~ 9.4 lb/HP or 107 HP/1000 lb

STILL a 45% difference, yet the cars are ~ equal in speed...<1% difference either way on the Ring, depending on which numbers are used
with this difference in power it should be much, much larger, at least 20 sec, probably a lot more, but it's 4 sec M3 or 7 sec RS4, avg ~ equal
explain?

did you even do the math before you stated using the UK numbers would make it all clear?

even using the incorrect weights 45% is a huge difference!...HUGE
no one will discuss the facts, only sling ridicule and personal attacks

seriously, tell me in which part of this video do these cars look 'equal' in speed? numbers/equations/facts/calculations cannot explain this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdHRAsFJV7E

and before you say it has an exhaust, you said earlier this makes no difference. On the us forums it categorically states that these cars lose 30whp through carbon and gain it post cleaning, maybe when the original mag figures where taken the cars were running like new... who knows
- maybe ask these guys in the us who say the same...
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showthrea ... fter-Dyno)

[Sims]

~50% power difference, yet ~ the same speeds
how????

Apples & Bananas. Disengenuous, but only you are convinced by this phenomenon. Maybe offer the news to Fox news for it is sensational

[P_G]

And yet again dlextreme1977 wades in with <beep> comparisons on Youtube but this time can't even quote the clip properly. If you look at the title graphics properly it says the M3 Coupe equiped with M-DCT has a Kelleners ECU and a Hartge exhaust which would suggest it is remapped (because I pretty sure BMW don't use Kelleners ECU's) and has an exhaust so the remap + exhaust wuld produce a power increase as with all cars.

So not really a stock car vs stock car comparison is it you Terry FCUKwit?

Frankly I'm getting a bit sick of the constant rubbish you use to try and justify your argument. And Sims, with the greatest of respect to you but you haven't been defending the indefensible, more of your posts on the RS4 being down on power or carbonisation have been in stirring up arguments whilst offering no basis of fact or evidence, merely heresay and circumstantial / unsupported data with no standardisation.

Put a sock in it the both of you unless you have something constructive to say.

And BTW, my car can vary by 48bhp dependent on which day I have put it on a rolling road and which road yet it still feels as fast and consistently hits the road timings suggested so why don't you try and explain that dlextreme 1977?

In fact you still haven't answered whether you have an RS4? I'm guessing not. Selective in your response; sure you are not in politics?

[Sims]

...And Sims, with the greatest of respect to you but you haven't been defending the indefensible, more of your posts on the RS4 being down on power or carbonisation have been in stirring up arguments whilst offering no basis of fact or evidence, merely heresay and circumstantial / unsupported data with no standardisation.

Put a sock in it the both of you unless you have something constructive to say.

The arguments on carbon started years before I came, and carry on here and elsewhere. It's for JR to stop debates on this subject, not you. If you do not like the debate, don't visit the thread - it is not mandatory.

The few faithful on here defend the RS4 regardless of any evidence they encounter and IMO do more disservice to Audi than their competitors could.

Further you do yourself a great disservice by supporting people rather than issues.

If people are convinced by Arthur's unfair calculations (have you a comment to make on these?), then let them vote by stating on here that they believe him about the power difference calculations he has stated. He prefers that vote system, as you will know. Let's see how many sign up to that.


You will no doubt remember what happened last time this was tried, and although rules were changed midstream to suit, people did not sign up because they cared for their credibility.

[rs4v8]

I'm not getting into the calculations or the argument above as my head hurts and frankly I'm too lazy to read it all! Gentlemanly agreement to disagree perhaps?

As someone who has been in an argument (ok several!) on here before, I can honestly say that all it did was piss me off and spoil my enjoyment of reading the stuff here. I'm not fussed if you guys carry on having a rumble, but I think you might spoil it for yourselves.

Looking at the you tube clip above, in my mind this can be explained simply by the fact that the M3 has two less driven wheels and a trick gearbox. The advantage off the line the RS4 has is reversed at speed due to frictional losses in the 4wd. Furthermore the M3 coupe is a wee bit lighter

I'm not getting paranoid about carbon build-ups or dyno charts. I know from experience, in performance terms, that my car compares favourably with others especially if you throw in the typical conditions / surfaces you have to deal with in my part of the world. Add to that skill / bravery / stupidity / waistline(!) of the pilot and things can be easily reversed.

[P_G]

It wasn't about their credibility Sims, more likely they didn't give a **** about voting because in the grand scheme of life it doesn't matter.

And as for not visiting threads Sims, it appears recently I can't visit any about this subject that you have not antagonised. And JR or anyone else shouldn't have to intervene.

And who exactly have I supported? Where in any of my posts have I actually said "I fully support the comments on X?" I am sure you will be pedantic enough to now search thorugh all my posts to prove me wrong.

And as for evidence, I have not seen any on here about the detrimental effect of carbonisation on performance and power output because it is all circumstantial and does not factor out the multitude of variables that could also cause the same 'issue'. Therefore until this is done it is only an 'issue' for those who choose it to be.

And you are right, the carbon debate was started before you came and it was never found to be conclusive yet you wanted it continued devoid of technical data. Why? Just be happy with your car and if you are not, sell it. Simple. Because Audi aren't going to come to this or any other forum to say there is an 'issue' because there is no irrefutable evidence to say there is across all cars.

And Audi associated mechanics, franchised or independent, from those I have spoken to do not believe it to be an issue either and they work on these cars day in day out.

[Sims]

..
And as for not visiting threads Sims, it appears recently I can't visit any about this subject that you have not antagonised. And JR or anyone else shouldn't have to intervene.
.

No doubt you will provide evidence of where I have antagonised.

I suggest you carefully read the threads on this subject, for they also deal with the other points raised.

I do enjoy my car

[ArthurPE]

Your conclusions should be based on facts, and that is where you have difficulty on this and all issues. Everytime you are challenged, you duck and dive.

Do check my 1st post - is it on Carbon? Should you not check (it's so easy to do so) before you make statements on this or any subject.

each and every one is...
it's you who ignore the facts and your own faults...

but I digress

again, no explanation on how a car with 50% more HP/lb can be the same speed, or slower in some cases...
it's you who 'duck and dive'

[P_G]

..
And as for not visiting threads Sims, it appears recently I can't visit any about this subject that you have not antagonised. And JR or anyone else shouldn't have to intervene.
.

No doubt you will provide evidence of where I have antagonised.

I suggest you carefully read the threads on this subject, for they also deal with the other points raised.

I do enjoy my car

Yet again selective in what you choose to respond to; at least you have consistency in that.....

ArthurPE is not correct in suggesting your first posts were about carbon intake, however only until recently has the ratio of your posts about power loss and carbonisation to general contribution been lowered by your involvement to other threads but at one stage the majority of your contribution was just that.

And as for enjoying your car, stick to that until such times as irrefutable proof exists of that which you and others believe happens.

And for ArthurPE, you struck controversy immediately in the title of this post so perhaps should not be too surprised at the response you received, Dyno Data Manipulation may well have been better.

[ArthurPE]

seriously, tell me in which part of this video do these cars look 'equal' in speed? numbers/equations/facts/calculations cannot explain this...

and before you say it has an exhaust, you said earlier this makes no difference. On the us forums it categorically states that these cars lose 30whp through carbon and gain it post cleaning, maybe when the original mag figures where taken the cars were running like new... who knows
- maybe ask these guys in the us who say the same...
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showthrea ... fter-Dyno)

again, you refuse to answer, but it's OK, we know why...you can't make a case to fit your viewpoint...
after I proved you wrong, using your incorrect weights, you still can't explain it...why? becasue everything you postulate is false...plain and simple, wrong

RS4 faster or = around the Ring
7:58 (or 8:09 vs 8:05, a few seconds over 13 miles
amateur videos mean nothing
Cmajor magazine 1/4 mile
RS4 12.8
M3 13

RS4 3630 (I wish my car weighed 3600 lbs, lol)/270 = 13.5 lb/HP or 74 HP/1000 lb
M3 3520/375 ~ 9.4 lb/HP or 107 HP/1000 lb

50% Hp/wt difference...

answer that one question, then we can ove on

[ArthurPE]

Apples & Bananas. Disengenuous, but only you are convinced by this phenomenon. Maybe offer the news to Fox news for it is sensational

son, those are facts, 50% difference, hardly inconsequential...
I did the math for all to se, in fact using your incorrect weights it's still 45%...it's the heart of this discussion...

and still, not an iota of useful information from sims as it relates to the matter at hand

50% less power, same speed: how???

[larshs]

Can you experts tell me why I have a loss (drag power) of ~35%? Is that normal? Appreciate any comments.

See attached dyno's before and after installing the MTM supercharger (stock exhaust in both cases).