Request for gents with a data logger:

[Sims]

And most of the 'smoke' comes from you...

Thank you, but alas no...

Hey Sims, you a mate of russianM3dude?

Да, Ñ

[ArthurPE]

I have over 60 cars and 200+ runs now, that was very early in the experiement, also it doesn't have the temp/wt compensation applied
whether you believe the data or not has no relevancy, it is an accurate representation of what is going on...
and as far as deposits, no power loss
all data will have flyer, and in this case anything below 8 sec needs a hard look, just as >9 would
since a car using all gears only runs only 8 flat...

how much power would it take to go from 8.5 to 8 sec?

[ArthurPE]

the car have been on the market for 5 years now, 10,000+ examples, most owned by enthusiests, many on the internet
in fact it been out of production for what, 2 years now?
I wouldn't say there are too many unknowns...

[Sims]

I have over 60 cars and 200+ runs now, that was very early in the experiement, also it doesn't have the temp/wt compensation applied
whether you believe the data or not has no relevancy, it is an accurate representation of what is going on...
and as far as deposits, no power loss
all data will have flyer, and in this case anything below 8 sec needs a hard look, just as >9 would
since a car using all gears only runs only 8 flat...

how much power would it take to go from 8.5 to 8 sec?

How about you tell us together with all the likely scenarios from 7 to 7.5, to 8, to 8.5 and 9.0 and 9.5. It's your baby.

And a sample with all the variable is simply not credible. Really Arthur, even you are not convinced.

[ArthurPE]

I have over 60 cars and 200+ runs now, that was very early in the experiement, also it doesn't have the temp/wt compensation applied
whether you believe the data or not has no relevancy, it is an accurate representation of what is going on...
and as far as deposits, no power loss
all data will have flyer, and in this case anything below 8 sec needs a hard look, just as >9 would
since a car using all gears only runs only 8 flat...

how much power would it take to go from 8.5 to 8 sec?

How about you tell us together with all the likely scenarios from 7 to 7.5, to 8, to 8.5 and 9.0 and 9.5. It's your baby.

And a sample of with all the variable is simply not credible.

[Sims]

I have over 60 cars and 200+ runs now, that was very early in the experiement, also it doesn't have the temp/wt compensation applied
whether you believe the data or not has no relevancy, it is an accurate representation of what is going on...
and as far as deposits, no power loss
all data will have flyer, and in this case anything below 8 sec needs a hard look, just as >9 would
since a car using all gears only runs only 8 flat...

how much power would it take to go from 8.5 to 8 sec?

How about you tell us together with all the likely scenarios from 7 to 7.5, to 8, to 8.5 and 9.0 and 9.5. It's your baby.

And a sample of with all the variable is simply not credible.

Come fella, you can do better than that Let's really home in on this data so we can all decide whether it's worth partaking in, or that it has no universal value (perhaps, a big perhaps, limited value on an individual basis as P-G suggested).

[ArthurPE]

Come fella, you can do better than that Let's really home in on this data so we can all decide whether it's worth partaking in, or that it has no universal value (perhaps, a big perhaps, limited value on an individual basis as P-G suggested).

it is statistically valid, Audi found it interesting...
it is representative of the cars relative and absolute speed...
no difference, cleaned uncleaned
I'm not wasting time on you...it is pointless
do your own work

[/quote]

[ArthurPE]

Someone do us a favour and run some of the individual car data through http://www.cartestsoftware.com/index.php

I used to muck around with this software when it was free back in the 90's...

You can alter almost everything you could possibly want to along with sensitivity analyses etc etc

I have something better than that
designed by a physicist and Cal Tech, iirc
you put in the torque curve, gearing, weight, etc.
and it will do a curve for any speed/gear range...
pretty accurate, but can't compete with real world numbers

[Sims]

it is statistically valid, Audi found it interesting...
it is representative of the cars relative and absolute speed...
no difference, cleaned uncleaned
I'm not wasting time on you...it is pointless
do your own work

BS.

That's what you called my genuine attempt to make sense of this as a newbie. And you called me a liar. You were 100% wrong then, as you are now.

Here is the text, I am sure you will recall it. It's on the 420ps thread.

sims wrote:
ArthurPE wrote:
sims wrote:
P_G wrote:

... or simpler still, do the 3000-8000 rpm in third test and time how long it takes for your car to do that. If around 8 seconds then I'd suggest your car is near the mark.


As you suggested P_G

5 runs, engine temperature at 95, level road.

9.28 seconds, 8.99, 9.05, 9.01, 9.04

What does this imply Sir?


how did you time that, the OBC is only 1 digit of precision...
your car has a problem, the other 50 runs average 8 sec flat...
none higher than 8.5, and he ran 8 in another run

let me get this right:
he suggested it at 12:56
you posted at 1:14
and had results by 1:57
???


P_G has suggested an alternative method of testing, and I shall endeavour to get that done tomorrow.

stop watch operated by passenger.

I am not far from a road where I can carry out necessary tests, and I have keys to my car whenever I want them


I call BS...and troll

[ArthurPE]

yes, I agree, your content is BS, was then, is now

floop


dee


doo


[/quote]

BS.

blah, blah, blah

[P_G]

You'll have to refresh my memory as I don't remember suggesting any alternative method of measurement? IIRC you were discussing r/r results, I suggested using the 3k-8k rpm test that Arthur had suggested and to see what the times averaged including outside temp, level of incline (if any), oil temp possibly(?) fuel level /type and weight in car plus variant. Not a new method per se?

You then posted times and asked what that implied and someone else answered.

[P_G]

What I wrote in response to your times Sims?;

"Are you a saloon, Avant or cab? Avant
How much fuel did you have on board at the time?25 litres
Was it just you or did you have passenger / extra weight on board? 2 people combined weight 120kg
Are you using 95, 98 or 99 RON fuel? 99 Shell
What was the external temperature? 5 degrees
Did you have the accelerator flat to the floor before you hit 3000rpm or hit 3k rpm then nailed it? hit 3k and then nailed it, oops, did I do wrong?

Best to nail the pedal to the carpet at 2k rpm and then start timer at 3k rpm through to 8k; I originally did the same and then the proposed method and it can take up to 0.3 second off. Minus the weight of an additional passenger, who knows. Also, how many miles have you got on the clock and how old? and did you have TC'off'?

Put it this way, mine (Avant) is consistently doing 8.2 to 8.1 with 61k miles on the clock and just me in the car and I am big boned. If you are getting around that time up to 8.4/8.5 it is in fine health."

[Sims]

You'll have to refresh my memory ....

Here is the link:

http://www.rs246.com/index.php?name=PNp ... c&start=30

[ArthurPE]

What I wrote in response to your times Sims?;

"Are you a saloon, Avant or cab? Avant
How much fuel did you have on board at the time?25 litres
Was it just you or did you have passenger / extra weight on board? 2 people combined weight 120kg
Are you using 95, 98 or 99 RON fuel? 99 Shell
What was the external temperature? 5 degrees
Did you have the accelerator flat to the floor before you hit 3000rpm or hit 3k rpm then nailed it? hit 3k and then nailed it, oops, did I do wrong?

Best to nail the pedal to the carpet at 2k rpm and then start timer at 3k rpm through to 8k; I originally did the same and then the proposed method and it can take up to 0.3 second off. Minus the weight of an additional passenger, who knows. Also, how many miles have you got on the clock and how old? and did you have TC'off'?

Put it this way, mine (Avant) is consistently doing 8.2 to 8.1 with 61k miles on the clock and just me in the car and I am big boned. If you are getting around that time up to 8.4/8.5 it is in fine health."

so sims:
an avant, a bit heavier
with passenger
and hit the pedal at 3000, instead of <3000
with the passenger operating a stopwatch...
and still ran ~9 sec?
do you think that is a fair evaluation of the test?

and P_G ran ~8.2, in an avant with 61k miles (deposits galore) and is only a few 10'ths off of the modded and cleaned cars...do the math

[Sims]

yes, I agree, your content is BS, was then, is now

You are in denial on everything. That is sad.