Beyond FATS - Performance Testing

Post by **jimbogrey** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 4:46 pm

Mark

For these tests are you suggesting starting at a constant 60 in 3rd say at 1/4 throttle and then planting it, or hitting 60 with WOT. Obviously the difference wil be huge. If the former may i suggest thta you start at 55 then time from 60.

Jimbo

Post by **MarkB** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:40 pm

I was startinbg low and then WOT through 60 to 90

Not sure how good it was so the error could also be quite wide

Post by **jimbogrey** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:46 pm

OK I tried several runs tonight i must stress that i did not cross reference with GPS although I have done that in the past and it was OK.

The best time I managed starting low and going WOT at 60 was 3.9s the worst was 4.4s the difference seemed to depend on heatsoak. Better times acheived by keeping thottle open in lower gears thus keeping airflow through the engine. The lower figures occurred when I had a blast then slowed with 0 throttle to below 40mph and then planted again. It just goes to show how quickly the intake temperatures rise when the thottle is closed.

I also tried sitting at 55 in 3rd and then planting the thottle and timing 60-90 the best time here was 4.2s.

Whilst i was out i also tried a Fats run and managed a 4.42s

Post by **DavidT** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:17 am

4,42 FATS for a K03'd car is super, super quick. Lucky man.

Post by **MarkB** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:20 am

Your car makes me sick

Post by **s4woody** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 1:21 pm

i wonder if i can check mine...calling MarkB...

Post by **MarkB** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 1:33 pm

s4woody wrote:i wonder if i can check mine...calling MarkB...

I'm not sure. I have the kit to log live data on a BMW but I don't know if it does that. I'll look into it...

I also have GPS logging but don't know how accurate it would be, probably not very

Post by **viperbl** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 1:41 pm

Yeah, I have a race technology device that does 0-60, 1/4 mile etc etc, but it also does any other speeds inbetween, like 60-90.

I will need to give it a go, see what kind of difference there is between VAG COM and this ...

Post by **dace** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:44 pm

DavidT wrote:4,42 FATS for a K03'd car is super, super quick. Lucky man.

I managed 3.7 seconds...........

Post by **GrahamS4** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:22 am

In an S4 not an RS4?

Post by **jeffw** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:34 am

Dave
RS4 Stage III

I'm guessing it might be a RS4 Graham....just a wild guess

Post by **GrahamS4** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:44 am

I think you are right, but didn't want to presume he wasn't talking about an S4 he owned prior to the RS4 as unlikley as the figure was, considering he quoted the thread that says K03 in his response.

Post by **hethers** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:51 am

Well I've ordered VAG COM to see if my previous FATS estimate was so far out - see the other thread I posted. I'll keep you informed!

Post by **dace** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:10 pm

GrahamS4 wrote:I think you are right, but didn't want to presume he wasn't talking about an S4 he owned prior to the RS4 as unlikley as the figure was, considering he quoted the thread that says K03 in his response.

Yes, it was in my RS4.......sorry for any confusion!

Post by **hethers** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 11:31 am

FATS time today of 3.529 with vag-com - happy with that. MAF reading 337 g/s so I guess that works out about right for 420 bhp

I can try to post the logs if you want

RS246.com Forum :: The World's #1 Audi R, S and RS Enthusiast Community

Beyond FATS - Performance Testing

Who is online