really? Thought you had your $9,000,000 wheels on?
I’ll get it changed. Changes take a few days, so I will warn you. I can’t just delete the wheels part…I have to get God to delete the time, and I enter a whole new one. No editing.
It’s pretty simple math, no need for a spreadsheet. Your 3-4 shift will matter the least. Your 1-2 shift and your launch will matter the most for your ET. Think about it…if you misshift 1-2 and don’t accelerate for .5 seconds, that’s .5 seconds you’re only going 35 mph. If you misshift 3-4 at 95 mph, that’s .5 seconds you were stuck at 95 mph. Obviously scenario 1 will be worse.
The effect on trap is the same, though, in either case. And the effect on a 60-130 run will be exactly the time lost shifting, obviously.
Richi had the titanium wheels with the winter tires on.
retail is for suckers… ;D
So slow earlier shifts are worse for ET than the later shifts? OK great. I don’t think anyone is arguing that?
I said that I have all my times in a spreadsheet (sorry, it’s already done) and you can see as clear as day what the effect of mis-shifts are there. As I said, not really that catastrophic. Auditude was talking about 0.2 shifts vs. 0.4 shifts and I was just saying that it’s not as hard on your ET as people think (being a bad shifter). People always blame their shitty ET on shift times or use it as a pre-excuse when they go (or don’t go) to the dragstrip. It’s really not that big a deal. A decent launch and reasonable shifting will get you a good overall time and trap. Put an expert in th seat and they’ll certianly do better, but the difference between an expert and a beginner isn’t going to explain why a 600 whp car going 12.5 seconds. That car has other problems that people are ignoring by blaming the driving.
I guess manual transmission talk must make jspazz uncomfortable, since he only dragraces in automatics.
Checking last logs…
~1515-1520 kg/hr flow for MAF. Wasn’t seeing those numbers pre Strat intake though.
Vag Com Torque ~630 Nm on 93 file V2.2, ~665-670 Nm on 100 file V 2.0
Just did really quick glance at rpms/sec for diff setups/old logs/bored… Just Third gear ~2900ish-6900ish rpms
Nothing scientific bc there are a shitload of diff testing times/temps/DAs but stilll pretty cool.
I know Saki loves seeing it on the RS4 logs.
GIAC Stage1 93 intake,test pipes ~590 rpms/sec
GIAC Stage 1 100 intake,test pipes ~ 615 rpms/sec
APR S2 V2.2 93 pump intake,catback ~622 rpms/sec
APR S2 100 V2.0 intake, catback ~687 rpms/sec
APR S2 100 V2.0 intake, headers ~689 rpms/sec
We are gonna do some good data logging tonight if weather holds up. I want to see what’s up with Pete’s car and bypass. Especially since this is supposed to be a fixed version.
Lol saki, no need to troll so hard early in the week, it’s only Monday. I know you’ve been going to the track for 3-4 years now… You’ve got over a dozen years to catch up on me. And the B8 is the first auto car I’d ever taken to the track…hell was the first auto DD I’d had in over 20 years.
That’s interesting data. RPM/Second is a fun tool to use to see how the car is doing. Hard to compare car to car as in most cases people are logging in different spots etc. Further, tuners do different things to time in the various tunes that may have an effect. Finally gearing (obvious one) can change everything.
Still fun to look at. The manual B8 S4 speed range is the same for most of the gears as the RS4, so you could do some time speed comparisons there, but not likelly the RPMs will be of use since the RS4 revs to 8200 RPM at 101 MPH in 3rd whereas the B8 is hitting 7200 or so.
The race gas gain for the APR car there is pretty significant. For perspective, that’s 65 RPM/second…a.k.a. what those B8 cars are probably picking up with a tune. It’s like a whole nother tune delta.
On the RS4 stock we’re at about 550-575 RPM/sec depending on conditions. (high 12s cars)
With tune + exhaust + piggies RS4s are probably in the 650 range
With all the supporting mods and better downpipes pushing towards 700 (low 12s cars).
With the APR TVSr1320 we’ve seen 750 RPM/sec from a few (including Sharmut who just did this test the other day). (high 11s cars)
With the bigger superchargers you’re (well) into the 800 RPMs/second. (low 11s cars)
Some of the big power B5 S4 cars are seeing 1100 RPM/second. That’s incredible when it’s through an entire gear, not just the cherrypicked (and useless) FATS time range of 4200-6500.
You have any stock logs of third gear wound out?
you brought an auto Mercedes with you too
Tsivas, how about the top 2000 rpm only…? Like 5000-7000. That’s the biggie.
Yes my wife’s old car. The B8 S4 is also an auto because I got it for my wife…she got tired of driving manuals.
The NSX, the M5, even the allroad are manuals. So was the B5 S4, the Hondas and Acuras, the motorcycles i wont even get into, jeez I gotta go back to a hand-me-down 80s Park Avenue when I was a teenager to remember an auto.
FATS was important for dragstrip predictions, since cars weren’t spending any time below 4200…just as our cars are only spending time 5000-7000. That’s how a REVO car can hang with a stage II car…it otherwise gets killed 3000-5000.
RPMs/sec is only useful between cars with identical gearing, down to the wear on the tires even. Lets keep it to the B8…!
I don’t think FATS was 4200-6500 for the dragstrip. Let me rephrase that…FATS was NOT 4200-6500 to reflect on the dragstrip. It was a dyno substitute and was in the higher RPMS only because the tuners couldn’t deal with the Audi throttle cut in the lower RPM range (below 4000) of the lower gears.
When you go to the dyno, do you start at 5000 RPM? Of course not. You do a full rip through the entire gear to see what the car is doing. Same with these 3rd gear logs. FATS was a way for people to compare car to car without using a dyno…however when only 1 tuner had solved the throttle restriction and the others hadnt, comparing all of third gear was a bit silly since the 1 tuner’s cars would crush the others.
FATS became a replacement for actual performance testing unfortunately, and guys were cheating doing runs downhill etc. You even had tuners talking about FATS and using it to prove their concepts without going to the dragstrip. Bit of a joke. Especially when someone throws an RS4 transmission in their car (much better third gear for an RPM per second test) and they and their tuner announce a new record FATS time without disclosing that (yes, that happened).
I am eager to give it a try once the weather clears and we get the right temps and conditions for optimal runs on 100 oct. Does anyone know if the GIAC tune addresses whatever shift issues APR had to sort out with respect to shifting to quickly between gears?
I think the important point to be made is that all track conditions, vehicle conditions, and launch, shift etc are going to have to be pretty optimal to move our current mid 12 6 mt times into even the upper 11s. ;D
Since we’re talking dragstrip, yes 11.00 of the 12.08 seconds of my ET is between 5000-7000 rpm, so yes, that’s what matters the most. We’re comparing B8 S4s, but comparing stage I to stage II under 5000 rpm is unfair, of course the stage II car will kill it.
Having driven my car both REVO and APR stage II, the difference under 5000 is huge. The difference over 5000 rpm…? Well lets put it this way I trapped the same on REVO as APR stage II.
Third Gear ~2900ish-6900ish rpms vs ~5000-7000 rpms
GIAC Stage1 93 intake,test pipes ~590 rpms/sec vs ~553 rpms/sec
GIAC Stage 1 100 intake,test pipes ~ 615 rpms/sec vs ~588 rpms/sec
APR S2 V2.2 93 pump intake,catback ~622 rpms/sec vs ~577 rpms/sec
APR S2 100 V2.0 intake, catback ~687 rpms/sec vs ~643 rpms/sec
APR S2 100 V2.0 intake, headers ~689 rpms/sec vs ~622 rpms/sec
Just for shits and giggles
Third gear DSG
2900-6900 rpms vs 5000-6900 rpms
Revo Stage 1 93 DSG 670 rpms/sec vs 624 rpms/sec
Nobody said 5000-7000 doesn’t matter at the dragstrip. You said FATS was for dragstrip predictions. It wasn’t. It was never used for that. It was used as a dyno substitute and the high RPMs nature of the test was so people could compare how fast their cars are without running into the throttle restriction that most tuners couldn’t turn off.
Anyway, a full look at the car through the RPMs is certainly relevant. I wouldn’t dismiss it. I do agree that looking at a car at 3000 RPMs isn’t the biggest thing on my priority list. I don’t really care what my car does at 3000 RPM since I have a lever in the middle of my car with numbers on it that will let me change to a gear that puts me up around 6000-8250 in my particular car. So does the manual trans B8. Of course if the car was a big turbo A4 it may not be too fun with it making a fraction of it’s in boost torque when it’s out of boost…and that may mean that at 4500 RPM even you’re making a pittance. My car makes 90% of it’s peak torque across 90% of the rev range. The B8 makes a similarly wide band.
Interestingly the biggest beef that B8 S4 owners have with the high revving V8 motor cars is ‘there is no torque down low’. If you like to race people in the wrong gear I guess this could be a concern. If you like to race people in the right gear, being above 5000 RPMs is just fine.
Tsivas, that’s pretty good delta still for the APR car over GIAC. Ignoring richi’s data, looks like your car is putting a rape clinic on the GIAC car by about 60 RPM/second on race gas vs. race gas. That’s huge. That’s a few tenths in the quarter mile, if all else is equal.
wait why are we ignoring my data?
didn’t your car have something wrong with the CPS? Tsivas’ car is a good bit faster than your car in the logs he just posted.
If you’d rather we used your data, sure.
PR S2 100 V2.0 intake, catback ~687 rpms/sec vs ~643 rpms/sec
APR S2 100 V2.0 intake, headers ~689 rpms/sec vs ~622 rpms/sec
At high RPMs, headers + CPS make a car slower than stock cats and no CPS. Is that the conclusion we want to garner? Obviously doesn’t look right, and when you were talking about your car last week, didn’t you guys determine the CPS was causing trouble?
oh im not drawing any conclusions was just curious lol. i actually think the problem stems deeper than my coolant congealing. the pumps just flat out not pumping at all. maybe thats why it congealed? cus its been still?
the pump was making a strange ticking sound yesterday as well as the fact when i shine a light down to where the pump is i see fluid on the top side of the belly pan right near the pump and nowhere else… uuuurg