I’ve youtubed one of the earlier videos for convenience.
Dude, I get you have to overthink everything, but this is tiring.
The average speed also doesn’t mean anything. You are thinking way too linear. The trap speed is also an average speed at the end of the track through the traps.
The last 66’ of the track is where your trap speed is calculated. So your speed comparison is missing a ton of data points. Like 330’ time/mph, 1/8, 1000ft, etc.
All of the cars went through the traps in 4th gear WOT, the JHM tuned car went the same distance in the same amount of time, but the last 66’ it’s speed was 2.33 MPH faster.
It was faster through the traps because it makes more power than the other cars.
This is very common drag strip knowledge and one of the reason why we like it as a performance test.
I’m sure you will come up with 10 more reasons why this is a flawed conclusion because of science, BUT this is as close as it gets, besides getting the cars side by side.
Unfortunately from my experience I’ve challenged plenty of other S4s back in the day that were tuned by other companies who claimed to be just as good on the dyno as JHM, but never wanted to do any real world acceleration tests like the 1/4mile.
If you can’t see the results and our method of thinking, we can all agree to disagree. But maybe you should prove to us JHM isn’t the best option, instead of some of us trying to tell you they are the only option worth mentioning. Both options are once again impossible to prove because you have your own criteria set in stone.
Exactly. We are not seeking a death penalty here, where the burden of proof is great and the consequences are mammoth.
We are talking about cars lol.
It’s a mathematical certainty that a car which had a faster speed at the end but ended up with the same average over the run has lost time somewhere in the run. We can exclude the launch in this case as we know the 60ft. Somewhere after 60ft but before the end the other car (with a lower trap) was going faster. It’s irrefutable.
[quote]The last 66’ of the track is where your trap speed is calculated. So your speed comparison is missing a ton of data points. Like 330’ time/mph, 1/8, 1000ft, etc.
[/quote]
That would allow us to say more precisely where car X and Y picked up speed at different rates, yes, but it wouldn’t change the fact.
[quote]It was faster through the traps because it makes more power than the other cars.
[/quote]
This is not the only possible conclusion. It is your preferred one perhaps, but there are other possible explanations. Why are they being discounted arbitrarily?
[quote] But maybe you should prove to us JHM isn’t the best option, instead of some of us trying to tell you they are the only option worth mentioning. Both options are once again impossible to prove because you have your own criteria set in stone.
[/quote]
You can’t prove a negative. That would be a logical fallacy. Within the constraints we actually have to work with this is impossible to settle. I don’t mind not knowing, I have no trouble accepting uncertainty.
The only thing that gets my panties in a bunch is people drawing unsupportable conclusions which they then claim to “know”… You can say you think company X is faster than company Y. It can be your opinion based on what you’ve seen. Or you can know it within a certain margin of error and likelihood.
An MRC car may be slower than a JHM one with similar mods. It may not be. It may be faster. Who knows. Based on what as been submitted so far it remains an open question. So the only people who are being silly are the ones with the unfounded claims.
^^^This is why you’re losing the crowd.
You are looking at the Audirevolution quarter mile list and saying this is the only thing we’ve looked at to come to conclusion that JHM NA RS4s are fastest.
I have told you 4 or 5 times already now that
-
the quarter mile list has a very restrictive set of conditions to qualify (go read the OP in the ‘REVOLUTIONARY RESULTS’ thread already. Do your homework). There are dozens of other RS4 1/4 mile times we’ve seen from all sorts of tuners and customers (JHM included) that DON’T qualify and thus are not on the list. Despite not qualifying, we’ve yet to see a naturally aspirated RS4 come close to the fastest 3 or 4 JHM cars.
-
many of us have tested these cars in other formats, from 3k-8k testing, side by side races, PBOX acceleration testing etc. None of these are on our list. All of these have shown that the JHM cars do very well.
Because you are new, you are up to 4 years behind on the acceleration testing (in all forms) done with JHM modified cars. Because you are an engineer, you are acting like none of this testing exists because you weren’t there in person when it was done. That is your prerogative.
As for the tune, people tried to show you about a highly effective ECU tune that has been shown to work very well, better than all of the others we’ve seen offered. You had already made up your mind, and were letting your ‘mechanic’ tune your car. Great. But don’t try to denounce years of results and years of knowledge just because you’re a neophyte.
[quote]You are looking at the Audirevolution quarter mile list and saying this is the only thing we’ve looked at to come to conclusion that JHM NA RS4s are fastest.
[/quote]
Because it’s the only thing I’m being shown. When I ask for more, I hear “we’ve already presented it to you a million times!”
So what is it going to be?
Show me how much data you have from MRC stage 2 cars in Europe, if anything. What do you have that isn’t on the list?
[quote]As for the tune, people tried to show you about a highly effective ECU tune that has been shown to work very well, better than all of the others we’ve seen offered. You had already made up your mind, and were letting your ‘mechanic’ tune your car. Great.
[/quote]
You make it sound like I could have bought a JHM tune right now - I could not. I could wait a few months, fair enough. In a few months I will decide which actual tune I will get.
The JHM tune is not recommended for a car which still has precats. So that’s my car disqualified right off the bat.
I know because JHM told me when I asked them via email weeks ago.
Your ignorance doesn’t undo their existence.
There are about a dozen JHM tuned RS4s in Europe. There are half a dozen on RS246 alone.
Again…the common theme here is that if JCViggen doesn’t see it with his own eyes, it doesn’t exist.
Certainly not, but your counter claim doesn’t materialize them all on their own either.
Have any of them ever run the quarter mile or done any other kind of test we might be interested in?
What’s so hard to understand? If badtoyz missed a gear change on 2nd gear…or 3rd gear…he would lose time vs. the other cars, which he made up as he continued.
That night was weird. I was with him. We all struggled like balls for traction and the track was rammed full of cars so we didn’t get many runs. Badtoyz’ clutch was also on its last legs. One run between him and I he actually glazed it so bad it looked like his engine bay was on fire as we lined up (he tried a burnout…unsuccesfully lol). Perhaps his clutch slipped a bit on engaging second or third gear in that pass you posted, because that was the one right before the smokeshow. There could be a myriad of reasons however why he lost time on the track from 60-1320, only to make it back up in the second half of the track.
I can tell you that he and I had the same exhaust, however he had the tune. My best on that night was 12.8 @ 109.5 and his best was the one you linked. Head to head racing from a roll, he walked away from my car comfortably.
On the runs you posted, I nailed each shift on those two runs so I couldn’t do it much better. The MRC car also did very well (I’ve communicated with the owner on numerous occasions). Badtoyz? We will have to see if he chimes in.
That’s a stage 2 MRC car that’s on the 1/4 mile list ironically.
And for other data, try youtube, and try google. My computer has a google. does yours?
You’re basically asking me to go through, search a history of 4 years of data from RS4 acceleration testing around the world, and then conveniently present it to you. Get a fucking grip and don’t be so lazy. You’re already tuned anyway, so who cares? Dmitry the sparkplug part# challenged mechanic is taking care of you.
Again…we presented the JHM option knowing you’re a Belgian in Russia…not likely you know about it, so hey here’s an option. You then shot down the claims that JHM was best, and have done so for 3 days for no reason really…your mind is already made up, and you’re letting Dmitry practice RS4 tuning on your Misano Red example. Why are you still engaging in this discussion?
See this is why you’re lonely. You’re just ridiculous.
You just basically called me a liar. Because I know something that you don’t know…you suggest that me saying something doesn’t make it true. Well it is true. And you can go fuck yourself.
For FUCK’s sake
Yes I saw that. Anything else? You’re clearly a man who has been to school and understands that a sample size of one establishes very little as fact.
[quote]And for other data, try youtube, and try google
[/quote]
Tried it, found very little that hasn’t been mentioned yet. Some stock cars trapping 104-105 here and there. Can’t even find a 3-8k run of an MRC car on the UK forum even though they had a lengthy topic on it. Only Sonny who claimed a 6.7 on his stage 2 MRC with lightweight buckets in it without video.
[quote]You’re already tuned anyway, so who cares?
[/quote]
Apparently you’re skipping over information I’ve already posted. I’m not tuned yet. How else did I post a 7.9 second Arthur run on stock mapping today anyway?
And even if I WAS tuned… this is an EPROM we’re talking about. It can be overwritten plenty of times. I’m not signing a marriage certificate with the guy who tunes my car.
[quote]Dmitry the sparkplug part# challenged mechanic is taking care of you
[/quote]
Again, this is spark plug “joke” is based on an imaginary mistake. The Bosch spark plugs were a correct p/n in ETKA. Blame Audi.
[quote]You then shot down the claims that JHM was best
[/quote]
I have done no such thing. I am interested to know on which basis they were declared “best” rather than simply take your word on it. Just about every performance car in the world has some dedicated fanboys of one tuner or other. On RS246 UK everyone is into MRC. On RS246 Germany it’s Tunetec. Here it’s JHM. Give me a break for not automatically accepting the local flavor as the best in the world when the rest of the world hasn’t really been compared at all.
If it makes you feel any better, I certainly believe JHM can be established as the best tuner for RS4s in the US, and they do remote tunes which is handy for everyone.
In no small part I came to this forum precisely because I had already looked into JHM before I even bought the car.
It’s extremely simple: I make no claim which tuner is best because I don’t know. Some here DO make such a claim and I found the evidence lacking. That’s all.
[quote]you can go fuck yourself.
[/quote]
that escalated quickly meme
I guess it really was a religious topic.
Do us a favor and get JHM tuned…then go rape all of the MRC cars you can find. Come back, hand over the data you collected…or get MRC tuned, find a JHM car and be the rapage receiver. That would actually be more fun, but then you won’t come back because you will feel foolish that all of the data was some how right.
You are being a tad ridiculous and we really don’t care what you choose in the end but we don’t like to see people waste time, money, or buy dyno sheets here.
Odds are I will never be able to run against any other tuned RS4 sadly. Though it would certainly be nice to compare. If it happens it will be documented thoroughly.
I’m not so sad that I’m going to spend thousands of dollars swapping back and forth between tunes for the sake of an internet argument (which would probably still leave some doubting my motives regardless)
All things considered JHM is still the likeliest company I’ll use, even if I’m not a big fan of canned remaps which adjust themselves to the car. They replied quickly and thoroughly which is more than what I can say about the others. MRC is on an island (literally) and the Germans don’t seem eager to reply to my questions about invoicing.
You have your mind made up about a lot of things, like “canned tuning”
Do you know we have seen some custom tuned RS4s? Because some people were dead set that each modification needs to have a custome tune. They could not believe that an experienced calibrator, who like I said before… does the JHM thing on the side because he is an enthusiast, could possibly write a tune that could take full advantage of any bolt-ons you add to the car. It could also take advantage of better fuel among many other features. He has also been asked, which we’ve already said this, to help out companies like APR…I’m sure you’ve heard of them, right?
Those custom tuned guys…well they either never tested the tune for fear of being embarrassed or dropped the tune for something else because they were simply not happy. This same argument happened in the B8S4 platform…a member was boasting about the benefits of a custom tune. The short story is he did worse than the top canned tunes and eventually switched to the “canned” or OTS tune he at first considered obselete.
Canned is the wrong word, I apologize. It’s not that “canned” (if that makes sense) because it won’t work on a car with precats anyway. The stock tune adjusts to modifications very well as we’ve seen, so on these cars it’s not much of a concern. I’ve been used to more archaic EMS which has probably warped my perception.
So if we want to understand why nobody should listen to JCViggen, we just need to read these posts. He posted a link to a car that he described as ‘the fastest NA RS4 I’ve ever seen’. Of course it’s a speedtest that nobody in the world will likely do, or want to do, so it’s a pretty useless test. How about something more realistic? 30-100 mph maybe? That would be 50-160 km/h
When we have a look through the same guy’s youtube account, a couple of days after that video, he did a run through the gears at more realistic speeds. Conveniently he went in 1st gear, from around 30-40 km/h all the way up past 160, so here we have a great example of a speed test we can compare.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7RYb-Dd5lI
Time from 50-160 KM/H? 7.7 seconds. Pretty good right? I mean it has a bunch of mods including ’ a very expensive and elaborate airbox’. It’s a freakishly fast RS4…right?
Wrong.
Here’s what happens when an RS4 with no mods other than JHM exhaust with cats does the same test. Twice.
7.2 seconds.
This is funny too… Here’s his “546 hp” RS6 running from 80-130. No shifting. He put the 546 number in his signature on another forum
http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/sakimano/untitled_zpssaqfuwxn.jpg
2.4 seconds.
Wow… 546 hp!
Only problem is my RS4 with just an exhaust does it in 2. 4 seconds in the vids I posted above, and that’s with a manual gear change.
Not feeling too confident in jcviggen’s performance acumen.