MattyS4 125.75mph trap (2960ft D/A's, 85-87F)

B8 S4
#7

I will say 2 things, then I will step away and watch the explosions (either from B8 S4 guys calling me a hater, or from people who get what I’m saying realising I’m right).

  1. Correcting times for an intercooled car, that is running alcohol as part of it’s fuel source is a bit auspicious. Let’s just let him run a time before we guess what it would be in good conditions.

  2. (this is the big one) The trap is astoundingly good considering 0 DA, never mind 3000 feet. That’s enough trap for a 10.9-11.1 range ET if the trap is accurate.

BUT IS IT???

The car went 7.456 @ 93.96 at the 1/8. Based on hundreds of DSG B8 S4 times in our list, that would likely translate to about 11.55 @ 119 MPH. Normally, picking up 25 mph of trap speed from the 1/8 to the 1/4 is great. This car picked up 33 mph, aka impossible.

How his timeslip showed 11.3 @ 125 I have no idea. Clocks may have fucked up. This was a money event he was at, and I’m surprised nobody freaked out because that time is bad. You will probably see that being discussed on other forums for the guys he was up against once the slips are posted.

(ducks for cover)

#8

Saki, I tend to agree and made a few of the same points… Even when I trapped 123.13 I only picked up 28.5pmh as my 1/8th MPH was 94.63, so something does seem slightly off…

I doubt anyone on vendorzine will discuss in a way to question it as they just drink cool aid over there… There’s now a dude porting blowers but he can’t seem to find his pics of his work… lol On top of that he ran a best of 12.3 and thinks with a few more mods he’ll be going 10.6 - 10.8! lol Honestly, I hope he does but he needs to make some more passes and show some results… You know me though I’m certainly a hater! lol

#9

Those are all good questions and valid points, he did gain 31.8mph in the back half. Perhaps the injection system with IAT’s and fueling made that big of a difference versus just running race or an e85/pump blend? Not sure…

His car is slightly stronger in the top end than mine if we compare both of our 122mph traps, and he was on 91 pump too. He trapped 122.56mph to my 122.44mph, he was running in IIRC 1300 d/a’s, I was half of that. IIRC his 1/8mile trap was lower 96.xxmph, mine was lower 97.xxmph. It wasn’t his only time that day trapping above 120mph though.

Either way, Hoepfully it can be duplicated. I certainly will be aiming for at least 125mph for sure ;D

#10

the koolaid would be the guys who are seeing 15-17 degrees of ignition advance on pump or 21 degrees of ignition advance on race/E85 file on their dual-pulley set-ups and claiming OMG OMG it’s fast without #'s to back it up (I will not insert tuner) :o

If I can see 29.75 degrees, what does that make mine (or even yours)? ;D

#11

no. No audi on our list has ever gained 32 mph in the trap. Not low 10 second cars. Not high 10 second cars. Not low 11 second cars. Certainly not B8 S4s.

Not even this car that trapped 134 and 136 MPH…and was HORRIBLY driven in the first half (arguably the perfect situation to set up a big MPH gain in the second half). It gained 26 MPH.

Sorry, but your boy’s timeslip is a mistake. It won’t go on our list.

Let’s see his other 5 timeslips from the event. Let me guess…nowhere near that one?

http://i1357.photobucket.com/albums/q755/britishturbo/IMG_20131103_122944_831_zpsff014c2e.jpg

#12

FWIW- a 6 second pro-mod only picks up about 35"ish" mph from 1/8th to the 1/4.

#13

exactly…and that’s a 3000 hp car lol.

#14

If he has a big wing, it is possible to add 35 MPH between the 1/8 and the 1/4. The hype is real.

What was your front and rear tire pressure for the run?

#15

I don’t think he posts here anymore… so doubt he will chime in.

How do we know it’s not the 1/8 sensor that’s off? ;D

#16

If we’re using calculation and speculation :wink:

http://www.nitrousexpress.com/oldwebdocs/hpcalculators.htm

http://www.xcceleration.com/et.calculator.html

@ 4000lb he’s probably pushing 600+ bhp to hit that MPH- if true, and as I recall, isn’t that the number at which stock internals go are likely to go boom?

#17

because the only outlier is the 1/4 mile

not the 60
not the 330
not the 660
not the 1000
just the 1/4

consider the following…

primetime’s 11.45 vs Matty’s 11.39

1.60 60 1.64
4.73 330 4.87
7.33 1/8 7.45
94.62 MPH 93.96
9.56 1000 9.64
11.45 1/4 11.39
119.56 MPH 125.76

Primetime was 14 hundredths ahead at 330 feet
PT was 12 hundredths ahead at 660 feet and was 0.7 MPH faster
PT was 8 hundredths ahead at 1000 feet

From 330 feet to 1000 feet, Matty only gained 6 hundredths. That means he’s not going much faster than primetime if at all, and the numbers bear that out. But from 1000 feet to 1320 feet, Matty somehow gained 14 hundredths…and in the last 660 feet he gained 5.9 MPH on primetime, a car he was slower than at every other point in the race up to the halfway mark.

For perspective, a car that is 8 hundredths ahead of you at the 1000 foot mark is about a car length ahead of you. For you to pass him, and beat him by 6 hundredths, you’re half a car length ahead of him at the pole. To gain only that much time…but to absolutely WHOMP him with an extra 6 mph, is impossible. You’d be gaining on him so fast it would look ridiculous. If you trapped 125 in a DSG B8 S4 at a good track with a 1.6 60’ time, your 1/4 mph time should be 10.9 or so. Not 11.39.

So there’s something wrong with the 1/4 mph trap. He should be around 11.4-11.5 @ 119. The fastest cars are in the 11.4 @ 119 range. If you give them another 50-70 whp or so and add another 6 mph of trap speed, they’d be in the 10s. Easily.

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/sakimano/IMG-20160626-WA0008_zpshtlmeqfc.jpg

http://i1012.photobucket.com/albums/af247/concordslim/IMG_2485_zpsjjpeza1r.jpg

#18

according to the 1/8th to 1/4 mile estimate ( which are usually fairly accurate) he picked up .23 vs the chart: 7.45 = 11.63 vs 7.30 = 11.39- seems unlikely unless he sprayed it from the 1/8th on…?

#19

if you multiply the 1/8 time of almost any properly working car by 1.55 it will yield the 1/4 mile ET within 1/10 of a second almost every single time. I mean 1 in 500 will be off, and that’s because it wasn’t a properly working (or driven) car usually. But a DSG B8 S4, it’s a no brainer. Predictable as rain in Scotland when I go on vacation.

If you divide the 1/8 MPH by 0.785, you can generally predict the 1/4 MPH within 1 mph. This is less reliable than the ET prediction but is still damn good.

In this case, that takes his 7.456 @ 93.96 and turns into 11.55 @ 119.69. This is right where he should be among the best cars. The DA means he’s not setting records. The 60 which is good, but not great, means he is not setting ET records. Basically bang on what it should do with a massive overdrive pulley (max boost) and a piggyback to augment the conservative nature of boost management in the APR tune, alcohol for fuel (no timing pulled).

The problem is the ET barely improved over the prediction (1.5 tenths) whereas the MPH went haywire good. That doesn’t add up. You can’t gain that much MPH in the second half full stop, but if you did miraculously, your ET would improve DRASTICALLY…it wouldn’t fall within a tenth of the 1/8 prediction ET.

#20

Must have been some sweet tailwind

#21

Just curious LOE…did you add this dubious time to your list?

#22

Nothing has been added at this time; all times moving forward are on a submission-only basis, meaning he’ll have to submit it via the thread like others. I don’t think the list I was compiling will get updated though because Arin@APR is now starting to update the stickied list on AZ, and that list is likely to be more popular with the members than my spreadsheet.

His more recent times have been closer to the 121-123mph marks in above 2,000 ft D/A’s, and that seems to be his more consistent traps. It will be interesting if someone can hit that 125-126mph mark, even if near 0ft D/A’s. I’ve spoken to Matt via text multiple times, he’s the type to report back his findings and has been honest with all of his “duds” and “wows” and has more passion that I do to move the platform forward with all of his projects.

#23

120anything is amazing from a small V6 and a 1320. Impressive.

I wish someone would run their car on pump gas with 2 pulleys and a tune for boost. And a working DSG.

#24

I know it’s very easy to get excited about a personal best record setting run, and even moreso for a platform specific record run. But at the same time, an outlier should be enough to see something fishy, especially when it’s related to trap and not ET (as trap tends to be more consistent than ET). If he did really run that, I’d think it’d be no big deal to see it on all the other slips as well, or very close.

Saki and Primetime and laid the facts out pretty clearly. And it’s still a very impressive run, especially from a s/c V6 as saki mentioned. I just hope he doesn’t see this as anyone trying to deter him but rather take it as an informative lesson. I do look forward to seeing these records getting broken and advancing the street trim platform more.

#25

you will get your wish. I will bee trying to do this on just pump 94. not sure about any dsg tune though. kinda thinkin fuck that right now.

#26

anyone with a B8 facelift (2013+) DSG will want a DSG tune to get the RPMs out to 7000.
anyone with a 2010-2012 is wasting their time and over a thousand dollars playing games with TCU tuning.

The only beit to a DSG tune on the earlier years pre-facelift models is launch control which wasn’t available on the 2010 cars. The 2011-2012 cars came with stock launch control. Not to mention primetime showed us that NOT using launch control is just as fast or faster than launch control of any sort (stock LC or tuned LC).

So to summarize

2010 - don’t bother
2011 - don’t bother
2012 - don’t bother
2013-2016 - you probably want it but even then it’s not the end of the world if you don’t.

The only reason anyone with a 2010-2012 DSG car would want a TCU tune is if it was free and even then, it makes some cars SLOWER…aka don’t bother.