Not really. There’s a tool in dragtimes.Com called da calculator and you can input a time at a track etc but we we’re basically at sea level so there’s no correction needed.
The corrected times are a ballpark and not entirely useful for anything more than starting an argument.
Why does it suck?
That just sucks, because some of us, at least MDUBZ and myself that I know of, are stuck in places like Bandimere and PPIR about 5000 feet up.
Why does it suck?
Slower times at elevation.
Yup. That’s why I want to hit the track at Sacramento the day I pick the car up. I’m also going to drive to Phoenix this Christmas when I visit the parents so I can get a supposedly negative DA out there.
I spoke with Keaton about this yesterday Marcus, and he said the JHM tunes are adaptive as far as the elevation. So he said the tune should be good, although not as good as sea level, but they could offer some fine tuning for the elevation factor if I gather some logs for them. I’m assuming this all translates to the RS4 as well. Either way, VCDS software/scanner are on my Christmas list this year 
Slower times at elevation.
Yup. That’s why I want to hit the track at Sacramento the day I pick the car up. I’m also going to drive to Phoenix this Christmas when I visit the parents so I can get a supposedly negative DA out there.
I spoke with Keaton about this yesterday Marcus, and he said the JHM tunes are adaptive as far as the elevation. So he said the tune should be good, although not as good as sea level, but they could offer some fine tuning for the elevation factor if I gather some logs for them. I’m assuming this all translates to the RS4 as well. Either way, VCDS software/scanner are on my Christmas list this year
Well, I am p’bly going to have to get a netbook or used laptop, as I haven’t seen any VCDS software for Mac.
Well, I am p’bly going to have to get a netbook or used laptop, as I haven’t seen any VCDS software for Mac.
Unless you’re good with emulating windows you may as well get a $250 laptop. That’s my plan.
Unless you’re good with emulating windows you may as well get a $250 laptop. That’s my plan.
Yeah, I am pretty computer stupid, so looks like I will do the same. Will be pretty slick to have a computer just to do “car shit”…Believe me, I will sticker bomb the shit out of it 
Yeah, I am pretty computer stupid, so looks like I will do the same. Will be pretty slick to have a computer just to do “car shit”…Believe me, I will sticker bomb the shit out of it
Yeah I’m pretty excited. I’m hoping I can find one that fits perfectly in the little area under the steering wheel where the owners manual goes. Not sure if you guys have that in the RS4 but if you can find a way to strap it in that spot would be perfect.
Yeah I’m pretty excited. I’m hoping I can find one that fits perfectly in the little area under the steering wheel where the owners manual goes. Not sure if you guys have that in the RS4 but if you can find a way to strap it in that spot would be perfect.
I still don’t know why it sucks. Did you want us to out your corrected times on the list, and that sucks that we wont?
I still don’t know why it sucks. Did you want us to out your corrected times on the list, and that sucks that we wont?
It just sucks because we suffer quite a bit of power loss when compared to you guys who are near sea level. It has nothing to do with the list, although it does kind of suck that I have to drive over 1000 miles to lay down some serious times. I’m guessing I’ll maybe barely beat the current 11.9 record up here. I’ve heard the times differ by as much as a second in comparison. Most importantly though is the fact that our cars just aren’t as fun up here. Not sure what s/c loss accrues to, but naturally aspirated was like 3% power loss per 1000ft.
For reference, this is right now:
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/10/11/7c94968ffb504cf1927a980a22f8e9fc.jpg
I won’t notice it as much when I have all the extra power but it’s still probably a 10% loss. Not sure what my whp will be but 600 will mean a 60 whp loss which is pretty significant. That’s a generalization and probably isn’t actually even accurate.
FI loss is less.