So back to the dragstrip...... BOOM!

Richi had the traps, but not the launch. I’m too lazy to look but we both did 12.4 on pump, my ET a little faster but he was 114 vs my 111 mph.

I’d imagine he should be neck and neck with Bear. Put Vitaliy in Richi’s car and see what he can do.

Oh, I forgot, I looked at Prime’s logs. Jeez, these are the most ordinary set of logs I’d ever seen, there is absolutely NOTHING special. Prime, I’m posting comments here and maybe I shouldn’t, nothing extraordinary but I don’t want things to go “downhill” (that means you Saki). But things I noticed.

-The ignition timing is a flat 24 -25 degrees from 5500-7000, at intake mani pressures around 2000-2050 hPa. Very reasonable and safe.
-I can tell you’re losing about 0.5 psig of pressure to people who log closer to sea level, must be due to altitude. You may show 15.5-16 psig of boost (do you have a gauge?), but absolute pressure (what really counts) is definitely down.
-as expected, MAF calculated values are a little lower than expected too, a quick guess is about 3-4% lower than my car on a log I compared to.
-It appears you shifts to 5th, about 1/2 second before the 1320 stripes. I haven’t seen that from anybody except you. Damn that’s fast.

I don’t get it. I am not subscribing to the downhill theory, I am completely convinced it’s only worth 0.10 sec, but there is a definite loss of air charge in the motor with the altitude that cancels that out (and I’d say more). Well that’s one special car, and I’d say any chance we can meet you or you can meet us at the track, esp you vs. Bear, that would be so so awesome.

This is true, for those that are all motor S5, but now! ;D I am going to have more heat! but intercooler too so hrmm…I guess I will just have to wait and see

bigserve, Sorry I forgot you had a 4.2 car… I’m with Saki as it’s probably a tough comparison…

J, yeah I was one of the most negative on the 034 HFC’s but like you said Bear and I are two of the fastest cars so they are doing something good… lol If you want a set call Issam at http://www.inaengineering.com
As for the logs I agree nothing jumps out… as you point out the timing is fairly consistent up to redline… no crazy amounts like I see on some of those Revo logs… lol Would still love to meet up but the season is getting short… bummed I couldn’t make it to Hunter’s outing but I just had too much going on then with my mom and such… I’ll be back at it next Sat. as it is supposed to be low 50’s and overcast… Also, Norwalk is open for a week straight from Sun 21st through Sunday the 28th for their Halloween special… Depending on how busy I am at work I am going to try and go out there for a day and see what happens…

FAW, Thanks! I told you I would beat my time this year… lol

Turbobaby went 12.35 vs my 12.21. The big change was the V2 tune between my 12.21 run vs. my 12.11 run (also added the CPS unit though I don’t think it was of much benefit in such cold conditions).

I think the revo 93 tune uses more ignition angle (I think?) then all of the other tunes to perform so well in cooler weather conditions (not so great in warm weather conditions). I believe it’s been proven (via Jspazz and others) that the ignition angle at the 100+ octane level is very close amongst all the tunes (Revo, APR, and GIAC) so I don’t know if comparing my APR 93 tune times vs. his Revo 93 tune times are providing a fair basis for comparison to determine the added performance of “all the extra stuff” I have on my car. If anyone has an alternative thought or if I am being inaccurate in anyway please feel free to correct me.

re REVO and ignition timing, their 93 is about the same as APR 100 for perspective. Pretty reliant on excellent fuel and cool conditions.

That’s why you see the guys with access to good fuel and cool temps running 12.3-12.4 (auditude, turbobaby) and the guys stuck with weaker fuel and warm temps are pinging and complaining.

Yup. I can’t say I’m disappointed with the HFCs! well, that’s not entirely true… I do wish the install was easier but other than that they are good in my books.

Oh and the theory that they add power down low but restrict up top is suspect as I believe my trap time on the 93 tune was 114.51mph which is pretty good as far as I can tell compared to others… ;D

what was the cost on the HFCs?
what was the cost of install?

Do remember exactly… I think they were $850 plus 5hrs for the install (which was closer to 7hrs actually). Testpipes would be even better and they are like $350-400.

I paid $600 delievered as they were purchased by another forum member who sold his car for a GT3 before he installed… This included the spacers which I eventually returned for $80… Installation was about $800, bill was actually a little more but they did a few other small things for me at the same time… I could do test pipes now w/o a need to move the motor… I am actually thinking about doing exactly that…

test pipes would be interesting to see if they help.

I can’t remember where the cats are or if there are precats as well. Would be good to get a refresher.

The b6/7 4.2 S4/RS4 all had 2 cats per side, and the pre-cats were quite close to the motor, choking flow and trapping heat in the motor. Gutting them alone would deliver a significant bump in power. With a tune/piggies/catback my B7 S4 picked up 7 tenths and 6 MPH vs. stock. I think that’s pretty significant considering it’s an NA car, therefore it ‘doesn’t respond to mods’ according to the FI lovers out there :slight_smile:

Have been thinking about the test pipes for a while, I am assuming the problem lies in gettin the oem cats out…

[quote=“theKB,post:31,topic:3816”]
Yes, they are huge… I know the 034’s would come out easily now…

Nice times! Didn’t you end up porting your supercharger?

Thanks! No I wanted to port it but after seeing some pics of the blower apart and talking to some folks I decided it probably isn’t worth the hassle…