I’m not saying I know any more than anyone else but when I look at logs with injection duration I don’t see how it’s possible to flow 40% more unless you inject during the exhaust stroke and continue to inject well after the spark…?
[QUOTE=Austin@GIAC;8944568]I run 91/E85 blend on race mode already, as does 1fastS4. Testing thus far has been very good, though it’s an at your own risk subject at this stage.
Regarding full E85, there might be additional fueling upgrades required to sustain the AFRs necessary, which would constitute a custom tune, or an E85 specific one. If we do something like that, it will likely be available in a race slot so that customer can still run pump fuel as well. Thomas@GIAC has a setup like this for his B5 S4 and it’s very handy when E85 is hard to come by.
[/quote]
Ok read what he wrote, confirms that you would need injectors/pump or some fueling upgrade to use full E85.
The ECU as it sits could compensate 10 or 20% more fuel IIRC before throwing a CEL, I forget which. Which would give you room to blend fuels as it sits, but not have an E85 specific tune. I think this is what they are saying.
My guess.
Thanks for the link. I’ve started ignoring the latest tune availability threads. It’s usually a few pages of ppl asking for shop locations.
Or making fake charts to determine who’s is faster, or asking who’s is faster… Or the “will this void my warranty”, etc. LOL
So does anyone have PROOF that flashing back to stock will not get me a TD1? 
Ha lol
Afaik they (GIAC) do indeed have an e85 tune for the B5.
yes they discussed it here last year.
The chart thread made the other day was hilarious, that made my day.
Lots of smart people do dumb things everyday. I liked the guy who did a regression analysis on 1/4 mile times. Smart guy obviously, but didn’t realize the Type 1 error associated with his low sample numbers.
What’s the ‘who’s faster’ chart?
It should be the 1/4 mile thread here or AZ but everyone still asks which tune is faster and such… It’s a fucking PD blower car with limited mods and tunes that are very very similar in boost, bypass, timing and timing pull… IE GIAC and APR are going to be very close with variance coming from small mods like LW parts… Look at the 1/4 mile thread and you SHOULD be able to see that… Also, I find it funny that people don’t consider driver as part of the equation, they think it is a DSG so everyone should do the same… Yep just mash the gas and go… that’s all that matters… Anyway, here is the thread if you care…
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showthread.php/552189-Comparing-Stage-II-tunes
yeah, who cares about dyno results…especially those smoothed out to sell tunes by manufacturers. Who the hell cares?
I find it staggering that people rely on a dyno to ‘prove’ whether a modification or suite of modifications makes a car accelerate well. It’s just a strange thing.
I have always liked cars and racing and stuff, but never knew what a dyno was until about 6 years ago. I still don’t understand why anyone gives a fuck what it says. It proves that ink sticks to paper. That’s about it.
Dynos have their uses, but not for what most people intend. I like to Dyno because I am a numbers geek, and want to see how different mods change the car. 1/4 mile is great, but it still is far away for most and too difficult to control for and do an apples comparison (DA, tire pressure, launch, etc.)
Your dynos were pretty useful for your own use, it was interesting to see the gain from the headers.
The link that prime sent is hilarious…that guy is totally clueless. FWIW AWE uses a totally different dyno than APR at opposite ends of the scale of high/low readings. How he ‘digitized’ the results…lol…
FWIW i felt a large difference in grunt with the stage II pulley. That will not show up all the time on the drag strip…or in peak dyno numbers. Hitting full boost at 3000 rpm is massively fun, but if purely judged by the strip or peak dyno numbers you’d miss it. That’s why REVO/stasis gets bought still…people judge by the numbers including the 1/4. To me, REVO on the street felt crap. Couldn’t barely break the tires loose like with APR stage II, no grunt, useless.
what about if ur getting dyno tuned in an open source application like the old b5s or something along those lines, in that scenario a dyno is good for showing you a “live” delta. but shy of getting a delta then and there and not on a diff day or diff dyno i agree that dynos are worthless. although seeing a car going 140mph standing still is always cool to see and hear haha
Sure richi but you are not a dyno tuner. The tuner should care about the dyno if he’s using it as a tool, not you. They also shouldn’t be selling their product based on a dyno…it lowers the standard. APR uses a dyno a bit too much for my liking, in their marketing. However over the last 3 years, they have moved to comliment the dyno stuff with PBOX data, 1/4 mile data, races etc. That’s awesome. JHM for example never shows shit to do with the dyno. But what most people don’t know is they use the dyno to test parts all the time. They’re just not going to ‘legitimize’ it as ‘proof’ that something works. They acceleration test the cars, and they daily drive them too.
Anyway, what a car does on the dyno won’t necessarily be reflected where you actually drive the car.
Further, virtually all of the dyno tuners in the Audi world (EPL, AMD, ASP etc.) don’t talk about acceleration runs. They virtually eschew them. It’s a weird thing where they disconnect themselves from performance in favour of paper printouts.
agreed but i should note that i used to always be present when my car was being dyno tuned
I can only speak for myself but I’d prefer to have as much data points as possible from different testing methodologies (i.e. APR using dyno data, 1/4 data, and v-box data). This will reduce information asymmetry and provide a well rounded source of performance.
I firmly believe dyno graphs are a great tool to compare pre/post performance. It eliminates the most variables to help isolate and quantify the performance gain of a specific change made to ones setup. However, the major problem with the use of dyno figures is, well, the elimination of all the variables you face in real world driving applications. That is why it’s important to supplement dyno results with real world tests such as 1/4 ET and trap speeds, as well as v-box testing 0-60, 60-130, etc. These real world results will help solidify/support the dyno data and will help highlight any potential performance shortfalls.
On the flip side if you take an approach of just using 1/4 ET as a measure of performance without the use of dyno figures (for example) you run the risk of having skewed data where an outside variable is causing the results to show overly impressive or extremely underwhelming performance (i.e. adding a stage 3 blower and not being able to launch (traction issue or maybe a clutch issue as the outside variable) with the extra power causing the 1/4 ET to only improve marginally)
Again, this is just my thoughts. Not trying to sway any of your opinions.
81 bear, Yes, having lots of data is great, but if you’ll recall, you bought your APR tune based on promised dyno power. APR never 1/4 mile tested their own car. So I don’t see that point. The first 2-3 customers who did test the APR tune at the dragstrip did pretty poorly relative to stock.
APR sold the kit based on the dyno sheet and so did REVO and so did GIAC and so did jfonz. NONE of these companies provided 1/4 mile data on release. GIAC provided it shortly after release. The only ones. Still to this day, the only ones.
If you don’t see the harm that comes from a community being content with dyno sheets as proof, maybe I’m not communicating very well. It’s a VEEEEERY low standard of proof. Anyone can lie about dyno numbers. Nobody can lie about NHRA numbers. Further, even if they’re not lying, a great dyno sheet doesn’t mean a car accelerates through the gears. It might have a vicious throttle problem in the tune that they don’t know how to fix…but the dyno looks great. So would 60-130 for the most part. So would a ‘FATS’ pull B5 style. But the car would get dusted in a race.
As to the comment about ET potentially being bad or only improving marginally after adding a stage III supercharger, if you’re adding 60-100 whp and only seeing marginal improvements, either:
- you suck at driving and need to work on that (as a shop car, you should have a good driver eliminating that ‘variable’)
- your tuning or hardware isn’t working and you need to work on that
This happened to APR with their RS4 kit using the TVSr1320. The 1/4 mile times sucked frankly. My stock record was 12.75 @ 108.3. Their best time on their first tune? 12.79 @ 109. Customers went 12.7-12.9. it was a bit of a disaster because the kit was $18,000 back then. Did APR release the shitty 1/4 mile times? No, they kept working on it. They went back to the drawing board, got a new tune, and then launched the 1/4 mile data after going 11.8 @ 116.9.
ET was great
MPH was great
Dyno was great all along (420 whp+ even when they were running 12.7), but it told us fuck all because as I mentioned, the cars were barely faster than stock.
Not sure you understand what I’m trying to say. I want a well supported and well rounded pool of data (including dyno results). I’m not saying APR does this all the time or that they even did it for the B8 S4. Actually, if I remember correctly the only platform that has a mix of both dyno and real world testing straight from APR is the S6/7 and maybe the RS5. In the same breath I would prefer it if JHM also publicized their dyno numbers as it would add to the pool of data I could draw from as a potential customer.
Again, my post isn’t that APR does it right and JHM does it wrong or vise versa. My post is that I’d like all companies (APR, JHM, AWE, GIAC, etc.) to provide a healthy mix of performance measures including dyno results as well as real world testing (1/4, 0-60, 60-130, etc.). A healthy mix of these performance measures would help all consumers make a more informed purchase decision.
I still feel 1/4 ET alone allows for far to many variables, including the two you had mention, but there are a plethora of other variables that can skew results one way or the other. For these car (B8S4’s) I find DA and hot lapping to be a major variable that, with all other things equal, could swing the ET in a 1/4 mile a 0.5 second or more.
I hope this better explains my thoughts on the matter.