Close

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 160
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    612
    Rep Points
    420.1
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    I suppose you could view it that way but my experience with the same mods on both transmissions as well as the total body of evidence makes it a fact in my mind. The manual won't suddenly become faster with this setup. If you need to see it for it to be proven, fine, but I don't need to go outside to take a look at the grass to know it is green.



    Sure, hope my point does as well.
    I hear what you're saying, but until a car runs whatever it runs, it's all just bench racing.

    Let's say this car (the one in the first post) runs a solid time/trap/whatever at the airstrip event. Afterward, I don't think it'd be fair for anyone to claim "my car's faster" if the car he or she is talking about is still unproven. "My car should be faster," "I hope my car's faster," etc... are different claims.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Interesting - thank you.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM Click here to enlarge
    I hear what you're saying, but until a car runs whatever it runs, it's all just bench racing.
    So a built motor Z06 is being done with an aggressive cam and a 100 shot on top and it will race a stock Civic. You need to see the race to know what will happen? The Z06 being faster is an unproven theory?

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    612
    Rep Points
    420.1
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    So a built motor Z06 is being done with an aggressive cam and a 100 shot on top and it will race a stock Civic. You need to see the race to know what will happen? The Z06 being faster is an unproven theory?
    Correct - unless you're omniscient or clairvoyant. Because, a whole host of factors (mechanical failures, and/or driver error) could cause the Z06 to lose. It's why odds exist, and even though the odds of a contest like the one you mention might be 5,000:1 - that "1" exists for a reason.

    Especially if you're talking official events, like a timed mile run, or time spent at the drag strip. Once a run, or race, is completed - then comparisons can be made. Until then, it's just educated guesses - i.e. bench racing.

    Let's say this car goes 190 in the mile, in great conditions. Your car is done in March and you attend a Mile event during the summer. You manage a 182, in mediocre conditions. Which M3 is faster?

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM Click here to enlarge
    Correct - unless you're omniscient or clairvoyant. Because, a whole host of factors (mechanical failures, and/or driver error) could cause the Z06 to lose. It's why odds exist, and even though the odds of a contest like the one you mention might be 5,000:1 - that "1" exists for a reason.
    Come on, the only way the Z06 loses is if the a natural disaster takes place at that very moment or somebody carjacks the guy in the Vette.

    Look, DCT's are quicker than manuals. If you need more evidence that is fine but this is an established fact. Two M3's with the same setup one being manual and one being DCT the DCT will be faster. The physics won't change. You drop a ball to the ground 100 out of 100 times it is going to hit the ground.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM Click here to enlarge
    Especially if you're talking official events, like a timed mile run, or time spent at the drag strip. Once a run, or race, is completed - then comparisons can be made. Until then, it's just educated guesses - i.e. bench racing.
    Would you like to bet against it?

    Care to explain how the PDK 911 is so much faster than the manual? And if they are both supercharged with the same setup the manual will now suddenly be faster? Come on, let's use some common sense here. I don't think that is asking too much.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    612
    Rep Points
    420.1
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Come on, the only way the Z06 loses is if the a natural disaster takes place at that very moment or somebody carjacks the guy in the Vette.

    Look, DCT's are quicker than manuals. If you need more evidence that is fine but this is an established fact. Two M3's with the same setup one being manual and one being DCT the DCT will be faster. The physics won't change. You drop a ball to the ground 100 out of 100 times it is going to hit the ground.



    Would you like to bet against it?

    Care to explain how the PDK 911 is so much faster than the manual? And if they are both supercharged with the same setup the manual will now suddenly be faster? Come on, let's use some common sense here. I don't think that is asking too much.
    Or the Z06 lifts a head gasket. Or breaks an axle. Or the driver moneyshifts and strips a gear, or burns the clutch. Or botchs a shift like the 2-3 and accidentally goes 2-5 instead. Or spins instead of hooks and gets sideways. Or myriad other possibilities that cause the underdog to pull out a "W" when theoretically it shouldn't.

    You've been to the track a lot, right? You mean to tell me, you've never seen the "faster" car lose? Ever?

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM Click here to enlarge
    Or the Z06 lifts a head gasket. Or breaks an axle. Or the driver moneyshifts and strips a gear, or burns the clutch. Or botchs a shift like the 2-3 and accidentally goes 2-5 instead. Or spins instead of hooks and gets sideways. Or myriad other possibilities that cause the underdog to pull out a "W" when theoretically it shouldn't.

    You've been to the track a lot, right? You mean to tell me, you've never seen the "faster" car lose? Ever?
    Look I think we are all smart enough to understand when making comparisons between cars it is without assuming a freak accident will take place. Sure, a Veyron will lose to a Civic if the Veyron catches fire but how often do you see people say something like this:

    Person 1: No point in racing a Veyron vs. a Civic, the Veyron clearly is faster based on all information available.
    Person 2: Not necessarily, the Veyron might spontaneously combust leading the Civic to win.
    Person 1: Oh totally, good point, no way to know unless they really race which car will win.

    Sure a faster car can lose due to driver error. I'm talking about which car will be faster not which driver might make a mistake or random circumstances that make no sense.

    I mean I think this is a pointless argument and detracting from an otherwise very interesting thread.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    612
    Rep Points
    420.1
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Look I think we are all smart enough to understand when making comparisons between cars it is without assuming a freak accident will take place. Sure, a Veyron will lose to a Civic if the Veyron catches fire but how often do you see people say something like this:

    Person 1: No point in racing a Veyron vs. a Civic, the Veyron clearly is faster based on all information available.
    Person 2: Not necessarily, the Veyron might spontaneously combust leading the Civic to win.
    Person 1: Oh totally, good point, no way to know unless they really race which car will win.

    Sure a faster car can lose due to driver error. I'm talking about which car will be faster not which driver might make a mistake or random circumstances that make no sense.

    I mean I think this is a pointless argument and detracting from an otherwise very interesting thread.
    LOL, so now it's a Veyron vs. Civic? For the record, you started this weird "fast cars vs. Civic" tangent.

    Previously, we were talking about how a car that's in pieces could be claimed as "faster" than an already-complete 800+ HP M3. I think it boils down to this: you appear to think of things as absolute certainties, facts, whatever - when they're still just assumptions/speculation. I think of things as facts, once they're actually facts; not before.

    Apologies to all for my part in detracting from this thread's interest.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM Click here to enlarge
    LOL, so now it's a Veyron vs. Civic? For the record, you started this weird "fast cars vs. Civic" tangent.
    Yes, I'm exaggerating the point to hopefully get across how absurd your argument is. I don't need to see a Veyron and Civic race to know who wins. Apparently, you do.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM Click here to enlarge
    Previously, we were talking about how a car that's in pieces could be claimed as "faster" than an already-complete 800+ HP M3. I think it boils down to this: you appear to think of things as absolute certainties, facts, whatever - when they're still just assumptions/speculation. I think of things as facts, once they're actually facts; not before.
    Oh, right, another great point because obviously the questioned comparison here would be of a car that is not completed vs. one that is, right? Logical.

    My point is the DCT is faster than a manual with an equivalent setup. It is, it's been proven time and time again, and I have experience with this topic. So, if you don't want to believe me or embrace it I'm not going to force you to.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM Click here to enlarge
    Apologies to all for my part in detracting from this thread's interest.
    Not a big deal, but if you mean it let's return the thread on its course.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,648
    Rep Points
    -162.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Thanks for clearing that up!
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    The clutches are wet, don't know what you are talking about.
    Sorry, i was a bit drunk.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
    Sorry, i was a bit drunk.
    It's ok, I wasn't that time.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    93
    Rep Points
    88.4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    sorry if i am being a noob and ask a stupid question, but i've been biting my tonge on this topic for a very long time.
    why are we subtracting percentage of crank power instead subtracting a fixed amount of WHP when calculating drivtrain loss??
    I mean shouldn't drivetrain loss be a constant factor of WHP regardless of how much a car is making at the crank?
    i.e. if a stock M3 rate at 414BHP makes 350whp, then shouldn't the driveline loss for that M3 will always be 64WHP? drivetrain loss is just the amount of power needed to spin the drive shaft, flywheel, clutch, and finally rotate the wheels and tires correct?
    so why would the same M3, now modded to 800BHP all of a sudden needs 200whp to run the same driveline?

    can someone please help me understand?

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by mm28 Click here to enlarge
    I mean shouldn't drivetrain loss be a constant factor of WHP regardless of how much a car is making at the crank?
    No, drivetrain loss is not constant. We are just doing rough estimates based on peak values.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by mm28 Click here to enlarge
    can someone please help me understand?
    This may shed a little bit of light as well: http://www.bimmerboost.com/content.p...rivetrain-loss

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,614
    Rep Points
    3,236.6
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    33


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by mm28 Click here to enlarge
    sorry if i am being a noob and ask a stupid question, but i've been biting my tonge on this topic for a very long time.
    why are we subtracting percentage of crank power instead subtracting a fixed amount of WHP when calculating drivtrain loss??
    I mean shouldn't drivetrain loss be a constant factor of WHP regardless of how much a car is making at the crank?
    i.e. if a stock M3 rate at 414BHP makes 350whp, then shouldn't the driveline loss for that M3 will always be 64WHP? drivetrain loss is just the amount of power needed to spin the drive shaft, flywheel, clutch, and finally rotate the wheels and tires correct?
    so why would the same M3, now modded to 800BHP all of a sudden needs 200whp to run the same driveline?

    can someone please help me understand?
    hello,

    this is a very very good question

    and the answer is not so simple, although one would think that the horsepower loss through the drivetrain is RPM dependent, it in fact is both RPM and power dependent.

    The power that goes through your drivetrain, is transmitted via the forces acting on gear teeth in most cases through some type of transmission and rear end.

    The power goes up, therefore the forces on the teeth and rotating equipment goes up, and therefore your FRICTION and parasitic loss goes up.

    I used to think exactly like you, I asked myself that question many times and the answer was not clear. I hope it is now.
    Some people live long, meaningful lives.

    Other people eat shit and die.

    I'm not racist, I hate everybody equally; especially fat people.


    Click here to enlarge

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    93
    Rep Points
    88.4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DBFIU Click here to enlarge
    hello,

    this is a very very good question

    and the answer is not so simple, although one would think that the horsepower loss through the drivetrain is RPM dependent, it in fact is both RPM and power dependent.

    The power that goes through your drivetrain, is transmitted via the forces acting on gear teeth in most cases through some type of transmission and rear end.

    The power goes up, therefore the forces on the teeth and rotating equipment goes up, and therefore your FRICTION and parasitic loss goes up.

    I used to think exactly like you, I asked myself that question many times and the answer was not clear. I hope it is now.
    thanks! but the whole logic of HP needed to move the driveline goes up with increased crank HP is still not very clear, maybe my mind is stuck in a dead end....

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    612
    Rep Points
    420.1
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DBFIU Click here to enlarge
    hello,

    this is a very very good question

    and the answer is not so simple, although one would think that the horsepower loss through the drivetrain is RPM dependent, it in fact is both RPM and power dependent.

    The power that goes through your drivetrain, is transmitted via the forces acting on gear teeth in most cases through some type of transmission and rear end.

    The power goes up, therefore the forces on the teeth and rotating equipment goes up, and therefore your FRICTION and parasitic loss goes up.

    I used to think exactly like you, I asked myself that question many times and the answer was not clear. I hope it is now.
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by mm28 Click here to enlarge
    thanks! but the whole logic of HP needed to move the driveline goes up with increased crank HP is still not very clear, maybe my mind is stuck in a dead end....
    Modified Magazine wrote an excellent piece on this topic:

    http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-10...s/viewall.html

    Here's the punchline:

    In the end, there's no easy way to estimate the drivetrain loss your vehicle experiences on the road or even on the dyno. Coast-down tests are sometimes used on a dyno to attempt to measure frictional losses, but because this test is not dynamic (meaning they're not done while accelerating, but rather while coasting to a stop with the direct drive gear engaged but the clutch depressed so that the engine and transmission aren't linked) it really only captures steady-state drivetrain losses as well as rolling resistance. So rather than attempting to convert your vehicle's dyno-measured wheel horsepower to a SAE net horsepower figure using a percentage or a fixed horsepower value, you're far better off accepting the fact that these two types of horsepower measurements aren't easily correlated and forego any attempt at doing so.
    In the end, whether people use percentage-loss estimates, or a fixed-horsepower estimate, they're just taking a wild ass guess - and the more modified the vehicle is, the more likely it is that they're way off of the actual crank-output figures. But, people do it anyway... it's just become a common practice, regardless of its significant flaws.

    The only way to figure out crank HP levels for a modified engine, is to yank it from the vehicle and hook it up to an engine dyno. Period.

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,106
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Yep. The only real way is with an engine Dyne, and then with a chassis Dyne.

    This whole 15-25% drivetrain loss is BS. Vendors shouldn't list "crank HP". Show your WHP, show the type of Dyne you used, show your correction factor and ambient conditions. There is no need for "crank HP" in a completed car.

    It's used to boost up egos.....

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM Click here to enlarge
    In the end, whether people use percentage-loss estimates, or a fixed-horsepower estimate, they're just taking a wild ass guess - and the more modified the vehicle is, the more likely it is that they're way off of the actual crank-output figures. But, people do it anyway... it's just become a common practice, regardless of its significant flaws.
    People like to correct it with the "standard" %'s to inflate the numbers and stroke their ego.

  19. #94
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,462
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    wasnt this car supposed to go to the airstrip? what happened?

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
    wasnt this car supposed to go to the airstrip? what happened?
    No idea, I'll find out.

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    184
    Rep Points
    45.1
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Bump. It's been a year. What happened to this e90 M3?
    Track/Airstrip: 2013 BMW M3 DCT - 567 rwhp uncorrected
    Beater: 2013 WRX STi

  22. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by longboarder Click here to enlarge
    Bump. It's been a year. What happened to this e90 M3?
    It's getting turbos.

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Encino,CA
    Posts
    8,040
    Rep Points
    5,733.7
    Mentioned
    179 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    58


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    It's getting turbos.
    Ahhhhhhh everything makes sense now.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, S55s, N63s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please click here for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    184
    Rep Points
    45.1
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    It's getting turbos.
    Thanks but are there any more details? Seems strange that the owner would make this much power (perhaps an S65 record) and then scrap the project without it attending any events.
    Track/Airstrip: 2013 BMW M3 DCT - 567 rwhp uncorrected
    Beater: 2013 WRX STi

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,488
    Rep Points
    32,174.7
    Mentioned
    2112 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by longboarder Click here to enlarge
    Thanks but are there any more details? Seems strange that the owner would make this much power (perhaps an S65 record) and then scrap the project without it attending any events.
    Well the owner works for them so not strange at all.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •