Area Under the Curve

Subscribe
Jun 24, 2011 | 06:35 PM
  #46  
Dave, any additional details about how your turbos are different from Milou's?
Reply
Jun 24, 2011 | 06:41 PM
  #47  
Quote: Dave, any additional details about how your turbos are different from Milou's?
I'm not exactly sure which wheel he has (I think it's still 63.5 mm ) but I know that he upgraded the hotside by extrude honing and retuned via Proto.
Reply
Jun 24, 2011 | 09:58 PM
  #48  
Quote: Dave, any additional details about how your turbos are different from Milou's?
I'm running same turbos with Dave. The only difference is that I also had the hot sides extruded by TPC racing.

Thank you Dave
Reply
Jun 24, 2011 | 10:32 PM
  #49  
Thank YOU Antonis for sharing. Do you notice a difference without the maf?
Reply
Jun 24, 2011 | 10:35 PM
  #50  
Dave, this is an excellent thread. Basic science, physics, and a whole lotta torque!
Reply
Jun 24, 2011 | 10:47 PM
  #51  
Quote: Dave, this is an excellent thread. Basic science, physics, and a whole lotta horsepower!
Thanks Bob. I like it because it's really easy to do comparisons right from datalogging. Everything is standardized so no dyno variations. If we all datalogged from 2000-6800 it would be interesting to compare different set-ups. With enough data, I imagine we could start correlating/predicting 60-130 times based on AUCs.
Reply
Jun 24, 2011 | 11:00 PM
  #52  
It will be interesting to see if we can get more tuners involved - the AUC will eliminate many variables in comparing setups! (...and kudos to CMS for being first to step up to the plate.)
Reply
Jun 24, 2011 | 11:06 PM
  #53  
Yeah, that would be really interesting. We might even start some AUC wars...
Reply
Jun 25, 2011 | 05:42 AM
  #54  
Quote: Thank YOU Antonis for sharing. Do you notice a difference without the maf?

Thank you Dave for your valuable information.
Yes big difference after removing the MAFs, I think after a certain point MAFs cannot read the air quantity or MAFs and MAP read differently, so the car pulls back timing,
I had this problem when I reached 600AWHP, then with mafless I jumped to 640AWHP
Reply
Jun 25, 2011 | 02:48 PM
  #55  
Quote: Milou's third gear pull with Tip. He's running mafless so I used Load values. Looks like your extrude hotsides paid off! Nice low end gains with some gains up top as well. Thanks for sharing bro. Your car must feel really sweet.

Nice gains. Is some of the difference due to the use of meth? Dave, was your plot on racegas? Would it differ much b/w pump and racegas or is it a function of the turbos only?
Reply
Jun 25, 2011 | 02:56 PM
  #56  
Hi Asher, Mine was with race gas. It makes a difference for sure as long as your tune is optimized for it. I'll have to check to see if I have any logs with pump gas. Dave
Reply
Jun 25, 2011 | 04:44 PM
  #57  
Hey this is GREAT!!! Compliments to you Dave for the excellent math. And for thinking a very good comparison method...

I'm anxious to share my numbers when my tune will be refined at 100%....I'm on 93oct though....but could still be interesting.
Reply
Jun 25, 2011 | 05:06 PM
  #58  
Thanks Ema and congrats to you on your successful build! Must be really gratifying and feels like a beast I bet. Cheers my friend.
Reply
Jun 25, 2011 | 05:16 PM
  #59  
The Bogg (Asher) had some really great data he is able to contribute to this thread. Stock 997tt, stock with SC, Proto-tuned stock (SC off), and Proto-tuned stock with SC activated. This is really great data. He must be a bit **** (ytical)--LOL. Reps to you Asher! Thanks for sharing.



Without line fit (you can see the raw curves more clearly).


AsherAUCCalc_zpsd8239379.jpg   AsherAUC_zps9bf08049.jpg  

Reply
Jun 25, 2011 | 10:02 PM
  #60  
Thanks for graphing that Dave. I was looking for this kind of comparison when I was thinking of buying the tune and I couldn't find it so hopefully it will help out someone else who may be wondering what exactly you get for the money. My pbox numbers correlate well with the AUC numbers (I'll post the pbox numbers soon) in the different modes.
Reply