[ba] Re: [s-cars] 80tq: 20v Project Update, 415whp, 12.25, etc

JShadzi at aol.com JShadzi at aol.com
Fri Nov 12 00:10:50 EST 2004

Hey Dave,
I just wanted to clarify (and speak for myself), that I didn't post here to  
attack anyone or call anyone into question - I just wanted to share some  
excitement with other Audi-turbo-heads about my project, that's all!   =)  (really 
big, bad-tone defying smile)
In my original post, I stated that I was quoting an "uncorrected  figure".  
I'm of the opinion that SAE correction figures for turbocharged  motors are not 
valid, nothing personal against you, I'm not the only one in  the "tuning 
community" that feels this way, and I've taken the advice of  tuners/engineers 
with much more experience and understanding of this topic than  I do.  Do a 
little research, you'll quickly find I'm not the only one  saying this.
I also have to admit that I know very little about your project or its  
results - care to share your experiences? I'm sure you have plenty with the  S-car 
list in the past, but I'd love to hear about it, sounds like you've got a  
project with a lot of passion and energy invested into it.
In a message dated 11/11/2004 8:03:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, Djdawson2  

Sorry, but you need to go back  to school.  If the air is being forced in or 
not, the conditions, if not  standardized, do have an impact.  They may have a 
different impact (as a  percentage), but to say they don't apply to turbo 
engines is absolutely and  unquestionably inaccurate.  Does your car run the same 
on a 100 degree  day as a 30 degree day?  Of course not.  That means that 
some sort  of correction is REQUIRED to normalize the tests.  Otherwise, we can 
just  wait for that 20 degree day, test the car "uncorrected," and claim 
victory  because Brett said that temp, pressure, and humidity don't matter to turbo  

I  can appreciate your list of typical dyno tricks, but we're not quite that  
stupid.  There are a few of us here, interested in taking a scientific  
approach to engine tuning.  The "cheating" concepts that you've spoken of  don't 
pertain to my concept of scientific, and an exaggerated number doesn't  provide 
me any benefit.  If you had looked at my latest graph, you'd see  72 F, 24.4 
in Hg, and 7% humidity... all very reasonable, no  tampering.

Seems like some of you think there is a conspiracy theory  WRT dyno testing 
by us Denver folks.  Well, there isn't a conspiracy,  more likely an interest 
in finding what correction is reasonable... and one is  required.  Anyone 
claiming that there is no difference between  uncorrected power at altitude vs. 
uncorrected at sea level just because  there's a turbo involved, needs to revisit 
their textbooks.

To satisfy  my curiosity, I'll go to a sea level dyno and see just exactly 
what the  difference is... but I'm going to guess someone will still "cry  foul."

BTW, I'm not interested in confrontational speculation, just  real results.  
So don't take my comments personally.  However, don't  just throw "stuff" out 
there as fact, that simply isn't fact.  The  conditions surrounding the test 
ALWAYS have an impact, and to claim that they  don't, is ignorant.

Remember, I'm in this for the fun... so let's have  fun, damn it!
Dave in OH, today


More information about the ba-group mailing list