JohnSt Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 On the contrary Peter, if an organised event, such as a special sprint (one warm up and 2 flying laps) were to be organised round KH, them I'm sure they would have no problem with it. This would help also by ensuring that no one else was on the track, so avoiding any daft accidents (ie collisions between 2 cars). A short twisty sprint round Muirkirk, or as you say, Ingliston, would also be a possibility for the agility section or using some of the rally stages at Crail (trying to get a road closure is not the easiest of tasks). The big thing with this is to try and enlist the help of a car club that has done these type of events many times before. If enough support was gained, different classes could be organised. I doubt you would get enough people interested in participating to make it worth hiring a venue specifically for the task, min number to hire Kames (Muirkirk) would be 20 @ £25 and all would have to join EACC which would be another £20. ---john---
Gumball Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 WUZ SAID-Gumball - call Gerry then. Better still, lets get him on here and he'll confirm (as he did to 3 certain people, naming no names) that the rollers weren't running accurately that day and ALL CAR (INCLUDING YOURS) were running around 20 bhp over their true figures. You never had 403 M8, SORRY! Gerry will confirm that if you want your bubble burst. Otherwise, let it go. Russell ps - within a 1 week period, my car was R/R'ed by 3 places and the BHP varied from 387 - 430. I know it doesn't have 430 so take an average. Russell please refer to Andy Forrests posts regarding the turbo/car/difference. Working to your average then at that time it would have been 379bhp before the TD06 I would like to take the time to point out at this stage that, potentially your correct that it wasnt 403bhp or above with the 20G Having said that when it had the TD06 on it it certainly was. So once again please carry on doubting the performance of the car (that doesnt really/shouldnt really interest you) and ill continue watching the football, fishing, poling birds and earning enough money at my work to by an alarm clock for waking up after reading your posts. Once Mr Orkney brings it down to the next dyno day having made no changes to the performance im going to laugh outwardly as you eat your hat. My next scoob will be the new shape STI11 and it will be getting left standard.
doorman Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Alright GUMBALL what was your biggest fish you caught this season.
drb5 Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Have to say, this is one of the best threads ever on S.S. There will always be people who doubt figures GOOD OR BAD. That's just the problem, it's only figures. We all know that even on the road, smaller, less powerful cars can give you a scare. I remember SG72 once had a run in with a Lupo GTi, when he had his old Type-R(Andy's car now) and it was running over 400hp then with a 20G. He mentioned he was getting away, but not that fast and i believed him, purely as i'd had similar experiences. Golf TDI's for instance....amazing amount of torque and on the road, that's what matters. Enough people, i feel, that are on this site, can tell roughly with a list of mods, how powerful a car really is and therefore don't really NEED the figures to let them know. RR days are good, but it can leave you feeling gutted, so don't look too far into it, even if it's the figure you thought it would produce.
doorman Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 You should try fishing for salmon next time.LOL
rapidcossie Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 agree on the comment about being a good thread.. a good technical disscussion with knowledgable people without turning into an argument. Andy has given Gumballs car and figs some back up so even though it might not have been 430 hp we now it must have been getting up there at somepoint. lets all settle on 400 eh? LOL
wilky Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Chris, when your car was dynoed it was drawing unmetered air wasnt it? Im quite sure that would affect things as well.
rapidcossie Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 this would cause the car to run leaner than it should... but this would increase power if anything..
the squiggle Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 this would cause the car to run leaner than it should... but this would increase power if anything.. .....not if it was mapped with this unmetered air present. The problem would show itself after the problem was fixed.
rapidcossie Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 he mapper would notcie un metered air i would imagine? as it would prob throw up some funny readings...
Gumball Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 correct Callum, the car was mapped and had been drawing in unmetered air from the start. I never got it dynod after this mistake was realised. i then changed parts and soldiered onto bigger things. I cant recall where the ill fitted part was put in but someone clearly was wired to the gable end of a mars bar.
wilky Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 I know, Im not trying to start a "Who knows the most about this subject" p i s s i n g competition,I was saying that the car was very inconsistent until this problem was discovered, it would appear that when the car was ugraded,the intake pipe under the manifold wasnt fitted correctly onto the turbo intake, and the time it was inconsistent, the folded over lip of the intake was drawing unmetered air, Im quite sure that would bugger up all the Air flow metering to the ecu as you correctly stated.
rapidcossie Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 sure its not the first scob to have probs with boost pipes.. i know a few folks who have
G.Mac Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Esp when you forget to tighten up the jubilee clips [:$]
craig mac Posted October 23, 2006 Posted October 23, 2006 Was this "mistake" not later proven to be an actual burst hose?[*-)] after the map? CraiG
Gumball Posted October 23, 2006 Posted October 23, 2006 HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Craig, you crack me up sometimes. You can see how the IRA propoganda machine worked so effectively between 1969 and 2001. This is the same thing, someone WANTS the story to suit them so they modify it, lol
scoobaroo Posted October 23, 2006 Posted October 23, 2006 Never heard of a Type IRA ?? was this an experimental or prototype ??? 69 - 01 thats a long production run .... lol lol lol []
paddy247 Posted October 23, 2006 Posted October 23, 2006 HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Craig, you crack me up sometimes. You can see how the IRA propoganda machine worked so effectively between 1969 and 2001. This is the same thing, someone WANTS the story to suit them so they modify it, lol You were made to believe that it was only propoganda by her finest[] Paddy.
philip_wilson Posted October 23, 2006 Posted October 23, 2006 Who has the quickest new age's in scotland? how much bhp do they have? Captain F_U_D has the quickest new age 1000bhp, 8sec 1/4 mile & 50sec lap of knockhill in the wet. Pheeel[]
andrew_forrest Posted October 24, 2006 Posted October 24, 2006 FWIW, an unmetered air ingress prior to the turbo would not necessarily show itself during mapping IF the leak was consistant throughout. The mapping process includes matching the fueling to the measured airflow, there is no way to identify a smallish leak as the maf signal is different on each car. If the leak stayed constant, then the performance would not be affected up or down (other than unfiltered air causing more wear over time) The problem would come when the leak either increased or was repaired. If it increased then the car would run lean and possibly over advanced on timing. If it was repaired/reduced then it would run richer and with more retarded timing. If the air leak was post turbo then the opposite would apply. Andy
the squiggle Posted October 24, 2006 Posted October 24, 2006 FWIW, an unmetered air ingress prior to the turbo would not necessarily show itself during mapping IF the leak was consistant throughout. The mapping process includes matching the fueling to the measured airflow, there is no way to identify a smallish leak as the maf signal is different on each car. If the leak stayed constant, then the performance would not be affected up or down (other than unfiltered air causing more wear over time) The problem would come when the leak either increased or was repaired. If it increased then the car would run lean and possibly over advanced on timing. If it was repaired/reduced then it would run richer and with more retarded timing. If the air leak was post turbo then the opposite would apply. Andy Woooooohhhooooooooo Got it right. Well chuffed. might as well roll another to celebrate All from the back of a Frosties packet i tell thee
andrew_forrest Posted October 24, 2006 Posted October 24, 2006 So you did [] and thanks for the beer []
craig mac Posted October 24, 2006 Posted October 24, 2006 We all seem to have missed someone here too Peter and aye are only second and third..........Kev aka Kevametal has the quickest newage[] And much respect to him too he must be reading this pi55ing his sell laughin CraiG
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now