grogan545

No ideas yet on why your first run is always the best.I really didn't take note if this true for me.I will pay closer attention to see if it is the same for me.

I did notice a coincidence.All of your unadjusted times would round up to 13.7 sec.Exactly the time recorded by R & T.The speeds would be 103 or 104,R & T speed was 104.The do not use corrections.I doubt that R & T's conditions would be as unfavorable as yours.All this means is that you are getting signicantly better times than R & T.

znod

No problem. OK, I will hold off on posting any more data for you.

All of what you say above sounds very good. And, it will be very interesting to see your near standards results. I think that doing so is a great idea. I will be getting nearer and nearer to standards as spring approaches, but, of course, there is no way for me to lower my altitude--except through the NHRA adjustments. As you know, I have been paying some weather "penalties" too.

I am working on a very complicated analysis that implies, as you have suggested, that our optimal shift points might be less than approximately 6.45k. Right now it looks like approximately 6.4k would be better. The analysis, which is based on the Pro RR's "real" road-torque values, is too time consuming and too complicated to try other shift points--which might be even better. And, another reason for not doing but one analysis is that our hands are tied for now anyway--i.e., we can't make the Step shift earlier than it wants. BMW hasn't provide us with the opportunity to apply good old yankee (drag-racer) ingenuity. Darn!!! The new analysis will contradict the more conventional analyses that I posted on the other thread that deal only with a dyno-produced 545i torque curve.

znod

Good points; thanks for pointing them out to me. I like them. Additionally, 3 of my 5 best unadjusted passes round to 13.6 (1 up and 2 down and none of my best 5 are above 13.663), and 4 of my 5 best round to 104. Note also that R&T got the fastest big-three US mag. 0 to 60 time of 5.2. My 0 to 60's for my 5 best unadjusted passes are: 5.149, 5.079, 5.145, 5.161, and 5.190. Finally, as you would expect, each of my 5 bests beats the R&T 0 to 100 of 12.7. And, on balance, I agree that my conditions would be less favorable. It probably is impossible for "good" weather to come close to negating the adverse effects of a 1,550' altitude.

I am taking the Z06 out for a couple of 1/8's in the morning. I'll sneak my results into this post.

They are below. Good passes, but too much wheel spin on each pass. My 60' times definitely were too high (2.004 and 2.015). I can do better. There is room for much improvement (i.e., best 0-60 .377 earlier). Note that my best 0 to 60 below is too slow by about the amount that my 60' times are off given prior knowledge of Z06's.

Unadjusted

.......................Pass 1........Pass 2
0-10.................0.351.........0.364
0-20.................0.945.........1.025
0-30.................1.638.........1.611
0-40.................2.298.........2.242
0-50.................3.334.........3.236
0-60.................4.021.........3.961
0-70.................4.999.........5.294
0-80.................6.249.........6.300
0-90.................7.495.........7.573
0-100...............8.913.........9.013 (9.013 - 8.913 = .1)*
0-110...............................11.040
0-112.39............................11.51 (1187.72')

1/8 Speed........93.92...........93.4
1/8 Time...........8.022.........8.027

1/4 Speed.........................105.3 (coasted from 1187.72'--see above)
1/4 Time............................12.33 @ 105.93 (12.23 if I allow for *)
1/4 Spd (est)....................116.00 (average of US mags. with passes similar to mine)
1/4 Time (est)....................12.30** (12.20 if I allow for *)

*Note that Pass 1 would have yielded a better 1/4 time & 1/4 speed by about .1 sec & .52 MPH.
**11.51 + {60 sec [(1320' - 1187.72') / 5280'] [60 MPH / (116 + 112.39) / 2)]


Adjusted for Altitude and Weather

1/4 Speed..........................106.9
1/4 Time..........................12.145 @ 106.9 (best weather-adjusted mag time = 12.40)
1/4 Speed (est)................117.80 (based on 116 value above)
1/4 Time (est)..................12.115 (based on 12.30 value above)

Assuming .1 sec and .52 MPH better result in 1/4 based on **--results of 116.52 and 12.199

1/4 Speed (est)..............118.329 (based on 116 value + .52* = 116.52)
1/4 Time (est)..................12.017 (based on 12.30 - .1* = 12.20)

I keep trying to find a way to get to less than 12.0. I am kicking myself because I easily could have had a 60' foot times that would have gotten me below 12.0 at least on an adjusted basis given the following results of my earlier 0 to 60 in 3.77 pass. Darn.

0-60 3.77
0-50 3.03
0-40 2.08
0-30 1.45
0-20 .88
0-10 .25
60' 1.88
330' 5.15

Done deal: Went out this morn.; one pass; less wheel spin; went home; and happy I am. Briefly,

............................Unadjusted.......Adjus ted
60'............................1.902
0 to 60......................3.893
1/8 Speed................94.012
1/8 Time....................7.936
1/4 Speed................116.45...........118.747
1/4 Time..................12.165..............11.935

BetterMakeWay

Ahahaha...again...i somehow agree. Not with the tone or the insults but i kinda agree. We'll have to really be ponderate. Not drive like lunatics, or ticking bombs, but not like 100% law respecting squat. Also i do bealive we would better start DRIVING our cars then minding with those geekish stuff. Don't want anyone to be offended by my reply.

grogan545

I could't agree more BetterMake Way.Some people with their sanctimonious attitude would have you believe that they obey all laws 100% of the time.Like driving on an Interstate at 80mph with traffic all around is somehow safer than testing acceleration on a deserted road with no other cars in site.

znod

I drive both of my cars a great deal and also do geekish stuff--the best of all worlds for me. I hope I understand what you are saying. If so, I don't see why theorticians shouldn't do geekish stuff some of the time. Anyone not wanting to read geekish stuff is free to refrain. And, we can't drive our cars all the time. Is it true that you are saying we shouldn't do geekish stuff--that every time we are tempted to do so we should go get in a car and drive instead?

znod

On the "I agree part," I am curious about which part(s) of the above quote you specifically agree with. I have no problem with you agreeing with anything you want, but I am curious because you are agreeing with someone who apparently showed up for only one day simply to cause trouble, made veiled threats, did not post his or her location, and did not indicate if he or she even owns a car.

BetterMakeWay

Sorry man but i agree with the fact that you somehow try to keep this thread alive, sometimes posting almost all by yourself.You're sometimes a bit weird. Not by this thread alone but you express yourself in some replys in a way that makes my head go boom. Don't get me wrong i like cultivated speech but when this is not needed why use it? The same thing could be said in easier words.
I understand (in a way) that this stuff is important to you but i don't see it that important, only a waste of time and brains. I've seen F1 sites and docs with less data and...well....rubish if u ask me. That's too much geek stuff. Bmw if you look at it should mean a car to drive. I don't agree with the fact that it's a waste of bandwith, after all everyone is free to say whatever he/she wants. Especially if no one gets insultes or stuff like that.
Having clarified that, i assume this will be my last vizit here since i walked in just out of curiousity because i knew from the very begining what this thread is all about and as i found it uninteresting i didn't bother. But when i saw how huge and big it became i had to have a look (18pages? wow!). Now 20 and i don't see the point of it. No problem by me. I just said that if you by any chance wondered why did i post if i found it boring.

znod

No problem. You have a right to your opinions. But, understand that I post things, as you say "all by ... [myself]" because others will be interested in them. All you have to do is to check the repies to the topics I have introduced here. I don't find it necessary to be replying to someone to provide information that I know they will be interested in or to ask a new question that I know someone will reply to. Actually, I am not trying to keep the tread alive; there is plenty of interaction here. If no one but me was here, then I wouldn't be here either, and the tread would go away.

EuroCarFan

Come on guys. Everyone's entitled to their own opinions but seriously, if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it at all. This forum has been awesome predominantly from the many positive contributions by members. Let's refrain from saying anything negative if it's not called for.

Hope we're in agreement with this. Peace!