I agree with all you say. I will be doing more with the GT2--eventually. I have become somewhat suspicious of some of its results and have sent it off for a check up. I posted more, and related info/discussion, on the g-meter thread. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

Low humididty "good" high humidity "bad".The more moisture in the air the less oxygen your engine takes in.It always takes in the same volume but the more moisture in that volume means it contains less oxygen.Less oxygen means the ECU will call for less gas thereby reducing power.

 

Thanks, that's what I thought except I expressed the bad in terms of the air containing more moisture. I am waiting for tomorrow's paper, and I'll post, for the heck of it, the weather data for the last four days. As you can imagine, being in Phoenix (where it now hasn't rained for a record number of days), there aren't going to be any earth shattering changes. I'll post the data on the testing thread. Thanks for letting me know what your temps have been on the other thread. I'd like to try 30 or so degrees now that I don't have to worry about wheel spin. It's supposed to be colder tomorrow, but I am not sure how cold it will be. Regardless, I'll probably go for another very early spin tomorrow morning; I think I am becoming addicted. No adrenaline; just fun getting up very early and going for go. I am very glad our cars so stop well.

 

I know what you mean about stopping.My test road is about 1/3 mile straight with a sharp turn at either end.You need to be brave to go the entire 1/4 mile.I had some runs very close to a complete 1/4 but not quite.It is hard to be brave at over 100 mph with a sharp turn coming ever closer.I would change test roads if I could find one that was as desolate as this one.Unfotunately there are not a lot of roads around here that are not well traveled.

 

I though that some of the runs you posted on the g-meter thread were for the full 1/4, but I guess not. I am probably going to quit doing north runs because of the strip situation (i.e., the strip looks equally good performance-wise either way given my prior results). When going S to N, after the 1/4, there is a gentle downward slope. So, going N to S I have to start farther into the strip--which results in having to stop sooner than I want at the other end. I always push it beyond 105 to make sure I don't miss part of the trap.

Incidentally, remember the GT2 issue of faster times, say, to 81 than to 80 in the 1/8 presumably because of the use of trap speed for the 1/8. I made some calcs and checked things out with the Pro SS data and find that the "discrepancy" we noted should not exist, or at least be that large, in the 1/4. As I recall, I drew the same conclusion about the 1/8. That's one of the reasons I sent the GT2 back for testing/fixing if needed.

 

I had a couple of runs which were almost the full 1/4 but after checking my GT2 I found that I let off early.On one run I had a time of 13.28(N bound) but a speed of only 95,obviously let off early.On the other run the time was 13.48(S bound)with a speed of 102,but after analyzung the GT2 data I had reached 103.1 before the 1/4 and slowed to 102 by the end of the 1/4.Let off only slightly early.

Good idea sending your GT2 back for checkup.They should verify it's correct operation.Hopefully they will give you a report of any problems they found.

 

Znod,

When I removed my B&B and went back to the OEM muffler I noticed that the car "seemed" to accelerate noticably quicker. I just assumed that it was all in my head and I must be imagining it. I assumed that the acceleration just "seemed" faster because it was now "quiet and smooth" without all the extra noise and vibrations of the B&B. When there is noise and vibration you expect the acceleration to be quick but when it's quiet and smooth it sort of catches you off guard. Well, my observations were all based on "feel" and I was just coming up with the above reasons because I did not think that the acceleration would be worse with the free flow exhaust vs. the stock one. However, with your actual measured results maybe I was not imagining things after all.

 

That average 1/4 time is great as it stands--13.38--way ahead of my 13.629. I would like to have seen your speed. Too bad you don't have a Pro RR (hint ) since it would show your speed all the way through the trap. Then, you could have used your entering trap speed if you got that far before letting off. Incidentally, it wasn't colder today. I made 2 good runs, for where I am now, but did not beat my best. And, we aren't splitting Power Ball this morning. Darn!

You posted 1 new post-20.02.00 N/S run series on the new thread. Do you happen to know your average 0-90, 0-100, or both on that series. It would help me with something minor I am trying to look at/post. Thanks.

 

Hi rody:

I definitely agree that you might not be imagining things. I wish that I had my meter before installing my mods to do some benchmarks. But, I guess taking-off benchmarks are as good as putting-on bench marks in general. In my case, though, having pre-mod benchmarks would have been very cool since they would have allowed comparisons of the effects of my mods under both 19.01.01 and 20.01.00. Ipse d frequently mentions that mods can decrease low-end torque. It looks to me like mine were affecting torque all along the curve.

 

Unfortunately I did not reach 90 mph on either run.I decided that it is too dangerous to complete a 1/4 at this site and am shutting down after 1/8.I have an idea for a new test site.It is further from my home,but has much more straight road.The problem is that the traffic flow may be too great to use.I cannot use any site in the dark there are manny Deer around here, and hitting a deer at 100 mph would be a disaster.I know what happens at 25 mph from personal experience.A Deer hit me in 11-05 and caused $4100 damage.All confined to the drivers door 'everything looks and behaves as good as new.I was too traumitized to mention this until now.