lost against a highly modded GTR
06-19-10, 05:22 PM
#28
Original Gangster/Rotary!
iTrader: (213)
In my experience with them they don't hold stable boost, and are too complicated. Pretty much the opposite of the Profec B, which I've been running for a long time. I like the simplicity and the fact that I barely have to look at my boost gauge anymore, it's that consistent.
06-21-10, 08:48 PM
#29
silver ghost
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Home of the Rolex 24
Posts: 3,061
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
In my experience with them they don't hold stable boost, and are too complicated. Pretty much the opposite of the Profec B, which I've been running for a long time. I like the simplicity and the fact that I barely have to look at my boost gauge anymore, it's that consistent.
06-26-10, 09:14 PM
#31
In my experience with them they don't hold stable boost, and are too complicated. Pretty much the opposite of the Profec B, which I've been running for a long time. I like the simplicity and the fact that I barely have to look at my boost gauge anymore, it's that consistent.
07-05-10, 07:03 PM
#32
i have had the profec B spec II for a few years now. read the instructions and its simple to use. as for not holding boost???????????? again read the instructions..... it works exactly the same as the original profec B by duty but with the spec II you can actually control at what psi the wastegate starts to open which i shouldnt have to tell you builds boost much quicker.
if you are running 15psi and you have a 10psi wastegate spring to set the SET GAIN to 4psi less than you plan on running so you set it at 11psi. then adjust the duty% to get max boost to 15.... you dont need to mess with the gain. if you do it like this your gate wont start to open til 11psi. beats the profec b hands down. plus it has a max boost recall, i dont know about you but i rarely trust boost gauges. so my recommendation is for the profec B spec II.
07-09-10, 10:31 PM
#38
1st LOST ???
Darkphatom has posted several video's and I have YET to see him WIN any of them....
He definitely isn't producing the power he thinks he is...
At our local 1/8th mile track... I was posting 7.7 @ 91mph in my 440HP turbo II powered 1st gen.... FULL interior street car that had MAJOR traction issues..... BTW... I beat a Silver GTR that night
If he has the " POWER " he claims... he would have bettered my times... I think he is in the same range of HP that my 1st gen had......
And as a final note...... He was beaten by a friend of mine that has only 450HP in his FD.....and that friend of mine is also on this forum.... I will let him speak for himself...
Darkphatom has posted several video's and I have YET to see him WIN any of them....
He definitely isn't producing the power he thinks he is...
At our local 1/8th mile track... I was posting 7.7 @ 91mph in my 440HP turbo II powered 1st gen.... FULL interior street car that had MAJOR traction issues..... BTW... I beat a Silver GTR that night
If he has the " POWER " he claims... he would have bettered my times... I think he is in the same range of HP that my 1st gen had......
And as a final note...... He was beaten by a friend of mine that has only 450HP in his FD.....and that friend of mine is also on this forum.... I will let him speak for himself...
07-12-10, 03:18 PM
#40
1st LOST ???
Darkphatom has posted several video's and I have YET to see him WIN any of them....
He definitely isn't producing the power he thinks he is...
At our local 1/8th mile track... I was posting 7.7 @ 91mph in my 440HP turbo II powered 1st gen.... FULL interior street car that had MAJOR traction issues..... BTW... I beat a Silver GTR that night
If he has the " POWER " he claims... he would have bettered my times... I think he is in the same range of HP that my 1st gen had......
And as a final note...... He was beaten by a friend of mine that has only 450HP in his FD.....and that friend of mine is also on this forum.... I will let him speak for himself...
Darkphatom has posted several video's and I have YET to see him WIN any of them....
He definitely isn't producing the power he thinks he is...
At our local 1/8th mile track... I was posting 7.7 @ 91mph in my 440HP turbo II powered 1st gen.... FULL interior street car that had MAJOR traction issues..... BTW... I beat a Silver GTR that night
If he has the " POWER " he claims... he would have bettered my times... I think he is in the same range of HP that my 1st gen had......
And as a final note...... He was beaten by a friend of mine that has only 450HP in his FD.....and that friend of mine is also on this forum.... I will let him speak for himself...
Thats a whole lotta ouch right there!!!
07-20-10, 12:00 AM
#43
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
iTrader: (33)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LMFAO
1st LOST ???
Darkphatom has posted several video's and I have YET to see him WIN any of them....
He definitely isn't producing the power he thinks he is...
At our local 1/8th mile track... I was posting 7.7 @ 91mph in my 440HP turbo II powered 1st gen.... FULL interior street car that had MAJOR traction issues..... BTW... I beat a Silver GTR that night
If he has the " POWER " he claims... he would have bettered my times... I think he is in the same range of HP that my 1st gen had......
And as a final note...... He was beaten by a friend of mine that has only 450HP in his FD.....and that friend of mine is also on this forum.... I will let him speak for himself...
Darkphatom has posted several video's and I have YET to see him WIN any of them....
He definitely isn't producing the power he thinks he is...
At our local 1/8th mile track... I was posting 7.7 @ 91mph in my 440HP turbo II powered 1st gen.... FULL interior street car that had MAJOR traction issues..... BTW... I beat a Silver GTR that night
If he has the " POWER " he claims... he would have bettered my times... I think he is in the same range of HP that my 1st gen had......
And as a final note...... He was beaten by a friend of mine that has only 450HP in his FD.....and that friend of mine is also on this forum.... I will let him speak for himself...
07-27-10, 06:07 PM
#44
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again, it's never as simple as power to weight ratios. The higher the speed, the less weight plays a factor. This is basic physics (rolling resistance)
07-28-10, 01:45 PM
#47
On flats
iTrader: (29)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 1,379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a fact:
If one were to take a car and run it once from 60-120 (or 10-50, or from any speed to any higher speed),
t2 = t1*(m2/m1)
How quickly a car accelerates, regardless of initial speed, is directly proportional to its weight. In other words, power/weight still matters. A lot.
If one were to take a car and run it once from 60-120 (or 10-50, or from any speed to any higher speed),
Let's say it has mass=m1 and that it takes time=t1 to perform the acceleration from the first speed to the second speed.
and then take the same car, with the same power, running in the same conditions, shifting at the same RPM, with the same speed, etc except this time take out some weight and then do the same run,Let's say it has mass=m2 and that it takes time=t2 to perform the acceleration from the first speed to the second speed.
The time it would take the car to accelerate to whatever the second speed is from whatever the first speed was will be less by exactly a factor of the ratio of the two weights.t2 = t1*(m2/m1)
How quickly a car accelerates, regardless of initial speed, is directly proportional to its weight. In other words, power/weight still matters. A lot.
07-28-10, 01:56 PM
#48
^ Exactly. It's also easy to think of it in terms of pure inertia. For those who don't know, inertia is an objects tendency to resist a change in motion or a change in speed.
The more mass an object has, the more inertia it has. Therefore, assuming everything else is equal (gearing/power/aerodynamics/etc) a lighter car will out accelerate a heavier car, as the lighter car has less inertia. It's important to remember that a cars speed is constantly changing as long as its accelerating, and so the laws of inertia always apply due to the cars change in velocity. As stated above, it doesn't matter from what mph to what mph the acceleration occurs.
The more mass an object has, the more inertia it has. Therefore, assuming everything else is equal (gearing/power/aerodynamics/etc) a lighter car will out accelerate a heavier car, as the lighter car has less inertia. It's important to remember that a cars speed is constantly changing as long as its accelerating, and so the laws of inertia always apply due to the cars change in velocity. As stated above, it doesn't matter from what mph to what mph the acceleration occurs.
07-29-10, 09:47 PM
#49
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do I have to keep correcting over-simplified power-to-weight "formulas" again and again on this forum? Did anyone here take a college physics course?
Here's where the bullshit gets really deep.....
This is pure nonsense.
There are many factors that come into play at speed: tire size, Cd, etc....at higher speeds (especially as you near 100 mph and above), horsepower and aerodynamics dominate the equation...period
A little education is in order here:
It matters alot at a drag strip. It doesn't matter as much during a freeway roll, provided the Cd of the two vehicles are similar.
Here's where the bullshit gets really deep.....
If one were to take a car and run it once from 60-120 (or 10-50, or from any speed to any higher speed), let's say it has mass=m1 and that it takes time=t1 to perform the acceleration from the first speed to the second speed. and then take the same car, with the same power, running in the same conditions, shifting at the same RPM, with the same speed, etc except this time take out some weight and then do the same run, let's say it has mass=m2 and that it takes time=t2 to perform the acceleration from the first speed to the second speed. The time it would take the car to accelerate to whatever the second speed is from whatever the first speed was will be less by exactly a factor of the ratio of the two weights.
There are many factors that come into play at speed: tire size, Cd, etc....at higher speeds (especially as you near 100 mph and above), horsepower and aerodynamics dominate the equation...period
A little education is in order here:
Road load horsepower is the power required for a vehicle to maintain a constant speed on a level road. It is the sum of the powers required to overcome the car's rolling resistance, and aerodynamic drag.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance includes power train losses, wheel bearing losses, and power losses in the tires. Of the three, tire rolling resistance is the greatest, and so dominant that the other losses may be disregarded for first-order approximations.
The force of tire rolling resistance in radial-ply tires for passenger cars tend to be about 1.2% of the car's weight at 30 mph (48 km/h), increasing to about 1.6% at 70 mph (113 km/h), when properly inflated. For a 3000 pound car these equate to roughly 35 and 50 pounds of force at 30 and 70 mph, respectively. Under inflation or excessive weight increase tire rolling resistance considerably.
Aerodynamic Drag
The force of aerodynamic drag is a function of a car's shape (Coefficient of Drag), size (frontal area), the square of it's speed, and (to a minor extent) its altitude. For a mid-size sedan this equates to about 20 and 90 pounds of force at 30 and 70 mph, respectively.
Modern cars have drag coefficients (Cd) ranging from 0.30 to 0.50 (with pickups and SUV's being somewhat higher). To give some idea of what these number mean, here are typical Cd's for some other objects: an airfoil, 0.05; a ball, 0.10; a narrow (30°) cone, 0.34; a wide (60°) cone, 0.51; a square flat plate, 1.17; a parachute, 1.35.
Road Load Horsepower
Horsepower is a measurement of a force applied at a speed. Both rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag are calculated in terms of force. At any chosen speed, these forces can be resolved into horsepower requirements. If the car can supply that amount of power to the wheels, then it can maintain that speed. Total road load horsepower for a typical mid-size sedan is about 15 hp (11 kW) at 50 mph (80km/h).
Since rolling resistance force is not a function of speed, then rolling resistance horsepower (a function of speed) increases proportionally with speed. Since aerodynamic drag force is proportional to the square of the car's speed, then aerodynamic drag horsepower increases proportionally to the cube of the car's road speed.
It is generally accepted that, on a typical car, its rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag become equal at about 50 mph. So at twice that speed the aerodynamic drag is about 4 times the rolling resistance.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance includes power train losses, wheel bearing losses, and power losses in the tires. Of the three, tire rolling resistance is the greatest, and so dominant that the other losses may be disregarded for first-order approximations.
The force of tire rolling resistance in radial-ply tires for passenger cars tend to be about 1.2% of the car's weight at 30 mph (48 km/h), increasing to about 1.6% at 70 mph (113 km/h), when properly inflated. For a 3000 pound car these equate to roughly 35 and 50 pounds of force at 30 and 70 mph, respectively. Under inflation or excessive weight increase tire rolling resistance considerably.
Aerodynamic Drag
The force of aerodynamic drag is a function of a car's shape (Coefficient of Drag), size (frontal area), the square of it's speed, and (to a minor extent) its altitude. For a mid-size sedan this equates to about 20 and 90 pounds of force at 30 and 70 mph, respectively.
Modern cars have drag coefficients (Cd) ranging from 0.30 to 0.50 (with pickups and SUV's being somewhat higher). To give some idea of what these number mean, here are typical Cd's for some other objects: an airfoil, 0.05; a ball, 0.10; a narrow (30°) cone, 0.34; a wide (60°) cone, 0.51; a square flat plate, 1.17; a parachute, 1.35.
Road Load Horsepower
Horsepower is a measurement of a force applied at a speed. Both rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag are calculated in terms of force. At any chosen speed, these forces can be resolved into horsepower requirements. If the car can supply that amount of power to the wheels, then it can maintain that speed. Total road load horsepower for a typical mid-size sedan is about 15 hp (11 kW) at 50 mph (80km/h).
Since rolling resistance force is not a function of speed, then rolling resistance horsepower (a function of speed) increases proportionally with speed. Since aerodynamic drag force is proportional to the square of the car's speed, then aerodynamic drag horsepower increases proportionally to the cube of the car's road speed.
It is generally accepted that, on a typical car, its rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag become equal at about 50 mph. So at twice that speed the aerodynamic drag is about 4 times the rolling resistance.
In other words, power/weight still matters. A lot.
07-30-10, 01:46 AM
#50
On flats
iTrader: (29)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 1,379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few. . . It's cute how well you think you know people.
Please tell me where I said that there weren't other factors at play. I very purposely said that the ONLY thing that changed on the car in the example was the weight. Therefore, Cd, tire compound elasticity, et cetera will be the same.
Since you're such a physics prodigy, please explain how the conclusion that I arrived at based on my example is incorrect given that I did in fact say, intentionally, that the ONLY factor that changes is the car's weight. Please.
What I posted is true. Period. "This is basic physics." Deal with it however you see fit.
It would seem so.
PS - Thanks for the PM. I'll try to grow up.
Originally Posted by PM from no_more_rice
clearly you're still in high school with that retarded post