C63 with Oe-tuning 1/4 times
11-23-2010, 01:38 PM
#52
MBWorld Fanatic!
I would say, if you want to really tell what your car runs, eliminate the fastest run and the slowest run and then average the rest of your runs. I would say that would be a good real world outcome to how fast your car was that day. You can't really take your fastest time ever and say this is how fast my car is even though everyone does. The real world is what we live in and I would say that would be a fair indication of what your car does. I know everyone also talks about the altitude and everything else but the bottom line is that the weather is what it is and there is nothing you can do about it. Average all your times, eliminate the fastest and the slowest and let's see what everyone's time is, how does that sound?
11-23-2010, 01:45 PM
#53
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 2,207
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2012 CTS-V
I would say, if you want to really tell what your car runs, eliminate the fastest run and the slowest run and then average the rest of your runs. I would say that would be a good real world outcome to how fast your car was that day. You can't really take your fastest time ever and say this is how fast my car is even though everyone does. The real world is what we live in and I would say that would be a fair indication of what your car does. I know everyone also talks about the altitude and everything else but the bottom line is that the weather is what it is and there is nothing you can do about it. Average all your times, eliminate the fastest and the slowest and let's see what everyone's time is, how does that sound?
Actually, in my Eurocharged/MBH thread I took the averages of my
runs before and after header install to compare the actual gains
and apparently that didn't make sense to some.
They kept comparing my previous best run to my current best run
which to me doesn't tell the whole story.
..but I do understand why they were doing it.
11-23-2010, 01:45 PM
#54
MBWorld Fanatic!
I would say, if you want to really tell what your car runs, eliminate the fastest run and the slowest run and then average the rest of your runs. I would say that would be a good real world outcome to how fast your car was that day. You can't really take your fastest time ever and say this is how fast my car is even though everyone does. The real world is what we live in and I would say that would be a fair indication of what your car does. I know everyone also talks about the altitude and everything else but the bottom line is that the weather is what it is and there is nothing you can do about it. Average all your times, eliminate the fastest and the slowest and let's see what everyone's time is, how does that sound?
I would hate to throw away my fastest times! How dare you!
11-23-2010, 01:58 PM
#56
Super Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E63
I would say, if you want to really tell what your car runs, eliminate the fastest run and the slowest run and then average the rest of your runs. I would say that would be a good real world outcome to how fast your car was that day. You can't really take your fastest time ever and say this is how fast my car is even though everyone does. The real world is what we live in and I would say that would be a fair indication of what your car does. I know everyone also talks about the altitude and everything else but the bottom line is that the weather is what it is and there is nothing you can do about it. Average all your times, eliminate the fastest and the slowest and let's see what everyone's time is, how does that sound?
11-23-2010, 02:07 PM
#58
Super Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E63
Jon really needs to post the ETs/Traps of all runs. I heard the three DR runs were 12.1@116, 11.9@118, 12.39@115.
Would be nice to see all the data.
11-23-2010, 03:02 PM
#62
MBWorld Fanatic!
I think he needs more than practice. He made 10-15 passes and only 1 was in the 11s and it was an 11.9, DA wasn't bad at all (not great) and with 1.85 he wasn't spinning.
Jon really needs to post the ETs/Traps of all runs. I heard the three DR runs were 12.1@116, 11.9@118, 12.39@115.
Would be nice to see all the data.
Jon really needs to post the ETs/Traps of all runs. I heard the three DR runs were 12.1@116, 11.9@118, 12.39@115.
Would be nice to see all the data.
11-23-2010, 03:07 PM
#63
Going by trap speeds alone is not always the best way of comparing horsepower. To do it right would entail factoring in other factors, such as, how much wheel spin was in the 60' for a specific run as well. For example, if someone pulled a 1.6 60' and trapped 120 mph and someone else pulled a 2.1 60' and also trapped 120 mph, those two cars are likely not equal in power. Being on street tires generally helps trap speeds as you've seen today. It would've been nice to see some runs from RalieghC63 with street tires in good weather. And it would've been even nicer if RalieghC63 had ran side by side with you on the same track and same day today This would've provided the ultimate data in my opinion.
EDIT: RalieghC63 beat me to it.
This would've provided the ultimate data in my opinion.EDIT: RalieghC63 beat me to it.
MB_Forever, I agree with your post. I just wanted to point out another factor that sometimes plays into the 60'/trap mph equation.
Sometimes, the 60' can be bad on C63's if they are running on street tires and they don't have an LSD and they wheelhop at launch. This slows the car down for the 60' time, and effectively places the car further down the track, leaving it less room to build maximum speed.
So, sometimes, 60' can be high and mph can drop.
Last edited by SonnyakaPig; 11-23-2010 at 03:39 PM.
11-23-2010, 03:14 PM
#64
Sorry, kinda off topic.
11-23-2010, 03:20 PM
#65
11-23-2010, 03:30 PM
#66
I came to the C63 platform from the 5th gen Camaro platform. When you look at the 1/4 times for the Camaro's with blowers you find that it isn't very easy for those cars to get into the 11's. The car can do it obviously, but it definitely isn't being done with anything near 415-430 rwhp.
It's really amazing actually that the C63 performs how it does. Your car for example would destroy most blown 5th gen Camaros, and I'm talking cars with 550-600 rwhp, cars with centrifugal blowers, which are great for 1/4 mile racing.
11-23-2010, 03:33 PM
#67
MBWorld Fanatic!
11-23-2010, 03:43 PM
#68
I hear you, it's not an exact science. But I'm trying to find out if the same ratio -- 100 lbs weight savings = (approximatly) .10 lower ET -- applies to 1/8 mile tracks.
11-23-2010, 03:45 PM
#69
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
+1
Actually, in my Eurocharged/MBH thread I took the averages of my
runs before and after header install to compare the actual gains
and apparently that didn't make sense to some.
They kept comparing my previous best run to my current best run
which to me doesn't tell the whole story.
..but I do understand why they were doing it.
Actually, in my Eurocharged/MBH thread I took the averages of my
runs before and after header install to compare the actual gains
and apparently that didn't make sense to some.
They kept comparing my previous best run to my current best run
which to me doesn't tell the whole story.
..but I do understand why they were doing it.
11-23-2010, 03:58 PM
#70
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
11-23-2010, 04:13 PM
#71
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reality is that drag racing is done with another car in the lane next to you. If that car beats you, guess what, you lose. You cant use any excuses when you lose the round, if it's eliminations you're going home early. As for the numbers, the track should have a scale at the end and you should be putting your car on it and recording the weight after your pass with you in the car. With that information you can calculate the horsepower fairly accurately on the pass.
11-23-2010, 04:15 PM
#72
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 2,207
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2012 CTS-V
He was talking about averaging the runs for that specific day, which would essentially give you an idea of how fast your car really was specifically on that day and on that specific track. You can not, however, take the average runs from a different day, different track, different weather conditions and compare them because the numbers would be skewed depending on which track you made more runs on. And things would get even worse if you would take the average of those runs and compare them to yet another average after certain mods from another track. I think the average suggestion works best for comparing runs made on a certain day.
So, it's incomprehensible to compare the average of my runs from
October 29th.
Island Dragway - October 29th 2010 - RENNtech Air Box**
Run 1: 12.151 @ 116.29 (DA: -37)
Run 2: 11.972 @ 117.39 (DA: -123)
Run 3: 11.850 @ 118.37 (DA: -194)
Run 4: 11.933 @ 117.89 (DA: -194)
Run 1: 12.151 @ 116.29 (DA: -37)
Run 2: 11.972 @ 117.39 (DA: -123)
Run 3: 11.850 @ 118.37 (DA: -194)
Run 4: 11.933 @ 117.89 (DA: -194)
...to the runs post header/tune installation on November 21st
and get an idea what the car really gained?
Which average to 11.62 @ 120.236
Now, I understand it was a different day with different weather
and the times should be adjusted accordingly based on the
differences in DA. Imo, taking the averages is the proper way
of coming to an informed conclusion.
I'm not being argumentative in any way just trying to get
clarification. Am I off base for looking at it this way?
11-23-2010, 04:29 PM
#73
Super Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E63
I understood exactly what he meant and I agree with you.
So, it's incomprehensible to compare the average of my runs from
October 29th.
Which average to 11.976 @ 117.485
...to the runs post header/tune installation on November 21st
and get an idea what the car really gained?
Which average to 11.62 @ 120.236
Now, I understand it was a different day with different weather
and the times should be adjusted accordingly based on the
differences in DA. Imo, taking the averages is the proper way
of coming to an informed conclusion.
I'm not being argumentative in any way just trying to get
clarification. Am I off base for looking at it this way?
So, it's incomprehensible to compare the average of my runs from
October 29th.
Which average to 11.976 @ 117.485
...to the runs post header/tune installation on November 21st
and get an idea what the car really gained?
Which average to 11.62 @ 120.236
Now, I understand it was a different day with different weather
and the times should be adjusted accordingly based on the
differences in DA. Imo, taking the averages is the proper way
of coming to an informed conclusion.
I'm not being argumentative in any way just trying to get
clarification. Am I off base for looking at it this way?
Average from one night vs Average from another using the same track. We can correct for weather so that helps eliminate another variable:
Originally Posted by Petroc55
If you look at my October 29th runs with the RENNtech air box which
are my last runs prior to the headers/retune the average of those
runs are 11.976 @ 117.485.
And yesterdays runs averaged: 11.62 @ 120.236
If you look at my October 29th runs with the RENNtech air box which
are my last runs prior to the headers/retune the average of those
runs are 11.976 @ 117.485.
And yesterdays runs averaged: 11.62 @ 120.236
Originally Posted by RStevens63
That's a .35 seconds and 2.75mph gain on average despite the DA being -500' better for the headers and mids.
Best run to best run (both were single runs not backed by another 11.8@118+ with airbox or 11.5@120.5+ with all 3 mods) we are looking at a 11.85@118.37 vs 11.58@120.66 or a difference of: .27 seconds and 2.29mph using average runs before vs after at the same track correcting for weather
Correcting the 11.85@118.37 to -700' (as the headers were run) assuming -200' for the RENNtech airbox and tune pass to start, we get 11.78@119.012 for tune & airboxes. Now compare that to the best + header pass of the night 11.58@120.66 and we see a .2 second and 1.65mph gain in the same air, same track, all things equal.
Respectable for sure, but not .4 and 4mph.
Best run to best run (both were single runs not backed by another 11.8@118+ with airbox or 11.5@120.5+ with all 3 mods) we are looking at a 11.85@118.37 vs 11.58@120.66 or a difference of: .27 seconds and 2.29mph using average runs before vs after at the same track correcting for weather
Correcting the 11.85@118.37 to -700' (as the headers were run) assuming -200' for the RENNtech airbox and tune pass to start, we get 11.78@119.012 for tune & airboxes. Now compare that to the best + header pass of the night 11.58@120.66 and we see a .2 second and 1.65mph gain in the same air, same track, all things equal.
Respectable for sure, but not .4 and 4mph.
11-23-2010, 04:31 PM
#74
MBWorld Fanatic!
Ok I averaged my day at atco out... Took out my best and worst..
I came up with 11.327!!! That's a good true average of my day I'll list all my times average 60' was1.698
Run #:
1: 11.291 @123.25 1.706
2: 11.317 @125.29 1.641
3: 11.361 @124.80 1.700
4: 11.291 @125.37 1.629
5: 11.291 @124.76 1.692
6: 11.363 @125.60 1.727
7: 11.372 @124.67 1.741
8: 11.304 @125.19 1.718
9: 11.374 @124.80 1.714
10: 11.219 @122.17 1.663
11: 11.337 @121.64 1.686
12: 11.335 @121.74 1.693
13: 11.330 @122.29 1.688
14: 11.330 @125.09 1.713
15: 11.386 @121.69 1.728
16: 11.305 @123.96 1.693
17: 11.305 @121.89 1.687
Those are all my runs
I came up with 11.327!!! That's a good true average of my day I'll list all my times average 60' was1.698
Run #:
1: 11.291 @123.25 1.706
2: 11.317 @125.29 1.641
3: 11.361 @124.80 1.700
4: 11.291 @125.37 1.629
5: 11.291 @124.76 1.692
6: 11.363 @125.60 1.727
7: 11.372 @124.67 1.741
8: 11.304 @125.19 1.718
9: 11.374 @124.80 1.714
10: 11.219 @122.17 1.663
11: 11.337 @121.64 1.686
12: 11.335 @121.74 1.693
13: 11.330 @122.29 1.688
14: 11.330 @125.09 1.713
15: 11.386 @121.69 1.728
16: 11.305 @123.96 1.693
17: 11.305 @121.89 1.687
Those are all my runs
Last edited by dodger63; 11-23-2010 at 04:50 PM.
11-23-2010, 04:36 PM
#75
Super Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E63
Ok I averaged my day at atco out... Took out my best and worst..
I came up with 11.327!!! That's a good true average of my day I'll list all my times
Run #:
1: 11.291 @123.25
2: 11.317 @125.29
3: 11.361 @124.80
4: 11.291 @125.37
5: 11.291 @124.76
6: 11.363 @125.60
7: 11.372 @124.67
8: 11.304 @125.19
9: 11.374 @124.80
10: 11.219 @122.17
11: 11.337 @121.64
12: 11.335 @121.74
13: 11.330 @122.29
14: 11.330 @125.09
15: 11.386 @121.69
16: 11.305 @123.96
17: 11.305 @121.89
Those are all my runs
I came up with 11.327!!! That's a good true average of my day I'll list all my times
Run #:
1: 11.291 @123.25
2: 11.317 @125.29
3: 11.361 @124.80
4: 11.291 @125.37
5: 11.291 @124.76
6: 11.363 @125.60
7: 11.372 @124.67
8: 11.304 @125.19
9: 11.374 @124.80
10: 11.219 @122.17
11: 11.337 @121.64
12: 11.335 @121.74
13: 11.330 @122.29
14: 11.330 @125.09
15: 11.386 @121.69
16: 11.305 @123.96
17: 11.305 @121.89
Those are all my runs
Is Jon going to post all his runs?
