[QUOTE=jim07;4671771]This is my point! Many factors effect a day at the track (track prep,wind, improved skill, DA, launch, etc.). Adjusting your times based on DA is not valid. Petro inproved his time by less than a tenth, not four tenth. I appplaud his improvement! But to hold one tune up on your shoulder and proclaim they are better based on less than a tenth and 1 mile an hour improvement is a bit much. I guess my slight grip would be with the title of the tread not the report. He gave a honest report w/ no fudge.
I developed an air induction lid for F body LS cars and I am guilty of the same enthusiasm to believe in what you are doing has to be right --- even if the fact are not conclusive!





.


Correction still applies. That's why DA gets corrected. I think you are a bit short sighted if you think neg da isn't going to significantly improve that time.

If waiting until the fall is somthing you need as conclusive proof then ill hold off on my I told ya so until then.

 

.


You don't have to stop, please keep posting.

I improved my ET and trap speed in much worse conditions, which speaks
volumes to me. If the car ran .1 quicker in the same negative DA as my previous
tune than it's not a big deal.

DA is so important.

 

What was your 60 ft on the previous best?

 

I had two runs that day that were both an 11.504

Run 1: 1.762 60'
Run 2: 1.755 60'

 

So this is part of the factor -- you improved your launch.
I am not partial to any tuner I just trying to keep it fair.I do agree you will run quicker with a better DA if all other factors are equal. Keep up the fight!!

 

What rpm did you launch at? Awesome times too well done

 

Congrats Petroc63!!
Awesome times and great write up. Nice improvements with the new tune!!

You have caught the fever. Lol
Keep up the good work!!

 

I'm not partial to any tuner either.

I knew some people would be skeptical about the gains, which is
totally understandable. It provides for good discussion.

I am no rookie when it comes to the racetrack. That being said,
you are never to old to learn something new and I took advice
from someone who has more experience with these cars than I
but I still have about 200 passes under my belt in this car.

 

Thank you.

Initially I was launching at about 1500 rpm but after mthis drove the
car a few times he recommended trying 1000 rpm and the car seemed
to like that better.

Thanks Keith.

MIR in the Fall!

 

Guys I'm done for the night.

I need a beer!

 

We need more info buddy he gave you his old pb with his old 60'.. You would need to get allot more info to come to any solid realization then we go back to the old war as same day same track.. There is no perfect way to come to any conclusion.. Other then he ran this with that and that with this. Craig from rpm said it pretty good "take all your runs throw out the best and worst avg them and that's a fair conclusion.. So petro do all your calculations and give us an avg for both tunes.. But correct all for da first! Haha jk. But great running and at the end of the day as long as your happy that is all that matters..

 

I'm very happy.

I know I made the right decision.

Okay, now I'm getting that beer.

 

Big congrats!!
Thank you for the writeup and 1/4 mile times.

 

The dark side is taking over every one!!!

 

Congrats on a PB. Always a good feeling to run a better time. But I gotta say that the average runs were on par with the old runs and you had a better 60'. So to say, "Clearly, with my set-up the MHP tune is superior" is a bit of an over exaggerated statement. As jim07 said, different mods, different day, different weather, prep, etc all take part. If you went 11.0 then I would say the tune is night and day. But 11.5-11.4 with added mods???? Just my observation. Not too mention I never correct for DA. My run is my run and recalculating is kind of making up a run. I have multiple World Records and the runs were counted as is for what they were on that specific day. If I had worse weather on a different night, it is what it is. Just like saying I could've had a WR record run on a marginal run if I had a tailwind vs a headwind. Not hating on anyone. I think the tunes are very comparable and you have a great running car. Congrats...

 

Neg 1000 DA 11.5

1 trunk saving 20 pounds. +1100 DA 11.4

Results speak for themselves. Anyone who doesn't think so just watch what he puts down in the fall.


I don't correct for DA either but I recognize how much of an effect DA has on runs. Both Positive and Negative.

I ran an 11.5 in big Neg DA on the perfect day. I told everyone I would be happy to run under a 12 on this day at ATCO. I ran an 11.72 as my best. 11.8 was my average. Lots of 11.9's too. Good DA got me 4 tenths and the record for tune only. It makes all the difference.

I figured some loyal people who never track would defend their tune but track guys with track experience like you MW surprise me with your comments.

I'm gonna just let this one go, have at it. Congrats on your time Petro. Ill be there in the fall. Please do at least 1 rental before making any changes so we can bump this thread with the results.

 

Im not really disagreeing with you. And DA is def a factor. Im just saying you can build and speculate a run on paper all day. But what counts is what the slip says. Thats why I dont shoot for records in June here in Florida. Weather just isnt on my side. Its my off season. I just saw lots of changes to mods in his post and he didnt specify what gas he was on when he did the initial 11.50. He did say he was on 109 for the best run of 11.4. What gas was he running when he went 11.50 on the old tune? That right there could make a big difference. The bottom line is the car had a PB on the new tune. And for that, I congratulated him. A PB is a PB. I just dont see the exaggerated statement of "superior" tune being justified when he averaged 11.5 and then averaged 11.50 with a best run of the night at 11.4... And the better 60' would easily justify the marginal difference. It is very hard to do comparisons for the very reasons mentioned. Maybe they prepped right before that run? So many variables. I look at averages. I am also all for MHP. I plan on using them in the future with the C63 BS, so no hating from me at all. I only wish I could run an 11.4 in mine. I just think the statement comparing tunes is a bit off base. But again, great run. 11.4 in this car is a great run regardless of who tuned it. I havent run mine yet for the sole reason its already hot and humid in Florida. Im not even about ready to be disappointed LOL... Great runs Petro.

 

Finally someone got the point!
I do have hundreds of track passes! I have been at the strip since the late 70's with many different cars. I have not taken the c63. I have only owned it for 4 month but I will and I will report the time with no correction. What you run is what you run.

P.S. Pedro reported a .085 gain -- others inflated it to .4 based on DA

 

Keep in mind though that the better 60' time could also be due to the tune. I've seen some tunes put out more torque and more hp at the lower rpm values than other tunes - especially on the 63 platform.

Also, all the weather conditions which have varied from the previous tune to the new tune have only gotten worse. So despite the many variations, each of those variations favor the old tune yet the new tune produced slightly better numbers. Eventually, I'm sure we'll see more times in more comparable weather conditions (-1200 ft DA). I predict that he'll improve by (at least) another 2 tenth if not more.

 

I think we have all beat this horse to a pulp! We need a new tread to over ****--lize! Have a great weekend and once again Congrats to Pedro for the PB!!

- I see Powerchips just offered their tune for $500, I guess competition works for all of us! God bless free enterprise!!

 

I don't believe there is any paper racing going on.. Sometimes we like a nice day at the track and although correcting times isn't perfect it is a way to get a bit of an idea were we would stand in better weather? Obviously we get out in good weather to fo the "real" runs but it's all in good fun. There are 1000s of variables. And understandable petro has been to the track pushing his car prob more then 95% of the people on this forum. When u have a goal and shoot for it and fall short all the time, it's frustrating, he changed tunes and got what he was shooting for in much worse air so obviously it is superior it got him what he was looking for! There is much improvement in all of our runs/cars/setups. You guys keep saying better 60' the tune could justify that also keep in mind that he was running (to the best of my knowledge) MTs before and nittos now, nittos have a shorter roll out we all no what that does! Never the less Mhp has a great product and it works real well with my setup!

 

Agreed and I have no problems talking this over as long as it stays civil. Its actually quite fun and educational. If it becomes mud slinging Im out...

So now, lets look at his 93 octane runs. They are actually slower than his previous runs which is an indicator that the car was more aggressively tuned for 109 and running better on 109. So we still need the question answered what gas was the car on when it ran the previous best of 11.50? We know it was on 109 on the PB. He did say he ran 109 previously which showed no gains so that shows the old tune was better suited for 93. So I'd assume he probably wasnt on 109 if it showed no gains and that the car wasnt tuned for 109. So then that brings up the question what was the old tune. Was it a mail in 93 octane tune? Custome? Was the MHP tune a custom tune or off the shelf 93 tune? Did he specify MHP to do a high octane tune? So many variables is the problem. But what I see is a marginally better time with better gas and a different tire with a better 60'. That is what makes it hard to say the tune is superior. I would say the tune is better on 109 and worse on 93. It makes for good conversation and by no means am I taking away from anyone. I love diagnosing time slips etc. If Petro would divulge all the info it would be awesome to see all the differences. And it will be awesome to see him go faster in the Fall and we can look back at this. Added info I would like to see in comparing the best two runs is complete 1/4 info including 60', complete tire info, tune info, and fuel info. And one thing I've learned is one little change can make a huge difference. I've spent thousands of dollars on changes almost guaranteeing a faster run only to go slower. From better tires to making the clutch slip netting me slower times. To weight reduction which affected weight transfer and traction to go slower. The list goes on. Thats why I do one mod change at a time. So Im in for a fun conversation and like I said, a PB is a PB. But divulging all the details is only fair. Bottom line is it is running great now. Nothing to take away from an 11.40 C63. And as long as your happy with the changes, who cares...

Oh yeah, one more thing. You say weather conditions were worse but we dont have wind info? He couldve been running with a 10 mph headwind and then 10 mph tailwind. Thats why for me it always comes back to a night of racing is a night of racing. Variables are changed on every run period even on the same night. Even a small factor as running after the big cars run is a benefiting factor. I always do my important runs on a big night when the heavy hitters are out. The track prep is better and the rubber helps.

 

Again you continue to miss the point!

His gain is an indication of what he would run with equal variables. Those variables include DA. It is intuitive to conclude that with this tune and the DA he was running his 11.5 in that he would run better than the 11.4 with his new tune dropping that .085 gain to more like 2-4 tenths. NO QUESTION.

The .4 was based on equal DA. His actual gain is .085 as you stated on this day in +1100 DA. This leaves no question to me that he will and would run lower than 11.4 in equal DA that he ran NO BETTER than 11.5 with the Eurocharge tune.

If you need to see it first then I guess you have to wait till the fall to be convinced about the tune compare. Others who have been there done that already know the answer.

 

NNE 5-10 MPH.

It shifted around quite a bit but the smoke from the burnouts mostly indicated a head wind.

 

More than fair. So can we add 60' time to the equation? I dont even know what they were. I would just like to make it apples to apples. I just saw someone post it was a better 60' on the his PB. Better 60' could come from many variables like better tune, improved driving, better tire, better track prep or temp, etc. But at least it will make it an equal playing field. I mean if he went 1.9 on his old set up and 1.7 on his new set up then there is more room for arguement. .1 is a big deal Propain can you post what you think he will run with equal DA? I'm too tired to look it up for figure it out