blackbenzz

Key word is TRY. There is no true "controlled environment" where they control ALL the variables. Trust me buddy, I pretend to be a scientist during the day

This is irrelevant anyway, back on topic...

TMC M5

Sorry...no drama intended.. I found it funny...and I just was giving you more unsolicited advice....given that I know what Ahmad does for a living. I am getting this strong vibe that you don't appreciate my advice...which kind of hurts.

Tom

chiromikey

angry? no way...i was laughing my **** off at you while i wrote it.

yes i did state rocks car is only moderately modified and i stand behind that. simply because you're not completely familiar with the platform or what's available doesn't make me wrong.

LZH

I'm very well aware of further internal motor mods (rotating assembly, top end work, etc) and blower upgrades, but you are talking BIG bucks compared to just a tune. And it's exactly THAT which you are missing. With all the money spent on Rocks car for mods, MHP's tune allowed the C63 to hang with it - as stated by Rock himself. That's impressive in my eyes, and, its a mod that is easily reversed if one should ever require a visit to the dealer for warranty work. Maybe instead of constantly engaging me simply for the sake of argument, you should let MHP tune your E55 and then report back here since your sole purpose here seems to revolve around how much one contributes.

JAYCL600

LZH, is your saddle that tightly secure to Andy's *****? No offense to Andy, but all he did was tune one lil C63 and you have claimed him tuner of the year, Im confused.

LZH

When I look at what Andy has done with a tune alone compared to Rock's modified E55, I see lots of potential and VALUE. Rocks car should have walked all over the C63. Perhaps you guys are just bent that the almighty E55 has been dethroned. I would venture to say that all of Rocks mods cost more than Andy's tune - not to mention the fact that all those mods raise lots of eyebrows when it comes to warranty work. If you can't see the value there then I cannot help you.

JAYCL600

^^^my oh my, OK.

Fikse

that C63 was pulled by a stock Gallardo that only traps 118 MPH...... maybe Rock's car is having issues.....

MarkoCL65

Rock Wrote:
"I reported that I could not pull on his car in the few seconds that we were both on the accelerator"

That's about as good of an example of a "dethroning" as "we must go into Iraq to get Al-Qaeda" is of the absolute truth.

chiromikey

so you're basing your entire conclusion on a very short set of uncontrolled runs done in traffic where even rock claims full speed potential was not realized? all i can say is that i guess your and my requirements for data are quite different...i prefer objective over subjective.

there's no way i'm letting anyone tune my vehicle unless they can actually prove to me their tune is, first and foremost, safe...which is why i'm waiting for some data logging to show me timing info. and even if it is safe, i still need to know how much better it is than the rest to justify 2-4 times the cost over the competition. if andy could prove to me the tune is safe and wants to bring his equipment out here and do some back to back runs at firebird raceway, comparing his tune to mine...(it won't happen but) lets go! i have no problem taking my car down the strip to get some quality OBJECTIVE data to provide for everyone.

LZH

Well then I guess the examples you are looking for will present themselves at MIR...But that begs the question - how much better do you think Andy's C63 would be with all the mods Rock's car has ?


I agree that their run was not as controlled as I would have liked to see; but it was very promising nonetheless and you cannot deny that. Guess you will just have to wait until MIR for more objective data. Will you be attending ?

chiromikey

i was committed to attend until a few events recently squashed my play funds. right now it doesn't look good but there's still a slim chance i can work something out.

MarkoCL65

Rock trapped 124.6 and Andy trapped 116.XX. How can you argue around that fact and bring the race between them as a stronger example of the difference/similarity between the two cars? Doesn't one most logically conclude, given all the facts, that the race between them is non-admissible as it wasn't performed to an extent which would yield notable results?

MHP

Thanks buddy.

MHP

Sorry, not coming to CA to do that unless there's at least 10 of you to tune. However we will be doing that Nov 1st (trying to rent trails Nov 2nd) here in Columbus.

MHP

To reiterate the biggest problem with 63s is the lack of low end/midrange opposed to a 55/65. Once we're out of first gear (or at least in the powerband in first gear) things even out pretty quickly especially considering the closer ratios of the 7A. That being said I don't think LZH is saying my car would definitely beat Rock's in the quarter, but I know for a fact it can hang from 50-130 (which in my mind is a pretty good spread) which says a lot for a N/A motor with just filters/tuning. Would you agree to that?
Also keep in mind that Rock's made more than 1 pass to net that 124.6, I only got to make one and bogged. More data coming this Friday. I think Rock's going to be there as well.

MHP

Maybe you need to stop reading magazines and get more seat time in a Gallardo. Going from a roll is not the same as going from a dig.

chiromikey

i still wouldn't agree to that unless you ran a much more controlled race without the traffic, etc. but that's just me.

MHP

LMAO we went from 50-130 multiple times... Next time I'll be sure to hit 180 just for you.

chiromikey

not sure what you're lmao'ing about???

MarkoCL65

Of course I agree. Rock's absolute best was 124.6 and you haven't gotten the best out of your car yet. I focus more on trap speed as an indicator of power and performance than anything else. That being said, a car that traps 120+ is going to pull away from a car that traps 116.XX. The fact that it didn't happen during your race with Rock doesn't signify anything meaningful in my opinion. How many times have you raced side by side with identical cars and yielded completely different results? Who got the jump, what gear were you in, whose car was a hotter, who spun more..???...way too many variables. 116.XX is a great MPH for a 63 motor with little to no miles on it.

LZH

Look forward to seeing the results, Andy.

MB_Forever

Okay, so it seems that this argument can keep going back and forth almost indefinitely........ until of course more data is introduced. Andy, this time try to make at least 4 to 5 runs, so we have more data to analyze and reference. In the mean time, I think it's fair to at least agree that Andy's tune looks very strong. Rock (who is highly respected here on the boards) seems to think that the car held it's grounds fairly well and videos of the Gellardo and shift points, along with dynos seem to confirm that Andy's C63 indeed has become a stronger, faster, and "fresher" car.

It'd be interesting if we can find a way to measure shift speeds on a stock car, then again after a tuned version to see how fast shift speeds have improved after the tune (especially after minimizing the always slow adaptations).

Fikse

the point is, you lost, the Gallardo isn't trapping 120, and neither are you....

and from a dig? I'm sure you would "instantly" take a Gallardo by two car lengths from a dig like you said..... You would have ZERO chance if the Gallardo really ran you like it could, nice video here:

http://www.dragtimes.com/video-viewer.php?v=RycA3jNFQb8

please, please tell everyone that you would have beat him by 2 car lengths from a real dig.....

V12Godspeed

Any news on the 65's.....forget about those little V8s'...., Just kidding fellas, relax before I get the book thrown at me....