pulley kit and other basic mods comparison

[D_Thissen]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

@Tcoat The calibration records of my foot?


If you check the posted Ecutek logs there isn't any change in the "Accelerator Angle (%)" value. It is always 100%. I started pressing the gas pedal from a smaller speed. Your arguments are even more laughable and the same test is very easily reproducable. It is a plain 2nd gear pull. So, waiting for results ...

Was your launch the same both times? For example, are you sure the road was perfectly level? How about the temperature, atmospheric pressure and relative humidity? Wind speed?

Doing 2 pulls is not a large enough sample to compare results.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Ok guys.

It looks that no one will post a result for comparison. So, I used the log file as an input to the Virtual Dyno app. I changed the tire diameter to my value, the fd ratio to a 3.727 value and changed the car weight to what you have normally in US (std weight of Limited MT model). Here is the output with an additional 80kg driver and the standard smoothing factor:




Anyone can cross-check the results with the attached Ecutek log file of my first post.

Result is 194 whp

What is the actual weight of your car? What level was the gas tank at?

Have you considered that noone posted a comparison because we all have better things to do than try to figure out how to match your specific setup, location, and conditions overnight? It's pretty easy to go do a thing that cannot be easily repeated. You have to put a lot more effort in to perform a real experiment. We have a 0-60 (mph) times thread already if you want to post "look how fast my car is" logs. If you actually want to have a technical discussion you are going to need to try harder.

Basic scientific method:
If you want anything you say to be taken seriously, start with a single question and hypothesis. At this point I can't even tell what you are trying to prove. Throwing results out there and saying they prove you were right about some undefined thing does not help your case.

Next, design an experiment that disproves the hypothesis if said hypothesis is wrong. For example, dropping two items with different mass from the same height proves that acceleration due to gravity is independent of mass if the items hit the ground at the same time (assuming no other factors). Otherwise the hypothesis is false. Here, you have, among other issues, essentially created the famous hammer and feather experiment. There are parameters you have failed to account for and they have confused your results and brought doubt to your conclusion.

Third, someone else has to be capable of reproducing your experiment and results. In fact, real scientific results are not accepted until they can be reproduced by another lab. Otherwise, this exact situation occurs. If your results cannot be reproduced by an accurate reproduction of your experiment, then you don't have a valid experiment in the first place. Here, you haven't sufficiently documented your experiment and haven't given anyone enough time, or even a reason to care, to reproduce your results.

...

I've offered to do the math on pulleys twice now and will repeat it here. Math does not lie or exaggerate. It has no motivation. It simply is. I just need stock numbers for the model.

[D_Thissen]

Plot twist. He's a troll and just trying to f*ck with us.

[Lantanafrs2]

All in the name of making a 25k car feel quicker.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

We are not trying to prove here how much the gains are, but if there are in general any gains at all. If not even a single person doesn't want to post a result (even for a stock car), then it means that you are just hiding behind your finger and for me the topic is closed. From now on I'll discuss if someone post times. Anyone?

You can't take data from another car for comparison. There is a reason people baseline a car before modifying it.

If your aim is to compare potential gains from the pulleys you need to post a pull with stock, and a pull with the aftermarket. Preferably at least a few pulls of each. If you do not have a stock set of pulley's PM me. You pay shipping I will pull the set off my spare motor and send them to you, it is a 13' though, don't know if that will matter.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by D_Thissen

Plot twist. He's a troll and just trying to f*ck with us.

I actually could accept that. The problem is that he is doing neither. He simply feels he know more than everybody else and can not recognize that anything beyond his own theories as fact. This results in twisting things to meet his expectations and if you do not agree then you are being a jerk.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Lantanafrs2

All in the name of making a 25k car feel quicker.

My car "feels" faster, sounds louder and seems to run better every time I wash it. I at least understand that it is just my brain playing games with me.

[tomm.brz]

are you jelly that you don t have 194 whp and a perceived power of 280hp Tcoat? jellyness is an evil monster

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

You can't take data from another car for comparison. There is a reason people baseline a car before modifying it.

If your aim is to compare potential gains from the pulleys you need to post a pull with stock, and a pull with the aftermarket. Preferably at least a few pulls of each. If you do not have a stock set of pulley's PM me. You pay shipping I will pull the set off my spare motor and send them to you, it is a 13' though, don't know if that will matter.

Both sets of pulls would need to be under the same conditions as well if it is to be a valid test. That's actually the more difficult part since changing the pulleys takes time, meaning one can't do back-to-back tests.

[SuperTom]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Do a pull with and without. I don't see the debate here.

That's it. Simple

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Both sets of pulls would need to be under the same conditions as well if it is to be a valid test. That's actually the more difficult part since changing the pulleys takes time, meaning one can't do back-to-back tests.

As long as ambient temp was close I would be willing to accept it. I know it's not perfect, but I have an idea of what the result will be anyway.

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by D_Thissen

Was your launch the same both times? For example, are you sure the road was perfectly level? How about the temperature, atmospheric pressure and relative humidity? Wind speed?

Doing 2 pulls is not enough to compare to compare results.

This!

Do three dyno pulls back to back to back and the variance between pulls will be greater than the 0.01 second difference you claim supports your mods made an improvement.

Doing second gear pulls is also way more likely to introduce variations between pulls. There's a reason that real dyno pulls are done in 4th or 5th. The longer gear gives more data and helps naturally smooth out tiny variations.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by D_Thissen

Was your launch the same both times? For example, are you sure the road was perfectly level? How about the temperature, atmospheric pressure and relative humidity? Wind speed?

Doing 2 pulls is not enough to compare to compare results.

What do you mean if the launch was the same? It is a plain simple full throttle 2nd gear pull. It is not a launch! You log the parameters and you calculate the acceleration based on the timings. Weather conditions were the same and there was no wind. Road was the same and level.


Doing two pulls is not enough? Ok, but I wouldn't expect a 40-100 km/h timing to be THAT different on a 3rd or 4th pull. Maybe some small differences, but not THAT different.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

My car "feels" faster, sounds louder and seems to run better every time I wash it. I at least understand that it is just my brain playing games with me.

Please stay on the measurements and the results. We are not talking here about "feel" or "theories".