Quote:
Originally Posted by vividracing
I could post each dyno run for each exhaust version we made. But why? Those are not going to be sold. Also when you build something new. You tend to keep your R&D work to yourself.
I guess you did not read the 1st post in this thread. Which had a BASELINE RUN. Then you didn't read other posts of people screaming that our car was not stock after we did the exhaust. Which was also part of the 1st post.
Once again I hate to do this. But you clearly did not read the 1st post. There is a base run, a Flywheel run then a run with flywheel and exhaust.
I do not know what else to say. You are beating a dead horse. Please go back and read all the posts. Read the long post I posted today.
|
Actually, I have read the first post, and every post in all 3 threads that have come along.
I was explaining to him how a baseline is done, however now that you bring it up...
The first thread you had made claimed that all gains were achieved through your exhaust. This however was not completely accurate since a flywheel and crank pulley were added. That makes your baseline prior to the other additions null. A new baseline needed to be made post flywheel/pulley installation.
If you read my link it will show you proper scientific method when trying to prove a hypothesis, and yes, this is just that a hypothesis.
Your claim is that the AP exhaust creates X HP, and Y TQ. To do this you would create a baseline with NO changes other than the AP exhaust, and then dyno the parts to prove the validity of your claims.
I'm not asking you to turn all of your R&D work over to the public so your intellectual data can be stolen ruining months of time and losing potential profit to the open market, but what information can be gained by showing the dyno runs from each previous stage of development without showing the actual part?
At this point any argument is moot since the AP parts are hitting the market, and independant testers will be posting their results very shortly.
I have no past with Vivid or AP one way or another, but being a science geek proper methodology is the key to proof of results.
I've stated it before, and I will restate it. If you can verify your claims I will be in line with everyone else to shell out money to buy the AP product, but I would like your methods to be proper.