View Single Post
      12-17-2007, 05:28 PM   #104
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
611
Rep
10,407
Posts

Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast. View Post
OK, ignoring your normal attack mode opening, I'll skip to:

My experience with chassis dynos (Dynojet and others) has me convinced that 1) They're all over the place in terms of readings, both between different brands, and between different shops using the same brand. 2) The operators are also all over the place. 3) A given shop can give you pretty much any readings they please, within *extremely* wide limits.

After due diligence, I stopped just short of buying a dynojet and renting a place near my home back in 2002, partially due to the above, which I believe is a result of everybody and his brother getting into the game. I'll restate that we don't know anything about that particular dyno, nor the operators, but if torque and horsepower don't cross at 5252 rpm, then just toss the entire thing.

Wait a minute. I said "The 'Ring test isn't indicative of anything I can think of other than it's a flyer. The car may be naturally fast (more on that in a minute), or in fact the car may be under-rated."

This is a self contradiction? Can I make up my mind?

Of course not! That's the whole point of my posts! I don't know whether the car has been under-rated or is fast around the 'Ring for other reasons that we've been discussing.
...
No attacking Bruce. You are simply wishy washy to the absolute limit on this topic and it is 100% apparent from you posts. First you say there is absolutely no evidence for an under-rating then you admit the car may be under-rated and are willing to discuss the evidence. Which the hell is it and if the former why all the discussion?

I mostly agree with your thoughts on dynos, much like simulation, garbage in, garbage out and just the same they are much better for relative comparisons rather than absolutes.

How many times do we have to go back to my "abominably poor" simulation results. E46 M3 right on, E92 M3 right on, IS-F, good once the final drive mistake was sorted, C63 AMG effectively enveloped to determine a CLEAR and huge under-rating. If you would stop attacking and insulting my results perhaps I would give you a little break as well. By the way just to clarify my conclusions from simulation is that neither the E46 nor E92 M3 nor Audi R8 is in any way under-rated. C63 AMG is for sure, IS-F maybe slightly under-rated and GT-R, potential under-rating, could be small, could be large.
Appreciate 0