toddk911

So you put down 290hp/270tq at the wheels with only 15.5 psi and stock AFM????

toddk911

You guys with the awesome 0-60, how exaclty are you launcing?? at what revs, etc.

awilson40

270hp / 290tq.... I'm not saying that...just how much of an improvement % wise of before and after with the G-tech and showing the effect of aero drag on G-tech readings.
I gained 35hp and 60 lb/ft tq.
This is from Stock chips at 13psi and a reliaboost(this was all I could run before boost protection would kick in) to TT's chips kissing 16psi.
I dont have a bone stock reading to compare it to but I would guess I was about 15-20hp and 20-25TQ above stock to begin with.
I just reved to about 3500 rpm and feed the clutch and floor it in one smooth movement. I get very little wheel spin or bogging with out slipping the clutch.

Robby

Since your HP is at the wheels, that makes more sense in response to Streckfu's original question, although, since the Turbo S was capable of 5.5 stock, when new, it's hard to say- so many variablles....

"I just reved to about 3500 rpm and feed the clutch and floor it in one smooth movement. I get very little wheel spin or bogging with out slipping the clutch"


I start at about the same RPM, but, it sounds like I'm getting more wheel spin- could be a dif in techniques- hell, there's NO "ONE WAY"- also, tire compounds- it's possible that some tires allow more spin w/out OVER-spinning- a controlled spin, so to speak- than other's- could be different tires require diffferent techniques...

Todd- I think you really have to have little to no concern for your car to do it right- I think thats one reason why we see few 0-60 / 1/4 mile listings on RL... It's the reason why I've only "launched" my car several times in 4.5yrs
of ownership- these things cost lot's of $$$ when things break, unfortunately... PLUS, they're not the worst, BUT, also are not the simplest cars to launch effectively....



Anyone have some BRAKE distances to share?

Danno

"Rear end squat, the down fall accuracy wise of accelerometers. The tipping aft of the device induces a false acceleration."

Ah, but this is counteracted by the rear-end lift and nose-dive when you shift. So on the very first shift, the squat is equalized by the deceleration recorded when the rear end rises the same amount and more.

Blueman33

all i know, is that i got 3.75 secs 0-60 when the top attachment of my accerlerometer didn't stick and the unit tilted backward.

i can get a better 0-60 going uphill than flat.

awilson40

If you are running the old ver. of the G-tech then I bet this could happen.
The Gtech-Pro-Comp is a 3 axis accelerometer and is temp compensated as well. A lot more accurate and repeatable.

Robby

Yeah- I know what Danno is saying, BUT, based on MY experience, w/the OLD style G-Tech, I don't think it will neccessarily balance out- maybe hte new ones do, like awilson mentioned... I STILL love my old G-Tech- I always just try to make sure I'm on flat land, &, like the manual says, I try to do few a runs, BOTH directions, to get an average for better, more realistic, results & I've been very happy w/it... Sure, I'd rather have a new one, but, can't justify the $$$ right now- the old one is fine, w/it's simplicity, etc- I just wish I could get some times, distances, etc, from more speeds than just 60mph &/OR the 1/4 mile... THIS is why I've been asking about 60-0 stops in several of my recent threads- it's NOT b/c I consider 60-0 to be any kind of final word in braking perfomance....