you don't have to be a member to read posts...
RS4 Rolling Road Numbers - Another View
- Thread starter Housey
- Start date
- Status
you don't have to be a member to read posts...
See you are selective in your reading and you know nothing about me or others on this site, how would you. I am a 41 year old with 'some' experience of things like this and see a RR as nothing more than a estimate with lots of subjectives. NEVER said 366bhp was acurate, but I do know that on the same road my GT3 did 383bhp and a load of E46 M3's were around 325 to 340bhp.
I know because I was standing 2 inches from my car at the time, so I know what gear it was in. I also know John Thorney and was at a BMW day not an Audi day. TMS are not an Audi tuner. My car was one of 20 run that day, mostly BMW's and 911's, I was the only RS4. The tuner was trying to sell ME nothing...
I also have driven (and owned) plenty of rapid cars and run my RS4 at VMax events down 2 miles of runway so I am basing my view on a bit more than one RR.
I know because I was standing 2 inches from my car at the time, so I know what gear it was in. I also know John Thorney and was at a BMW day not an Audi day. TMS are not an Audi tuner. My car was one of 20 run that day, mostly BMW's and 911's, I was the only RS4. The tuner was trying to sell ME nothing...
I also have driven (and owned) plenty of rapid cars and run my RS4 at VMax events down 2 miles of runway so I am basing my view on a bit more than one RR.
to manipulate the numbers and obtain the desire result: low HP, so you can sell a fix to a nonexistent problem...
it doesn't matter what gear: as long as you don't spin the machine too fast, or it takes too long and you overheat the motor...
3 & 4 are the most common, it limits wheel speed to ~100 mph...
1:1 would take too long, and the rpms would be so low at the start that you would bog the engine...try starting out in 5th at 2000 rpm
uphill
now ry it in 3rd...remember, the dyno is providing the load, not nature...you are not propoelling a mass thru space, you are spinning an electric generator...which the power you generate, is used to try to turn it into a motor to oppose you...some is buffered/absorbed thru inertia of the drum...
Why if you are so confident you are right would you not post there when you are happy to post on a forum with as far as I know 1 RS4 owner? I would have thought that would have been your starting point, you know, to tell everyone who you critacise (some as ringers) how wrong they all are?
Very odd...
RS4er said:
You say you post though, so you must have a username. Spit it out.
I must say this is all making interesting reading.
you are selective in your application of logic, but not lack thereof
I am older than you, and know a bit about engines, engineering and such...
my RS4 is almost 2 seconds faster to 100 than my e46 M3, and it weighs 600 lbs more...
handling, different story...the M3 is impeccable...
gotta go, F1 in 10 minutes...damn tape delay
I have posted a link to this thread on there, I suspect a few of said members might be somewhat annoyed that this person believes them all to be idiots and 2 of them ringers for a tuner, even when only one of their cars was tuned by the operator of the RR...
sorry, meant I know the site and (the particular) post, not that I post
Kenai, love to fish there, on the penninsula
lived there for 10 years, amazing place
you are selective in your application of logic, but not lack thereof
I am older than you, and know a bit about engines, engineering and such...
my RS4 is almost 2 seconds faster to 100 than my e46 M3, and it weighs 600 lbs more...
handling, different story...the M3 is impeccable...
gotta go, F1 in 10 minutes...damn tape delay
I have run side by side with E46 M3's and I promise you MY RS4 is NOT 2 seconds quicker. I owned 2 E46 M3's and your logic is FULL of holes. Enjoy F1, it's littered with ill educated British engineers, some of them older than both of us. Button won, we have it live here.
some of them are glad that someone posted a similar arguement...that's where I got this info
read the whole dyno day thread...it's enlightening...
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 17,616
- Location
- Bristol
to manipulate the numbers and obtain the desire result: low HP, so you can sell a fix to a nonexistent problem...
it doesn't matter what gear: as long as you don't spin the machine too fast, or it takes too long and you overheat the motor...
3 & 4 are the most common, it limits wheel speed to ~100 mph...
1:1 would take too long, and the rpms would be so low at the start that you would bog the engine...try starting out in 5th at 2000 rpm
uphill
now ry it in 3rd...remember, the dyno is providing the load, not nature...you are not propoelling a mass thru space, you are spinning an electric generator...which the power you generate, is used to try to turn it into a motor to oppose you...some is buffered/absorbed thru inertia of the drum...
O rly?
So the results from the RR day I organised for a bunch of us, that everyone's cars were run in 4th are completely wrong then are they? Whilst I know they are not accurate, as it's nigh on impossible to get accurate readings you get a good idea as to the power output of the cars.
I can't actually be bothered to explain RRs and the gears and the fact you don't start in the running gear, far too much effort.
... I don't think the rest of the world judges a whole nation based on the actions of one person
no, you don't start in running gear, but to get readings as low as 2000 rpm, which the graphs have, you must 'pull' from 2000 in 3 or 4...
you can't record the results in multiple gears, each will have a different peak reading...
now that was easy to explain
I know more about the subject than you and any 3 people you know lol
do you know what standard Audi rates the engine to?
is a ramp test?
or must they hold a stable rpm for > 1 minute?
which would be more accurate?
a ramp test, with rate/load set wrong in 3rd gear which is torque limited...
then guessing at a cf to adjust...each reading being sampled at <1 sec/1000 rpm...
or an engine dyno, run by a quasi governmental testing agency, with a fixed load, at a stable rpm for > 1 minute...repeated multiple time with all readings having to be +/- 2%, then averaged?
do you know the difference between a electrical load dyno, hydraulic load and an inertial type?
do you know how they measure the torque?
do you know HP is a calculated qty, not a measured, instantaneous physical 'force' like torque (M = F cross r, yes engineers call 'torque' Moment, 'cross' means the multiplication of vector quantities, not magnitudes, because the qtys are always not aligned, like an axle)
do you know T = Hp x 5252/HP
and 5252 = 60 sec/min x 550 ft-lb (work, not lb-ft torque)/2Pi
since M = P/w where w = 2 pi f or rotational speed...
if you want to talk the problem, do so, if you want to sling *****, I'm game...
now, us Americans may be 'knobs', but that beats condescending, cowardly ***** any day of the week...
ponder this, at least Americans are considered, for better or worse..
beats being marginized and not considered, doesn't it?
we sent your asses packing twice, to go home and bow before the throne...
and saved it twice...you'ld be goose-stepping...
we are not perfect, but if you think the UK is any better than the US, you are more clueless than anticipated...even I don't think the US > UK...
tony blair suckin' gwb's 'knob' all the way to a useless war...
who's dumber? the initiator? or the hapless follower?
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 17,616
- Location
- Bristol
Pretentious much?
I got as far as that and gave up, I have no time for people that think they know everything and think everyone else knows nothing.
Obvious troll is obvious.
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,480
no, you don't start in running gear, but to get readings as low as 2000 rpm, which the graphs have, you must 'pull' from 2000 in 3 or 4...
you can't record the results in multiple gears, each will have a different peak reading...
now that was easy to explain
I know more about the subject than you and any 3 people you know lol
do you know what standard Audi rates the engine to?
is a ramp test?
or must they hold a stable rpm for > 1 minute?
which would be more accurate?
a ramp test, with rate/load set wrong in 3rd gear which is torque limited...
then guessing at a cf to adjust...each reading being sampled at <1 sec/1000 rpm...
or an engine dyno, run by a quasi governmental testing agency, with a fixed load, at a stable rpm for > 1 minute...repeated multiple time with all readings having to be +/- 2%, then averaged?
do you know the difference between a electrical load dyno, hydraulic load and an inertial type?
do you know how they measure the torque?
do you know HP is a calculated qty, not a measured, instantaneous physical 'force' like torque (M = F cross r, yes engineers call 'torque' Moment, 'cross' means the multiplication of vector quantities, not magnitudes, because the qtys are always not aligned, like an axle)
do you know T = Hp x 5252/HP
and 5252 = 60 sec/min x 550 ft-lb (work, not lb-ft torque)/2Pi
since M = P/w where w = 2 pi f or rotational speed...
if you want to talk the problem, do so, if you want to sling *****, I'm game...
now, us Americans may be 'knobs', but that beats condescending, cowardly ***** any day of the week...
ponder this, at least Americans are considered, for better or worse..
beats being marginized and not considered, doesn't it?
we sent your asses packing twice, to go home and bow before the throne...
and saved it twice...you'ld be goose-stepping...
we are not perfect, but if you think the UK is any better than the US, you are more clueless than anticipated...even I don't think the US > UK...
tony blair suckin' gwb's 'knob' all the way to a useless war...
who's dumber? the initiator? or the hapless follower?
I logged in just to reply to this. I was with you until the last two paragraphs, you may have went a little far in embarrassing the guy, but perhaps he deserved it.
However, you need setting straight:
The UK is hardly marginalised by anyone, so please do stop talking crap. We are a tiny nation, but we punch well above our weight in any sphere of influence you want to mention.
Don't start parading the US military as anything to be proud of. I served 14 years in the British Army and served in multiple operational tours with the US. I saw nothing to feel in awe of, your tactical awareness in particular is utter ****. You may have weight of numbers, but so do the Chinese
I will always be critical of Tony Blair's decision to follow GWB into Iraq, but at least Tony Blair can string a ******* sentance together! GWB is the WORST President in history, but hey, guess what, the American dream is alive and well eh? Even retards get their chance!
If you want to come on here and get arsey with someone that's one matter, but DO NOT start slagging my country off you pompous ******* *****.
Last edited:
- Status