RS4 Rolling Road Numbers - Another View

Status
Not open for further replies.
RS4er said:
oh no, I'll be banned for humor...woe is me...just think of all the stuff I'll be missing here while I live out my life in the REAL WORLD lol
Click to expand...


no, if you get banned it will be because you joined up solely to have a go and stir up trouble. You've got no intention of becomming part of the community, and instead have your own agenda to pedal and go dragging up old threads (how did you even find this thread and this board for gods sake ??) just to start arguments.
 
Last edited:
Jonny ///M said:
Whats with the pictures of the couples? I'm rather confused with this thread.
Click to expand...

That has also confused me

Housey said:
Nope, never claimed the RR numbers were fact, just interesting and I was VERY careful not to post them as proof, just indicators of further interest. I have always said RR's are no proof of anything, said it many times.

Again I didn't doubt what was posted, that has been missed I believe and again it's interesting and warrants investigation. I'm going to post it on R246 and see what people think and I shall also email it to Audi on Monday to get their view.
Click to expand...

Good good, let us know how Audi respond.
 
RS4er said:
to dispel the BS about the RS4's rating...
that's all...
I'm not trying to sell ecu mods that 'recover' the imaginary HP you never actually lost ;)

if you read my first post, it was all information, accurate:

no one responded...except the wisecracker...

how about the FACT that the RS4 is INCAPABLE of making full power because torque and airflow are limited above 5000 rpm in 1, 2 and 3 gears?

so if the car is dyno'ed in 3rd, the power WILL tail off, as intended...
and the 2 cars that made 415?
their ECU's have had this function disabled...

discuss that
Click to expand...

Ok then, why would you ever run it on a dyno in 3rd. Its gear ratio is 1.462:1, which as already stated is not the closest to 1:1. You do this to get more accurate readings for the dyno plot. You would infact use 4th (1.133:1) or 5th (0.919:1) as these are the nearest two to the ideal ratio.

So please explain that one.
 
BigDannyO said:
I don't claim to know a lot about the subject, but I thought RRs were done in 4th as it's as close to 1:1 ratio as you'll get.

So all this BS about torque limits in 1st 2nd and 3rd is irrelevant, no?

Or am I talking out of my ****? :p
Click to expand...

the dyno numbers posted were in 3rd, the charts are online...

RS4 ratios:
3.667:1
2.050:1
1.462:1
1.133:1
0.919:1
0.778:1

in this case 5th is ~1:1, but 4th would be the best...
one issue in higher gears you are really spinning the drum...

it's not BS, it's fact...the torque is limited >5000 in 1, 2 & 3...

another issue with these runs:
the engine is a variable torque device, the T varies ~ load
the dyno provides the load, and that is set by the operator
if the load is not high enough, the engine will not produce power
think of it as climbing different grades...
this is set by setting the ramp rate (rr) parameter...if set too high, the car will read low...this should be set ~ at the rate same that the car would run on the road in the same gear and speed range...
it was set ~40% too high...
 
RS4er said:
another issue with these runs:
the engine is a variable torque device, the T varies ~ load
the dyno provides the load, and that is set by the operator
if the load is not high enough, the engine will not produce power
think of it as climbing different grades...
this is set by setting the ramp rate (rr) parameter...if set too high, the car will read low...this should be set ~ at the rate same that the car would run on the road in the same gear and speed range...
it was set ~40% too high...
Click to expand...

still doesnt explain the variations between the apparently "identical" cars.

We all know dyno figures can be influenced depending on what dyno is used. But they were all infludenced the same way. So whatever % out the dyno figures are, most of the cars made different power figures, so a lot of those cars arent making stock power.
 
saitrix said:
Ok then, why would you ever run it on a dyno in 3rd. Its gear ratio is 1.462:1, which as already stated is not the closest to 1:1. You do this to get more accurate readings for the dyno plot. You would infact use 4th (1.133:1) or 5th (0.919:1) as these are the nearest two to the ideal ratio.

So please explain that one.
Click to expand...

I did not operate the dyno:

but suppose...you have a 'free' dyno day for RS4's
and you have 2 'ringers', cars that have had the torque limitation defeated by a ECU mod...

still with me?

all cars run 'low', except the 2 with the mods (iirc sold by the shop who's giving the dyno day)...preety good sales tool, huh?

the average numbers for all non-modded cars (tossing the 2 highest & lowest) ~355 HP
the modd'ed cars, 415 HK
60 HP from a chip? on a non-turbo car?
they made the rated power...
suppose the other cars were run in 4th?

also, the cf's used to calculate crank power are unreliable...
only wheel torque is measured, everything else is calculated or ESTIMATED
 
MrLOL said:
still doesnt explain the variations between the apparently "identical" cars.

We all know dyno figures can be influenced depending on what dyno is used. But they were all infludenced the same way. So whatever % out the dyno figures are, most of the cars made different power figures, so a lot of those cars arent making stock power.
Click to expand...

far from controlled conditions:

tire pressure can affect HP by 10%
different temperatures
different fuels
ECU different adaptations (one guy was thrashing his, the other 2 hours on cruise control)
etc.

and who knows how the numbers werer manipulated?

the point, a guy who made almost the lowest HP, timed his car to be with a couple tenths of the best magazines got: his car is heavier (avant) and he admitted it's the fist time he's done 1/4 mile runs...

and his times from drag calculators put HP >400, although only 330 was dyno'ed
 
Supposing you're right, and everyone was running in third and two cars had ecu mods etc etc, can you please answer me some questions...

Why on earth would a car manufacturer sell a premium sports car which you can only use half the available rev range? What's the point in having an 8250rpm rev limiter if you can only use 5000rpm in the first three gears?
 
Why don't you head over to RS246.com, all the owners of the cars, RR and mapped 'ringers' are all over there. I have sent them a link to this thread too and I suspect the 'ringers' tuned by different tuners I hasten to add might have a differing view to you.

As you said "don't believe ANYTHING you hear, and only 1/2 of what you see..." the most appropriate part of your posts to date.
 
BigDannyO said:
Supposing you're right, and everyone was running in third and two cars had ecu mods etc etc, can you please answer me some questions...

Why on earth would a car manufacturer sell a premium sports car which you can only use half the available rev range? What's the point in having an 8250rpm rev limiter if you can only use 5000rpm in the first three gears?
Click to expand...

I am right, it's all posted on the forum this data was copied from, charts and all...

the engine runs to 8200 in 1, 2 & 3
it limits torque NOT rpm, to preserve the drivetrain and traction...you don't need all of it...not when you have torque multiplication from 6 to 15...so 200 at the crank ~ 3000 at the axle in first...

besides, peak has less to do with it than duration, ie, area under the torque curve...
 
Housey said:
Why don't you head over to RS246.com, all the owners of the cars, RR and mapped 'ringers' are all over there. I have sent them a link to this thread too and I suspect the 'ringers' tuned by different tuners I hasten to add might have a differing view to you.

As you said "don't believe ANYTHING you hear, and only 1/2 of what you see..." the most appropriate part of your posts to date.
Click to expand...

I know the site and post...that's how I know the data is 'suspect' at best, downright deceiving at worst...

I want to 'sell' you nothing (other than knowledge, which is free, take it or leave it)...unlike the generous folks who hosted the 'free' dyno day
something 'free' is usually worth nothing

glad I taught you something ;) it wasn't easy
 
RS4er said:
I know the site and post...that's how I know the data is 'suspect' at best, downright deceiving at worst...

I want to 'sell' you nothing (other than knowledge, which is free, take it or leave it)...unlike the generous folks who hosted the 'free' dyno day
something 'free' is usually worth nothing

glad I taught you something ;) it wasn't easy
Click to expand...

You give yourself too much credit, I told you my car produced 366bhp in 4th gear and you are simply posting 'your view' which should be held as nothing more. Many people disagree with you, I am simply objective and don't take things at face value. I am far from agreeing with you, I am willing to take it on board and validate or dismiss it. THAT is where I sit and your arrogant 'cocky' posting style does you no credit on a British forum, that is a FACT.
 
Housey said:
My RS4 produced 366bhp in 4th gear at TMS
Click to expand...

so they say...

what was the wheel torque, what was the cf used to calc crank HP...

go to the dyno dynamics website...they say anybody who purports to tell you an accurate crank HP is BS'ing...in the States the only numbers used are the raw wheel number

also the engine was legally certified in the States by the SAE at 414...as it was in the EU by the ECE (both 2% tolerance for type rating, and 5% for production variance)...if they advertise 414 and sell 360, that's criminal fraud...and conspiracy

there are dynos that actually MEASURE these losses, and they exceed 100kw
and they rated the engine at ~415...someone posted the links in the thread you lifted this data from...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom