# AmD RR Day - Big thanks to WAK



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Just got back from the really good day. 

It was great to put some faces to new names and also to catch up with old friends. Thanks to Tim for letting me drive the S4, and also thanks to caney for keeping us all amused with the NOS trips!

I managed to get a run at the end with figures of:

BHP (Standard BHP is 237 @ 8300)
246.9 @ 8572

lb/ft (Standard ft/lb is 153 @ 7500)
153.4 @ 8185

So all in all, im a happpy chappy 

A BIG thanks to WAK for organising the meet, and a big thanks to the guys at AmD for keeping us all supplied with hot drinks, and also for being the professional outfit they are, especially catering for their first ever S2000 and the noise it made!  

Cheers
Kevin


----------



## Love_iTT (Aug 18, 2002)

Yep, I'll second that, well done Wak and thanks for organising yet again an excellent day out. Great to see some of the old faces again - just a bugger that mine seems to be the oldest 

My best ever figures yet, thanks Morgan :roll: :wink:

280.2 BHP @5603 rpm
309.4 lb ft @ 3090 rpm

I'm very happy with those results - what next? :roll:

Graham


----------



## caney (Feb 5, 2004)

yeah good to meet everyone again  and to hear that "honda thingy :wink: " sounding awesome on the rollers


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Cheers Wak! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

You even managed to sort the weather out. 

I was 10bhp shy of the magic 400 again but at least I know it's all running well.

390.3bhp @ 6447rpm
350.9lb ft @ 4234rpm

Good to see some old and new faces.

p.s. Tim & Lisa - cheers for the coffee. The caffeine worked a treat this morning. :wink:


----------



## PaulRS3 (May 7, 2002)

Big thank you to Wak, and our hosts AMD.

always an enjoyable day out.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

Just got back and I am one very happy chappie   

One broken cable, and so much power lost. I reckon it has been like that since I first bought the car 18 months ago.

It is like having a new car!!!! 8) 8)

Thanks Wak a great day well organised

PS Just frightened the wife showing her how much better the car is.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

who was top dog out of the tt/s3's?


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

It was Morgan (UK225) when I left. I don't think anyone else was gonna get near his figures.


----------



## Chip_iTT (Nov 14, 2003)

thanks Wak for organising and nice meal after...

good to see you all again...

I'm well pleased with 239BHP out of a standard engine...those lower temps made all the difference!


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

scoTTy said:


> It was Morgan (UK225) when I left. I don't think anyone else was gonna get near his figures.


Depends if you're talking highest power or highest torque 

(Morgan would win the "area unde the torque curve" (or line in his case!) competition I'm sure though!).

Clive


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Who wins based on the ooooooommmmpppph factor? :lol:


----------



## Gworks (Jan 20, 2003)

Sounds like you all had a good day. Graham, 280BHP!  Impressive mate. Glad your happy with the results. Did u keep ur Neuspeed on for the RR's or take it off?
Glen.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

second (or more realistically seventh) the sentiments here.

Bit disappointed after seeing Irving's car's figures - especially as at PE we were only 2bhp apart.

Still, I may well win the comp for smoothest graph.

Good to put more names to more faces too.

Cheers all.


----------



## UK225 (May 12, 2002)

Fantastic day.. Many thanks to Wak & AmD for making it all possible 

Great to catch up with everyone new & old.

My figures were a little down on yesterdays but still very happy & would always expect figures to vary day to day anyway, but I think with some C02 sprayed onto the FMIC will see 300 bhp sometime soon 

290.8 bhp
312.3 ftlb

After applying Clives ooommpph factor calculations 90816.84 :lol:

Steve you were a bad influence showing me the power of your NOS 

Cheers all
Morgan


----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)




----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)




----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

KMP - no wonder you rev your S if that's the peak torque!

I knew they were fairly low on torque at low rpm but I expected higher than that as a peak. Is that normal?

Morgan - great result!

Sundeep - How does that fit with what you was expecting?


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

Wak, do you remember clearing a fault code using VAGCOM at Poole?

I am sure that was a N75 fault. You saved a copy of the fault diags to your laptop, do you still have that, if so would that be explained by yesterdays problem?

Cheers Richard


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

Damn..... 8% less peak torque than ScoTTy's modded S4 - I really must try harder..... :wink:


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

scoTTy said:


> KMP - no wonder you rev your S if that's the peak torque!
> 
> I knew they were fairly low on torque at low rpm but I expected higher than that as a peak. Is that normal?


Yes mate, we dont all drive huge V8's  remember that the S is only a 2.0. No turbo, no SC, just 2 Reeters of Jap tweeking.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

What was the problem with your n75 mightee?Or did a error code just pop up before they rr'd it?


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

Bit late catching up on this thread - Thanks for a great day Wak and Amd. Really made me realise how much I miss my TT  Probably lucky I didn't have it there - I think I might have been tempted to grab few bargains from AmD :?

Nice to put some more faces to names too. Wish I could've stayed long enough to hear the Honda "screaming like a banshee" Kev but it seemed my frozen toes had other ideas :roll:

Big thanks to Tim and Kell for the lifts. Hope you found your way back across Aylesbury Kell - especially with my crap directions!! 

Thanks again Wak and AmD - let's hope it's not the last one they do.


----------



## caney (Feb 5, 2004)

morgan,didn't realise you had the power pulleys? are they any good mate?


----------



## Love_iTT (Aug 18, 2002)

Clive - 325.6 ft lb   Thats about the same as Rob was getting out of his MTM big turbo at Interpro. What have you done to get your torque figure that high - excellent figure, but on the other hand a lowly (in comparison) 257.8 bhp. Is there a specific reason for this? Curious thats all.

Graham


----------



## caney (Feb 5, 2004)

Love_iTT said:


> Clive - 325.6 ft lb   Thats about the same as Rob was getting out of his MTM big turbo at Interpro. What have you done to get your torque figure that high - excellent figure, but on the other hand a lowly (in comparison) 257.8 bhp. Is there a specific reason for this? Curious thats all.
> 
> Graham


 it's better to have more torque than bhp,torque is what gets you moving  that's what's good about the MTM chip  i think MTM only claim 245bhp don't they? but over 300lb ft torque!


----------



## markTT225 (Apr 8, 2004)

Big thanks to WAK and AMD for a great day! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

I finally put the doubts about my car being chipped by the previous owner to rest. I quite pleased it's standard really, as it means I can now easily get more power if I need it. It's just trying to decide which remap to go for now - AMD, Revo, Apr, MTM or Jabbasport?

Cheers
Mark


----------



## Gworks (Jan 20, 2003)

Good Results.  I must admit tho, TTvic got pretty high figures considering he's only got Chip n exhaust! Must have been cool temps to get sucj good figures indeed! 8) Shame I missed out!


----------



## UK225 (May 12, 2002)

caney said:


> morgan,didn't realise you had the power pulleys? are they any good mate?


The gains are minimal & you wont feel any extra power in your butt dyno, but they do help the engine rev quicker being considerably lighter than the OEM ones.

Build quality is very good, you may notice a little increased in cabin engine noise/vibration as the OEMs have a NVR dampener that the Neuspeeds dont.

Your next mod imho should be the VF engineering pendulum mount  
Although again will increase noise & vibration.

Where did you get your rear caliper Brembo stickers from Steve ? Do you have a link ?

Cheers
Morgan


----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)

Thanks to all for coming and to AmD for a great day.

Some shots here:-
http://www.wak-tt.com/amdday1104/amdday1104.htm

I ran out of battery so if anyone wants to send me any pics I'll add them.

Kevs S2000 has a really nice growl note and at 6000 revs VTEC kicks in and just says "bosh! I got some more for ya!" sounded awesome an the rollers.

Scotty's S4 and Caneys/Clives Sportlites also get my vote for growl factor!

I wouldnt read too much into the figures as I've had more bhp, less toque and more torque less bhp, than yesterday but at different RR days.

Even UK225 was down a day later, so consistency is allways difficult to maintain.

Congrats to Morgan for being the most powerful TT fo the day and Clive for being the most Torquey!


----------



## caney (Feb 5, 2004)

hi morgan,had a guy make them up for me when i was at santapod will look for the flyer he gave me.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

clived said:


> Damn..... 8% less peak torque than ScoTTy's modded S4 - I really must try harder..... :wink:


I'll show you my graph if you show me yours. :wink:


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

Love_iTT said:


> Clive - 325.6 ft lb   Thats about the same as Rob was getting out of his MTM big turbo at Interpro. What have you done to get your torque figure that high - excellent figure, but on the other hand a lowly (in comparison) 257.8 bhp. Is there a specific reason for this? Curious thats all.
> 
> Graham


I just don't know Graham! We've previously had closer figures (at Interpro), so who knows what is going on in those little electronic brains in our cars! Of course, your can is an APX, mine is a BAM, so the engine is subtly different and so could the map be I guess.

As for having more than Rob's big turbo'd car.... firstly, different day, differerent RR, different temps, so if the two cars had run side by side, the big turbo car may have had more. Secondly, the torque curve is totally different - mine touches that and then dies away as revs rise, whereas the big turbo car has that peak higher up the rev range and holds a higher proportion of it for longer - giving an ultimately faster car, but one where you need to keep the revs higher to get the best from it.

Cheers, Clive


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

clived said:


> ...mine touches that and then dies away as revs rise


I think we should ban all peak figures!! Bring back the ooooompppphhh!!


----------



## UK225 (May 12, 2002)

1.8T Oommmppphh factor figures applied using Clives original formula :roll:

Modified
1st 90816 UK225
2nd 86693 Love_iTT
3rd 83939 Clived
4th 83057 Wak
5th 76078 Normstrm
6th 75839 TTVic

Standard
1st 62721 Mighty_Tee ( Perhaps modified :? )
2nd 56618 Chip_iTT
3rd 53357 MarkTT225
4th 49862 Kell

Ok so I was bored...


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

Ohhhhhh.... don't let Wak see that!


----------



## NormStrm (Sep 6, 2003)

Wak et al

Yet another excellent meeting @ AmD [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

So how is this derived ? "1.8T Oommmppphh factor figures applied using Clives original formula"

Also what sort of "Oommmppphh factor" do the other cars that were on the rollers for comparison.

Norman


----------



## UK225 (May 12, 2002)

Its crude & just a bit of fun Norman... torque x bhp


----------



## NormStrm (Sep 6, 2003)

UK225 said:


> Its crude & just a bit of fun Norman... torque x bhp


Cheers Morgan

What about the "under the line figure!" I think that's what was talked about previously. All I know is my "butt dyno" still loved the drive home and the  was still there.

Norman


----------



## UK225 (May 12, 2002)

I will start by posting my graphs in case anyone wonders about the area under the torque curve & would like to apply these to the ommpphh factor figure 

Bhp









Torque


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

Norman,

The problem with area under the graph is a) that you actually have to measure it - the graph lines don't follow some nice mathematical equation, so it's bits of graph paper and boxes.... and b) the graphs don't show torque from low enough down the rev range to really give you a valid reading for driveablity - and also favour therefore cars that have their peak torque figures higher in the rev range. I'd like to see runs that start at 2K rpm, so you can start measuring realiably from 2.5K.

Of course, assuming you're comparing like for like (e.g. coupe vs coupe or roadster vs roadster) and you can get the vehicle weights the same, carrying out in-gear acceleration tests will tell more than you'll find out from area under the curve calculations. Actually, I guess you could do that timing on the RR....

By the way, it's OOMPF - "Only Our Made Up Push Factor".

Cheers, Clive


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Norm - the graph area is particularly interesting as it rules out the bragging rights that some chips with peaky performance have.

e.g. if a chip develops 260 bhp at 5000rpm but tails off quickly before and after then perhaps it's slower in the real world than one that has 250bhp over a wider rev range. The graph area sort of captures this.

p.s. my OOMPF is 136,956. 

p.p.s. My bhp/litre figure is embarassing on this forum! :wink:


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

hi guys,
Area under the torque curve gives a very good indication of the drivability and real world power of the car.A good friend of mine has a website with a nifty dyno plot tool which gives you a area figure under the curve,very good for comparing as you can overlay graphs etc.
heres the link;
http://www.mr2mania.com/plot.php
My old car is ryan copson stage 1(it's a mr2 turbo if your wondering)
maybe someone computer minded could do one for the tt forum.


----------



## NormStrm (Sep 6, 2003)

Cheers guys

I suppose the next mods will be how can we make the TT's replicate the sound of Kev's VTEC engine :wink: Now could a remap give that effect, albeit lower down the rev range as I don't think the 1.8T would take too kindly to 9000 RPM 

Norman


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Chaps

Thanks for all your comments on the S's 'engine growl! 

I managed to grab the footage of my Power run on my camphone (Real player format & 657k in size), but it hasn't come out very well 

1. I started filming WAY too soon, so he doesn't actaully start accelerating untill 33 seconds into the film and also there is a lot of noise from the fans AmD use to cool the area which the phone picked up more in places. 
2. When the VTEC kicks in at 53 seconds, it goes a bit higher pitch for some reason. :? 
3. Watch the AmD guy (holding the fan at the front) signal to give it 'more' when the driver lets go of the 'loud' pedal at the end! 

It gives you a general idea though! 

http://www.fnet.freeserve.co.uk/s2krollers.3gp (To download right click the link and 'save target as' cos your machine might not recognise the strange format Nokia use. You can then open with RP)

Cheers
Kevin

p.s. Did anybody else get any footage or pics of my car (either on or off the rollers), cuz i'm a bit dissappointed with mine.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Ryan said:


> hi guys,
> Area under the torque curve gives a very good indication of the drivability and real world power of the car.A good friend of mine has a website with a nifty dyno plot tool which gives you a area figure under the curve,very good for comparing as you can overlay graphs etc.
> heres the link;
> http://www.mr2mania.com/plot.php
> ...


Ryan,

Rather than re-invent the wheel do you think he'd be willing to either host something or let us setup something based on his. i.e. copy it :?


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

i'll drop him a mail scotty.See what he can do.
just off topic has anyone ever seen a big turbo mtm tt/s3(330bhp) on a dyno before just wondered what sort of results it got.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

B3VES used to have the very car.

Though I've never met him, plenty of people have on here and I have no doubts that he'll have had the car on a RR somewhere.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

Ryan said:


> What was the problem with your n75 mightee?Or did a error code just pop up before they rr'd it?


Ryan - I suspected that I was underpowered but unable to prove it. I actually believe the Turbo had not been spooling up correctly for the full 18 months I have owned the car, but as I graduated from underpowered family saloons/hatchbacks (not GTi version) I did not have the experience to know things were definitely wrong. When with other TTs I could keep up without too much problem but did feel I was always a little slow out of corners (which I thought was my driving technique) and felt there was "Turbo Lag". I never truely experience the "kick in the back" which I now get

Since leaving AMD, I have done 350 miles and it is like having a new car. Thanks AMD


----------



## Multiprocess (Aug 9, 2004)

Sounds like you all had a fantastic day, just wish I could have been there!! When's the next one??


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

Mightee-How did they diagnose your faulty n75?By looking at your dyno?Did they replace it?Good results by the way do you tink it might be chipped?Did amd say anything?


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

Ryan said:


> just off topic has anyone ever seen a big turbo mtm tt/s3(330bhp) on a dyno before just wondered what sort of results it got.


These are old results (July 2003) and I had to plot them in Excel as the actual plot was very spikey as the Interpro rollers we having trouble containing Rob's power.... (which also probably means the numbers are a bit conservative), but it should give you some idea. Purple was Rob's big turbo, blue was my car then.

Cheers, Clive


----------



## PaulS (Jun 15, 2002)

Interesting stuff. I've done two dyno sessions at Abbey Motorsport recently, where they use dynos connected to each hub to measure actual power at the hubs/wheels.

I'm assuming the AMD figs are 'corrected' flywheel bhp - as chip_iTT & TT Laws standard cars show outputs very close to the factory engine spec ... i.e not showing any transmission loss?


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

PaulS said:


> I'm assuming the AMD figs are 'corrected' flywheel bhp - as chip_iTT & TT Laws standard cars show outputs very close to the factory engine spec ... i.e not showing any transmission loss?


Correct Paul.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

actually paul s ,your figures from abbey are power at the hubs not the wheels as the majority of losses are through the tyres.Power at the wheels will be lower.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

Ryan said:


> Mightee-How did they diagnose your faulty n75?By looking at your dyno?Did they replace it?Good results by the way do you tink it might be chipped?Did amd say anything?


All AMD said was she was slow spooling up, they seemed to know exactly the problem as they went straight to the N75 connector and pronounced the wire was broken. 5 minutes later the connection was fixed and results gained.

No one seems to commit to whether I am chipped or not, and I can't comment as the car was sold me as a LHD (German) 225. :roll:


----------



## PaulS (Jun 15, 2002)

Ryan said:


> actually paul s ,your figures from abbey are power at the hubs not the wheels as the majority of losses are through the tyres.Power at the wheels will be lower.


You're dead right - I've corrected my post 

So do AMD apply different 'correction figures', depending on the vehicle and transmission system in use - eg 2wd/4wd ?

Rolling road figs :roll: - great topic for pub debates :wink:


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

My understanding is that when they drop the clutch at the end of the run (i.e. at high revs) they can then measure how long it takes to slow the rollers down and hence that's how they calculate the loses.


----------



## Guest (Nov 14, 2004)

scoTTy said:


> Sundeep - How does that fit with what you was expecting?


thanks for organising Wak.... good to meet all the regulars again and BL for the 1st time.... 

my numbers showed my car had a few 'problems' :? esp with the hih end varioram power not appearing !

261 bhp @ 5692 <<< where's my varioram ! Std is 285bhp !
249 lbs @ 5198

I've had an oil leak from what appeared to be frm the rocker cover gasket.... so from london to bicester to london to birmingham and back to london tonite I got through an extra 3.5 litres of Mobil 1 (oil tank is 13.5 litres!)

but that was only half the story.. with the varioram porsche engine system (which has been around since the mid-1990's) these open up from about 4500rpm all the way up to 7000rpm to enhance the power to the top end (consider the wonda s2000 as the kit from halfords in comparison)... and I though the surge after 4000 was already amazing.. so there is more to come .. wow !

the varioram wasn't opening up at all.... :? thankfully it is probably a pipe which is unconnected (quite common problem, or so Andy from AMd tells me) then I will get an instant surge with another 25bhp with a peak somewhere at about 6000.... of about 285bhp

the torque without the varoiram is pretty much flat at above 240lbs from 3000 through to 6000rpm.. so I'm guessing that missing varioram pipe will probably push it closed to the 260lbs across the board...

so I don't really know what it will do beyond the std 285bhp with it's old sports exhaust and K&N panel air filiter.. maybe a few points closer to 290bhp, but a remap would only take me into the 290's...

but the benefit of a rolling road has been proved again and an engine fault discovered that prob' otherwise wouldn't have been noticed ! I mean I already though it was fast ! and there is more to come.. oh yea ! looks like I won't be needing that remap.. yet !

so not quite or rather it will never will be the near 400bhp of Scotty's power house or the Torque from Clive's MTM TTR or the lightening power shot from Caney's..... but a thrilling supercar ride nethertheless !

which defo' means I will see the three of you for a bit of fun at Santa Pod in 2005  .. and at the odd track day as well  (ok, steve !)

regards


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Sundeep993 said:


> ...top end (consider the wonda s2000 as the kit from halfords in comparison)...


Pardon, care to elaborate on your meaning?


----------



## paulb (May 6, 2002)

I think Sundeep is saying that his ten year old car has a more advanced system than your state of the art, highest specific output normally aspirated road car production engine ever made - doesn't really stack up to me Kevin.


----------



## Guest (Nov 14, 2004)

wow.. ! you boys still hold hands ! have fun PM'ing everyone to response :lol:


----------



## PaulS (Jun 15, 2002)

:wink: did Arafat drive a 911? :roll:


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

Glad they fixed it mightee-could be one of the early chips from abt ,mine was and i didn't notice,it produced 267bhp and 263lb/t at AMD on another occasion so not as much as the more modern remaps.I always thought the lotus gt3 was the higher 2.0 output engine rather than the s2000??240bhp and 216lb/t.


----------



## ttvic (Jul 4, 2003)

Just wanted to add my thanks to WAK, AMD and Roy who did an excellent job on cleaning my wheels and a good job on the rest of the car.

Nice to meet the old and the new faces.

Great day out and Chelsea won as well.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

So, reading between the lines a little, am I to assume that because my car produced the lowest power of the day, that something may be worng with it?

Especially given the figures that Chip_iTT, in particular, achieved?


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Hi guys

Just catching up, owing to not having broadband at home (yet!)...

Thanks for a great morning. Lisa and I had a great day, and considering my car is only 1100 miles (and 3 weeks) old, and has a few k to go before she loosens up properly, I was pretty happy with the results, the comments and particularly the smoothness of my curves.

Good to meet all the old crew again, and some new faces who managed to work out who I was and came to say hello...

Scary moment giving kmp the keys to the blue bus, but he not only managed to bring it back in 1 piece, he managed it with a huge grin too 

Had to disappear off shopping afterwards, so sorry for running out so quickly - but having just moved in, there is SO much to do to get my new pad looking like "home"...

See you all soon!


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

Have you had a word with the dealer about your engine covers?

I thought there was something different from Scotty's when they opened the bonnet but I didn't register what :?


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

NaughTTy said:


> Have you had a word with the dealer about your engine covers?
> 
> I thought there was something different from Scotty's when they opened the bonnet but I didn't register what :?


I've left him VM today. Also about the (minor) matter of me being Â£120 out of pocket because they couldn't be bothered to settle the finance on the Z within a reasonable time...

*sigh*

The settlement figure I gave them (on the day) was valid for 10 days. They obviously needed a lot longer than that to raise a cheque and put it in the post. Result? Nissan finance took the usual monthly payment from me even though I no longer have the car (ouch) and, when they refund, (which will be 3 weeks after the payment!) I'll get back Â£120.59 LESS than what they took. Reason? Dealer late paying the part exchange finance off.... Grrr. Typical of Audi. Nissan had no such problems when I part exhanged the TT...


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

Welcome back the marque... :roll:


----------



## ttvic (Jul 4, 2003)

Jampott, time to change your picture.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

ttvic said:


> Jampott, time to change your picture.


Maybe 

But I don't yet have a nice photo of the bus...


----------



## Roy (May 6, 2004)

Thanks to everyone including AmD, although busy it was still nice to put some names to the faces and listening to car's on the rollers, I so thought the Honda was going to blow..

Hopefully i managed to keep things fair although i didn't have time to fit everyone in. (damn flu!!) if I was unable to fit you in drop me a mail and i'll keep you on record, maybe for the next RR day or a discount on some Swissol products.

Cheers, Roy


----------



## NormStrm (Sep 6, 2003)

Kell said:


> So, reading between the lines a little, am I to assume that because my car produced the lowest power of the day, that something may be worng with it?
> 
> Especially given the figures that Chip_iTT, in particular, achieved?


Hi Kell

I did notice that your's was the only car that the bonnet was not raised for the RR session. Do you remember ?

Does anyone know whether this would make a difference ?

Norman


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

talked to my mate dino and he's going to sort out a page so we can upload and compare our plots and get the area under the cuve figure(ommphh).We need to start requesting amd to give us full printouts rather than the cutoff 2500rpm jobbies.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Excellent ! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Many thanks for that.


----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)

Many thanks to NRMSTRM Norman,

just added your great pics, virtually all the cars!

http://www.wak-tt.com/amdday1104/amdday1104.htm


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

Ryan said:


> talked to my mate dino and he's going to sort out a page so we can upload and compare our plots and get the area under the cuve figure(ommphh).We need to start requesting amd to give us full printouts rather than the cutoff 2500rpm jobbies.


It's more about how they do (where they start) the run than where the printout cuts off...


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

NormStrm said:


> Kell said:
> 
> 
> > So, reading between the lines a little, am I to assume that because my car produced the lowest power of the day, that something may be worng with it?
> ...


Dunno - does just seem odd. Also though, I think I was probably one of the only ones to not let the car tick over for a good five minutes before going on the rollers. Mainly because I forgot, but also because my turn came up a lot quicker than I thought it was going to. :?


----------



## UK225 (May 12, 2002)

Kell if anything you would make more power with a cooler engine than you would a hot engine


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

clived;- I have lots of rr runs that start from 1.5k so it's pretty normal unless AMD have a weird set-up but i think it's more likely they think no-one is interested in below 2.5k.


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

Ryan said:


> clived;- I have lots of rr runs that start from 1.5k so it's pretty normal unless AMD have a weird set-up but i think it's more likely they think no-one is interested in below 2.5k.


I don't see the problem either Ryan, so I think you're correct - but to get decent data for "area under" I'd want to see the run in full flight by 2.5K.


----------



## UK225 (May 12, 2002)

Is no one else going to post their graphs 

Wak, Clive, Graham.. would be good to see them


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

UK225 said:


> Is no one else going to post their graphs
> 
> Wak, Clive, Graham.. would be good to see them


Haven't even looked at them since I put them in erm, the glove box I think!

I'll see if I can get to the inlaws house to scan them in.... note to self, must buy scanner. Second note to self. Must clear crap of desk to make space to put scanner!


----------



## markTT225 (Apr 8, 2004)

Here's my dyno plots from Saturday for my standard car. My plots go down to 1500 rpm


----------



## Love_iTT (Aug 18, 2002)

UK225 said:


> Is no one else going to post their graphs
> 
> Wak, Clive, Graham.. would be good to see them


I'll scan mine tomorrow and put them up.

Graham


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

Likewise. Mine are currently on the floor of the passenger footwell. With the MC2 that leaked and covered my mats.


----------



## Love_iTT (Aug 18, 2002)

Here are my graphs Morgan.

http://www.********.co.uk/gallery/loveitt/bhp.jpg
http://www.********.co.uk/gallery/loveitt/torque.jpg

Graham


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

Wow - all your graphs look like they were drawn by someone with Parkinson's.

Is that a 'trait' of the various chips?


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

I think it's more to do with Haldex pulsing the power to the back wheels, they then start spinning the same as the front so it cuts the rear power and then they slow so it puts more power back etc etc.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

I will try and get my graphs posted then as there's seems to be very little of that going on with mine. In fact the one from PE was very similar.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 6, 2004)

My graphs from amd are fairly smooth,i think it's more likely to be boost spikes,anyone with a standard car posted there dyno?


----------



## NormStrm (Sep 6, 2003)

scoTTy said:


> p.s. my OOMPF is 136,956.
> 
> p.p.s. My bhp/litre figure is embarassing on this forum! :wink:


Just noticed W7PMC figures :-
Ebony Black 2003 RS6 Saloon. AmD Stage2 putting out 515BHP / 460lbsft Torque

OOMPF = 236900  Is it a Paul thing to make up in other areas 

Still I'm happy with my 76078 :wink:

Norman


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

NormStrm said:


> scoTTy said:
> 
> 
> > p.s. my OOMPF is 136,956.
> ...


It must be. After all, the name Paul apparently means "little one". :?

:roll: :wink:

Here's my graphs for anyone interested I had to photograph them as I don't have a scanner)
Torque (351lb-ft/476Nm at 4234rpm)








390Bhp at 6447rpm


----------



## NormStrm (Sep 6, 2003)

Here's my graphs









260.9 Bhp @ 5553 rpm









291.6 lb-ft @ 2663 rpm


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Any chance of resizing them? They're so big I can't see any of what they're trying to show! :roll: :wink:


----------



## NormStrm (Sep 6, 2003)

scoTTy said:


> Any chance if resizing them? They're so big i can see any of what there trying to show! :roll: :wink:


Look fine to me 

Now :wink:

Norman


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

Ryan said:


> My graphs from amd are fairly smooth,i think it's more likely to be boost spikes,anyone with a standard car posted there dyno?


Not yet, I keep forgetting to get me graphs out the car. Then I have to scan them, and then I have to try and upload them somewhere to host them. It's a lot for me to try and remember. 

I'll try and scan them tonight - but I might have to ask someone to host them for me as my 200k of TTF space is currently being used. :roll:


----------



## markTT225 (Apr 8, 2004)

Ryan said:


> My graphs from amd are fairly smooth,i think it's more likely to be boost spikes,anyone with a standard car posted there dyno?


Yep, check page 6 for my graphs :roll:

They look very bumpy for a Standard car, but I haven't anyone else's to compare it against. Kell, I thought you have a Miltek exhaust? Surely that would smooth things out a bit?


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

Here they are then. I'll try and dig out the one from PE as it was pre-milltek, but it was also fairly smooth.

*BHP*
http://www.********.co.uk/gallery/kell/AMD-BHPscan.gif

*Torque*
http://www.********.co.uk/gallery/kell/AMD-torquescan.gif


----------



## UK225 (May 12, 2002)

Your plots are very smooth Kell, shows Audi did a pretty good ( if conservative) job of mapping the ECU the torque curve ( line) is very nice


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Either that or his Haldex doesn't work!!  :wink:


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

scoTTy said:


> I think it's more to do with Haldex pulsing the power to the back wheels, they then start spinning the same as the front so it cuts the rear power and then they slow so it puts more power back etc etc.


I'm not trying to find something wrong with my car, but if the above is true, could there be something wrong with the ESP system of my car? As you can see, apart from very low down in the rev range, there's hardly a wobble on my graphs.

I also noticed that when they stopped the rollers my rear wheels kept spnning despite the fact that the fronts had stopped.

I wish I knew more about cars.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

GULP! I was joking but that does sound a little weird. Maybe a call or email to AMD could help? :?


----------



## thorney (May 15, 2002)

That looks a bit weird to me, almost like slip on the rollers (which it wouldn't have been). I'd make a call to AmD if it were me.


----------

