60 to 130 - December 8 - Lonestar Results and Pics
#47
12-10-2007, 01:07 AM
Have Vortech upgrade it to the T-trim. It adds some boost and additional flow without needing to change the mounting and accessories.
#48
12-10-2007, 08:33 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Incline Village, NV
Posts: 1,423
Rep Power: 197 
Sean, your first shift was 0.19 seconds and you're second shift was 0.31 seconds. Pretty darn impressive if you ask me! I think the M3 has a low 9 in it, but I'm not sure it has any more than that in perfect conditions (meaning in its current state). In any event, that is a daily that is faster than a Z06 and Viper on the street and is very impressive.
Jon - amen brother...
Ryan - in 20 degree colder weather, DEPENDING ON TRACTION, you should be in the 8's.
Peter
Jon - amen brother...
Ryan - in 20 degree colder weather, DEPENDING ON TRACTION, you should be in the 8's.
Peter
#49
12-10-2007, 08:46 AM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,621
Rep Power: 235
Jamie, I'm doing it the only way you can with the data that we have. I can break the graphs down to such detail that I can see the hundred thousandths place (time). I am looking at the time at which the acceleration stops and measuring the time until the acceleration starts again. I'm also taking into account longitudinal G's as they help paint when the shift starts/ends. It's a rough number but I bet it's damn close to what's actually going on...
Peter
Peter
#50
12-10-2007, 08:52 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Incline Village, NV
Posts: 1,423
Rep Power: 197 Jamie, I'm doing it the only way you can with the data that we have. I can break the graphs down to such detail that I can see the hundred thousandths place (time). I am looking at the time at which the acceleration stops and measuring the time until the acceleration starts again. I'm also taking into account longitudinal G's as they help paint when the shift starts/ends. It's a rough number but I bet it's damn close to what's actually going on...
Peter
Peter
#51
12-10-2007, 09:01 AM
Interesting....my calculations were .4. I can tell you, having actually been in the car at the time is that the shifts were slow.
It seems that the big advantages of the SMG are twofold: For pure performance, the benefits are on the track where the SMG will rev-match on downshifts for those of us who aren't experts at heel toeing (which is what SMG was originally designed for). I can't wait to get her on TWS, Peter.
The second benefit is that you can drive like the typical fat lazy and stupid American (not meaning to be unpatriotic here folks). I can literally eat a sandwich while racing the endless supply of rice mobiles that want to run me. I swear, this car is a magnet for teen racers.
It seems that the big advantages of the SMG are twofold: For pure performance, the benefits are on the track where the SMG will rev-match on downshifts for those of us who aren't experts at heel toeing (which is what SMG was originally designed for). I can't wait to get her on TWS, Peter.
The second benefit is that you can drive like the typical fat lazy and stupid American (not meaning to be unpatriotic here folks). I can literally eat a sandwich while racing the endless supply of rice mobiles that want to run me. I swear, this car is a magnet for teen racers.
Last edited by Dr_jitsu; 12-10-2007 at 09:04 AM.
#53
12-10-2007, 09:14 AM
Looking at the graph my car gets to 125 in 8.4....the last shift kills me!
Going to get the plugs and the missing 5 pounds of boost (car is supposed to make 22lbs) and hopefully figure out a way to hit 130 in 4th.
Going to get the plugs and the missing 5 pounds of boost (car is supposed to make 22lbs) and hopefully figure out a way to hit 130 in 4th.
#54
12-10-2007, 09:14 AM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,621
Rep Power: 235
Jamie, help me understand...I'm not as smart as you!!!!
Peter
Peter
#55
12-10-2007, 10:46 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Incline Village, NV
Posts: 1,423
Rep Power: 197
Ok smart ***! Just you look at Sean's graph. His SMG shifts at 2.6 seconds and recovers at 3.2. Technically it takes .2 sec to drop the G's to zero, then another .4 to bring it back up. His foot never lifted off the right pedal. That's no F1 transmission, that's for sure
If we manually shift a car, power shifting vs. slowly getting back onto the gas would have a huge impact on shift time irregardless of how quickly we actually moved the gearshift.
On another note, it would be interesting to see a CVT data log.....
If we manually shift a car, power shifting vs. slowly getting back onto the gas would have a huge impact on shift time irregardless of how quickly we actually moved the gearshift.
On another note, it would be interesting to see a CVT data log.....
#56
12-10-2007, 11:38 AM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,621
Rep Power: 235
LOL, I was being serious, I wasn't sure I understood what you were talking about... I think a more accurate way to look at it is to use the MPH line as opposed to using the G line. With the MPH line, it's CUT/DRY.......although not a perfect way to measure, it's damn close. Acceleration stops with the shift starts....acceleration resumes when the shift is complete. Using the G graph, it's a "guess" as to when the car is actually in gear and accelerating again. At 3.2 he's a PEAK G in the next gear, but at that point he had been IN GEAR for some time and on the throttle for some time. It would NOT make sense to say that the shift took until 3.2 seconds on the graph... Make sense?
Peter
Peter
Ok smart ***! Just you look at Sean's graph. His SMG shifts at 2.6 seconds and recovers at 3.2. Technically it takes .2 sec to drop the G's to zero, then another .4 to bring it back up. His foot never lifted off the right pedal. That's no F1 transmission, that's for sure
If we manually shift a car, power shifting vs. slowly getting back onto the gas would have a huge impact on shift time irregardless of how quickly we actually moved the gearshift.
On another note, it would be interesting to see a CVT data log.....
If we manually shift a car, power shifting vs. slowly getting back onto the gas would have a huge impact on shift time irregardless of how quickly we actually moved the gearshift.
On another note, it would be interesting to see a CVT data log.....
#57
12-10-2007, 12:40 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Incline Village, NV
Posts: 1,423
Rep Power: 197 LOL, I was being serious, I wasn't sure I understood what you were talking about... I think a more accurate way to look at it is to use the MPH line as opposed to using the G line. With the MPH line, it's CUT/DRY.......although not a perfect way to measure, it's damn close. Acceleration stops with the shift starts....acceleration resumes when the shift is complete. Using the G graph, it's a "guess" as to when the car is actually in gear and accelerating again. At 3.2 he's a PEAK G in the next gear, but at that point he had been IN GEAR for some time and on the throttle for some time. It would NOT make sense to say that the shift took until 3.2 seconds on the graph... Make sense?
Peter
Peter
#59
12-10-2007, 01:32 PM
But in terms of acceleration Jamie's analysis is the bottom line. Car stops accelerating (and even slows slightly from 4th to 5th) between gears.
For straight line my limited experience suggests that SMG is not faster than manual.
For straight line my limited experience suggests that SMG is not faster than manual.
#60
12-10-2007, 01:38 PM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,621
Rep Power: 235
We're not talking in terms of acceleration, we're talking in terms of shifting gears... Also, Jamie's analysis does NOT tell you when a car starts to accelerate again, it tells you when it reaches MAX acceleration in the next gear, enough to generate peak G in the next gear. Here your role is reversed professor, you are now the student... LOL
I do however think that a human can out shift some of the automatics on the market...
Peter
I do however think that a human can out shift some of the automatics on the market...
Peter