volflo Posted May 6, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Here's the video..http://www.slo5oh.com/volflo.mpgI guess you really believe in power-to-weight ratio... you even run it on a gallon of gas! of course. didnt want to ruin my accelration. but i forgot to take some stuff out the car. my helmet, some tools..... but what do u think af traction. dont those 245ers do an excellent job?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jross Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 That is absolutely nuts.. I love it. Great exhaust note, too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenhoeve Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 You run 1.3 bar with just a chip? No mbc or aquamist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volflo Posted May 6, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 You run 1.3 bar with just a chip? No mbc or aquamist?jep just a custom bsr. i used to run 1.3 bar, but it only did that in fifth gear. 1.25 in fourth. now i run a quite steady 1.2 in fourth and fifth form 4000 to 5000. at top speed with 6 rpm and more in fifth it still does 1.05 bar.dont actually know why i dont hit the 1.3 anymore, or at least very rarely.is my wastegate or turbo itself starting to break? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHEIII874T5M Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 could be wear and tear going on, maybe ecu has adapted... try resetting the ecu, might help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbor850 Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 good video, i don't like how the first part is all blurry and crap though . . . . but good video nonetheless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbor850 Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 ok, it was hard to really figure out when you started going, but it looks like you dropped the clutch around 3500 and started to go (which started 1.21 seconds into the video) so thats where I started my calculations . . . .IN MPH0-60 = 4.90-100 = 10.90-125 = 17.90-130 = 20.0so I have to say, very very nice performance ! ! ! ! ! if you want to compare this to other cars tested by Road and Track, here are cars that have the same acceleration pretty muchBMW M3 SMGCorvette 50th Ann. EditionJaguar XJRMaybach 57SLK 32 AMGGREAT JOB VOLFOp.s. - I can't do Johanns 0-60 and 0-100 because his is in Quicktime format, if someone can change that to another program, I can compare it to Volfo . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volflo Posted May 6, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 i am in good company then. thanks for figuring the out the other cars... and we can all be proud of getting those figures with a FRONT (!) Wheel drive car AND a standing start. i have learnt so much thru vptuning and this forum. for example the underdrive pulley which caused just at MR sweden. they didnt even know stiff like that was existing.....wich size of the autotech intercooler would u suggest? 40, 50 or 60mm? assumed that i keep pushing 1.3 bar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volflo Posted May 6, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 good video, i don't like how the first part is all blurry and crap though . . . . but good video nonethelesswell i took the time again and again but from 0 to 160 (o to 100 mph) i get below 11 secs all the time. and to 200k (125 miles) i get belo 18. i dont understand how u get 20 here the point where i take off can be heard with my tires squeeling and.....be seen when the water for the windshield switches on but anyway i need a g-tech or an official time or something........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbor850 Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 well i took the time again and again but from 0 to 160 (o to 100 mph) i get below 11 secs all the time. and to 200k (125 miles) i get belo 18. i dont understand how u get 20 here the point where i take off can be heard with my tires squeeling and.....be seen when the water for the windshield switches on but anyway i need a g-tech or an official time or something........ yeah, the calculations aren't 100 % accurate, but they are closer then just using a stopwatch . . . . maybe they are .2 seconds off . . . .HAHA I MESSED UP, see i took 200 X .6, not .62 like it should be, they have been fixed . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbor850 Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 I FIXED IT !! ! !! !! B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenhoeve Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 turbo, does the video when played not represent real time accurately?I get0-60 4.9s0-100 10.9sIt's just odd that I got the same 0-60 as you, but a different 0-100. :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbor850 Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 our 0-60 time is accurate, but the video starts to accelerate about 1.29 seconds into the movie, he hits 100 mph about 12.3 /12.4 seconds, so a 0-100 in 10.9 seconds is right . . . . . I miscalculated the 100 because I thought it was 165 km/hr . . . . sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt1122 Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Forget side by side videos - you and Johann have to race. You both hit 124mph (200kmph) in about the same time I think.Is there a list anywhere of exactly what you did to reduce the weight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbor850 Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Forget side by side videos - you and Johann have to race. You both hit 124mph (200kmph) in about the same time I think.Is there a list anywhere of exactly what you did to reduce the weight?figuring out Johanns movie times now. . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.