franki68
|
revo technik result,,strange figuresok,full day involved due to a revo update of their software and the results are
standard car figures....# Max power 414 bhp at 7800 rpm
# Max torque 317 ft at 4500 rpm
now I was told off as the car had a full tank of tesco 99ron petrol....'you should use optimax' and they want me to run this petrol out and fill it up with optimax and bring back for another go on the rolling road...but aside from that here are the figures.I have the graphs and will post up if anyone wants but not now as i'm knackered..
My car before tune up
max power 391 bhp at 7750rpm
max torque 298 at 4630 rpm
after tune up
max power 391bho at 6125 rpm
max torque 386 at 3138 rpm
Well I was obviously disappointed with the first figures falling quite a bit short of the claimed figures,and intrigued as to why the torque had such a huge leap and yet the bhp was the same.
All I can say is what a remarkable difference the tune up has made,the car now pulls like a train from much lower down,and in any gear,,now there is little need to change down to overtake...it feels a lot faster,so very pleased with the result on the road.
I will run the car on optimax and take it back for another run on the rolling road,but very happy with the actual driving change.
I will update the results after the next rolling road.
|
Blarno
|
If the Optimax makes more than 2 Bhp difference, I will make a spurious claim to do something ridiculous.
How did they know what fuel it had without asking you? I bet if you'd told them it was Optimax, they wouldn't have batted an eyelid.
|
Guitar Zero
|
Erm - these figures don't look right at all - how does a remap of a nat asp V8 drop the peak power rpms by over 1600 rpm but give you an 88 lbs ft torque increase at 1500 rpm lower ?
|
GonnaBreakABuggy
|
Optimax vs tesco 99 ron = fook all difference, especially in a N/A petrol
|
Turbonutter
|
Those are interesting results - big torque jump. More than mine as well ( 378lb/ft @2980 )
|
franki68
|
| Guitar Zero wrote: | Erm - these figures don't look right at all - how does a remap of a nat asp V8 drop the peak power rpms by over 1600 rpm but give you an 88 lbs ft torque increase at 1500 rpm lower ?
|
Blarno he asked before he did the car.
not sure myself about those,but it certainly feels much torqiuer much lower down the range.
|
GonnaBreakABuggy
|
Yes, but that's easy to fiddle by remapping the throttle opening/pedal ratio/throttle response settings.
That is an immense amount of torque to suddenly gain from a remap down low on an N/A car
|
Frank Bullitt
|
Franki, you should have just bought an A4 diesel if you wanted a 'slogger'!
If you can feel the difference and like it don't worry about the stats.
|
Blarno
|
I assume the rerun after the Optimax tankful is free?
Otherwise they're stiffing you right in the hoop.
|
simonp
|
Re: revo technik result,,strange figures | franki68 wrote: |
My car before tune up
max power 391 bhp at 7750rpm
Well I was obviously disappointed with the first figures falling quite a bit short of the claimed figures... |
and no-one believed me... 
|
Twelfth Monkey
|
I think that the specific torque per litre output would trump the Ferrari California, which holds the record for an NA petrol, I believe. I'm deeply skeptical of the figures, but happy for you if you're enjoying it.
|
franki68
|
I am going to speak direct to revo technik tomorrow as it is very strange.But my god it is so much quicker,I have a little run I do to see how fast a car is,I come off a bend in 2nd gear at 10mph and floor it,then check the speed as I pass a marker...I am doing 70mph now whereas before it was very low 60 ish mph.The figures may be wrong but the performance isn't.
|
DaveGibson
|
| Guitar Zero wrote: | Erm - these figures don't look right at all - how does a remap of a nat asp V8 drop the peak power rpms by over 1600 rpm but give you an 88 lbs ft torque increase at 1500 rpm lower ?
|
Since torque is proportional to the power developed divided by engine speed, if the remap results in more power at a given engine speed, there will be more torque. Why the new engine map does not produce any more top end power I can't say but perhaps they decided that the production of more power at the top of the rev range was less than useful.
|
Guitar Zero
|
Not 88 lbs ft of more torque.
The numbers are complete arse - end of.
|
DaveGibson
|
On the figures given, the original setup is producing 263bhp at max torque revs (4630rpm) while the remap is producing 230bhp at the new max torque revs (3138rpm). Not knowing the original torque figure at 3138rpm, it's not possible to work out the actual power increase at that engine speed but the torque improvement is feasible.
|
Guitar Zero
|
No it isn't
It is technically impossible for a 4.2 litre naturally aspirated V8 to produce 386 lbs ft of torque at just over 3000 rpm.
|
franki68
|
faulty dyno ? I find it impossible to believe that the car is producing no more horsepower but such a large torque gain,I have emailed Revo and will speak to the people who fitted it on monday.My concern is regardless of the driving improvement.
It is possible(reading around) for a chip and better exhaust to produce 15-20% improvement ,but that would at best produce an extra what ? 60lb of torque ?
|
JohnC
|
| Guitar Zero wrote: | Erm - these figures don't look right at all - how does a remap of a nat asp V8 drop the peak power rpms by over 1600 rpm but give you an 88 lbs ft torque increase at 1500 rpm lower ?
|
Back in my racing/tuning days we used to have an adjustable vernier pulley which let me change the cam timing to give different engine characteristics. The differences were very significant and I could have a top end screamer with nothing at all below 4000rpm or a torque loaded bullet which ran out of steam by 5500rpm. Although I never used any extremes I did vary it depending on the track I was at.
Modern electronics must allow the same changes to be mapped in to an engine which already has variable valve timing so I suppose it isn't too surprising.
|
Gooner
|
I'm slightly surprised that such a high performance engine should lose 20hp between production and a years ownership. I'm sure you treat your car with a reasonable degree of mechanical sympathy (I would if I'd paid that much for a car!) so it seems odd that there's a drop in performance compared to the manufacturers figures. Have you looked at having it dyno'd elsewhere to make a comparison. On the other hand if you're happy with the on road result, who gives a stuff about the on paper performance?!
|
franki68
|
It seems the dyno they use reads from the 'alternator rpm signal' whatver that means.Now when they flash the car,they have to charge the battery and this creates a false reading on the dyno.
In a nutshell I need to get the dyno run done again.
I spoke to Revo and they told me they expect the actual gains to be about 25bhp and 40lb of torque which makes sense.
The rev limit is also increased....something I did not notice.
I am still astonished how much faster the car feels.
|
GonnaBreakABuggy
|
So, they've got a completely useless dyno then?
Weird.
|
franki68
|
| GonnaBreakABuggy wrote: | So, they've got a completely useless dyno then?
Weird. |
It seems.
|
