[E92Fan]

Originally Posted by RagingKileak

Now I am curious because I rarely find my paddles of use unless I am caught out of gear - perhaps mid corner or whatever and need to override it quicker than it would otherwise do it for me...

So in effect if I am going right through the gears I would always allow the DS to choose when to gear up - course, mine is not mapped.

Matt

Herein lies the rub - by using the paddles properly, you should rarely be caught in the wrong gear mid-corner... having to facilitate a gear change mid-corner is the key factor in unbalancing a car - most noticeable on a race track obviously because the car is much closer to the limits of cornering. By using the paddles to ensure you're in the correct gear before each corner will allow you to maximise cornering control and subsequent acceleration through the apex - your exit speeds will be vastly quicker...

[dxb335d]

The rev drop is not the same

The revs drop lower when its auto mode cuz it takes so long to change.

When i change it does not drop so quick as ive changed earlier and also quicker with the paddles.





and thats Bone Bullshit.

You cant get 1.7 60ft on a stock M3, On drag radials just about.

4Wd FQ400 stuggle getting 1.7 60ft.s

[Dave_3]

Originally Posted by E92Fan

The change speed of shifting via paddles or automatically is the same, and yes the rev drop is also the same (as there is no change in gearing). However, what you can do by changing using the paddles is to make sure the next gear hits right at the top of the torque band and in the power zone and not under, or even worse, over the band...

I'm more used to N/A cars where the parabolic power/torque tails off mainly due to valve bounce ...

D.

[dxb335d]

Also Baris, that makes every other M3 in the world absolutely shit then. Especially yours as you even crack a 1.9 60ft (which means you can drive) and still only manage a 13.2 with 360bhp also and only trapping 106.

LOL

The car was modified.

Im going to be like the americans and call mine bone stock.


335d> bone stock 13.1 yeah.

[Dave_3]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

The rev drop is not the same

The revs drop lower when its auto mode cuz it takes so long to change.

When i change it does not drop so quick as ive changed earlier and also quicker with the paddles.

That may be what you perceive, but it is impossible for the revs to drop to another value if your actual instantaneous speed is the same, regardless if you or the gerabox initiates the change. As Tony also pointed out.

D.

[Jude1]

You don't change quicker with the paddles. The time taken to change is the same from the point the car in auto mode detects the "up shift" point and from when you manually yank the paddle. What I think you are trying to say is that you stay in the "power band" and the car "feels" quicker when you manually change gear via the paddle, because the engine hasn't dropped out of the power band. But not sure if I agree with this.

Whatever time you lose or save over the 60ft is replicated over the 1/4 mile. So if you shave a 1/10th of over 60ft, you'll see the same drop at a 1/4 mile.

[E92Fan]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

The rev drop is not the same

The revs drop lower when its auto mode cuz it takes so long to change.

When i change it does not drop so quick as ive changed earlier and also quicker with the paddles.

The rev drop IS the same, given there is no change in gearing when in automatic or manual mode. What you are referring to is the speed of change, in that in automatic mode because the shift point is not optimal, the gearbox software takes a fraction longer to calculate the throttle and fuelling for the next gear. This is why it is a slower change when shifting at redline. Shifting using the paddles a few hundred rpm less than redline will allow the gearbox the easiest change right into the torque and power band, without as much need for torque management, and hence a quicker change.

Originally Posted by Jude1

You don't change quicker with the paddles. The time taken to change is the same from the point the car in auto mode detects the "up shift" point and from when you manually yank the paddle. What I think you are trying to say is that you stay in the "power band" and the car "feels" quicker when you manually change gear via the paddle, because the engine hasn't dropped out of the power band.

Exactly

Originally Posted by Jude1

Whatever time you lose or save over the 60ft is replicated over the 1/4 mile. So if you shave a 1/10th of over 60ft, you'll see the same drop at a 1/4 mile.

It's not what I've found at all - over 60ft if I'm 0.2 secs quicker, I'll be almost 0.5 sec faster by the 1/4 mile marker... don't know why, might be because I'm into the power band earlier along the strip and wheelspinning a lot less throughout the run.... Have all your time slips replicated the difference in 60ft times at the end of the 1/4 mile?? I'd be interested to compare...

Originally Posted by Dave_3

I'm more used to N/A cars where the parabolic power/torque tails off mainly due to valve bounce ...

D.

If I get valve bounce on my car, I'm screwed....!!!!
There's a world of difference between the power curve on a N/A compared to my turbo lump - I love the bottom and middle range of a turbo, but there's nothing that can compare to the top end of a well-sorted N/A engine

[RagingKileak]

One thing that we knows is 'its not how you sit on your car, its how you race your car'...

Sorry, I just had to...

Seriously though, Carl can probably prove his times and we all know the state of tune. He is a forum member on our forum.

Do I believe a load of random text that features a load of numbers and the claim of bone stock from someone else in a different country - do I fuck.

Support Carl why dont ya - until someone PROVES otherwise, he is leading this race because he can PROVE what he is saying.

Its a little tiresome watching everything this guy posts be bitched and moaned at. OK its a forum an opinions are welcome - I see a lot of people using the popcorn smiley, if there was a huge fucking SIGH smiley, that would be me right now as I see another thread degenerate into shit despite Tony's effort to save it.

Matt

[- Paul -]

I won't use the popcorn smiley then but wanted to tag this as it's interesting.

[RagingKileak]

Originally Posted by - Paul -

I won't use the popcorn smiley then but wanted to tag this as it's interesting.

I absolutely agree.

My only point is there is little purpose in comparing Carl's Santa Pod times with some American guy in fictionland who may or may not exist...

If the day comes I claim to have a faster 335D than Carl, it will be because I can prove it - and not because I read about some guy who did it and then sold his car to me... for example.

Matt

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by Dave_3

That may be what you perceive, but it is impossible for the revs to drop to another value if your actual instantaneous speed is the same, regardless if you or the gerabox initiates the change. As Tony also pointed out.

D.

If you in a manual take 2 seconds to shift up from 6k compared to half a sec, the revs it drops down to will be different.

Originally Posted by RagingKileak

I absolutely agree.

My only point is there is little purpose in comparing Carl's Santa Pod times with some American guy in fictionland who may or may not exist...

If the day comes I claim to have a faster 335D than Carl, it will be because I can prove it - and not because I read about some guy who did it and then sold his car to me... for example.

Matt

Thanks for the support Matt,
Thing is Baris M3 is a modded one and is deffo alot faster than stock, im as quick as him for example. therefore i muller stock E46 M3's which i have done time and time again.

For Baris to post this crazily ace time for a supposed stock one, is silly i feel as we both know the car simply cannot do it.

[RagingKileak]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Thing is Baris M3 is a modded one and is deffo alot faster than stock, im as quick as him for example. therefore i muller stock E46 M3's which i have done time and time again.

For Baris to post this crazily ace time for a supposed stock one, is silly i feel as we both know the car simply cannot do it.

I dont know much about 1/4 mile times.

But I do know I had a manual E46 M3 and I do know I own an E90 335D - I know there is not much in it and I strongly expect the 335D to be a fair bit quicker once remapped and the LSD fitted.

Matt

[Geoffo]

Originally Posted by - Paul -

I won't use the popcorn smiley then but wanted to tag this as it's interesting.

I thought that's what the popcorn smiley meant ( that the thread's interesting)..

Wasn't my intention to 'take the p*ss', If that's what people thought..

[Dave_3]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

If you in a manual take 2 seconds to shift up from 6k compared to half a sec, the revs it drops down to will be different.

The gearing of your car does not change, Carl. If during those 1.5 seconds your rate of acceleration slows you may drop slightly less when you change. But that change of acceleration will hurt your overall goal (area under the graph which you intregrate to calculate time and distance - I'm guessing that area should be more for better times for a set distance).

And as others have pointed out the actual speed of a gear change comparing manual to automatic is pretty similar (physically triggered by software or a paddle). So the 2 seconds/0.5 second point is not valid, or at best grossly exaggerated. So I am determing the actual change of velocity (or change in acceleration if we are more accuratley looking at 2nd derivatives) as basically a fixed value for manual or automatic gear changes (same thing as saying the same time for a change).

It is the rolling speed = revs due to the gear you are in, that determine things.

So if you change up slightly earlier (lower speed) your delta rev may well be smaller, but will still drop to that defined by the next gear combined with the speed you are doing. If that is a slower speed then revs will be lower.

What I have said above does not counter what you say. Just that the mph at which you change is more relevant than any slight, barely perceivable difference in time to change between a manual or automatic gearchange. That is what I said in my previous statement.

Originally Posted by ME

That may be what you perceive, but it is impossible for the revs to drop to another value if your actual instantaneous speed is the same, regardless if you or the gerabox initiates the change. As Tony also pointed out.

D.

[E92Fan]

Originally Posted by Dave_3

The gearing of your car does not change, Carl. If during those 1.5 seconds your rate of acceleration slows you may drop slightly less when you change. But that change of acceleration will hurt your overall goal (area under the graph which you intregrate to calculate time and distance - I'm guessing that area should be more for better times for a set distance).

And as others have pointed out the actual speed of a gear change comparing manual to automatic is pretty similar (physically triggered by software or a paddle). So the 2 seconds/0.5 second point is not valid, or at best grossly exaggerated. So I am determing the actual change of velocity (or change in acceleration if we are more accuratley looking at 2nd derivatives) as basically a fixed value for manual or automatic gear changes (same thing as saying the same time for a change).

It is the rolling speed = revs due to the gear you are in, that determine things.

So if you change up slightly earlier (lower speed) your delta rev may well be smaller, but will still drop to that defined by the next gear combined with the speed you are doing. If that is a slower speed then revs will be lower.

What I have said above does not counter what you say. Just that the mph at which you change is more relevant than any slight, barely perceivable difference in time to change between a manual or automatic gearchange. That is what I said in my previous statement.



D.

And all I can say in response to the above is... thank feck I did further maths A-level..... I actually understood all of that!!!!

[XKaLiBaR]

Carlos, I checked my time sheet yesterday, I only got a 2.0219, not a 1.9

[Hotcoupe]

Originally Posted by RagingKileak

One thing that we knows is 'its not how you sit on your car, its how you race your car'...

Sorry, I just had to...

Seriously though, Carl can probably prove his times and we all know the state of tune. He is a forum member on our forum.

Do I believe a load of random text that features a load of numbers and the claim of bone stock from someone else in a different country - do I fuck.

Support Carl why dont ya - until someone PROVES otherwise, he is leading this race because he can PROVE what he is saying.

Its a little tiresome watching everything this guy posts be bitched and moaned at. OK its a forum an opinions are welcome - I see a lot of people using the popcorn smiley, if there was a huge fucking SIGH smiley, that would be me right now as I see another thread degenerate into shit despite Tony's effort to save it.

Matt

Excellent post Matt, and I agree.

It you haven't tried it, don't knock it!

I admit, I thought getting a good run in an Auto was just hitting the 'Go' pedal when the light turned green was all that was required, but reality is far different.
OK SP is no race track with no bends etc and the perception is that no skill is required, but try it, and it's surprising how getting it so wrong can be so easy!

Good on you Carl, enthusiasm is something to be encouraged, not shot down in flames.
Hopefully now that Tony and Jules have added some gravitas to the thread it will stay on drag, it's just a shame that Carl is not afforded the same respect as others.

[RagingKileak]

Originally Posted by Hotcoupe

Hopefully now that Tony and Jules have added some gravitas to the thread it will stay on drag, it's just a shame that Carl is not afforded the same respect as others.

Thats the eloquent way to say what I meant I think!!!

I would say there must be some skill in it because I cant do it hence why I asked earlier... seriously, I tried a lot of variations on TCS/DSC and Gearbox modes but I always bogged down, or couldnt spin up to launch with any kind of conviction.

I will try Carlos' left foot braking technique and see how it goes.

One could argue that the bitching in this thread has been counterproductive, because the what to expect question was looked over in favour of Carl defending himself - if I was a noob, I would be quite annoyed but seeing as I saw the bullshit coming a mile off I guess I knew nothing I asked in faith could be taken seriously by anyone else, and Carl has probably missed it due to all the other shite.

Matt

[Looney Toon]

Originally Posted by E92Fan

And all I can say in response to the above is... thank feck I did further maths A-level..... I actually understood all of that!!!!

I'd like to say that i fully understood it too!


.... but i can't, as i didn't!

[E92Fan]

Originally Posted by RagingKileak

So what happens then?

The front wheels should stick and the rears spin up or what?

Just curious before I go test it

Matt

Basically, brake boosting before launching loads up the torque converter so that when you release the brake pedal, the gearbox is already loaded up and doesn't have the 'rubber-band' effect of a delayed getaway. You also get the turbos spooling so there's no delay in boost. The idea is NOT to spin up the rear wheels whilst stationary however - that in effect is doing a burn out and you'll muller the rear brake pads (and tires) in no time!!

What you should try is this - press the DTC button once to turn on DTC (and turn off DSC), gearbox into M1 (manual 1st gear), left foot hard on the brake pedal, right foot on the gas revving to about 1500rpm - hold the revs steady, then release your left foot and mash your right to the carpet!

[Jude1]

Originally Posted by RagingKileak

One could argue that the bitching in this thread has been counterproductive, because the what to expect question was looked over in favour of Carl defending himself - if I was a noob, I would be quite annoyed but seeing as I saw the bullshit coming a mile off I guess I knew nothing I asked in faith could be taken seriously by anyone else, and Carl has probably missed it due to all the other shite.

Matt

I could detect the undertones also, but you need to remember that there was a similar thread a while back where certain members took it upon themselves to question the validity of another members comments, to a point where the thread went from being positive to a slanging match. The difference this time is that the OP hasn't backed up his claim and as such he is being heckled....ironic as the OP was the heckler in the similar thread. Just my take on events, I could be off the mark? But I personally don't doubt the time as it is entirely possible given the right conditions.

[RagingKileak]

Anyway, never mind. I guess we are keeping it roughly on topic and friendly!

Thanks for answering tony - that sounds like the thing i have been missing. Odd that i wouldn't ever have dreamed of doing that on my own!

Does a limited slip diff change the way this works at all? Dont get me wrong, i understand what an lsd does and that it would usually only apply for cornering - and fast as well. 

But is there any difference in the way the car handles all that power at the back? Less fishtailing or whatever?

Matt