OM617 Performance

mk216v

07-27-2010, 03:18 PM #8

(07-26-2010, 11:02 PM)GREASY_BEAST
(07-26-2010, 10:45 PM)mk216v It just makes it difficult for the noob's to know what works the best, and for even veterans to compare with each other, as with SOOOO many different setups, comparing them all is fruitless.

Since there is no "shit in a box" solution for these things, it pretty much comes down to experimentation. That's why it's fun. I disagree that comparison is fruitless, comparing solutions and results (torque/power curves, 0-60 times, hell even subjective things like handling impressions), gives one an idea of what is possible. One fact of life is that cat-skinning can be done many different ways. Since there are no boxed kits for these cars, one is saved by default from the delusion of the "only" solution.

"Shit in a box"---you mean like much of the stuff you find on eBay? Wink

I agree it can be fun, but it can also be frustrating.

Yes, comparing may give an idea what is possible but IMHO improvement over one's custom setup can be more difficult/expensive/etc than not since there is no standardization. Let's say two guys with 617A's with different i/c's(size, routing, placement) and different turbo setups (trims, a/r's, whatever) compare setups...any data compared between the two is really irrelevant IMHO until there is only ONE sole component difference between the two vehicles (let's say if everything was the same but the turbo differences). If the turbo specs are the only variation then it's much easier to see a delta(+ or -).

That's all I'm saying.

(07-27-2010, 02:13 PM)Captain America I hate "Shit In A Box" cars..... Like Hondas. That's why I bought My 300. Everything is custom, no two cars are the same. And yes you CAN benefit from the info here because you will not be able to copy one setup, but rather use ideas and setups from many different guys to put together your own version of what YOU think will work best.

What you THINK will work best? See my post above...

Data is key IMHO. Thinking and theorizing is just that--thoughts and theory. Do you think professional race teams just hypothesize about what will work best and then implement it and call it good vs hypothesizing/thinking/theorizing followed by testing testing testing, and more testing, and then more testing, probably re-thinking/theorizing many times along the way?

You guys answered my question--doesn't seem to be the standardization and data checking on top of that, that I was hoping there would be. It is what it is. Undecided

1980 W460 300GD LWB 4spd manual, AKA "Radio Flyer"

Reply

View a Printable Version

0 Vote(s) - 0 Average

Users browsing this thread:
3 Guest(s)