ANNOUNCEMENT.>>> The car is getting serious engine modifications...

[winston@podi.ca]

Everyone does their builds differently. When you blew your motor, didnt you look back and say, "Hmmm I realized that Revo software made for a GTRS probably wasn't the right choice" but you ran it anyway... and you learned

I stated that my suggestion was my opinion and it is worth as much as you choose it to be.

Once again please check the facts beforehand

- I never blew my motor

- Revo? At that time it was the only software option available for a B6A4 to allow the setup to run.

There was no Unitronic file, no Eurodyne file, nothing for an Audi.

If there was don't you think I would have used it instead of running REVO?

[winston@podi.ca]

the whole idc thing seems a little shaky to me.... a lot of it all just doesnt add up - just like what you said above.

to me, if my wideband gauge says i'm good... and i'm not detonating -- fuck it, i'm going to run my car hard.

Well I'm going by a combination of what the wideband says and the CF figures on the VAG logs.

Right now I have my boost locked at 19psi and on the roadtrip I got to hammer it very often and the wagon just flies. The gauges just holds steady at 19psi and 12.0 AFR and the car just does not stop accelerating.

The new muffler for my wastegate does sound really sexy too.

[A4SoftWalker]

Well Right now I have my boost locked at 19psi and on the roadtrip I got to hammer it very often and the wagon just flies. The gauges just holds steady at 19psi and 12.0 AFR and the car just does not stop accelerating.

Good choice with holding the line @ 19psi till all doubt and issues are worked out with the fueling and injectors... 400AWHP is my future goal too albeit an engine rebuild away for me though

[Issam@INA]

Experience around racecars. Virtually every thrown rod that I have seen on the track (and his car is a track car) was an overrev, typically a missed shift such as a 5-2 and not a 5-4. The cars that I've been around are very, very powerful... Porsche 935's, 944 turbos, 911TTs, RUFs, etc. The power wasnt breaking the motors, rev's were almost always the culprit, usually from driver error.

You have a link or data I can read up on this? What exactly was breaking on the rods....the above is VERY VAGUE.

[lookaught]

No I don't have a link, these cars were built by professional shops and they don't post build and failure threads like individual enthusiasts. I was just at the tracks when these happened and talked with the race engineers and drivers.

The rod failure point varied... bolts are the usual culprit. In the case of the H beam that I mentioned earlier the bolts were not the problem, the rod snapped almost in the middle. Unfortunately I don't have pics as this happened in 2001 and the rod was sent back to Carrillo for analysis. I suppose if you were really interested you could call them and ask about it, it came from a 1969 2.0L porsche motor. I can't imagine that they received too many of these.

Im not an engineer so I can't tell you why the rods are failing when overrevved... perhaps the velocity of the pistons caused stretch or simply pushed the bolts beyond their tensile strength. The point that Im trying to make is that in my experience, every rod failure that I have seen was in a car that overrevved just prior to failure... and that the power of the motor was not causing (at least immediately) the failure (even in very powerful cars). Because of that, I don't see why you would NEED to invest in Carrillo or Pauter over SCAT, a 400 or 500 hp motor just is not going to break one from power alone (barring installation error). And that buying Carrillo or Pauter rods does not guarantee that you won't break a rod... it may improve your chances of not having a failure, but certainly does not guarantee it.

And that being said, it follows logically that I see no problem with Jet's choice of SCAT rods for his build, given the application and intended use of the car.

[PRY4SNO]

Later on when the motor is back in the car I will get some chassis dyno numbers, (Dynapak, Mustang and MAHA) and that should give us a pretty good look at drivetrain loss on three types of chassis dyno.

Wow, that will be some seriously valuable info for the tuning/enthusiast community. Keep up the great work, we're all enthralled.



And congrats on being so close to your 2900lbs goal... now it's finally within reach!

[mike-2ptzero]

Just dont post on Vortex because they will just try to tell you that the quattro only has a 8-10% driveline loss no matter how much real world data to back up any number you claim.

[AudiA4_20T]

Just dont post on Vortex because they will just try to tell you that the quattro only has a 8-10% driveline loss no matter how much real world data to back up any number you claim.

hahaahahaah true

[actlsub9]

Just dont post on Vortex because they will just try to tell you that the quattro only has a 8-10% driveline loss no matter how much real world data to back up any number you claim.

obviously, because you would be loosing eleventy billion BTUs...

[mike-2ptzero]

obviously, because you would be loosing eleventy billion BTUs...

LOL.

[Issam@INA]

obviously, because you would be loosing eleventy billion BTUs...

wahahahah

[onemoremile]

No I don't have a link, these cars were built by professional shops and they don't post build and failure threads like individual enthusiasts. I was just at the tracks when these happened and talked with the race engineers and drivers.

The rod failure point varied... bolts are the usual culprit. In the case of the H beam that I mentioned earlier the bolts were not the problem, the rod snapped almost in the middle. Unfortunately I don't have pics as this happened in 2001 and the rod was sent back to Carrillo for analysis. I suppose if you were really interested you could call them and ask about it, it came from a 1969 2.0L porsche motor. I can't imagine that they received too many of these.

Im not an engineer so I can't tell you why the rods are failing when overrevved... perhaps the velocity of the pistons caused stretch or simply pushed the bolts beyond their tensile strength. The point that Im trying to make is that in my experience, every rod failure that I have seen was in a car that overrevved just prior to failure... and that the power of the motor was not causing (at least immediately) the failure (even in very powerful cars). Because of that, I don't see why you would NEED to invest in Carrillo or Pauter over SCAT, a 400 or 500 hp motor just is not going to break one from power alone (barring installation error). And that buying Carrillo or Pauter rods does not guarantee that you won't break a rod... it may improve your chances of not having a failure, but certainly does not guarantee it.

And that being said, it follows logically that I see no problem with Jet's choice of SCAT rods for his build, given the application and intended use of the car.

The stress on a rod increases with the square of rpm. 7k is twice as hard as 5k. Add in various harmonics and things can get bad at really high revs. Run FEA on a rod and you'll see it get rubbery. Everything does when pushed hard or often enough.

[Jet Jockey]

WOW, A thread from Dec 2008!

Many things have changed since then and it was decided that we were going to increase the power ouput of the motor. So the final choice for the rods was changed.

The Scats are out and the Pauters rods are in.