Originally Posted by
NOTORIOUS VR
I bet you the VAST kit would have faired similar if everything was the same. ie. starting temps, compressor efficiency of the turbos, nozzle size, meth/water mix, etc, etc.
Honestly, these logs shouldn't have been posted because it will just confuse people and it is NOT a true direct comparison between the two kits.
The only way to compare kits is install both on the same car and do back to back pulls/logs. That's it. It's the same thing with people who post logs from SMIC & FMIC's... and then somehow say one is better then another.
Yet they're all from different cars, at different times, running different setups (tunes, boost levels, etc) all which greatly effect the outcome.
I typed essentially the same in before I noticed your post :)
To add to it. Not enough that we have two different cars, different turbos, tunes, weather, we also have unknown nozzle size on the other "inferior" VAST set up and the nozzle size would be the only factor that would matter the most in this comparison! And let's not forget that we also don't have, in most likeliness, the same water/meth ratio.
If the vast is running like #3 or #5 and OP has #7, of course the Aquamist will look "better" than Vast.
What is also not taken under consideration is the initial w/m fluid temperature. I run my W/M from windshield wiper reservoir and on hot days the tank gets real warm if you shut off the car and let it stand for few hours. Pouring in new fluid from cold container would significantly lower the W/M fluid temp and consequently IATs...
There are so many variables than any test other than back to back with two systems on the same car is not representative of systems performance.
Bookmarks