1/4 run rs7 audi 10.6

[nickrs7]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFWc-2VL87g

[OOOO SSSS]

Nice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[viren.89]

People still record with camera holding in that position lol

Nice run though.


See a difference after the down pipes ?

[kouzman]

Excellent 60ft. For such low 60ft however I would expect the ET to be much lower...

plus the mph is on the low end too... maybe the is not running pure racegas but a mix? I found my car to be very sensitive if I am not running pure racegas...

My 10.61 was on a 1.71 60ft... if I would 60ft in the 1.5 range then I should be looking at 10.40s....

Check the racegas mix. What I do is I bring the tank down to 0 and I drive a few miles. Then I add 100 octane unleaded (sunoco gt260) maybe about 2 gallons, bring it down to 0 again and then I switch to the ms109 about 2.5-3 gallons for the event. Time consuming yes but it guarantees pure racegas in the tank.

[nickrs7]

Excellent 60ft. For such low 60ft however I would expect the ET to be much lower...

plus the mph is on the low end too... maybe the is not running pure racegas but a mix? I found my car to be very sensitive if I am not running pure racegas...

My 10.61 was on a 1.71 60ft... if I would 60ft in the 1.5 range then I should be looking at 10.40s....

Check the racegas mix. What I do is I bring the tank down to 0 and I drive a few miles. Then I add 100 octane unleaded (sunoco gt260) maybe about 2 gallons, bring it down to 0 again and then I switch to the ms109 about 2.5-3 gallons for the event. Time consuming yes but it guarantees pure racegas in the tank.

i take to 0 then i put 104 gt260 5 gallons then take to 25 range

[kouzman]

i take to 0 then i put 104 gt260 5 gallons then take to 25 range

Keep in mind that even if you bring it down to 0, you still have probably another 20-30 miles range. It all comes down to your comfort level. I try to time it in a way where I don't get stuck in the middle of the road. As soon as it hits zero, I also zero out my counter and I drive gently since I don't want to burn any fuel pumps since there is very little gas left... when I hit about 10-15 miles then I add the good stuff.

[gk1]

That answers my question...
Drag radials are good for 1.583 60ft.
Nice

[OOOO SSSS]

@kouzman... On the note of VP MS109, does your car need more than just the Sunoco gt260 ? That's 109 vs 104 RON. Reason I ask is that APR only get the same power on the c7.5 as the c7 with a 109 file. This is in comparison to the c7 being a 104 file. Do you know what timing advance you run ? I'm afraid of loading the 109 file on my c7.5 with the fear of it being a too high timing file !! What are your thoughts on this ?

Sorry for the hijack of the post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MBrock]

What et and trap speed does an does a RS7 run with just tune and 93oct?

[kouzman]

What et and trap speed does an does a RS7 run with just tune and 93oct?

My best trap on straight 93 was just over 126mph but shifting manually. I haven't raced the car again on pumpgas but letting the car shift... it think it will go faster.

10.6 is a good time for his RS7 considering the 40whp loss of his AWE intake.

Excellent observation. That would justify the fact that he is 2-3mph short... he would just put the stock intake back and take the car to the track again.

[kouzman]

What et and trap speed does an does a RS7 run with just tune and 93oct?

10.6 is a good time for his RS7 considering the 40whp loss of his AWE intake.

@kouzman... On the note of VP MS109, does your car need more than just the Sunoco gt260 ? That's 109 vs 104 RON. Reason I ask is that APR only get the same power on the c7.5 as the c7 with a 109 file. This is in comparison to the c7 being a 104 file. Do you know what timing advance you run ? I'm afraid of loading the 109 file on my c7.5 with the fear of it being a too high timing file !! What are your thoughts on this ?

Sorry for the hijack of the post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We do not have a 109 file. I have the standard 93 octane and 100 octane maps...

Sunoco gt260 is 100 octane r+m/2
Sunoco gt260+ is 104 octane r+m/2
VP ms109 is 105 octane r+m/2

If you have pumpgas leftover is the tank it is guaranteed that you are not running pure 100 octane minimum for the racegas map.

If you have leftover pumpgas in the tank and you run a 104 or 105 octane gas then depending on the mix it is almost guaranteed that you will be running 100+ octane on the racegas map...

The first option has not produced good results for me. The second option has given me my best time and speed numbers to date.. I hope that helps...

[viren.89]

You can carry a jug around (or whatever that is called) and keep driving -once the car stalls-stop it and use the jug to put in that race gas. Pure race gas lol

[HeelBuff]

You can carry a jug around (or whatever that is called) and keep driving -once the car stalls-stop it and use the jug to put in that race gas. Pure race gas lol

That's the conclusion I've reached, at least, once I get the stage 2 104 file with my new down pipes.

[Blackstallion]

Boy that's fast -- who holds record for 1/4 mile?

You can carry a jug around (or whatever that is called) and keep driving -once the car stalls-stop it and use the jug to put in that race gas. Pure race gas lol

jerrycan...

[playwithonehand]

10.6 is a good time for his RS7 considering the 40whp loss of his AWE intake.

APR never stated it was AWE intake that lost 40awhp secondly that was tested for stage 2 tune running their dp has nothing to do with the op setup which is stage1

Again i strongly disagree -40awhp until i see the prove, i have seen 10 maybe 15awhp lost but 40 is crazy

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

[markreed]

APR said it was a "popular closed intake." Do you know of any other popular closed intake systems for the 4.0T? It was pretty obvious from the discussion that followed that they were referring to AWE's CF intake.

While the OP doesn't have stage 2 software, he does have full stage 2 hardware. If anything, he may be losing more than 40whp since he's not making tuning changes on the dyno trying to make more power like APR was.

I am still trying to figure out this whole MAP vs MAF thing, but I don't see how any scenario where the engine is made more efficient could result in less HP. (talking about your statement that he is losing power with hardware from Stage II, not comments about the intake.

If he has improved the engines ability to flow air better, especially out of the engine, then this would reduce the overall pressure. The engine via the MAP should compensate for that change in pressure by adjusting the voltage output of the sensor. As long as the tables for the MAP exist, which they should, then he will make more power. If he has somehow exceeded the MAPs ability to adjust for the intake pressure, then the overall fuel mixture would be lean. Normally, lean conditions generate more power (at the risk of engine damage...and again this is at a worst case scenario...)

I am still trying to understand this whole MAP thing...so please fill in the blanks for me.

[markreed]

I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make. My original comment was that the OP's 10.6 pass wasn't too shabby considering he's losing around 40whp with his AWE CF intake. Playwithonehand then said he doubts he's losing 40whp since APR's test mule was a stage II car and the OP is not stage II thus he won't be losing nearly as much as the 40whp. My response to that was while the OP may not have stage II software, he does have the stage II hardware, thus he's likely to see the same 40whp loss that APR saw on their in house dyno, if not more since APR likely tried to do some tuning for the AWE intake to see if it would pick up power. We're not sure if the -40whp was before or after further tuning tweaks on the dyno. If it was with tuning tweaks, then the loss could be greater than 40whp. Hope this helps clear up any confusion.

Got it!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

[nickrs7]

10.6 is a good time for his RS7 considering the 40whp loss of his AWE intake.

i hope your right i just put in the stock one back car doesnt feel the same

[kouzman]

^the only way to verify it is to go back to the track with the same gas, tune etc and test it out...

I am planning to do the same in order to test another company's intake system, hopefully this coming weekend if the weather holds...

[kouzman]

Racing season!

[playwithonehand]

APR said it was a "popular closed intake." Do you know of any other popular closed intake systems for the 4.0T? It was pretty obvious from the discussion that followed that they were referring to AWE's CF intake.

While the OP doesn't have stage 2 software, he does have full stage 2 hardware. If anything, he may be losing more than 40whp since he's not making tuning changes on the dyno trying to make more power like APR was.

USP motorsports has S6/C7 closed intake and half of the price of AWE.
So far there is zero evident as any intake system will product -40awhp, surely there is claimed by APR using their downpipe and stage 2 software but until any sort of evident being released this is all speculation.

Once piece of information I have from a reliable source who ran S6 stage 3 RS turbo upgrade with AWE intake and lost 13-15hp vs stock intake. However after some holes drilled in the back and towards the bottom of the AWE box it actually made slightly more than stock. He have dyno sheet to back this up.

Again Nick's setup is using Miltek downpipe not APR cast downpipe so the result will be different, in my opinion APR has better design straight downard vs Milltek crossover.

Don't get me wrong I agree with the oem intake makes more power than closed intake however don't take -40awhp theory and apply on every single person you came across. So far the -40awhp theory only apply to APR stage 2 with their cast downpipe which is not made available to public yet.