South West Rolling Road at K-tec Racing: 21st January

[Luke.]

If it made genuine gains of even half that (ie 6lbft) then its impressive IMHO mate.

You guys seem to be acting like I have slagged off your product, I actually havent done so at any point. Will be interesting to see some more testing of it, like I said I would like to find a way to increase peak torque marginally on our RS2 car which runs a standard throttle body so if an induction kit comes along that does help to boost peak torque I'd be interested in it, assuming it can do so without harming too much elsewhere.

No you did however say its impossible to get gains of that. Which back to back is exactly the results I got. This was also tested against various other clios which were at the rolling road day before so is why it seems like all your points are invalid..

My starting point Wasent exactly low. My car was making near peak torque at 3000rpm which I was told is good. I was quite happy with my results as the car on the road tells a different story. However after this other setup was fitted the car pulled even better. Hugely noticeable from my point of view..

Await testing. We could even get pictures and videos of back to back testing. Gains are obviously different from car to car but it's definatly a benchmark to work from..

 

[Laine_16v]

I think we should just accept the results, i dont think anyone can question the accuracy of their new rollers seeing as they seem spot on (very comparable to SRR who most people, inc myself take their results as about as accurate as they get).

The engine has responded very well to the induction setup and has proved the results.

As much as i don't believe it...... i do believe it.

 

[Harpham]

Just because I can...

 

[Chip-mk1]

No you did however say its impossible to get gains of that. Which back to back is exactly the results I got.

You are now claiming 12 lbft a month apart, which isnt quite the same as 15lbft back to back which is what I said I dont personally believe happened, so not sure why you are saying its "exactly the result you got" which I am disputing.
If you must know that I think even on your lower figure of 12lbft, that some still probably comes from rolling road inaccuracies although I would love (as would all clio owners when torque is so hard to find on these cars) to be proved wrong on a proper back to back test.

This was also tested against various other clios which were at the rolling road day before so is why it seems like all your points are invalid..

pointless testing against other cars TBH

My starting point Wasent exactly low. My car was making near peak torque at 3000rpm which I was told is good. I was quite happy with my results as the car on the road tells a different story. However after this other setup was fitted the car pulled even better. Hugely noticeable from my point of view..

Post the graphs, it will be interesting to see where the apparent gains lie.

Await testing. We could even get pictures and videos of back to back testing. Gains are obviously different from car to car but it's definatly a benchmark to work from..

I'd be interested in that testing, if it was done scientifically as personally Im always interested in seeing how engines repond to different intakes etc.

 

[Luke.]

Just LMAO at you and your stupidity.

Go and get some reading lessons. Then come back and start again.

 

[MartinR]

Just reading this thread with intrest and not taking anyones side just that the above quote sounds like the only way to settle it, Just IMO of course if I was that confident I was correct I would take it !!
You both seem quite sure you are correct. I must say that 15lbs/ft does seem a lot for induction set up.
I have ran my car on several rolling roads at the same spec nothing changing and got different figures each time wheel and flywheel measurements , also when run on same rollers . So many variables on rolling roads also intresting to how wheel and flywheel figures vary a lot eg 155bhp at wheels gives one reading at fly on one rollers, and same wheel figure on another gives another flywheel figure on another.

^^100% agree with this.as for the rest off the thread flol you pair need to learn a bit of respect and stop going about talking to people like something on you're shoe..its a forum chill out not somwhere to f n blind at fellow members. i await the graphs to be posted,something doesn't sound right??

as for k-tec .........that is all

 

[gti6steve]

^^100% agree with this.as for the rest off the thread flol you pair need to learn a bit of respect and stop going about talking to people like something on you're shoe..its a forum chill out not somwhere to f n blind at fellow members. i await the graphs to be posted,something doesn't sound right??

as for k-tec .........that is all

Well said mate

 

[Will.]

Right. Now that I'm back in the game. Before I would have just called Chip a c**t, but I'm not going to.

I don't understand why you have such a problem believing something that is quite clearly true. In all other threads about people making stupid power etc, everyone always b****cks on about how it should be tested by the same RR to ensure that the figures are concise with each other as different roads read different powers.

Forget about the actual final figure. If you believe it made THAT much power you can, if not, jog on.

The KEY thing here is that there was a definite increase in power with this induction set up (that you don't know anything about, might I add) when compared to the previous standard set up and the air filter set up before that. All of this has proven to INCREASE the power each time on the SAME rolling road.

Pull your head out of your ass and just accept that the power has INCREASE. If you had a problem with the amount of power it made, I would understand, as most of this forum seem to have it in for K-tec and the "it's over reading" bull s**t is getting tiresome.


Oh and FYI. Going on about how the air filter could have been clogged etc actually made me genuinely LOL. If it was clogged, then it would have restricted the power and therefore putting something ELSE on would have seen better gains.

Now K-tec's road is very good. My car ran once in December and once in January (3 runs each time). Both occasions, the figures were very similar and in January each read out read the same figure (to the nearest whole number). And the only thing that changed on my car was a RS tuner remap which is known for not increasing the power at all, but smoothing the torque out. WHICH IT DID.

December: 178 bhp and 159 ft lb
January: 178 bhp and 160 ft lb.



If you look (red line is January) the torque is MUCH smoother and the bhp is smoother too.

Now it seems to me that you're only here to argue with people. Well tbh, all you've succeeded in doing is looking like a w**ker who is only here to argue. Why couldn't you have been happy that someone had actually had a decent result from their car? Do you feel almighty trying to put people down on the internet?

Anyway, Cooksport FTMFW. I shall be going with this induction set up soon.

 

[NFox]

That brought a tear to my eye Will!!

Wheres the pictures from the day too?

 

[Luke.]

They will be up tomorrow. Willdot for president..

As for talking to someone whos a piece of s**t on my shoe, had he not acted like one and gave it the biggun and did actually read anything then he wouldn't of got spoken to like so.

I need to get back to driving my car which is much faster then it was before by a country mile!! oh an now I've fitted an exhaust what goes to say it won't make even MORE power

 

[Cub.]

I can't understand the anti k-Tec rubbish either. Will - flamer made 197bhp and 167 LB ft after the 438 cams...check out my project thread for the graphs. Happy days!

 

[Luke.]

Glad your happy mate that's a really good result. Don't get what everyone's problem is with k-tec.

They are beaut.

 

[Will.]

Nice results you got there mate


I think I should hold more of these days so we can show the Cooksport cars progress

 

[Luke.]

Touché Will.

 

[Ash87]

need a cooksport megane set up iirc

 

[Chip-mk1]

Right. Now that I'm back in the game. Before I would have just called Chip a c**t, but I'm not going to.

I don't understand why you have such a problem believing something that is quite clearly true. In all other threads about people making stupid power etc, everyone always b****cks on about how it should be tested by the same RR to ensure that the figures are concise with each other as different roads read different powers.

Forget about the actual final figure. If you believe it made THAT much power you can, if not, jog on.

The KEY thing here is that there was a definite increase in power with this induction set up (that you don't know anything about, might I add) when compared to the previous standard set up and the air filter set up before that. All of this has proven to INCREASE the power each time on the SAME rolling road.

Havent said anywhere there wasnt an increase, my comments were that I dont believe the 15 lbft over standard that was initially implied by Luke, the figures have since been altered marginally, although it still sounds too good to be true, but I do actually REALLY hope it is true as I would love to see a product that could easily add those sort of gains to these cars which we all love so much.

Its not slagging its healthy sceptism having seen these sort of claims for the last 20 years that I have been into cars and bikes and them never being true yet TBH

Cant see why it winds you up so much that I thought something was too good to be true when to a small extent thats already been proved by the figures posted since for the standard filter anyway.

I havent slagged ktec anywhere at all either, all I said was like ANY test done on a companies own product (and I made a point of putting that in context and saying not ktec specifically ) i'd have preferred to see the figures on an independant rolling road.

Oh and FYI. Going on about how the air filter could have been clogged etc actually made me genuinely LOL. If it was clogged, then it would have restricted the power and therefore putting something ELSE on would have seen better gains.

Yes exactly my point, I was on about the BEFORE filter being clogged not the one fitted after obviously!

Now it seems to me that you're only here to argue with people.

Not at all, im here to agree with things that I think are correct and disagree with things I think are incorrect, I dont care who says them or what about, Im not getting personal etc, am just talking about cars and engines politely.

Well tbh, all you've succeeded in doing is looking like a w**ker who is only here to argue. Why couldn't you have been happy that someone had actually had a decent result from their car? Do you feel almighty trying to put people down on the internet?

Im not putting him down and Ive already said I think the result is a good one, clearly you havent actually read my posts very well before you comment on them.
As for feeling mighty or not, from a forum? Seriously would anyone? Without being funny if I was going to get a high and mighty feel from writing it would be from all the magazine articles I write not forum posts surely?
But im not here for feelings im just here to help people better understand their cars and to learn a bit myself as well into the bargain occasionally.

Really weird the way on this forum people want to spend so much time talking about what their opinion of other posters motivations are etc, personally im just here for the cars, not to analyse people.

 

[Luke.]

Im not putting him down and Ive already said I think the result is a good one, clearly you havent actually read my posts very well before you comment on them..

Haha. Hypocrite much.

Oh and Will. Everyone else seems to be happy with the fact that the same rolling road was used to give the different results.

Just one fag who thinks he knows the ins and out of everything trying to prove people wrong when he doesn't even bother reading the posts that have been written.

Its actually laughable how much of a joke you are.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Luke, out of interest, do you talk to strangers like that in person as well? Or do you just stick to the internet for childish name calling?

 

[Cooksport]

No, he really does speak to "strangers" like that.

You never answered my question regarding qualifications in the automotive industry?

 

[Chip-mk1]

No, he really does speak to "strangers" like that.

Should think he gets slapped about a lot in the pub then, well assuming he is old enough to get into one, he certainly doesnt sound it from how he talks, lol

You never answered my question regarding qualifications in the automotive industry?

No I didnt, as after I answered the one about industries I worked in and you didnt bother to respond when I asked why so I realised at that point you werent actually asking out of any genuine interest but because you were looking to try and claim I dont have the experience or knowledge to comment when I in fact do of course, I've been building and modifying engines since most of the people on here were learnign to ride a bike I suspect so I decided not to bother discussing such things any further with you as like I said im here to talk cars not people. TBH all the best people I know in engine building laugh at qualifications and value experience anyway, I certainly know lots of people with plenty of qualifications and still no idea, lol

 

[MartinR]

No, he really does speak to "strangers" like that.

flol this thread has past it i would say. petty and pathetic, ^^good luck in life

 

[Daz_RT_04]

I personally think the results on my own car are possibly a little far fetched tbh, but Im happy to be proven wrong.

176.2bhp

168.8Trq

Im struggling to understand how mines gained this much over the standard figures of 166bhp and 147lb's (IIRC).... I've gained an apparent 10.2bhp and 21.8 ft lb's of torque.

Mods:
Full exhaust 2.5" Exhaust system with De-cat
Ph1 Airbox, JMS Intake pipe, Bigger CAF's + an ITG filter.

Its done 93k and is treated like a baby, but I cant see the gains being that realistic surely?

 

[Chip-mk1]

I personally think the results on my own car are possibly a little far fetched tbh, but Im happy to be proven wrong.

176.2bhp

168.8Trq

Im struggling to understand how mines gained this much over the standard figures of 166bhp and 147lb's (IIRC).... I've gained an apparent 10.2bhp and 21.8 ft lb's of torque.

Mods:
Full exhaust 2.5" Exhaust system with De-cat
Ph1 Airbox, JMS Intake pipe, Bigger CAF's + an ITG filter.

Its done 93k and is treated like a baby, but I cant see the gains being that realistic surely?

169lbft is certainly a massvive figure for a "standard" engine like yours (ie a few basic external mods only) and its unusual to be coupled with a sub 180bhp figure too.
I know of others getting well past 160 "standard" too, but normally when F4Rs make comfortably over 160lbft like that they also make over 180bhp.

Again, my first gut instinct would simply be a roller sync error, a look at the graphs could quickly prove or dispel this theory, this doesnt effect BHP at all, but can alter torque fairly dramatically.

Where in the rev range did the graph show your car hitting the rev limiter?

Again would be good if you were going to surrey rolling road on saturday to see how the torque figures their vary.
Ive a funny feeling bhp will end up very similar but with less torque shown.

 

[Laine_16v]

A lot of it IMO is how the car was driven for the first few thousand miles of its life.

Some were bought by boy racers and thrashed around from day dot, some bought by a respectable middle aged business man who wanted a little sports car to commute to work.

I am very much convinced the engines given a considerably harder life from day dot produce the best figures.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Ps

Do any of the graphs have details of the intake temperature correction that was used?
Its a cold time of year so easy to get a high figure if the rolling road doesnt take the temp into account properly and apply the relevant SAE correction factor.

 

[Owen]

Polite warning: Any further posts referring to other users as c**ts, fags or any other inappropriate terms will result in points.

 

[Laine_16v]

Ps

Do any of the graphs have details of the intake temperature correction that was used?
Its a cold time of year so easy to get a high figure if the rolling road doesnt take the temp into account properly and apply the relevant SAE correction factor.

My SRR run the day was considerably hotter than the day my car went to Ktec

 

[Chip-mk1]

Polite warning: Any further posts referring to other users as c**ts, fags or any other inappropriate terms will result in points.

Seems like a good idea, its all water off a ducks back to me, but it doesnt look good for users who find threads in google search and might want to join the forum etc.

 

[Chip-mk1]

My SRR run the day was considerably hotter than the day my car went to Ktec

If used properly the rollers should have a pretty good guess at getting all figures to be not the figures actually produced but what they would be if the tempeature was 298K instead.
There is a limit to how far this is accurate though of course and the further the temperature of the dyno cell is away from 298K then worse this inaccuracy will be.

Also depends on where the probe is placed of course, if you have an induction kit drawing air from the floor and place the probe in the bay for example, thats a whacking chunk more power in an instant as it will be correcting for temps you arent seeing.

Its SO easy to get a misreading out of a rolling road, either through incompetance or dishonesty or simply a minor technical fault with the temperature probe itself etc.

 

[Luke.]

Luke, out of interest, do you talk to strangers like that in person as well? Or do you just stick to the internet for childish name calling?

If a 'stranger' came up to me and had the attitude you had then yes I would. With regards to getting slapped about in the pub, I'm pretty sure you don't know me at all. So you don't know who I am, what I look like or what my reputation is like. LMAO @ Keyboard Warrior.

Hypocritical about taking about being childish. It's childish of you to nit pick in the first place. I'm just telling you a few home truths. Shame you've not taken it so well..

It's also not a good image to see people being brainwashed with all the crap 'some' people come out with on this forum so it really is swings and roundabouts.

 

[Chip-mk1]

If a 'stranger' came up to me and had the attitude you had then yes I would. With regards to getting slapped about in the pub, I'm pretty sure you don't know me at all. So you don't know who I am, what I look like or what my reputation is like. LMAO @ Keyboard Warrior.

Lol @ you and your reputation locally, ok mate, lol

Hypocritical about taking about being childish. It's childish of you to nit pick in the first place.

Im not nit picking im trying to have a technical discusison, sadly by picking you to have it with, im on to a bit of a time waster as its very apparent you dont really know much about engines.

I'm just telling you a few home truths. Shame you've not taken it so well..

Im not taking any notice at all, of you calling me a c*nt etc, if you think that is a "home truth" just because I happen to doubt some figures from a piece of measuring equipment you really are even stranger than you have already seemed in this thread.

It's also not a good image to see people being brainwashed with all the crap 'some' people come out with on this forum so it really is swings and roundabouts.

Not just on this forum, I see companies trying to brainwash people with misleading "tests" all the time, hence my sceptism, Ive spent a long time now building and tuning engines and the vast majority of "too good to be true" claims are exactly that, not true.

I'll be very pleased if this becomes the first product of this nature to prove me wrong though, as it would be great to see an easy way to get more power from these cracking little cars

 

[Skeeter]

Wow. Looks like I made a good move by deciding not to go to this.

 

[Nick172Cup]

Not related to much to these rollers but I'll post a few graphs this evening regarding torque figures and different induction setups. I had a setup that made 181bhp and 169lb/ft of torque so if the chap had a shite Halfords filter on the car, changed it for a better setup no wonder he's made a large lump of power and torque.

 

[gti6steve]

Wow. Looks like I made a good move by deciding not to go to this.

That's what I was thinking glad i went 2 to work

 

[Cub.]

I was there, along with about 30 other people. And I don't think I have sworn once on this forum, so I wouldn't generalise chaps...everybody is different.

 

[tom172cup]

wow this has escalated.

 

[Luke.]

Lol @ you and your reputation locally, ok mate, lol

As stated you do NOT know me or anything about me. So dont call me mate..

Im not nit picking im trying to have a technical discusison, sadly by picking you to have it with, im on to a bit of a time waster as its very apparent you dont really know much about engines.

Please elaborate on how you think I know nothing about engines??

Im not taking any notice at all, of you calling me a c*nt etc, if you think that is a "home truth" just because I happen to doubt some figures from a piece of measuring equipment you really are even stranger than you have already seemed in this thread.

I actually dont recall calling you a c**t..

Not just on this forum, I see companies trying to brainwash people with misleading "tests" all the time, hence my sceptism, Ive spent a long time now building and tuning engines and the vast majority of "too good to be true" claims are exactly that, not true.

I dont think this is brainwashing at all, the results IMO arent misleading, you just seem to have a problem with N/A clios making good power.

I'll be very pleased if this becomes the first product of this nature to prove me wrong though, as it would be great to see an easy way to get more power from these cracking little cars

Watch this space!!

 

[Will.]

Im not taking any notice at all, of you calling me a c*nt etc, if you think that is a "home truth" just because I happen to doubt some figures from a piece of measuring equipment you really are even stranger than you have already seemed in this thread.

Do you go into every thread on Rolling roads and do the same? If the answer is:

Yes: Get a life and stop aruging about rolling road results.
No: You're just picking on K-tec, which means you too have been brain washed by the bulls**t this forum provides.

Not just on this forum, I see companies trying to brainwash people with misleading "tests" all the time, hence my sceptism, Ive spent a long time now building and tuning engines and the vast majority of "too good to be true" claims are exactly that, not true.

If the induction system was created by Cooksport, why would K-tec give us misleading info on the result?

Wow. Looks like I made a good move by deciding not to go to this.

That's what I was thinking glad i went 2 to work

Why not? Because some knob has brainwashed you into thinking that K-tecs road is misreading?

Oh and FYI, it was me that "called you a c**t", but if you read what I wrote carefully, you shall see I didn't actually call you one.

 

[Luke.]

Wow. Looks like I made a good move by deciding not to go to this.

That's what I was thinking glad i went 2 to work

You need to stop reading into things. 'Someone' has just blown things out of proportion..

 

[gti6steve]

It just seems like one massive slanging match or am I reading the wrong thread here!!!!!!!