Decat FAIL!

[ditz]

The magical transparent suck up bandwagon arrived ?

.....:nono:



and, for the record, RR results arent worth the paper they are written on in terms of pre decat/post decat results.


what would you prefer a bit of paper with some numbers on it or a car that feels physically quicker to you?

 

[.Gem.]

^^ thats what I thought?

I physically felt that something was wrong, and as such had filter checked etc....but was only after removing the decat, and getting an instant and extrmelely noticable increase in power. Felt like going from a 1.4 to a 2.0 tbh

 

[Turkish]

The magical transparent suck up bandwagon arrived ?

.....:nono:



and, for the record, RR results arent worth the paper they are written on in terms of pre decat/post decat results.


what would you prefer a bit of paper with some numbers on it or a car that feels physically quicker to you?

For the record I'm well aware of the inaccuracies you can suffer on a RR as a result of tyre pressures, ambient temperature, humidity and even the operator carrying out the test.

Lets put it another way, would you trust a human beings perception over a measured quantative peice of information? For example you take your car to have tuning work done would the tuning company saying it feels quicker be enough for you or would you actually want some evidence? A RR or dyno is still the most reliable and trusted way of measuring power output and until manufacturers and tuners start employing human beings to measure engine performance I'll stick with RR ta.

If lil blondie noticed a marked difference (seeing as she likened it to driving a 1.4 vs a 2.0) then a RR run would definately confirm a 40 + bhp drop despite your concerns over how accurate they are.

 

[Clgale88]

must of been somet in the decatblocking and now its probally ghone so id personaly put the decat back on i love the sound of myne



ps if anyone wants a decat for a 1.4 or 1.6 ive got a brand new one

How much my mate wants 1 for his 1.4

 

[ditz]

.....:nono:



and, for the record, RR results arent worth the paper they are written on in terms of pre decat/post decat results.


what would you prefer a bit of paper with some numbers on it or a car that feels physically quicker to you?

For the record I'm well aware of the inaccuracies you can suffer on a RR as a result of tyre pressures, ambient temperature, humidity and even the operator carrying out the test.

Lets put it another way, would you trust a human beings perception over a measured quantative peice of information? For example you take your car to have tuning work done would the tuning company saying it feels quicker be enough for you or would you actually want some evidence? A RR or dyno is still the most reliable and trusted way of measuring power output and until manufacturers and tuners start employing human beings to measure engine performance I'll stick with RR ta.

If lil blondie noticed a marked difference (seeing as she likened it to driving a 1.4 vs a 2.0) then a RR run would definately confirm a 40 + bhp drop despite your concerns over how accurate they are.

i dont care how accurate they are, you've missed the point.

all im saying is... if i had a choice of A somebody who knows a particular car well and drives it every day, telling me after making a modification it feels like its gone from a 1.4 to a 2.0 in terms of power..
or B a bit of paper

i'd go for A

 

[mattjk]

To be honest it makes no sense at all this thread, I suspect either the lambda was loose/not plugged in propely etc.. and when the operator put it back on he noticed and put it right, theres no way putting a cat back on would make a car feel like a 2.0 from a 1.4 unless thats just a womens perception I dunno