Not bench racing, real world event. The point you make is the same basic
point I wanted people to think about. While the programs can be close in
predicting outcomes the fact remains that the number of variables are too many
to
incorporate into a predictive program. What the program fails to do in degree
is to
account for variables as they relate to each other and they are for static
figures taking a cross sectional piece that is forever tied to that fraction of
a second, with a certain barometric pressure, temp and other variables.
Mark fed the most accurate data had into the program and it came up with
ratios and shift points. Made the changes and went way faster than he wanted or
the program predicted. Real world results beat theoretical results always. This
leads us to several possible explanations;
data input wrong, program wrong, variables not accounted for (traction etc.),
dyno figures wrong, math errors or the program is not as accurate as other
programs. No bench racing here just a mystery to resolve.
Same thing happened with an engine he built for the 64 Marauder.....it
produced 90 more HP than the program indicated. The real problem is being able
to id
all variables and then finding a program that can include these variables as
they relate to all other data points.
Love your comments, keep em coming
Love ya babe don't ever change, except to always agree with me.
Sean (moonstone)
P.S. Challenger and Columbia
|