RIDOX Replica Garage-In Memory of TurnLeft-GT40,300ZX,F430,TVR,AEM S2000,Cizeta,TransAm Doug Nash

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Who are you quoting? Race gas vs 91 octane consistently adds 10 hp? In what cars? You can use a bloody million octane fuel in a car tuned to run 91 and it won't add anything. Octane rating is just a measurement of a fuel's knock resistance. Unless you're changing the tune on a car, using higher octane fuel than the car has been tuned for makes no difference other than costing more.

This reminds me of a friend of mine who was convinced he could "feel the difference" in his crappy old Commodore when he ran 98RON premium in it lol.

For the quote, you can read here : http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16459929&postcount=11

Also read here :

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16517925&postcount=190

"I believe that there is a lot of misinterpretation of the term "drivetrain" losses in the discussion here (and in general). By definition, drivetrain losses are the losses incurred by friction in the transmission, bearings, differential and CV joints. However tire drag and slip losses, engine ancillary losses and inertial effects should not be included in drivetrain losses.

10% pure drivetrain loss is not an unreasonable number IMO. Looking at the Rototest results, I found drivetrain losses to be in the 6-10% range. Add to this tire drag and inertial effects and the difference between crank power and WHP can easily reach 15-18%. But that 15-18% is more than just "drivetrain" losses."

Interesting discussion there Tire pressure alone can influence dyno reading, intentionally raising or lowering tire pressure can give interesting results. I think a better term is parasitic loss. Japanese tuner tend to use lower % at 10-13 ( depending on MT or AT ) as often they use Dynapack, which is different as it runs on wheel hub.



I wonder what your friend would say if he drive Commodore or Falcon running on gas like the taxis Can he feel the difference ? Back in early 2000, most young import enthusiasts in my circles know that ECU tuning is very crucial part to make sure the cars perform well and reliable no matter what fuel used to run, some just ran piggyback, some use standalone like EMS, Wolf EMS, and expensive one like Motec or plug n' play like PowerFC. Cars also can have more than one mapping on stock ECU for different conditions, usually one of them is for safe mode, but I also heard special mode for emission test / factory mode ?
There's also aftermarket solutions to allow storing of multiple maps, and change of mapping at user discretion ( been in a car that can change maps using cruise control switch )

 

[Mike_grpA]

For the quote, you can read here : http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16459929&postcount=11

Yeah I found the quote, it was just from a random forum poster lol.

I wonder what your friend would say if he drive Commodore or Falcon running on gas like the taxis Can he feel the difference ?

No idea, he's a derpasaurus, so he'd probably claim to feel the difference even if I gave him two identical cars to drive. Besides, Bommodore taxis running LPG, like any vehicles running LPG, are tuned for that fuel. LPG can be awesome if the car is tuned for it, and can be a nightmare if it hasn't been tuned well. There's a vast difference between a car that is tuned to run LPG vs one that is tuned to run petrol, and someone claiming a car that is tuned to run 91 octane petrol will produce more power when running 98 octane.

Back in early 2000, most young import enthusiasts in my circles know that ECU tuning is very crucial part to make sure the cars perform well and reliable no matter what fuel used to run, some just ran piggyback, some use standalone like EMS, Wolf EMS, and expensive one like Motec or plug n' play like PowerFC. Cars also can have more than one mapping on stock ECU for different conditions, usually one of them is for safe mode, but I also heard special mode for emission test / factory mode ?
There's also aftermarket solutions to allow storing of multiple maps, and change of mapping at user discretion ( been in a car that can change maps using cruise control switch )

Yeah I'm fully aware of the hows, whats, and whys behind ECU tuning. I've got a mate with a performance workshop. Edit: Well in truth, he's more of an acquaintance. He's a good mate's brother in law. In any case, I'll let you get this thread back to being about your GT6 garage mate.

 

[ALB123]

@ALB123 , You haven't answered my question ? Is this why you are here ?

I've been a follower of this thread for 2 years.

Have you not stated several times that the reason you open this GT6 Garage is to fix the errors Polyphony Digital made when building their cars for GT6? All of this could have been avoided if you simply acknowledged that you might possibly be a chance you aren't always 100% right.

In the 2+ years of me posting in this thread, have I ever said "Hey...that's wrong..." No. I'm fully aware you know more about cars & specs than I could ever fathom. One time I come to you with information to try and help you maintain accuracy with your builds. After all, this isn't "Fantasy Garage" it's a Replica Garage. But you can't even consider the fact that you might be incorrect about something. "Oh, your brother owns the car and he was able to spend an afternoon with BMW employees including M4 project engineers where they actually measure the engine output directly, not real wheel horsepower, but they take power readings straight from the source?"

Perhaps you feel the engineers are wrong, as OdeFinn does. Or perhaps you think I'm lying about this. The one time in 2+ years that I even challenge one single aspect of your Replica building. One single time. Your arrogance refuses to even consider the possibility that you are wrong about this. I'm not asking you to admit you're wrong, but just consider the possibility. Nope. That's not going to happen.

I'd bet any amount of money that if I were still playing Gran Turismo 6 every day and hanging out in here posting how much I love your tunes you might have given 10 seconds thought to the completely foreign idea that you might be incorrect about one single vehicle specification. Ever since I stopped playing GT6 you have treated me with disdain. I understand my excitement for something new & fresh, to me, is of no significance to you and perhaps I let my enthusiasm get the better of me by posting about my excitement with Assetto Corsa in your Garage. I posted here because I thought I was among friends. I quickly understood that my presence was no longer welcome here by you now that I was no longer praising your tunes as I had in the past.

Or shall we discuss the snide remarks you started putting on your Profile Page - taking jabs at me and anyone else who dare enjoys a game that isn't GT6. I didn't even know about that until someone PM'ed me to clue me in on the digs you were taking at my expense. Don't deny it because you eventually visited my Profile Page, took a quote that I had written as much "Status", which I found on a stupid meme from Reddit and changed a few words to levy insults in my direction. Or was that just a 1 in a million coincidence? Please, continue spending hours reading post after post in the Assetto Corsa threads just so you can find the complaint posts and hit your Like button -- you know, to offer your support (your words) to those poor people who are unhappy. We will continue to laugh in return. 👍

I don't take video games seriously...I play one game. What I do take seriously is when someone I considered an online friend starts lobbing petty slights in my direction because he doesn't like the game I've switched to. You asked a few of us why are we here in this thread. Every one of us owns GT6 - I've been subscribed to this thread for 2+ years. Why do you follow dozens of threads for a game you don't like, don't own, don't plan to ever own & couldn't own if you wanted to because you don't have the game system to play it?

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I've been a follower of this thread for 2 years.

Have you not stated several times that the reason you open this GT6 Garage is to fix the errors Polyphony Digital made when building their cars for GT6? All of this could have been avoided if you simply acknowledged that you might possibly be a chance you aren't always 100% right.

In the 2+ years of me posting in this thread, have I ever said "Hey...that's wrong..." No. I'm fully aware you know more about cars & specs than I could ever fathom. One time I come to you with information to try and help you maintain accuracy with your builds. After all, this isn't "Fantasy Garage" it's a Replica Garage. But you can't even consider the fact that you might be incorrect about something. "Oh, your brother owns the car and he was able to spend an afternoon with BMW employees including M4 project engineers where they actually measure the engine output directly, not real wheel horsepower, but they take power readings straight from the source?"

Perhaps you feel the engineers are wrong, as OdeFinn does. Or perhaps you think I'm lying about this. The one time in 2+ years that I even challenge one single aspect of your Replica building. One single time. Your arrogance refuses to even consider the possibility that you are wrong about this. I'm not asking you to admit you're wrong, but just consider the possibility. Nope. That's not going to happen.

I'd bet any amount of money that if I were still playing Gran Turismo 6 every day and hanging out in here posting how much I love your tunes you might have given 10 seconds thought to the completely foreign idea that you might be incorrect about one single vehicle specification. Ever since I stopped playing GT6 you have treated me with disdain. I understand my excitement for something new & fresh, to me, is of no significance to you and perhaps I let my enthusiasm get the better of me by posting about my excitement with Assetto Corsa in your Garage. I posted here because I thought I was among friends. I quickly understood that my presence was no longer welcome here by you now that I was no longer praising your tunes as I had in the past.

Or shall we discuss the snide remarks you started putting on your Profile Page - taking jabs at me and anyone else who dare enjoys a game that isn't GT6. I didn't even know about that until someone PM'ed me to clue me in on the digs you were taking at my expense. Don't deny it because you eventually visited my Profile Page, took a quote that I had written as much "Status", which I found on a stupid meme from Reddit and changed a few words to levy insults in my direction. Or was that just a 1 in a million coincidence? Please, continue spending hours reading post after post in the Assetto Corsa threads just so you can find the complaint posts and hit your Like button -- you know, to offer your support (your words) to those poor people who are unhappy. We will continue to laugh in return. 👍

I don't take video games seriously...I play one game. What I do take seriously is when someone I considered an online friend starts lobbing petty slights in my direction because he doesn't like the game I've switched to. You asked a few of us why are we here in this thread. Every one of us owns GT6 - I've been subscribed to this thread for 2+ years. Why do you follow dozens of threads for a game you don't like, don't own, don't plan to ever own & couldn't own if you wanted to because you don't have the game system to play it?

I feel sorry for you if you feel that way, none of the bolded part ( first part ) is true, I think you are being too carried away emotionally.

My status post are about the game and people behavior regarding said game in general, and no I didn't go to your profile, I simply saw it on the status update list, and I changed it for fun, just like the next few other member status talked about ignorance For the likes, I don't take like button really that serious ( unlike some people here in GTP ), it's more like, oh this guy need support or I like the way this guy post. You all can laugh at me, I don't mind. It was never about you. The only people that keep annoying me are 2, Johnnypenso and Killerjimbag, those two are old news.

I will add the power figure you stated if that's what you wish. I never said the engineers are wrong, until there's engine dyno reading to complement the chassis dyno reading so I can derive how much parasitic loss %, I can't conclusively determine the actual power output of the engine. These replicas are always work in progress, new information will be used as they are available. If there's anything like engine dyno reading that can be used, that would be great.

For the last part, I do plan to get the game, I don't hate the game, I'm just critical about it and I will still be critical in the future. Did you see the like on your post ? I liked that because that shows that you finally share what's on your mind and I'm glad that happen, although I would have preferred that we talked about this in conversation. Anyone else have issue with me or want to clear things up, hit me up in conversation, it only cost a few clicks.

 

[OdeFinn]

Do you have an engineering degree? because if not, this post just looks ridiculous.

Yes several engineering, not engineer. It's ridiculous to confront people with several high level degrees without understand of their own work, so ridiculous is good word for this.

Perhaps you feel the engineers are wrong, as OdeFinn does.

Don't make to far taken assumptions, never said at they are all wrong, only taking lot of with grain of salt due their arrogance of believing to know all.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Don't make to far taken assumptions, never said at they are all wrong, only taking lot of with grain of salt due their arrogance of believing to know all.

Irony

 

[Mike_grpA]

Yes several engineering, not engineer.

What does that even mean? You're saying you have several engineering degrees, and then that you're not an engineer?

If you have several engineering degrees, you'll be happy to outline exactly what ones you have, and what they encompass. Of course, I think you're making things up, because you seem to have a tenuous grasp at best of the basic things you're talking about in here.

 

[OdeFinn]

What does that even mean? You're saying you have several engineering degrees, and then that you're not an engineer?

Engineering doesn't mean engineer.

If you have several engineering degrees, you'll be happy to outline exactly what ones you have, and what they encompass. Of course, I think you're making things up, because you seem to have a tenuous grasp at best of the basic things you're talking about in here.

Lol, don't see a sign where says at this thread is for applying job or something.
But many years wasted on school learning automotive technics, that answer is more than you need to know.

 

[Mike_grpA]

Engineering doesn't mean engineer.


Lol, don't see a sign where says at this thread is for applying job or something.
But many years wasted on school learning automotive technics, that answer is more than you need to know.

Saying you have several engineering degrees does in fact mean you are a qualified engineer lol. Obviously from this post you have precisely 0 engineering degrees, and by the sounds of it, you've at best done a course to become a qualified mechanic, but I wouldn't bet you're even that qualified. As someone who is friends with a few good mechanics, and two engineers with qualifications in different fields, you definitely don't sound like you have any expertise in this field. I'll leave it at that, because clearly you'll just keep making things up.

Edit: Just for clarification, I haven't got an engineering degree, nor am I a fully qualified mechanic, but I'm not here to pretend to be more knowledgeable than I actually am. I've done two years of mechanics electives at tech college after becoming qualified in automotive smash repairs, have spend most of my adult life playing around with cars, and have a few friends with a lot of expertise and knowledge in the industry, and I have a huge passion for motorsport and automotive technology - That's the extent of my knowledge, and I'm more than happy to be open about it.

 

[OdeFinn]

Saying you have several engineering degrees does in fact mean you are a qualified engineer lol. Obviously from this post you have precisely 0 engineering degrees, and by the sounds of it, you've at best done a course to become a qualified mechanic, but I wouldn't bet you're even that qualified. As someone who is friends with a few good mechanics, and two engineers with qualifications in different fields, you definitely don't sound like you have any expertise in this field. I'll leave it at that, because clearly you'll just keep making things up.

Edit: Just for clarification, I haven't got an engineering degree, nor am I a fully qualified mechanic, but I'm not here to pretend to be more knowledgeable than I actually am. I've done two years of mechanics electives at tech college after becoming qualified in automotive smash repairs, have spend most of my adult life playing around with cars, and have a few friends with a lot of expertise and knowledge in the industry, and I have a huge passion for motorsport and automotive technology - That's the extent of my knowledge, and I'm more than happy to be open about it.

Good for you, I'm not pretending anything, or telling how many engineer friends or girlfriends I have, translation of engineering to Finnish seems bit strange to you, but I don't care.
Are you after tin or tin era dude? I have one tin era, one of so called "made up studies".

 

[Mike_grpA]

Keep talking complete nonsense, it's all you seem to be able to do consistently. I'm done with this conversation.

 

[Thorin Cain]

Guys, seriously? Let it go already I get that this is a forum, and by definition it's for giving opinions and having discussions 👍. But all I've been reading in the last few pages is a bunch of off-topic nonsense. With the exception of a few posts discussing technical details of one of Ridox's replicas and the validity of the information used by him to create it. The rest just reads like a school playground game of he says, she says. Are we all not a little too old for that?

Also. Disagreeing with someone's opinion is one thing. But taking personal shots at people because they do not share your opinions is just petty and childish. So is the incessant need a couple of you seem to have with questioning others in an accusatory manner in an attempt to discredit their opinions.
If you feel that strongly about it take it to PM and try to resolve your differences between yourselves. Doing so in a public forum shows a). That you want to show off in front of others, b). A lack of class, or c). Both.

P.S. It also helps to remember that Google translate is not the best when it comes to making sense. Don't assume just because the words don't make sense that the person is at fault .

Have a nice day gentlemen .

 

[Pete05]

Guys, seriously? Let it go already I get that this is a forum, and by definition it's for giving opinions and having discussions 👍. But all I've been reading in the last few pages is a bunch of off-topic nonsense. With the exception of a few posts discussing technical details of one of Ridox's replicas and the validity of the information used by him to create it. The rest just reads like a school playground game of he says, she says. Are we all not a little too old for that?

Also. Disagreeing with someone's opinion is one thing. But taking personal shots at people because they do not share your opinions is just petty and childish. So is the incessant need a couple of you seem to have with questioning others in an accusatory manner in an attempt to discredit their opinions.
If you feel that strongly about it take it to PM and try to resolve your differences between yourselves. Doing so in a public forum shows a). That you want to show off in front of others, b). A lack of class, or c). Both.

P.S. It also helps to remember that Google translate is not the best when it comes to making sense. Don't assume just because the words don't make sense that the person is at fault .

Have a nice day gentlemen .

Here here TC 👍

 

[Johnnypenso]

Guys, seriously? Let it go already I get that this is a forum, and by definition it's for giving opinions and having discussions 👍. But all I've been reading in the last few pages is a bunch of off-topic nonsense. With the exception of a few posts discussing technical details of one of Ridox's replicas and the validity of the information used by him to create it. The rest just reads like a school playground game of he says, she says. Are we all not a little too old for that?

Also. Disagreeing with someone's opinion is one thing. But taking personal shots at people because they do not share your opinions is just petty and childish. So is the incessant need a couple of you seem to have with questioning others in an accusatory manner in an attempt to discredit their opinions.
If you feel that strongly about it take it to PM and try to resolve your differences between yourselves. Doing so in a public forum shows a). That you want to show off in front of others, b). A lack of class, or c). Both.

P.S. It also helps to remember that Google translate is not the best when it comes to making sense. Don't assume just because the words don't make sense that the person is at fault .

Have a nice day gentlemen .

If you think someone violated the AUP you should report it. Otherwise, anything brought up in the forum is fair game for discussion. Someone pretending to have several engineering degrees is going to be questioned about it, tough luck if he can't back it up. Labelling opinions you don't like as either/or alternatives of lack of class or showing off is nothing more than that which you are accusing others of doing. Personal attacks, a lack of class and showing off for your friends. Pot, meet kettle.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Yeah I found the quote, it was just from a random forum poster lol.


No idea, he's a derpasaurus, so he'd probably claim to feel the difference even if I gave him two identical cars to drive. Besides, Bommodore taxis running LPG, like any vehicles running LPG, are tuned for that fuel. LPG can be awesome if the car is tuned for it, and can be a nightmare if it hasn't been tuned well. There's a vast difference between a car that is tuned to run LPG vs one that is tuned to run petrol, and someone claiming a car that is tuned to run 91 octane petrol will produce more power when running 98 octane.




Yeah I'm fully aware of the hows, whats, and whys behind ECU tuning. I've got a mate with a performance workshop. Edit: Well in truth, he's more of an acquaintance. He's a good mate's brother in law. In any case, I'll let you get this thread back to being about your GT6 garage mate.

Just for information, the BMW M3/M4 minimum fuel is 91 AKI / 95 RON or 89 AKI / 93 RON with no more than 10% Ethanol, the recommended fuel by BMW is 93 AKI / 98 RON with no more than 10% Ethanol. The stock ECU do adapt to the fuel quality changes, either by retarding or advancing ignition timing as well as adjusting fuel map and boost levels ( not sure if with 91 AKI, the car hit stock boost level ). The lower limit is 91 AKI, while upper limit most likely be around 96 AKI / 100 RON, in which any more higher likely to be useless without further tuning ( fuel map and ignition timing, there's limit on stock ECU can adapt to knocking, boost, altitude, fuel etc ) Sea levels/altitude also affect turbo cars more and when the car is going rich to keep it cool ( at high altitude for example, the turbo need to work harder to build up boost ), then usually running higher octane than recommended will also be pointless without proper tuning.

 

[Thorin Cain]

If you think someone violated the AUP you should report it. Otherwise, anything brought up in the forum is fair game for discussion

Thanks for clearing that up Kettle .
However, I don't recall saying anyone violated the AUP. I did however make a point of saying some of it was fair game, because it was. But that doesn't change the fact some of it wasn't. I only call what I see, nothing more .

Someone pretending to have several engineering degrees is going to be questioned about it, tough luck if he can't back it up.

The fact you included this sentence in your reply just goes to show there was some validity to my interpretation, so thanks for that . You'll notice I bolded a word for you...."pretending". Don't you mean "claiming"? I only ask because these two words have very different meanings, especially in this context. One means someone said they did/had something and you would like that verified. The other means, I know they don't have it but they say they do. Which is calling someone a liar, is it not? I'm pretty sure this could be intetperated as an accusation/personal attack, without blatantly violating the AUP.

Labelling opinions you don't like as either/or alternatives of lack of class or showing off is nothing more than that which you are accusing others of doing. Personal attacks, a lack of class and showing off for your friends. Pot, meet kettle

Oh, how well you think you know me ..
The fact I gave 3 options was no coincidence, it's a reminder that not everything is black and white .
And it wasn't the opinions I was labelling. If you look real closely you'll see It was the way they were conveyed that I took exeption to. And you know that because you are not that .

Anyway, Now that you've had your fun, let's move on. I had written the last post in an attempt to stop this public littering. So if you have any more to say to me, you know what to do.

Thanks for the longest "I know you are but what am I" insult I've ever read. Don't worry I won't go running tho the headmaster, unlike some, I don't take these things personally

Pot .

 

[Johnnypenso]

Thanks for clearing that up Kettle .
However, I don't recall saying anyone violated the AUP. I did however make a point of saying some of it was fair game, because it was. But that doesn't change the fact some of it wasn't. I only call what I see, nothing more .

No one said the AUP was violated. If there's no AUP violation it's just discussion that you're attempting to shout down. That's the point.

The fact you included this sentence in your reply just goes to show there was some validity to my interpretation, so thanks for that . You'll notice I bolded a word for you...."pretending". Don't you mean "claiming"? I only ask because these two words have very different meanings, especially in this context. One means someone said they did/had something and you would like that verified. The other means, I know they don't have it but they say they do. Which is calling someone a liar, is it not? I'm pretty sure this could be intetperated as an accusation/personal attack, without blatantly violating the AUP.

Someone claims to have several engineering degrees, get called on it, and suddenly they are not an engineer. It's no longer a claim because the claim has been debunked. Therefore it's pretending. It's all about the tense.

Oh, how well you think you know me ..
The fact I gave 3 options was no coincidence, it's a reminder that not everything is black and white .
And it wasn't the opinions I was labelling. If you look real closely you'll see It was the way they were conveyed that I took exeption to. And you know that because you are not that .

Anyway, Now that you've had your fun, let's move on. I had written the last post in an attempt to stop this public littering. So if you have any more to say to me, you know what to do.

Thanks for the longest "I know you are but what am I" insult I've ever read. Don't worry I won't go running tho the headmaster, unlike some, I don't take these things personally

Pot .

I don't know you, but I can read what you wrote. You gave two possible motivations for anyone posting discussion that you don't like, in a public forum, both negative. Now you add a third...public littering. It's nothing more than the predictable, "I don't like what you're saying so I'm going to disparage it and and try to make you feel bad so you stop talking about it".

 

[Thorin Cain]

Really? That wasn't what to do

No one said the AUP was violated. If there's no AUP violation it's just discussion that you're attempting to shout down. That's the point.

Who's shouting? Merely suggesting a bit more civility and patience. This whole thing started because a fair question wasn't given the dignity of a response before others decided to "chip in". You can say what you want but we all, know it was meant to illicit a certain response. Most of us have seen you guys do it on many a forum. Who can vouch for the validity of the Porsche driver by the way? I haven't seen him drive it (Nothing personal if you are reading this 👍. I have no reason to doubt you ). Get that point? Ok I'll spell it out. Don't ask for proof of something if you can't prove to the contrary.

Ironic how one of the people I felt hadn't been out of hand, Is the one with the problem isn't it. What? Did that thought not cross your mind either?

Someone claims to have several engineering degrees, get called on it, and suddenly they are not an engineer. It's no longer a claim because the claim has been debunked. Therefore it's pretending. It's all about the tense.

Read again. He said them both at the same time.....at least I assume he's a he, I really should stop doing that . But I digress. I am just saying, if I had two engineering degrees but worked as, let's say a toilet attendant. I'd call myself a toilet attendant. But I'm not so I don't

Want to know what I do know about him (there I go assuming again )? If you ask him a question in a civil manner, you tend to get an honest answer. You may not agree with it or like it but....

Just for reference, this is why you should never react too quick to something posted thru Google translate while your emotions are high . It might give you a chance to consider different possibilities 💡 (<- To get the full effect come back when the seasonal smiles disappear; ))

I don't know you, but I can read what you wrote. You gave two possible motivations for anyone posting discussion that you don't like, in a public forum, both negative. Now you add a third...public littering. It's nothing more than the predictable, "I don't like what you're saying so I'm going to disparage it and and try to make you feel bad so you stop talking about it".

Na, guess not. But then that's not my concern.

You can read what I wrote but unfortunately you don't really hear what I say. Probably the cause for all these false assumptions you have been making recently. Perhaps for you, information is best absorbed through the ear 💡.
Again, I point to the patience and civility point from above. That was the general opinion I was giving. And possibly implied certain people needed to act their age a little bit. I work with teenagers so I have a good frame of reference (Want to guess my job yet guys ).

Oh there was one other point was their not?
Oh, yeah...

....seriously? Let it go already

that was it.....

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Just for information, the BMW M3/M4 minimum fuel is 91 AKI / 95 RON or 89 AKI / 93 RON with no more than 10% Ethanol, the recommended fuel by BMW is 93 AKI / 98 RON with no more than 10% Ethanol. The stock ECU do adapt to the fuel quality changes, either by retarding or advancing ignition timing as well as adjusting fuel map and boost levels ( not sure if with 91 AKI, the car hit stock boost level ). The lower limit is 91 AKI, while upper limit most likely be around 96 AKI / 100 RON, in which any more higher likely to be useless without further tuning ( fuel map and ignition timing, there's limit on stock ECU can adapt to knocking, boost, altitude, fuel etc ) Sea levels/altitude also affect turbo cars more and when the car is going rich to keep it cool ( at high altitude for example, the turbo need to work harder to build up boost ), then usually running higher octane than recommended will also be pointless without proper tuning.

More reference data that I found, Dynojet log for M4 DCT, stock ZCP with most probably close to 93 octane fuel ( using E30 blend ), though not sure if it's full tank of E30 or mixed ( maybe mixed ) :

Stock boost between 15-20+ psi, 447WHP on close to 93 octane BMW recommended fuel. AFAIK, from back E46 M3 and E92 M3, the stock ECU could support up to 96 octane fuel / 100 RON ( advancing timing up to this fuel level, up to +2, retarding timing with lower fuel octane up to -5 on E46 ), back then BMW also outlined similar fuel limits, 91 octane minimum and 93 octane recommended.

The E30 blend could yield varied octane depending on the base fuel used, it can be 93 to 94+ AKI ( up to 100RON ) I used 93 for worst case scenario.

This is ZCP model, Competition Package, with supposedly 19HP increase from standard model M4.

Another ZCP stock M4 dyno :



440WHP, mmm, not sure what fuel used.

Another stock M4 ZCP dyno, this time on Mustang Dyno, with 93 octane fuel, Dynojet numbers around 450+WHP, which means the E30 blend mix above may be less then 93 octane.

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1171540

 

[OdeFinn]

Someone claims to have several engineering degrees, get called on it, and suddenly they are not an engineer. It's no longer a claim because the claim has been debunked. Therefore it's pretending. It's all about the tense.

"Engineering is done by mechanics", does this mean at several mechanic are having some kinda sexual thing with several engineers?
I have never said/claim to have any engineer degree. But several other "level studies", how those translate to your country's education systems CORRECT degrees I don't know, or care.

Edit: just thinking if ordering few engineers from eBay, maybe this shop sells cheap engineers:
http://www.racecarengineering.com.au

 

[Johnnypenso]

Really? That wasn't what to do
Who's shouting? Merely suggesting a bit more civility and patience. This whole thing started because a fair question wasn't given the dignity of a response before others decided to "chip in". You can say what you want but we all, know it was meant to illicit a certain response. Most of us have seen you guys do it on many a forum. Who can vouch for the validity of the Porsche driver by the way? I haven't seen him drive it (Nothing personal if you are reading this 👍. I have no reason to doubt you ). Get that point? Ok I'll spell it out. Don't ask for proof of something if you can't prove to the contrary.

"Shout down" is an expression, it's not meant to be literal.

Ironic how one of the people I felt hadn't been out of hand, Is the one with the problem isn't it. What? Did that thought not cross your mind either?

Too cryptic, have no idea whom or what you're talking about.

Read again. He said them both at the same time.....at least I assume he's a he, I really should stop doing that . But I digress. I am just saying, if I had two engineering degrees but worked as, let's say a toilet attendant. I'd call myself a toilet attendant. But I'm not so I don't

Nope.

Want to know what I do know about him (there I go assuming again )? If you ask him a question in a civil manner, you tend to get an honest answer. You may not agree with it or like it but....

Just for reference, this is why you should never react too quick to something posted thru Google translate while your emotions are high . It might give you a chance to consider different possibilities 💡 (<- To get the full effect come back when the seasonal smiles disappear; ))

There you go again with the assumptions. If I ever react to anything on here with emotion I'll be sure to let you know.

Na, guess not. But then that's not my concern.

You can read what I wrote but unfortunately you don't really hear what I say. Probably the cause for all these false assumptions you have been making recently. Perhaps for you, information is best absorbed through the ear 💡.
Again, I point to the patience and civility point from above. That was the general opinion I was giving. And possibly implied certain people needed to act their age a little bit. I work with teenagers so I have a good frame of reference (Want to guess my job yet guys ).

Ah so some of us are acting like teenagers because we don't agree with you or others. There you go again.

Oh there was one other point was their not?
Oh, yeah...
that was it....

Is this how you work with teenagers? Tell them to let something go, while never letting it go yourself? Someone who's really interested in letting it go, would. Let's see if you're more advanced in that regard than the teenagers you work with.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

Hey Ridox, just dropping by among all the heated arguments here. Tried your Cizeta and Lotus Carlton last night. Cizeta is very convincing for an MR car now. Still tricky on the limit obviously, but doesn't try to kill you when you go above 20 km/h in a hairpin I compared it to your old Cizeta tune and it's a lot better too. Well done 👍 The Carlton is a bit meh in my opinion, bit too heavy and understeery for my liking. But I suspect that's because how the real car is and not your tune. Anyway, I'm looking forward to your next tunes (even though I feel activity in GT forums have died down a lot recently ).

Also a quick take on my thoughts with Ridox's replicas and accuracy: it does not change the underlying physics engine with GT6, but it is pretty good at creating the illusion of a better "feeling" car. As long as you try to drive it realistically (not GT Academy style drifting around every corner), it does give realistic sensations even for the notoriously flawed MR/RR cars. From creating almost 50+ of his tunes from this thread, the main things he does is using ballast and suspension settings. When done right the effect is quite profound. No, I don't think it's better than AC/AMS/LFS, but it's a lot closer than the stock PD setups. If 0-100% is a realism scale, vanilla GT6 is around 80%, with Ridox tune it's around 85%. AC and the top sims are 90% (maybe 95% with VR, motion rig and direct drive wheel). Roughly speaking.

Also, with regards to OCDness to setups and specs figures. IMO Ridox can be a bit contradictory sometimes. He pursues numbers to the nth degree with such detail, but then with a lot of his cars where figures are hard to find he's happy to use figures from similar cars and/or just go by feel. If making replicas is your goal, IMO these cars aren't true replicas (strictly speaking). In any case, I'm still happy to drive them because driving feel is all that matters to me, and most of his cars still drive quite well. Anyway, I've never driven any of them IRL so I can't prove they're wrong. For GT6 maybe this level of detail is overkill, but hey I'm not an engineer either so

 

[OdeFinn]

Tried your Cizeta and Lotus Carlton last night.

Anyway, I've never driven any of them IRL so I can't prove they're wrong.

Gotta start ps3 for this and test, I agree level of realism increase after installing Ridox setup on GT6 base car body, he makes then work and behave lot more realistic and predictable as they should.
On case of Carlton I have several comparison points, driven several of them and been part of building few, not actually Carlton but Opel Omega 3 liter which is practically same car, power levels different due single turbo and smaller engine, but 300+ coming out.
Local opel guru's daughter showing how "little girls" can drive Carlton(she was 15y on that video), her father was always the "last and first choice" if opel need something more than you can personally do.. Well he had his fingers also on my old play car finalising, good source for parts too.

Edit: Just ended testing setup, it had few things fighting against my memories, slightly too much body roll, know reason, zero toe on front with camber on GT6 and trying to keep traction during cornering. And rear travels/rolls also bit too much.. Take own privileges and altered setup to match more for my memories and ended up this:
Damper Extension 3/6
ARB 2/1
Front toe -0.04
[Edit using 0.9/2.7 camber, not optional ones, also if chasing more street comfortable setup rear dampers could go C4/E5 and body movements are like street suspension setup, equal front and rear roll, increases bit oversteer possibilities, but is smooth to control, above rear C5/E6 makes it stiffer and harder on low compounds, maybe compromise C5/E5 is best?, softer makes easier on low compounds]

After those it felt really much like I recall omegas base body movements and handling.
I used Ridox 18/33/18 lock, not stock, running on comfort hard tires at Tsukuba.(now tested also other compounds, SH is just fine, giving good semi slick feeling on driving )
Edit 2: all my cars need run at Nordschleife, so did this too:

Edit #: tested Rear dampers C5/E5 and CH, yes it's probably best choice for realism

 

[Dietrich]

Gotta start ps3 for this and test, I agree level of realism increase after installing Ridox setup on GT6 base car body, he makes then work and behave lot more realistic and predictable as they should.
On case of Carlton I have several comparison points, driven several of them and been part of building few, not actually Carlton but Opel Omega 3 liter which is practically same car, power levels different due single turbo and smaller engine, but 300+ coming out.
Local opel guru's daughter showing how "little girls" can drive Carlton(she was 15y on that video), her father was always the "last and first choice" if opel need something more than you can personally do.. Well he had his fingers also on my old play car finalising, good source for parts too.

Edit: Just ended testing setup, it had few things fighting against my memories, slightly too much body roll, know reason, zero toe on front with camber on GT6 and trying to keep traction during cornering. And rear travels/rolls also bit too much.. Take own privileges and altered setup to match more for my memories and ended up this:
Damper Extension 3/6
ARB 2/1
Front toe -0.04
[Edit using 0.9/2.7 camber, not optional ones, also if chasing more street comfortable setup rear dampers could go C4/E5 and body movements are like street suspension setup, equal front and rear roll, increases bit oversteer possibilities, but is smooth to control, above rear C5/E6 makes it stiffer and harder on low compounds, maybe compromise C5/E5 is best?, softer makes easier on low compounds]

After those it felt really much like I recall omegas base body movements and handling.
I used Ridox 18/33/18 lock, not stock, running on comfort hard tires at Tsukuba.(now tested also other compounds, SH is just fine, giving good semi slick feeling on driving )
Edit 2: all my cars need run at Nordschleife, so did this too:

Edit #: tested Rear dampers C5/E5 and CH, yes it's probably best choice for realism

Great car.
It was very successful in Brazil from '92 to '98 named Chevrolet Omega (in Brazil Chevrolet produces Opel).
With 3.0 engine, 6 cylinders aspirated, 165cv. Later, options 2.0 4 cylinders and 4.1 6 cylinders and 168 cv. With 1486kg was not a sport car. I had the opportunity to drive some. It was aimed at comfort.
From '94 to '99 he made a lot of success on the tracks as Stock Car. With 4.1 engine, three carburetors and 350 cv.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Honda / Acura NSX Concept 2013
CAA-NC1 New Sports Experience/ JNC Twin Turbo 75 degree V6 3.5L Hybrid

Special Build NSX Concept 2013
Comfort Soft to Sports Medium​

​

CAR : Honda / Acura NSX COncept '13
Tire : Comfort Soft to Sports Medium

Specs
Horsepower: -- HP / 562 - 564 HP at 6500 RPM
Torque : -- ft-lb at 5000 RPM
Power Limiter at : 100%
Weight: -- / 1692 - 1700 kg
Ballast : 200 kg
Ballast Position : 50
Weight Distribution : 45 / 55
Performance Points: 540


GT AUTO
NO Oil change
Improve Body Rigidity ( NOT INSTALLED IN THIS BUILD )
Car Paint : Spectrum white Pearl or Berry Pearl Effect or Velocity Red Mica or Rosso Monza or Deep Burgundy Metallic or
Ink Blue.



Tuning Parts Installed :
Fully Customizable Suspension




Suspension - Custom
Front, Rear

Ride Height: 107 107
Spring Rate: 13.42 10.72
Dampers (Compression): 3 5
Dampers (Extension): 6 6
Anti-Roll Bars: 2 2
Camber Angle: 1.0 2.0
Toe Angle: -0.13 0.21



Brake Balance:
7/9 ( personal BB) or for ABS 0 wheel : 7/9, for ABS 1 - feel free to use your preferred brake balance. I recommend to run 7/9 for ABS1.

Recommended setting for DS3 user :

Steering sensitivity at +1 or +2, all aids off, except ABS 1 ( if not comfortable with ABS 0 ) with 4/3 brake balance as starting point.



Notes :

Tried to get close to the final production NC1 NSX, suspension tuned in similar aim to the NA2 NSX-R build.

Enjoy the car, and Merry Christmas everyone

 

[GT6champNK_69]

Nice build of the NSX Concept '13 @Ridox2JZGTE . I just briefly run the car out on track, I will try it later and give you a brief on it. Merry Christmas to you Ridox. I have learned your touch on your replicas, and I appreciate fully what you do, and now there is a decent tune of this sweet car. Thanks

 

[Dietrich]

Merry Christmas Ridox and friends!
I looked for the GT6 Christmas gift and found nothing. I've just shut down and the present is here. I'll test it as soon as I log in again. Thanks!

 

[Dietrich]

Honda / Acura NSX Concept 2013
CAA-NC1 New Sports Experience/ JNC Twin Turbo 75 degree V6 3.5L Hybrid

Special Build NSX Concept 2013
Comfort Soft to Sports Medium​

View attachment 616331
​

CAR : Honda / Acura NSX COncept '13
Tire : Comfort Soft to Sports Medium

Specs
Horsepower: -- HP / 562 - 564 HP at 6500 RPM
Torque : -- ft-lb at 5000 RPM
Power Limiter at : 100%
Weight: -- / 1692 - 1700 kg
Ballast : 200 kg
Ballast Position : 50
Weight Distribution : 45 / 55
Performance Points: 540


GT AUTO
NO Oil change
Improve Body Rigidity ( NOT INSTALLED IN THIS BUILD )
Car Paint : Spectrum white Pearl or Berry Pearl Effect or Velocity Red Mica or Rosso Monza or Deep Burgundy Metallic or
Ink Blue.



Tuning Parts Installed :
Fully Customizable Suspension




Suspension - Custom
Front, Rear

Ride Height: 107 107
Spring Rate: 13.42 10.72
Dampers (Compression): 3 5
Dampers (Extension): 6 6
Anti-Roll Bars: 2 2
Camber Angle: 1.0 2.0
Toe Angle: -0.13 0.21



Brake Balance:
7/9 ( personal BB) or for ABS 0 wheel : 7/9, for ABS 1 - feel free to use your preferred brake balance. I recommend to run 7/9 for ABS1.

Recommended setting for DS3 user :

Steering sensitivity at +1 or +2, all aids off, except ABS 1 ( if not comfortable with ABS 0 ) with 4/3 brake balance as starting point.



Notes :

Tried to get close to the final production NC1 NSX, suspension tuned in similar aim to the NA2 NSX-R build.

Enjoy the car, and Merry Christmas everyone

I already have this car with the oil changed so I bought a new one. Painted it Spectrum white Pearl and it matched very well.
I took this car to race the Silverstone 550 PPs seasonal challenge. As expected, very easy win using Sports Hard tires and ABS 1. P1 on lap 2. Best lap 2: 18.xxx. As a personal challenge I ventured ABS 0 in a higher PP level car (I'm eventually using ABS 0 in cars up to 500 PPs). Using Comfort Soft tires I conquered P1 on lap 3. Best lap 2: 24.9xx. Brake balance 3-5. Not so bad for a beginner in this ABS 0 thing. Exceptional handling with Comfort tires. Good job.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

The NSX concept has a high chassis grip in GT6 ( chassis code ), the AWD system also helps a lot, but you can still slide it I suggest to try the NSX at Matterhorn Short, Deep Forest and Trial Mountain, it was tested there.

I don't know if I have posted Lancer Evos build before, I'm planning to post them after a few cars this week. The Lancer Evos will be unique when AYC is fitted, tailored AYC to suit different surface.

 

[Dietrich]

The NSX concept has a high chassis grip in GT6 ( chassis code ), the AWD system also helps a lot, but you can still slide it I suggest to try the NSX at Matterhorn Short, Deep Forest and Trial Mountain, it was tested there.

I don't know if I have posted Lancer Evos build before, I'm planning to post them after a few cars this week. The Lancer Evos will be unique when AYC is fitted, tailored AYC to suit different surface.

I already have some Evos from here, but let's see what's new.