I would expect nothing else......Ford pays his bills.
Thoughts on DCT
- Thread starter PowerWheels
- Start date
I would expect nothing else......Ford pays his bills.
Now that says a lot about the Tremec DCT.
I'm on it. I've had numerous discussions with George about different hardware possibilities and will be verifying dimensions the moment I pick up the car. If the rotary dial feels too light I think George will have something up his sleeve. Black anodize may look better than plastic chrome as well.
My biggie is yanking the plate atop the blower with the snake sticker and replacing it with a billet piece that has a deep laser etch in just the right hue. Fluff, I admit, but the little touches make a difference. Hopefully, there will be some performance hardware ugrades to be had as well in this regard.
I'm on it. I've had numerous discussions with George about different hardware possibilities and will be verifying dimensions the moment I pick up the car. If the rotary dial feels too light I think George will have something up his sleeve. Black anodize may look better than plastic chrome as well.
My biggie is yanking the plate atop the blower with the snake sticker and replacing it with a billet piece that has a deep laser etch in just the right hue. Fluff, I admit, but the little touches make a difference. Hopefully, there will be some performance hardware ugrades to be had as well in this regard.
Is this the dct from the GT or the GT500? Im assuming the same dct did not go in both.
@Tob
I talked to Ford Performance today, checking on order status, and asked about the oil separator and was told that it is included in the CF Track Package and should be available through FP for those who opted out of the CFTP.
Let us know if the blower plate will be available for sale.
I talked to Ford Performance today, checking on order status, and asked about the oil separator and was told that it is included in the CF Track Package and should be available through FP for those who opted out of the CFTP.
Let us know if the blower plate will be available for sale.
FXX Evoluzione: 160 ms I CALL BS!!!!!! NOOOO WAY
Speaking Specifically to the gt500, and no, different dct in GT vs GT500
Tony, I see times all over the map and many of Ferrari's cars are slower than 100ms. I saw a list showing a spectrum of fast shift times this morning...
- Lamborghini Aventador LP 700-4 [Single clutch ISR gearbox]: 50ms[3]
- Ferrari 430 Scuderia: 60 ms[4]
- Maserati GranTurismo MC Stradale 2016: 60ms[5]
- BMW M5 E60 with SMG III: 65-250 ms[6]
- BMW M3 E46 with SMG II: 80 ms[7]
- BMW M3 E92 with M-DCT: 80 ms
- Bugatti Veyron (DSG): 100 ms[8]
- Ferrari FXX: 100 ms[9]
- Drag car: 100 ms[circular reference]
- Maserati GranTurismo S Cambiocorsa: 100 ms
- Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG: 100 ms[7]
- Fastest Automatic/semi-automatic transmission: 100 ms
- Lexus LC500: 120ms[10]
- Chevrolet Camaro ZL1: ~150 ms (36% faster than PDK[11])
- Clio RS EDC 200: 150 ms (race mode)[12]
- Enzo Ferrari: 150 ms[7]
- Nissan GT-R: 150 ms (R Mode)
- FXX Evoluzione: 160 ms
- Lexus LFA: 200 ms
- Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale & Ferrari F430: 250 ms[7]
- BMW M3 E36 with SMG I: 250 ms[7]
Other Mentions:
- Aston Martin Vanquish: 250 ms[7]
- The fastest (Race gearbox) manual: 250 ms[citation needed]
- Ferrari 575M: 280 ms
- Lamborghini Performante DCT LDF: 290 ms
*This is an impossibly fast claim which is widely seen on the internet. This could refer to the gear engagement time of the DCT transmission, which would be the time it takes for the shift fork to select the next requested gear. Actual Up-shift time for the VW DSG and PDK may be closer to 200ms.
- AUDI (DSG)(Also S tronic): 8 ms*[circular reference]
- Volkswagen (DSG)(Also S tronic): 8 ms*[circular reference]
- Alfa Romeo Mito & Alfa Romeo Giulietta (2010)Dual Dry Clutch Transmission TCT: 8 ms*[13]
I'd say the GT500's Tremec DCT is pretty ****ing fast considering the above.
I say recheck all those #'s... FXX Evoluzione: 160 ms
Actually....
Certain changes were made to the gearbox in order to reduce the shift time to 60 milliseconds per shift, a reduction of 20 milliseconds over the original FXX.
Ford gearbox in that car is almost @ its max in torque. Once someone tunes and changes pulleys it's all over!!
Then again when someone options out car with $10,000 racing stripe and $20,000 carbon package who care's how much a tranny is.
I'm in a internet argument with this guy. "Cobra99 the GT500 will shift in 140ms roughly. The redeye does 150ms. 10ms is 1/100th of a second. Gearing will be more important. The redeye goes through the quarter in 4th with my 2.62 and the 3.09 goes through in 5"
This guy is saying the red eye is only 10ms slower then the DCT in the GT500.
This guy is saying the red eye is only 10ms slower then the DCT in the GT500.
That depends at what GVWR weight the DCT is rated at. Haven't seen that data published.
Gearing will play a role, but we cant compare yet.
However, we can say shift speed absolutely makes a difference.
And under 100ms is gaster than any tq converter trans. Understanding the components eliminates any misguided perceptions
However, we can say shift speed absolutely makes a difference.
And under 100ms is gaster than any tq converter trans. Understanding the components eliminates any misguided perceptions
[QUOTE="PencilGeek, post: 1, m]
It always seemed fairly obvious to me that a driver's shift speed would affect his 1/4 mile drag race ET and trap speed. To me, this makes natural sense. So when my own meager "BMW Performance Steering Wheel" 1/4 mile drag results (about as inaccurate as it gets) came under fire, I quickly pointed out that I'm a slow shifter on my 6MT, and this would surely account for my mediocre results. To my surprise, my explanation was vigorously attacked by a self-proclaimed BMW know-it-all and self-proclaimed drag racing expert -- Sticky. He said my car was weak and that's why it performed so poorly. That was a drum he's never quit beating, in spite of all of the data to the contrary.
But I'll admit, I'm a novice with drag racing...in fact I really don't know anything about it. But I do know that if two identical cars take off from the same point at the same time and one of them waits two seconds between every shift, then while it's coasting in neutral it will not be accelerating. Therefore, it will be impossible for that car to have the same 1/4 mile trap speed of the same car that shifts as fast as it can.
I sat on one end of the debate -- as a newbie who never drag raced a car in my life, and at the other end was this self-proclaimed know-it-all of everything. He insisted he was right...and I was wrong. So more than a year ago, I asked him to prove it at the drag strip by running some of his runs in D2 mode instead of D5 (or S6). No surprise to anybody who knows how he hates to be proven wrong...he refused with some flimsy excuse that he was out to set records...not run experiments. Back in my corner, I produced CarTest physics-based car modeling software results that showed exactly how shift speed affects trap speed. Back in his corner, he laughed every time I used car test. Back in my corner, I laughed everytime he laughed at CarTest because CarTest has proven dead-nuts accurate for every performance prediction on my own car . In fact CarTest has proven so accurate that it's been within a few hundredths of a MPH on my Mojave Mile results.
I believed this would be a very easy test to run...all I needed was a car owner with DCT and a vBox. The test to figure this out would be quite simple. Run the DCT in D2 and compare the vBox results against the same car running in D5. Even though the shift speed difference between D2 and D5 is only a few milliseconds, I was hopeful it would prove the results one way or the other. Now all I needed was to find the car and test it. I ended up waiting more than a year until I got my answer.
This weekend, I borrowed a guy's DCT car and took it to a remote road in the desert that was nearly perfectly flat in both direction. There are no side streets, except the ones I would use for the tests. I planned to place the car in D2 and turn on the vBox. I would run from 0-130 MPH -- as this would give me 1/4 and 60-130 MPH results. I would run the car in both directions on the same exact piece of road for three runs in each direction (six runs total), then I would switch to D5 and run the same test all over again.
The car I borrowed was nearly bone stock. Bone stock is ideal because if the results are obvious with a bone stock car, they will be even more obvious and exaggerated on a highly modified car (such as a supercharged car). So taking a near bone stock car for the test was also going to make it the most difficult for me, and give the naysayers all of the benefits.
I found the perfect road, hooked up my Video vBox and tried one practice run in each direction to make sure the road was safe. After I was satisfied, I turned on the vBox and ran in one direction. Then I ran in the opposite direction. Back and forth three times for a total of six runs. I switched to D5 and repeated the runs. I was running low on gas, so after two runs in each direction (instead of three), I abandoned the third set of runs and went home.
The results were overwhelmingly conclusive. Even though I was only changing the shift speed by a few milliseconds, the effect on 1/4 mile trap speed was obvious and I'd say even profound. Wasting a few milliseconds shifting affected my 1/4 mile trap speed by as much as 2MPH. Even the best D2 run couldn't beat the worst D5 run. Sticky was wrong...again. That's right: the self-proclaimed expert of drag racing and all automotive knowledge was proven dead wrong again.
As a final test, I input all of the actual car data in CarTest to see if it could predict the same results. If it did, it would be (yet) another slap in the face to the self-proclaimed expert who regularly mocks the use of this tool. I just happen to have the Dynojet dyno file from this exact car taken only a few weeks ago. CarTest allows the user to input the actual dyno results. After doing so, I adjusted the launch methods to match how I used the DCT. For D2, I selected a 0.20 second shift time (200 milliseconds). I chose this shift time after some research on three or four different car forums and other web sites who claimed that 0.20 seconds was about the slowest the DCT would shift (D2 mode). For D5, I selected 0.08 seconds shift time (80 milliseconds). In input the exact weather conditions I collected during my run, including elevation and wind speed and wind direction. Then changing nothing but shift speed, I let CarTest estimate the 1/4 mile ET and trap speed, along with a 60-130 MPH time as well.
Here's the results.
Weather Conditions:
Temperature: 55.9 degrees F
Pressure: 30.04 inHg
Humidity: 27%
Density Altitude: 30 Ft.
CarTest Estimates for D2:
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 12.65
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 112.55
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.63
Actual Results for D2:
_______________________________Run-1, _Run-2, _Run-3, _Run-4, _Run-5, _Run-6
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 13.208, 13.612, 13.412, 13.204, 13.177, 13.521
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 112.93, 112.23, 112.81, 112.84, 113.26, 112.13
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.595, 12.435, 12.512, 12.504, 12.411, 12.456
Average Results for D2 (average of three medium runs):
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 13.276
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 112.86
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.537
CarTest Estimates for D5:
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 12.48
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 113.83
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.20
Actual Results for D5:
_______________________________Run-1, _Run-2, _Run-3, _Run-4, _Run-5, _Run-6
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 13.135, 12.987, xx.xxx, 13.034
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 113.35, 114.09, xxx.xx, 113.62
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.147, 12.104, xx.xxx, 12.128
Average Results for D5 (average of three medium runs):
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 13.052
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 113.69
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.13
Conclusions:
To me, the results seem pretty conclusive. Even changing the shift speed by 120 milliseconds (or whatever the actual value may be between D2 and D5) created a pretty significant change in all 1/4 mile drag results, and 60-130 times as well. As I believed at the very beginning, shift speed does affect trap speed, no matter what the self-proclaimed drag race expert seems to think.
CarTest results proved to be very accurate as well. The D2 predictions vs. actual results were about as close as they could get. 1/4 mile ET was predicted to be 12.65, actual was 13.26 (4.7% difference). 1/4 Trap Speed was predicted to be 112.55, actual was 112.86 (3/10ths of 1% difference). 60-130 time was predicted to be 12.63, actual was 12.537 (less than 1/10th of 1% difference).
The D5 predictions vs. actual results . 1/4 mile ET was predicted to be 12.48, actual was 13.052 (4.4% difference). 1/4 Trap Speed was predicted to be 113.83, actual was 113.69 (1/10th of 1% difference). 60-130 time was predicted to be 12.20, actual was 12.13 (1/2 of 1% difference).
Trap speed and 60-130 MPH results were both less than 1/2 of 1% difference from the predictions for both D2 and D5. CarTest predicted 1.28 MPH trap speed difference, and the actual was 0.83 MPH difference. CarTest predicted an 0.15 second difference for 60-130 MPH runs, and the actual difference was 0.407 seconds. And even though 1/4 mile ET was 4.4% off, Cartest predicted a 0.17 second difference, and the actual results were 0.224 second difference.
VBox files will be made available for analysis to anybody curious enough to dive into the results.
VBox Results (I've highlighted the shift points):
Car Test Configuration:
Additional Information:
I did a little more digging into the results, and it's very clear that clutch engagement time is different between D2 and D5. I looked at the 60-foot times, and it's clear that the clutch engagement is faster in D5 than D2.
At the same time, I exported as much data from the runs as I thought made sense. I tried making some graphs of the data, but nothing was nearly as clear as simply presenting the data itself.
1/4 Mile results:
Even though these aren't actual drag strip results, I tried to simulate them as best as I could using the VBox tools software. I did my best to look up the NHRA rules and figure out how times, distances, and trap speeds are measured. Then using what I learned, I programmed the VBox software to simulate the same thing. For example, I used a 1-foot roll-out, and the trap speed is the average of the speed at 1321ft, and 1257ft (Q-60 ft, with 1-foot roll-out).
Gear Analysis: Time in Gears
Gear Analysis: Distance in Gears
Speed Analysis: Time to Speed
Speed Analysis: Distance to Speed
[/QUOTE]
It always seemed fairly obvious to me that a driver's shift speed would affect his 1/4 mile drag race ET and trap speed. To me, this makes natural sense. So when my own meager "BMW Performance Steering Wheel" 1/4 mile drag results (about as inaccurate as it gets) came under fire, I quickly pointed out that I'm a slow shifter on my 6MT, and this would surely account for my mediocre results. To my surprise, my explanation was vigorously attacked by a self-proclaimed BMW know-it-all and self-proclaimed drag racing expert -- Sticky. He said my car was weak and that's why it performed so poorly. That was a drum he's never quit beating, in spite of all of the data to the contrary.
But I'll admit, I'm a novice with drag racing...in fact I really don't know anything about it. But I do know that if two identical cars take off from the same point at the same time and one of them waits two seconds between every shift, then while it's coasting in neutral it will not be accelerating. Therefore, it will be impossible for that car to have the same 1/4 mile trap speed of the same car that shifts as fast as it can.
I sat on one end of the debate -- as a newbie who never drag raced a car in my life, and at the other end was this self-proclaimed know-it-all of everything. He insisted he was right...and I was wrong. So more than a year ago, I asked him to prove it at the drag strip by running some of his runs in D2 mode instead of D5 (or S6). No surprise to anybody who knows how he hates to be proven wrong...he refused with some flimsy excuse that he was out to set records...not run experiments. Back in my corner, I produced CarTest physics-based car modeling software results that showed exactly how shift speed affects trap speed. Back in his corner, he laughed every time I used car test. Back in my corner, I laughed everytime he laughed at CarTest because CarTest has proven dead-nuts accurate for every performance prediction on my own car . In fact CarTest has proven so accurate that it's been within a few hundredths of a MPH on my Mojave Mile results.
I believed this would be a very easy test to run...all I needed was a car owner with DCT and a vBox. The test to figure this out would be quite simple. Run the DCT in D2 and compare the vBox results against the same car running in D5. Even though the shift speed difference between D2 and D5 is only a few milliseconds, I was hopeful it would prove the results one way or the other. Now all I needed was to find the car and test it. I ended up waiting more than a year until I got my answer.
This weekend, I borrowed a guy's DCT car and took it to a remote road in the desert that was nearly perfectly flat in both direction. There are no side streets, except the ones I would use for the tests. I planned to place the car in D2 and turn on the vBox. I would run from 0-130 MPH -- as this would give me 1/4 and 60-130 MPH results. I would run the car in both directions on the same exact piece of road for three runs in each direction (six runs total), then I would switch to D5 and run the same test all over again.
The car I borrowed was nearly bone stock. Bone stock is ideal because if the results are obvious with a bone stock car, they will be even more obvious and exaggerated on a highly modified car (such as a supercharged car). So taking a near bone stock car for the test was also going to make it the most difficult for me, and give the naysayers all of the benefits.
I found the perfect road, hooked up my Video vBox and tried one practice run in each direction to make sure the road was safe. After I was satisfied, I turned on the vBox and ran in one direction. Then I ran in the opposite direction. Back and forth three times for a total of six runs. I switched to D5 and repeated the runs. I was running low on gas, so after two runs in each direction (instead of three), I abandoned the third set of runs and went home.
The results were overwhelmingly conclusive. Even though I was only changing the shift speed by a few milliseconds, the effect on 1/4 mile trap speed was obvious and I'd say even profound. Wasting a few milliseconds shifting affected my 1/4 mile trap speed by as much as 2MPH. Even the best D2 run couldn't beat the worst D5 run. Sticky was wrong...again. That's right: the self-proclaimed expert of drag racing and all automotive knowledge was proven dead wrong again.
As a final test, I input all of the actual car data in CarTest to see if it could predict the same results. If it did, it would be (yet) another slap in the face to the self-proclaimed expert who regularly mocks the use of this tool. I just happen to have the Dynojet dyno file from this exact car taken only a few weeks ago. CarTest allows the user to input the actual dyno results. After doing so, I adjusted the launch methods to match how I used the DCT. For D2, I selected a 0.20 second shift time (200 milliseconds). I chose this shift time after some research on three or four different car forums and other web sites who claimed that 0.20 seconds was about the slowest the DCT would shift (D2 mode). For D5, I selected 0.08 seconds shift time (80 milliseconds). In input the exact weather conditions I collected during my run, including elevation and wind speed and wind direction. Then changing nothing but shift speed, I let CarTest estimate the 1/4 mile ET and trap speed, along with a 60-130 MPH time as well.
Here's the results.
Weather Conditions:
Temperature: 55.9 degrees F
Pressure: 30.04 inHg
Humidity: 27%
Density Altitude: 30 Ft.
CarTest Estimates for D2:
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 12.65
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 112.55
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.63
Actual Results for D2:
_______________________________Run-1, _Run-2, _Run-3, _Run-4, _Run-5, _Run-6
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 13.208, 13.612, 13.412, 13.204, 13.177, 13.521
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 112.93, 112.23, 112.81, 112.84, 113.26, 112.13
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.595, 12.435, 12.512, 12.504, 12.411, 12.456
Average Results for D2 (average of three medium runs):
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 13.276
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 112.86
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.537
CarTest Estimates for D5:
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 12.48
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 113.83
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.20
Actual Results for D5:
_______________________________Run-1, _Run-2, _Run-3, _Run-4, _Run-5, _Run-6
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 13.135, 12.987, xx.xxx, 13.034
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 113.35, 114.09, xxx.xx, 113.62
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.147, 12.104, xx.xxx, 12.128
Average Results for D5 (average of three medium runs):
1/4 Mile Elapsed Time (ET): _ 13.052
1/4 Mile Trap Speed: ________ 113.69
60-130 MPH: _________________ 12.13
Conclusions:
To me, the results seem pretty conclusive. Even changing the shift speed by 120 milliseconds (or whatever the actual value may be between D2 and D5) created a pretty significant change in all 1/4 mile drag results, and 60-130 times as well. As I believed at the very beginning, shift speed does affect trap speed, no matter what the self-proclaimed drag race expert seems to think.
CarTest results proved to be very accurate as well. The D2 predictions vs. actual results were about as close as they could get. 1/4 mile ET was predicted to be 12.65, actual was 13.26 (4.7% difference). 1/4 Trap Speed was predicted to be 112.55, actual was 112.86 (3/10ths of 1% difference). 60-130 time was predicted to be 12.63, actual was 12.537 (less than 1/10th of 1% difference).
The D5 predictions vs. actual results . 1/4 mile ET was predicted to be 12.48, actual was 13.052 (4.4% difference). 1/4 Trap Speed was predicted to be 113.83, actual was 113.69 (1/10th of 1% difference). 60-130 time was predicted to be 12.20, actual was 12.13 (1/2 of 1% difference).
Trap speed and 60-130 MPH results were both less than 1/2 of 1% difference from the predictions for both D2 and D5. CarTest predicted 1.28 MPH trap speed difference, and the actual was 0.83 MPH difference. CarTest predicted an 0.15 second difference for 60-130 MPH runs, and the actual difference was 0.407 seconds. And even though 1/4 mile ET was 4.4% off, Cartest predicted a 0.17 second difference, and the actual results were 0.224 second difference.
VBox files will be made available for analysis to anybody curious enough to dive into the results.
VBox Results (I've highlighted the shift points):
Car Test Configuration:
Additional Information:
I did a little more digging into the results, and it's very clear that clutch engagement time is different between D2 and D5. I looked at the 60-foot times, and it's clear that the clutch engagement is faster in D5 than D2.
At the same time, I exported as much data from the runs as I thought made sense. I tried making some graphs of the data, but nothing was nearly as clear as simply presenting the data itself.
1/4 Mile results:
Even though these aren't actual drag strip results, I tried to simulate them as best as I could using the VBox tools software. I did my best to look up the NHRA rules and figure out how times, distances, and trap speeds are measured. Then using what I learned, I programmed the VBox software to simulate the same thing. For example, I used a 1-foot roll-out, and the trap speed is the average of the speed at 1321ft, and 1257ft (Q-60 ft, with 1-foot roll-out).
Gear Analysis: Time in Gears
Gear Analysis: Distance in Gears
Speed Analysis: Time to Speed
Speed Analysis: Distance to Speed
[/QUOTE]
The one person that was ripping into professional car reviewers for using a Vbox and testing "on a regular road" and not a "fully prepped" drag strip ends up testing DCT shift speeds on a remote desert road (probably covered with dust/sand) and getting results with a Vbox.
I applaud your "scientific" results getting those #'s on your fancy charts but sorry...……...lame.
I applaud your "scientific" results getting those #'s on your fancy charts but sorry...……...lame.
your stupidity would be laughable, if it wasnt so embarrassing.
1- he is not me
2- he is more intelligent than either of us when it comes to programming and tech, this i promise
3. testing for 2 different things - notice how he reduced the variables of inconsistency? He kept everything the same, changing only the variable he wanted tested, and did it multiple times, showed all , and the averages.
you want to test with different cars, different drivers, at different times of year, years difference in conditions, for money..
LOL.
A car that shifts miliseconds faster than another traps 2 mph better across a quarter mile over 3 or 4 shifts?
Stop already.
And all this time idiots have been using powerglides and Th400s to rule the drag strip.
A car that shifts miliseconds faster than another traps 2 mph better across a quarter mile over 3 or 4 shifts?
Stop already.
And all this time idiots have been using powerglides and Th400s to rule the drag strip.
[/QUOTE]
If you are implying that someone else did all this dirty work getting DCT shift times and #'s well, guess what???? I bolded no less than 30 (I stopped counting after about 25) I's in your life story about your DCT trip to loserville.
Once again, let's get 1 thing clear. You started the whole thing about a GT500 beating a ZR1 and wanted to wager on it. We had performance times on the Chevy and we are waiting on times for the GT500. Then you cried about times are crap because it's not done on a dragstrip and using a Vbox blah blah blah but now you produced the story above which took place on shitty roads and using equipment that you dispute as accurate. I'll never get that time back spent wasting it reading your BS life story and bolding all your I's.
Stupidity is your last name...………...you're a total hypocrite.
Last edited:
How the hell does anyone have the time to drum all that info up. Good lord
Sent from my iPhone using svtperformance.com
Sent from my iPhone using svtperformance.com
Yer trolling too hard and will break the intervetz.
It’s well known that shift speed is the key to winning races in a manual. Period. Granny shifting and not double clutching like you should will always be a recipe to fail.
I don’t know about you guys, but when I’m racing in a manual, I like to sip my latte between shifts so I get more sugar rush to press the pedal harder.
Every 5lbs of additional force you press down on the gas pedal tells the maf to count and send fuel for .0485% more oxygen since the throttle body is closer to reaching truly wide open.
Everyone knows modern electric throttle body’s are programmed to only open 81% when the vehicle is gently floored. You have to put about another 175lbs of force on the peddle to fully open he throttle body
Also as we all know, you can make up for a few slow shifts by downshifting from 4th to the very top of third just like Ja Rule
Every 5lbs of additional force you press down on the gas pedal tells the maf to count and send fuel for .0485% more oxygen since the throttle body is closer to reaching truly wide open.
Everyone knows modern electric throttle body’s are programmed to only open 81% when the vehicle is gently floored. You have to put about another 175lbs of force on the peddle to fully open he throttle body
Also as we all know, you can make up for a few slow shifts by downshifting from 4th to the very top of third just like Ja Rule
Users who are viewing this thread
