2.5l 5cyl via diesel crank and smaller bore

[Mihnea Cotet]

Todd, what MTM consider reliable and feasible (and believe me, they go well
beneath what other people who think they can tune a car can do) is what
their engineer, Peter Link measures while tuning the car in real time. If
he has a doubt of some sort on anything, he won't go past what he thinks is
safe, and sorry to say it but it's worked out great so far!

In German we use the word "standfest" which literally means that the engine
can stand WOT for hours with no problems, as I've already said in my
previous post, and Standfest is the word for all the cars that go out of
MTMs workshop.

Just think of another example: an UrS4 with a sport quattro EM, K26/27
turbo optimized by MTM's mechanic, FMIC, MTM ported and polished head,
serious rods, lower CR (like 8.7:1) and tuned by MTM's Peter Link in real
time on one of the world's best 4 wheel drive dyno. Well, how much do you
think MTM would tune the car to and rate it "standfest", especially since
it has that SQ EM that's much much much less restrictive than an RS2 (I
have both of them in front of me at this time)???? 450? 470? 500? 550??? 600???


No! only 420 and that's it.

Now all of you may say whatever you want, but as I've said it before, in my
own tuning "philosophy", I trust more MTM for a safe HP rating, than Hap
Maguire living dah vida loca in Everboost, CO, period.

End of the thread for me, I can't take no more, I don't want a new tor$en
thread or a new RS2 turbo thread or whatever.

Mihnea

At 01:20 19/09/2003 -0700, Todd Phenneger wrote:
>Heya all,
>   Again,  I agree partially with both parties.  But I have one
>comment.  This is in regard to your comment on what MTM will
>quote at Feasible and Save.  C'MON.  They are a VERY Capable
>tuner, but of course, as you say they will not jeapordize a
>customer car and their reputaion on a motor that is at the
>Ragged Untested Edge.  So 450hp may be the Upper safe Limit for
>what they consider safe.  Well, Safe limits are always
>changeable.  ANd what is their Idea of safe.  Myself, if a car
>running 450+ HP can do a 12hr Enduro with minimal problems then
>that says something.  And the problems it did have were not
>related to the EM.  More to a burst oil cooler line fitting at
>the oil cooler.  A 12hr Enduro is hell on a motor.  ON a street
>motor occasional use at 500hp if done right may be very
>feasable, but not somehting the MTM wills stake a reputation on
>without having it proven.
>   Just posting a counter argument.  I fully agree, but I dont
>agree that its fully relevent to our tuning.  Maybe the
>statement should be
>Todd Words
>   "For maximum reliability and efficiency the RS2 EM should not
>exceed X CFM of flow which is reached at around 450crank HP.  To
>go beyond this exceeds the efficiency range of the turbo and may
>stress some components beyond what they can reliably handle for
>long term use"
>   Man I need t go to bed.
>l8r
>   TOdd
>
>--- Mihnea Cotet <mik at info.fundp.ac.be> wrote:
> > Well, there are some things for which I don't have evidence to
> > back up what
> > I'm saying, but sorry to say this but I trust what MTM rate as
> > "feasible"
> > and reliable more than what Hap did (sorry for Hap but I have
> > yet to see
> > the dyno sheets of his car making 400wHP, have you seen any
> > yet????), as
> > I've already stated in a previous s-car list post, MTM know
> > what they are
> > doing and they are not taking any risks with their customers
> > cars, some
> > people (tuners) try to know what they are doing and they
> > possibly do it
> > well (and I'd like to consider myself as part of that "range"
> > of people)
> > and there are also loads of people who think they are tuners
> > but they have
> > no clue of what lies behind a Motronic fuel enrichment factor
> > map for instance.
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
>http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com