[s-cars] short shifting to save first?

[Mihnea Cotet]

Peak torque is indeed generated at low RPMs, but in the higher gears only. 
In first gear, the load on the engine isn't sufficient for the engine to 
produce peak torque before at least 4k RPMs or so, even with a stock turbo.

I generally never hit WOT in 1st gear, I just rev it up to around 4.5k RPMs 
with 3/4 WOT and then shift into second and give it WOT.


HTH,

Mihnea

At 11:05 26/01/2004 -0500, Dave Burig wrote:
>Scott throttled back:
> >> WRT first gear issues.  I solved that problem for many of my customers
>years
>ago.  Short shift out of first (do you really need a boost controller if you
>*know* first gear is an issue?).<<
>
>Isn't the problem with first gear a result of the amount of torque being
>transmitted through the transmission?  If this is the case, short shifting
>doesn't solve any problems, as the peak torque from our beloved beasties is
>generated pretty low in the RPM band. Or am I missing something?
>
>DB
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com
>[mailto:s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com]On Behalf Of QSHIPQ at aol.com
>Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 10:19 AM
>To: kirby.a.smith at verizon.net
>Cc: s-car-list at audifans.com
>Subject: Re: [s-cars] Fuzz logic vs adaptive learning
>
>I don't believe it's premature to argue the point at all.  More plots in a
>three dimensional map makes a more sophisticated controller by definition.
>You
>might be able to argue that more plots (output) isn't necessary to
>acceptable
>function, but that would require that the number of inputs are the same.
>They
>aren't.
>
>WRT first gear issues.  I solved that problem for many of my customers years
>ago.  Short shift out of first (do you really need a boost controller if you
>*know* first gear is an issue?).  WRT detonation, when you hear it Kirby,
>the
>damage is already done.  When you hear it, that means that the computer has
>already taken all the steps to retard the timing and trim the boost.  In a
>boost
>controller, retarding the timing and trimming the boost are oxymorons.  The
>motronic may retard the timing, but that just means the controller adds more
>boost.  I Hope your radio isn't on.  No driver is a good wastegate
>controller.
>
>HTH and my o2
>
>Scott Justusson
>
>In a message dated 1/26/2004 8:48:22 AM Central Standard Time,
>kirby.a.smith at verizon.net writes:
>Thanks, Scott, for your insight.
>
>I think it premature to argue that Motronic is more sophisticated than
>the A'pexi, for example, without our knowing just what functions are
>embedded in the A'pexi.  A large-valued n-dimensional table is not
>necessarily more sophisticated than an n-dimensional high-order
>function.  Unfortunately, I don't know what is in the guts of the A'pexi
>programming.  If you have some specific knowledge of the A'pexi inner
>workings, feel free to enlighten us.  For now, I will accept that it
>cannot know, or at least react to, engine degradation, but as a WG
>controller for a functional engine (running Hoppen Stage 1), IME it does
>very nicely.
>
>Do I agree that optimized Motronic code with your favorite waste gate
>valve (whatever that is) can do as well or better with less engine risk
>-- Yes.  But to argue for engine protection over tranny protection is
>short sighted, IMHO.  It would cost me a lot more for a replacement
>tranny than a valve job.  And burned valves would require a lot of
>detonation, which I would hear early and my right foot would then become
>the overriding WG controller.  Now when running with an open exhaust in
>competition, I agree the driver is not a good WG controller.
>
>kirby
>_______________________________________________
>S-CAR-List mailing list
>S-CAR-List at audifans.com
>http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>S-CAR-List mailing list
>S-CAR-List at audifans.com
>http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list