...sorry you not getting me...or not reading my replies...live map at a test track only..i dont condone a live map on the road!....i agree a rr map is fine if you dont drive flat out on the road..which you wont as you are all pedestrain conscious

 

now you have lost me as why would i not be able to run flat out because my car was mapped on the rollers could you explain please in idiot speak as im clearly having a dumb moment

 

...a rr can not recreate real world..its a false world...like fake tits they go wrong in the end

 

You argue against dyno mapping but 2 of the people for it have record holding cars so can not be all bad, in some ways you make sense and i agree with the fact that an engine dyno is the most acreate way but not every one has access to one.But i do think that as far as live mapping goes it is a long way behind chasis dynos as loading can be adjusted and conditions are replicated apart from airflow but thats where compensation tables come in to play. As even road conditions vary surely.

 

here is my thought (it may not even be slightly right, as i am not a mapper/tuner)

I would have thought that mapping live on the road would enable you to produce a car that feels more drivable, as it is conducted under real road conditions.

BUT if you are after out and out power, the only way you can do it is to have it on a RR, where you can measure any increase/decrease in power any adjustment you make

 

Bosch_Dealer should be a drug dealer, as it sounds like he is on something.
What a complete load of complete bollocks he talks.
When cars are road tested afterwards by big names in F1 for instance it is due to VARIABLES that cannot be so accurately controlled in most rolling road cells, altitude being one of many as air is thinner.
Cars like F1 are adjusted for bias towards high rpm/power or low rpm/power depending on track, whether it has more or less turns one way or the other, radius of turns etc.
For 99.99% of road cars ROLLING ROAD is best you will get, unless people can control the weather, which is unlikely, you set a car for max power when it is raining, you have less when it has stopped raining, and therefore do not maximise your true potential.
You can also control the temperature in most(good) cells(rolling roads), the operator is THE most important guy a bad one will kill your engine.
The real sophisticated cells are FULLY climatic, which you have no hope in hell of being able to replicate on the road, unless you wait a complete year!!
You can hold at steady load or speed or rpm AT FULL THROTTLE in a cell which you cannot do on the road.
tabetha

 

You don't half talk some shit sometimes!

 

i totally agree with you,, and just out of intrest, have you seen the new F1 transient dynos? serious cool bits of work

 

...lol..

...lets bring F1 into the equasion..a multi billion pound organisation


...i was talking more about air flow tbh...and you can only get that on the road or a wind tunnel...surely you dont beleive a rolling road can accurately predict the air flow from a small fan in front of the car?

...the dyno should be the first call if you have no base map...or if not avalible a rolling road will do....then you test track live map it to get real life.

 

I would say u need a base map (taken from a RR or engine dyno) from which u can alter on the road/test track.

 

Phil, an engine can only consume a certain amount of air, this isn't a limitless thing. Consider the size of your Turbo inlet and/or air filter. What's the point of trying to get a RR fan than blows at 100,000CFM when the engine can't process this amount of air anyway?

In other words, a fan of decent size can almost certainly supply enough air for what the engine needs. The difficult factor is whether the fan can keep the car within operating temperature in terms of coolant and also keep the inlet air at sensible temperatures. Our's can. It is more down to the indivdual car though to be honest. A car that has cooling troubles on the road, will have cooling troubles on the dyno and vice-versa. The fan size really only governs how long you can hold a car steady-state or how many consecutive runs you can perform.

However, this is fairly easily overcome. We, like most tuners, don't continue mapping as the coolant/inlet temp rises and rises, we obviously let the car cool down, just as you would on the road. As long as these factors are within the cars normal operating temperature range and the engine is getting enough air, how can there be any downside of RR mapping?

On the plus side, how can you, on the road, hold the car on one particular load-site on a map and make adjustments while monitoring the difference it is making, without crashing?

 

make your mind up christian if your fan is big enough the coolant temp and charge air temp would not rise.

 

I think Christian is on about the difference a PROPER air to air intercooler/radiator combination and that of a RS Turbo

Its car dependant, if their massive fan is fine on a car with both good intake and water cooling then tht can do more runs, if the car struggles with intake and water cooling on the road then they have to let the car cool down.

 

As Andy said. The need for us to have a larger fan would only mean that we can carry out longer mapping sessions. This has no effect to the customer, only higher mapping prices due to the higher running costs of the RR.

 

i get you