AutoCar - 223mph in a Bugatti Veyron

[RC45]

Originally Posted by nthfinity Originally Posted by tforth I guess you haven't seen that Veyron video where is in a sustained drift on an ice covered lake. This is a perfect example of what I am refering to. Cold whether testing is just one of umpteen requirements the OEs have that tuners (in general) do not. Maybe you missed what I wrote, I wasn't talking about the Veyron, but a RWD car.

And WTF does the OEM cold weather testing have to do with a tuner any fucking way?

Lets take - say the Porsche 911.

The reason RUF doesnt "cold weather" test all the 911s they tune.... why do we think?

Maybe its because the 911 has already been "cold weather" tested up the freaking wazoooo by the "OEM"- and the changes to the platform a RUF rebuild does will not need to be "cold weather tested".

The same way the current MODEL CHANGES that Porsche make to the 911 chassis won't be subjected to full program "cold weather testing" the NEW models get before launch.

I guess for a "special insider" tforth really does not have that much of a clue - and is simply arguing and posting nonsense to create friction and anger on the forums and promote hostility.

Is it possible he he has been shown to be ill-informed, incorrect or plain wrong? I hope not.

Unless he can come along and SHOW that every major manufacturer CONTINUEs to do super-long term HUGE expense cold-weather testing (as an example) of exisitng models for the entire model run - perhaps we shouldl call BS on what he is posting and claiming. (checks and balances you know)

Last time I checked, the manufacturers werer TOO BUSY testing the NEXT models to be caught up in ongoing and continual testing of the CURRENT models to the same depth and intensity as the NEW/FUTURE models.

Which negates ANY claim that just because tuners don't "ISO9000" test the "tuned" models they produce, they are inferior in any way shape of form.

As - uhm, lets see, repeated for dramatic effect - the manufacturer already took care of type and platform testing BEFORE they launched the new model, and we seldom if ever see the manufacturers subject mid-model changes to the same rigorous battery of tests we see the new/future models subjected to.....

Unless tforth can prove otherwise.

I am always willing to learn new stuff - so here is your chance to educate a simple stupid average enthusiast... I am willing to learn from the master.

[5vz-fe]

Originally Posted by JoeHahn Originally Posted by 5vz-fe To my understanding, German cars tend to have certain parts over engineered, and certain parts under-engineered. This achieve the unreliable you are talking about. A garage that has a couple engineers would choose to use something already engineered (and most likely race proven) and use that as a basis for a better product. In doing so, they can save ALOT of R&D and focus more on their overall packaging. VW insist on using W engine design, but the only advantage of this design is its compactness. So to make up for the power deflict, they slap on more turbos, this solve the power issue but create the heat issue. Then they slap on 3 radiators to cool the engine, 1 heat exchanger for the air to liquid intercoolers. Now they have to solve both power and heat issue, leaving the ultimate left over.....weight. Power issue for the W engine design? VW Pushed the W12 to over 100 bhp/l and ran it for 24 hours reliably.

I hope you understand when I mention power deflict, I mean in relative terms. I will bet my money that a V12 will run smoother than a W16, a V8 will run cooler than a W16 while achieving 600hp @ 100hp/L. The only reason, IMO, VW did the 24h record is to try to establish better reputation for the W design.

[tforth]

RC45 wrote:
Unless he can come along and SHOW that every major manufacturer CONTINUEs to do super-long term HUGE expense cold-weather testing (as an example) of existing models for the entire model run - perhaps we should call BS on what he is posting and claiming. (checks and balances you know)
[/quote]

No OE that I have ever dealt with allowed production changes without an appropriate DV sign-off. Sometimes the tests can simply be conducted on the component or sub-system in isolation. Typically, you should go back to your DFMEA and verify whether your change can cause new or increase the 'RPN' of failure modes.

On the other hand tuners are known for performing CV (Customer Validation) instead of DV (Design Validation). In other words the customer is doing the testing, and the tuner supports them when the run into problems.

To give you another example of where OEs differ from tuners is when it comes to max/min testing. A good OE will run some DV testing with worst case components, at the extreme of their production tolerances. Tuners just don't have the resources for this type of development. So, most of the time, most of their products should be ok. I think most customers accept this as a necessary trade-off for the performance benefit. They just wouldn't accept it from an OE, that's all.

From my perspective your 'message' would have more value if you put away your sledgehammer. I thought that 'Americans always yell', was just a stereotype...

[RC45]

Originally Posted by tforth Originally Posted by RC45 Unless he can come along and SHOW that every major manufacturer CONTINUEs to do super-long term HUGE expense cold-weather testing (as an example) of existing models for the entire model run - perhaps we should call BS on what he is posting and claiming. (checks and balances you know) No OE that I have ever dealt with allowed production changes without an appropriate DV sign-off. Sometimes the tests can simply be conducted on the component or sub-system in isolation. Typically, you should go back to your DFMEA and verify whether your change can cause new or increase the 'RPN' of failure modes. On the other hand tuners are known for performing CV (Customer Validation) instead of DV (Design Validation). In other words the customer is doing the testing, and the tuner supports them when the run into problems. To give you another example of where OEs differ from tuners is when it comes to max/min testing. A good OE will run some DV testing with worst case components, at the extreme of their production tolerances. Tuners just don't have the resources for this type of development. So, most of the time, most of their products should be ok. I think most customers accept this as a necessary trade-off for the performance benefit. They just wouldn't accept it from an OE, that's all. From my perspective your 'message' would have more value if you put away your sledgehammer. I thought that 'Americans always yell', was just a stereotype...

First off.. learn to quote...

Second off..in other words what you are saying is all along youwere full of hot air and I was pretty much correct.

Third off.. do you honestly think I care how you perceive my "message"?

p.s. I almost forgot... what does all this "OEM" test crap have to do with the Veyron? I mean they are never going to make a 1000 of anything, so ho wcoul dthey possibly meet your super high demands of QC?

Seems they are going to have to sample and estimate rather than actually build a enough to take samples you approve of?