Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Member
  • Member For: 18y 10m 19d

I Gtech'd my new XR6T yesterday and got 5.47 5.55 and 5.6 0-60MPH times. (gtech is an accelerometer for those that dont know, not deadly accurate but should be within .15 or so) Now this car is ex NSW police and has 70000 ks, has FPV suspension and brakes. Im wondering if theres some sort of stealth factory "enhancements" done for the cops? Or perhaps the last owner did something. Im the 3rd owner. It has a BMC airfilter but otherwise appears stock. How could I tell if theres been a basic edit/tune been done?

Id really rather it was stock for those last 700000.....

Edited by Chargin
  • Member
  • Member For: 22y 4m 27d
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Brisbane

I don't think a stock T will be quite that quick though my brother ran a 5.68 in his BF MkI 6 speed auto T. His car however was dyno'd at alot more than most stock T's.

  • Iconoclast
  • Donating Members
  • Member For: 20y 7m 23d
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: CH

I believe it is totally plausable.

That car would have been flogged from day 1 by the coppers, and therefore would go a lot harder than your average T. To get accurate 0-100, it needs to be done in different situations and an average taken.

  • Member
  • Member For: 20y 4m 5d
  Chargin said:
I Gtech'd my new XR6T yesterday and got 5.47 5.55 and 5.6 0-60MPH times. (gtech is an accelerometer for those that dont know, not deadly accurate but should be within .15 or so) Now this car is ex NSW police and has 70000 ks, has FPV suspension and brakes. Im wondering if theres some sort of stealth factory "enhancements" done for the cops? Or perhaps the last owner did something. Im the 3rd owner. It has a BMC airfilter but otherwise appears stock. How could I tell if theres been a basic edit/tune been done?

Id really rather it was stock for those last 700000.....

I have similar G-Tech times for a Mk II BAT (A4) with the same configuration Premo Brakes

and 17" wheels as your car. Only mod is the F6 CAI. Software is factory.

The same G-Tech unit registed slightly higher times for a BA F6 (M).

On another track, I hear from friends in the force that some of the T drivers modify their

cars. Your car however sounds pretty normal.

Fuel type, wheel size, option load and fuel load are all variable to consider when comparing

times for apparently identical cars. A car with 19" rims, sunroof, towbar and a full tank of 95 RON will

perform quite differently from a stripper with a half tank of 98 RON.

Regards,

aa

Edited by aiboart
  • Member
  • Member For: 18y 10m 19d
  Blonk said:
I believe it is totally plausable.

That car would have been flogged from day 1 by the coppers, and therefore would go a lot harder than your average T. To get accurate 0-100, it needs to be done in different situations and an average taken.

So by that, are you of the opinion that when running an engine in "flogging" it somehow enables extra horses because of some mystery cylinder wall wear pattern or something? Ive heard that idea thrown around several times before but I really cant logically believe it myself. Or did you mean something else? I doubt the ECU can adapt itself that much to vigorus driving to make a difference?

Edited by Chargin
  • Member
  • Member For: 18y 10m 19d
  aiboart said:
I have similar G-Tech times for a Mk II BAT (A4) with the same configuration Premo Brakes

and 17" wheels as your car. Only mod is the F6 CAI. Software is factory.

The same G-Tech unit registed slightly higher times for a BA F6 (M).

On another track, I have hear from friends in the force that some of the T drivers modify their

cars. Your car however sounds pretty normal.

Fuel type, wheel size, option load and fuel load are all variable to consider when comparing

times for apparently identical cars. A car with 19" rims, sunroof, towbar and a full tank of 95 RON will

perform quite differently from a stripper with a half tank of 98 RON.

Regards,

aa

Oh yeah forgot about the 19's...

OD is still the same though so I guess theres a little more weight there but that cant make any difference..

  • Member
  • Member For: 22y 4m 27d
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Brisbane
  Chargin said:
So buy that, are you of the opinion that when running an engine in "flogging" it somehow enables extra horses because of some mystery cylinder wall wear pattern or something? Ive heard that idea thrown around several times before but I really cant logically believe it myself. Or did you mean something else? I doubt the ECU can adapt itself that much to vigorus driving to make a difference?

I can't explain why you get extra power by flogging a car during it's 'run in' period but it does happen. A good example was the recent RDP dyno day. All the cars that were demo's, made very good power at the rear wheels. I'm pretty sure there were 2 tyhpoons and 1 xr6 turbo that were flogged from day 1 and all made more power than those that weren't. In fact there was a GT there that has been babied most of it's life and it only pulled 289RWHP whereas a GT that has been driven hard from day 1 made 330+RWHP. Perhaps someone more technically minded can explain why this is so.

  • Iconoclast
  • Donating Members
  • Member For: 20y 7m 23d
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: CH

The motor loosens up a lot quicker, higher tolerances in components subject to friction...

Unfortunately these "flogged motors" will be in the dumpster long befiore the babied motors will...

  • Member
  • Member For: 18y 8m 16d
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: NSW

The theory of a flogged run-in shouldn't make the car more powerful than a car properly run in, then flogged for the next few thousand ks to loosen it up.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
  • Create New...
'