Notices
The Loft / EvoM Car Talk Corner The landing pad for automotive discussions, news, articles, and opinions. A place for the community to kick back and chat.

Focus RS

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 27, 2016, 11:31 AM
  #3856  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
nemsin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PNW
Posts: 2,562
Received 50 Likes on 46 Posts
Originally Posted by ambystom01
Are we all ignoring the fact that the torque number is still where it should be?
Again,
250hp/290tq repeatably.
290hp/320tq in overboost
http://www.focusrs.org/forum/48-kaiz...s-rs-dyno.html

The issue is overboost is not consistent/reliable/repeatable. Or are you saying a 30wtq difference doesn't matter?
Old Jun 27, 2016, 11:38 AM
  #3857  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (29)
 
kyoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: US
Posts: 10,542
Received 233 Likes on 209 Posts
personally I don't care about the dyno numbers - too much variance there. I'm more interested in the difference in trap numbers

obviously I have no idea why the numbers have such a high variance, and it seems neither do the fors owners - could be a boost leak, tune/ecu thing, who knows. it is definitely curious though
Old Jun 27, 2016, 11:43 AM
  #3858  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
ambystom01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Canuckistan
Posts: 15,629
Likes: 0
Received 75 Likes on 68 Posts
Originally Posted by nemsin
Again,
250hp/290tq repeatably.
290hp/320tq in overboost
http://www.focusrs.org/forum/48-kaiz...s-rs-dyno.html

The issue is overboost is not consistent/reliable/repeatable. Or are you saying a 30wtq difference doesn't matter?
Using whtrice's numbers, 290 wtq is 342 engine torque, and 320 wtq is 377 engine torque. So even using those dynos, it's making the right amount of torque normally, and above advertised numbers in overboost.
Old Jun 27, 2016, 11:45 AM
  #3859  
EvoM Community Team Leader
 
Biggiesacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: West Coast
Posts: 5,688
Received 704 Likes on 592 Posts
Originally Posted by kyoo
personally I don't care about the dyno numbers - too much variance there. I'm more interested in the difference in trap numbers

obviously I have no idea why the numbers have such a high variance, and it seems neither do the fors owners - could be a boost leak, tune/ecu thing, who knows. it is definitely curious though
totally agree with this. Ultimately people are paying to make their car faster, not to change the number on a screen / spread sheet. What people expect is real world performance and apparently what ford is claiming isn't translating into that.
Old Jun 27, 2016, 11:50 AM
  #3860  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
whtrice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,349
Received 55 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by ambystom01
Are we all ignoring the fact that the torque number is still where it should be?

I haven't ..... boost would then sink the ship that sailed implying "over boost" is funky.

HP is more determined upon "flow" restricting factors.. even engine management...TPS setting....etc...wait...where have we heard this before.
Old Jun 27, 2016, 11:55 AM
  #3861  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
nemsin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PNW
Posts: 2,562
Received 50 Likes on 46 Posts
Even if we forget hp and tq., how do you explain the RS' inconsistent max boost (i.e., higher during the elusive overboost mode)?
Old Jun 27, 2016, 11:58 AM
  #3862  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
ambystom01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Canuckistan
Posts: 15,629
Likes: 0
Received 75 Likes on 68 Posts
Are you asking why the RS makes more boost in overboost mode?
Old Jun 27, 2016, 11:59 AM
  #3863  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
whtrice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,349
Received 55 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by Biggiesacks
totally agree with this. Ultimately people are paying to make their car faster, not to change the number on a screen / spread sheet. What people expect is real world performance and apparently what ford is claiming isn't translating into that.
Anyone who has strived for performance with a Evo knows this story all too well.

The dyno debate is always a issue and those people that are involved with tuning know this.

Like I said earlier, the paint isn't even dry on this product yet. The US has just now got a hold of some.
Old Jun 27, 2016, 12:02 PM
  #3864  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
nemsin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PNW
Posts: 2,562
Received 50 Likes on 46 Posts
Originally Posted by ambystom01
Are you asking why the RS makes more boost in overboost mode?
No, I am asking why the RS so rarely enters overboost mode. Ford outlined how the near permanent overboost mode is suppose to work. Meanwhile all signs point to it not working as advertised.
Old Jun 27, 2016, 12:07 PM
  #3865  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (29)
 
kyoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: US
Posts: 10,542
Received 233 Likes on 209 Posts
you guys are really hammering in trying to pick apart nesmin's argument, but I would say forget about him and look at the bigger picture - the car just seems to perform inconsistently with high variance. I'm curious to see explanations, as are other car enthusiasts and especially FORS waitlisted people.

The car yesterday felt great. Pulled nice and hard and felt like it should. My autometer gauge showed anywhere between 25-30psi. Lots of heavy, raw pops and bangs. I loved it. Drove it today and the inconsistent car was back again... felt like it was lazy and just didnt want to go. Went out with a few friends tonight and on the way home it did the whole pop and bang once. Tried track mode, drift mode, sport mode and it just would not do it. I even held 2nd gear and let it rev above 4500 and let off then accelerate again and wouldnt make any sound at all. Stopped at wal mart for 15 mins. Started it back up again and gave it a rev and got a pop out of it. Drove home and got nothing. I dont know if anyone else is having this issue but it just adds to my overall frustration. @gte has yours had any issues not popping? I know its a minor thing but still...

...

Im not trying to bash on the rs or say thay i hate the car. I dont want to hate it. I want it to do what was advertised as doing.
that's from one of the owners that was posting in that thread. sounds like a very frustrating experience to me - he's specifically talking about the pops/bangs or whatever, but he's one of the ones who's consistently had inconsistent performance from his fors
Old Jun 27, 2016, 12:13 PM
  #3866  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
whtrice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,349
Received 55 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by kyoo
personally I don't care about the dyno numbers - too much variance there. I'm more interested in the difference in trap numbers

obviously I have no idea why the numbers have such a high variance, and it seems neither do the fors owners - could be a boost leak, tune/ecu thing, who knows. it is definitely curious though
Trap speed was the first red flag that went up in regards to advertised HP for me. I don't need a dyno to suspect something was strange.

I know what 407 WHP on my car trapped...but that was with a mustang dyno and only relative to my car. Those dyno numbers and the real world trap speed correlation is important in my pursuit of performance gains.

I wish people would just settle down and wait for things to slowly reveal themselves. The answer will come out. This is such a difficult, hard practice in this day of instant gratification..
Old Jun 27, 2016, 12:14 PM
  #3867  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
whtrice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,349
Received 55 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by kyoo
you guys are really hammering in trying to pick apart nesmin's argument, but I would say forget about him and look at the bigger picture - the car just seems to perform inconsistently with high variance. I'm curious to see explanations, as are other car enthusiasts and especially FORS waitlisted people.



that's from one of the owners that was posting in that thread. sounds like a very frustrating experience to me - he's specifically talking about the pops/bangs or whatever, but he's one of the ones who's consistently had inconsistent performance from his fors
Didn't the debut of the X in the US suffer similar issues??? Maybe more modest but still concerns at the time......then they were resolved.
Old Jun 27, 2016, 12:15 PM
  #3868  
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (94)
 
Erik@MIL.SPEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,695
Received 24 Likes on 21 Posts
Trap speed usually tells the story of power, unless there are some funky gearing issues (which I don't think there are).
The following users liked this post:
whtrice (Jun 27, 2016)
Old Jun 27, 2016, 12:16 PM
  #3869  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
nemsin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PNW
Posts: 2,562
Received 50 Likes on 46 Posts
People did wait, months. Now Kaizen, Mishimoto, and others have their shop cars. The results are in. The inconsistent power is not just one owners opinion at this point.

From here, those shops are going to start tuning/parts development. The initial stock dyno runs (which show the inconsistent power) won't ever change.
Old Jun 27, 2016, 12:21 PM
  #3870  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (29)
 
kyoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: US
Posts: 10,542
Received 233 Likes on 209 Posts
Originally Posted by whtrice
Didn't the debut of the X in the US suffer similar issues??? Maybe more modest but still concerns at the time......then they were resolved.
thought that was a tune issue that was resolved via a reflash - and future X's just came with the updated tune - something like that?


Quick Reply: Focus RS



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:29 PM.