XEDE versus Dynoflash 1/4 mile times
Originally Posted by Quickshift
So the dynoflash made him only get a 14? I am thinking driver error 
So he lost time over a stock evo... Xede costs how much? and how much is a mail in flash ? I dunno its just a thought.
So he lost time over a stock evo... Xede costs how much? and how much is a mail in flash ? I dunno its just a thought.
<sacastic>
I thought that the 1/4 mile was the be all and end all for comparing power.
<sarcastic/>
You have to look at the Trap speeds and ignore the times. Does the car have any other modification diffierence between the two flashes? Do they drive any different? Good job Shiv.
I thought that the 1/4 mile was the be all and end all for comparing power.
<sarcastic/>
You have to look at the Trap speeds and ignore the times. Does the car have any other modification diffierence between the two flashes? Do they drive any different? Good job Shiv.
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
Originally Posted by denom
Well let's see. This is my old time with the dynoflash program (The best time with the dynoflash program, I must add)
60' - 2.022
1/8 - 8.992 @ 77.98 mph
1/4 - 14.057 @ 95.82 mph
XEDE Times
60' - 1.961
1/8 - 8.724 @ 81.27 mph
1/4 13.608 @ 101.27
Both runs were done on 91 octane maps.
60' - 2.022
1/8 - 8.992 @ 77.98 mph
1/4 - 14.057 @ 95.82 mph
XEDE Times
60' - 1.961
1/8 - 8.724 @ 81.27 mph
1/4 13.608 @ 101.27
Both runs were done on 91 octane maps.
.[/QUOTE] If these times were ran at the same track than I'd say these claims are
Suspect.
All conditions considered, I'm sure he had his dynoflash longer than (1) day at
the track. Dynoflash time listed is his best time out of numerous runs, but his
stock time is faster? I'm not knocking the Xede and if he's happy with it, than
thats cool. But for someone like me who has neither yet, I can't accept this
as being an accurate or legit opinion.
Originally Posted by denom
Well let's see. This is my old time with the dynoflash program (The best time with the dynoflash program, I must add)
60' - 2.022
1/8 - 8.992 @ 77.98 mph
1/4 - 14.057 @ 95.82 mph
XEDE Times
60' - 1.961
1/8 - 8.724 @ 81.27 mph
1/4 13.608 @ 101.27
Both runs were done on 91 octane maps.
60' - 2.022
1/8 - 8.992 @ 77.98 mph
1/4 - 14.057 @ 95.82 mph
XEDE Times
60' - 1.961
1/8 - 8.724 @ 81.27 mph
1/4 13.608 @ 101.27
Both runs were done on 91 octane maps.
When you post stuff like this you create a fight. I am so sick of people fighting on EVOM. My advice is not to post comparisons since an arguement will occur 100% of the time.
I use to have dynoflash and I was happy with it also
Originally Posted by denom
I believe my stock mph was 97 mph through the 1/4 mile. Yeah IE, I still need to work on my 60', but it was better then some of the other Evo owners there (Someone was cutting 2.0 sec. 60'). Plus I never miss a shift
. Stock evo + reflash( any ones reflash Vishnu's , Al's , TT's....) should be faster than stock , dont think we know all the factors in this .Iam glad your happy with your Exedy not trying to take any thing away from you
All you guys do is fight. This thread is useless. There's not clear reasoning to post the Dynoflash comparison expect to start something up. There could be any number of reasons the car ran a slower trap, but they're all hearsay.
I'm closing this thread since there's nothing to gain from it.
Mark
I'm closing this thread since there's nothing to gain from it.
Mark