Track TEMP DATA: IC and radiator combo data collection - ALL YOUR LOGS ARE BELONG TO US!

[DerHase]

Ooof.. Just realized the time filter did not get applied or saved or something. Very easy to get distracted when going through all this crap. Need to updated the summary back end sheet but in the meantime this is a more accurate representation of @yakboyslim 's log. It was the entire session showing, not just the 200 second snip.

 

[DerHase]

Quick comparison at a glance of all the cars at Fastivus for coolant and IATs.

@yakboyslim has a Mamba GT2867R (running lower boost than typical IIRC?)
Ashton has an IS20 and FMIC. He was definitely getting oil ingestion related knock so it may get discarded at a later date.
@tigeo has an IS38 wagon
I've got a basic IS20.

Despite the large power disparity... @yakboyslim 's overall top speeds were near identical to mine with an IS20. @tigeo had the highest top speed. I had higher average TPS %, but they're all roughly within noise of each other. I'd expect a higher horsepower car to have a bit less time spent WOT. Similar to comparing mine and @Mini7 at VIR. He's got at least 40ish more hp than me, registers about 6% more TPS avg... likely because he spends a solid 3+ seconds less on the straights, plus having to brake a bit sooner due to a +12-15mph top speed. Rough napkin math says that there will be 2-3% less time at 100% WOT there alone.

Realistically they're all terrible cars and oil is borderline too hot. The Shenandoah Circuit is pretty tough in that it's a LOT of turns (so lots of throttling out), and overall lower speeds so there's less airflow for cooling.

I think a big part of @yakboyslim 's temp success is 6MT + conservatively tuned. Also needs more skinny pedal

 

[tigeo]

View attachment 294820
Quick comparison at a glance of all the cars at Fastivus for coolant and IATs.

@yakboyslim has a Mamba GT2867R (running lower boost than typical IIRC?)
Ashton has an IS20 and FMIC. He was definitely getting oil ingestion related knock so it may get discarded at a later date.
@tigeo has an IS38 wagon
I've got a basic IS20.

View attachment 294821

View attachment 294823

View attachment 294822

View attachment 294824

Despite the large power disparity... @yakboyslim 's overall top speeds were near identical to mine with an IS20. @tigeo had the highest top speed. I had higher average TPS %, but they're all roughly within noise of each other. I'd expect a higher horsepower car to have a bit less time spent WOT. Similar to comparing mine and @Mini7 at VIR. He's got at least 40ish more hp than me, registers about 6% more TPS avg... likely because he spends a solid 3+ seconds less on the straights, plus having to brake a bit sooner due to a +12-15mph top speed. Rough napkin math says that there will be 2-3% less time at 100% WOT there alone.

Realistically they're all terrible cars and oil is borderline too hot. The Shenandoah Circuit is pretty tough in that it's a LOT of turns (so lots of throttling out), and overall lower speeds so there's less airflow for cooling.

I think a big part of @yakboyslim 's temp success is 6MT + conservatively tuned. Also needs more skinny pedal

 

[yakboyslim]

@yakboyslim has a Mamba GT2867R (running lower boost than typical IIRC?)

I think I was on my "conservative map" so 25 with a reverse taper to 26 (to give the hpfp a little headroom for the track). That's low boost for a 2867 but it still ain't low boost.

I was slow at the end of the straight because I was slow at the start of the straight, and more important I was always braking too early.

 

[tigeo]

This is really cool to see 4 cars same day/same track. They really all are pretty close.

 

[tigeo]

Also..that 121mph....that's when I was in the air over the ski jump. Top speed was around 115 on front straight.

 

[yakboyslim]

Also..that 121mph....that's when I was in the air over the ski jump. Top speed was around 115 on front straight.

I was actually going to ask for video of you getting on to the front straight, because for you to be that fast at the end of it in a IS38 wagon, you either needed to be going a lot faster than everyone else through the corners before, or have some hidden DRS system.

Ski jump makes more sense.

 

[tigeo]

I was actually going to ask for video of you getting on to the front straight, because for you to be that fast at the end of it in a IS38 wagon, you either needed to be going a lot faster than everyone else through the corners before, or have some hidden DRS system.

Ski jump makes more sense.

Here's 2 laps around, Vmax front straight was 112 for the in-car lap. I hit 115 at one point during the event but that was pushing that brake zone a bit and getting a bit better speed out of the turn before. The wagon is actually pretty good up top, I've hit 140 on the back straight at VIR in it.

 

[tigeo]

Air time....watch the speedo...."Thanks for flying wagon air!"

 

[DerHase]

Oooh yeah that'll affect things. Noted for future that (especially) when all 4 wheels are driven... it's more than statistically significant when the whole car gets unweighted.

It's a little less obvious with wrong wheel drive, though you can see the avg speed does jump a tad. Looks like about 3-4mph over "actual" speed if you look at the max of the both rear wheels vs the max of the vehicle speed.

 

[DerHase]

Been a little while, but these have all been updated to fix a boost calculation error:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17OmZvC_tlsmpFnLV45jxSy9Ocyry3ZaX/view?usp=sharing

The reason why can be explained with this very dumbed down example of these 10 example time stamps in a row:

(boost)
-10
-10
-10
-5
-5
5
5
10
10
10

For that entire length of 10 timestamps, the old formula was completely removing all of the negative values, and then only taking the average of the 5+5+10+10+10... which comes out to 8psi.

We want to capture the average over the ENTIRE time though... and the true average over time is actually 0. The problem is that because some logs are from PUT - ambient pressure... that value never goes negative.

So the best we can do is change all the negative numbers to zeros... so it's still capturing the boost over time factor, and it's equally "off" for everyone. So now it takes the average of 0+0+0+0+0+5+5+10+10+10... which equals 4psi... which is at least more realistic, and more importantly we can normalize this across all the given data logs.


There's also some bonus charts I've been sitting on, both at the beginning and end of the report. The most interesting of which is the fact that @Redslaya 's oil cooler duct did more for fixing coolant temps than anything else.

His oil duct final testing was covered here in depth:
https://www.datadrivenmqb.com/drivetrain/oil-cooler-duct-conclusionresults

But the biggest stand out for those who haven't seen... is that the car gained NINE MILES PER HOUR on the back straight... from a properly ducted oil cooler. Same tune and everything else (APR Stage 1). The lower temps are just allowing the car to not pull timing or reduce torque due to temperatures which it was doing prior.