Anyone tune their BASE RWD model with Redshift Performance?

[Avantgarde]

Again....didn't say I was the expert, do with this information what you will

There is a parameter in Carscanner that calculates HP by torque and RPM (i think it is called “power by torque and RPM”). That may be the best way to get a proper power pull.

However based on Prj’s work and posts, highly doubtful you will see anything higher than 480HP in the end. Tune is still an important value add given it gives an additional 100HP always on tap, even though a little unfortunate that RedShift was not entirely transparent around the technical specs of their tune.

Sponsored

 

[Emokeff88]

You don't have to be.
You said:

And I did just that.

What you provided matches what was provided earlier here, and also the curve that is in Part 2

So are we satisfied now, Is the mystery solved? N

There is a parameter in Carscanner that calculates HP by torque and RPM (i think it is called “power by torque and RPM”). That may be the best way to get a proper power pull.

However based on Prj’s work and posts, highly doubtful you will see anything higher than 480HP in the end. Tune is still an important value add given it gives an additional 100HP always on tap, even though a little unfortunate that RedShift was not entirely transparent around the technical specs of their tune.

I'm satisfied with what this thread discovered, I'll leave it at that then... Case closed?

 

[prj]

So are we satisfied now, Is the mystery solved? N
I'm satisfied with what this thread discovered, I'll leave it at that then... Case closed?

What you logged is not HP by torque and RPM. It's battery power translated to hp.
Battery draw is not the power the motors are producing, and also not what Porsche quotes in their official power figures.

So your torque logs are correct, the battery draw is pretty useless though, as that's dependant also on other things in the car running and on the current efficiency of the powertrain. Basically it has no connection about what power the car is making.
So saying you saw "X" or "Y" there does not mean anything in that context. The max it can make is 480 hp. And that's going to take at least 530 hp if not more from the battery, but how much it takes from the battery is ... irrelevant.

 

[Emokeff88]

What you logged is not HP by torque and RPM. It's battery power translated to hp.
Battery draw is not the power the motors are producing, and also not what Porsche quotes in their official power figures.

So your torque logs are correct, the battery draw is pretty useless though, as that's dependant also on other things in the car running and on the current efficiency of the powertrain.

As you mentioned I don't have the proper tools for the job so I'm afraid I'll have to leave at that. I was just trying to help the discussion a bit but I think you guys got it figured out.

 

[prj]

As you mentioned I don't have the proper tools for the job so I'm afraid I'll have to leave at that. I was just trying to help the discussion a bit but I think you guys got it figured out.

You haven't done anything wrong, just needed to clarify the difference between battery power draw and motive power, as they are two different things.

Your contribution is welcome and useful, don't take it the wrong way please.

 

[Avantgarde]

As you mentioned I don't have the proper tools for the job so I'm afraid I'll have to leave at that. I was just trying to help the discussion a bit but I think you guys got it figured out.

Thanks for taking the time pulling those stats though.

 

[freeforall]

even though a little unfortunate that RedShift was not entirely transparent around the technical specs of their tune.

100%. If I am not mistaken they were promising a 15% increase in HP and way more Torque for the RWD. I wouldn’t call that “not entirely transparent” though. It is selling something completely different. I guess that telling people that they don’t gain any torque and they will just get the power they already have in LC doesn’t help selling a lot especially for the price tag.

IMHO the tune price for the RWD should be lower than the other models given the gain even though I understand that the effort is the same for the tuner.

 

[Emokeff88]

I Appreciate all of you trying to figure out what should've already been clearly advertised. As frustrating as it is, we can't blame tuners if they never physically had a RWD in there possession to test. I'm sure 100% of tune sales were simply shipped out ECUs so I do get that part. At then end of the day I'm still satisfied with the bump in power for the driving I do.

 

[prj]

I Appreciate all of you trying to figure out what should've already been clearly advertised. As frustrating as it is, we can't blame tuners if they never physically had a RWD in there possession to test. I'm sure 100% of tune sales were simply shipped out ECUs so I do get that part. At then end of the day I'm still satisfied with the bump in power for the driving I do.

So you can pull the data off of any 4S or e-tron GT, as that has the same rear motor.
And the data is not just wrong for the RWD variant. It's wrong for every single variant.

 

[Emokeff88]

This makes me wonder even more about these guys and how accurate the numbers are

 

[prj]

This makes me wonder even more about these guys and how accurate the numbers are

A joke. Unless the price includes installation of a Turbo S front motor.

 

[prj]

we can't blame tuners

Oh you should absolutely blame the tuners.

When someone lies to you about performance numbers there can be only two reasons.
a) They are faking them to boost sales.
b) Or they don't know any better.

I don't like either of these propositions. a) is just evil and why would you want to buy something from b)?

I quit powertrain calibration in 2020 in part for this reason and focused on making tools for the tuners to use instead. Decided to give it a go again with EV's, because the electric motor is a beautiful simple thing, and incorrect statements about numbers are incredibly easy to prove.

In the end - the tune still delivers the maximum(*) the powertrain can do. Even if the numbers don't match up to what is advertised.

* Except for the launch torque, which is impossible to get without a code patch in normal mode.

 

[freeforall]

It was discussed if it makes sense to shift a bit later, ie 130km/h instead of 120km/h. It won't change much : at a certain point you'll have anyway this drop in torque/power when shifting.


In term of power, the curves (perhaps the most interesting ones) below illustrate the difference in power in real life where you (almost) never use Launch Control. You will never feel a difference below 70km/h.

@Gru how did you plot the Power vs speed graph with Carscanner? What are you using to display the power?
Thx!

 

[Gru]

@Gru how did you plot the Power vs speed graph with Carscanner? What are you using to display the power?
Thx!

I exported the rpm/torque/speed and used Excel for these plots. I don't think it's possible to do it with Carscanner.

For the power, kW = Torque (N.m) * rpm / 9550

 

[Avantgarde]

@Gru @Emokeff88

When you have a chance, do you guys mind checking your max G figure recorded for acceleration on the left side circle of the dash? (Looks like the attached picture). In non-LC mode i can only get 0.55-0.56G with my stock RWD PB+. Wondering tune makes any difference at all on this. (Likely not given max torque is not changing but i would like to rule out anything else possibly at play like throttle filtering etc, that could actually impact the g force experienced by the driver). Appreciate you doing this. (Btw you can clear the max history through the menu, in case you want to take a fresh reading).

Sponsored