F20 118i auto 8speed datalogged

[phantom]

Used racechrono previously and sorry imo its not accurate

Vbox is the one to test with

:idea:

I have also tried many over the years. I'm afraid V Box and the like can all be manipulated.Level etc.
Satellites can not be manipulated they are where they are.
You have either not had the correct Racechrono or and maybe did not understand the full scope of the program.
The travelled route with GPS and google earth coupling is something to admire.On every meter of road you can check altitude,number of satellites that were active, speed, gear and gear change time.Updates are every 0.1sec.
This is a very intensive tool and cannot be mastered in just 1/2 an hour.Any tool is as good as you use it but you have to have the time and patience to master this one.
The only persons i have logged for who did not like the figures were those not happy with the times.These are the same individuals who will run from dyno to dyno till they find the highest figure.
Don't knock anything until you have used it to it's full potential.

 

[r0ckf1re]

Tarlton should upgrade and get Racechrono :lol:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[phantom]

Tarlton should upgrade and get Racechrono :lol:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tarlton is a very difficult place to do good times with a street car.I held a number of National records their in the eighties and nineties.I took part in the National series in my street car's and one even stands today 23years later.Mr eliminator belonged to me for a few years with my Toyota Twincam RSI.I put 4AGE on the map at the National series in 1988 doing a 13.56 sec on the quarter with street tyres.Only mentioning this because i note a bit of sarcasm.
Tarlton is the only Nationl track in South Africa and built with slick tyres in mind.Tarlton has an uphill gradient of 2% as allowed for by National status.
On street tyres at Tarlton you will find that your times are 0.3 to 0.5 seconds slower than you can achieve on a normal road surface that is level.

---

14.7 1/4 mile ?

That i have to see to believe.

:fencelook:

I note your scepticism but believe me i was just as astonished.To me the standout figure was the 193km/h on the km.I was expecting more in the region of 180.

 

[m0lt3n]

Good level headed answers Phantom. Thanks for the effort you put in and the data you share. I find it very interesting, even though I am a noob with racing times and such

 

[Tareeq]

What bothers me a bit is that Phantom has been doing this with all his cars and the feedback has always been positive. I understand the doubt because of the car in question but what would he get out of lieing about this certain car?

Anyway thanx Phantom for the write ups always an interesting read.

 

[phantom]

What bothers me a bit is that Phantom has been doing this with all his cars and the feedback has always been positive. I understand the doubt because of the car in question but what would he get out of lieing about this certain car?

Anyway thanx Phantom for the write ups always an interesting read.

Thanks.As said i do not have anything to gain by giving this car better figures and whoever logs by me gets what the logger says and nothing else.
I will see if i can get this car again at a later stage to do another test to see if weather conditions (wind) played any part.
What i can say is that these cars with the 8 speed auto jump off the line and if you look at the 60ft (20mtre) time and speed it compares very favourably to much faster cars.I brake boosted to 2000rpm for takeoff.
Wind on the takeoff would not make much difference, but i am more impressed at the km speed and here wind will make a difference.

 

[phantom]

As promised i have done a re-log.Guys there is no mistake these cars are that quick.I think the owners of these 118I's are having the most fun.Who would have thought a little 118i pulling up next to you might kick your ass.
I would love to hear from other owners how they find their cars.













The 1km speed was down so i went into the graph setup and found i lifted off at 965mts at which stage the speed was 194.3km/h.So the speed registered on the km (190) is actually after you had already lifted off.This is what is nice about the Racechrono system.If there is something that does not look right you can investigate.

 

[Ashman]

I don't know much about electronics and computers and stuff so correct me if I am wrong...the GPS receiver in your cellphone is not as effective as those that one have on purpose-made GPS unit and definitely not as effective as units to the likes of a V-Box...

The receiver in your cellular phone/tablet suffers from a high satellite-to-device latency as its designed to not to consume battery life. In addition to this the the receiver shares "real-estate" with other components on your phone/tablet's motherboard hence reducing its antenna size and ultimately its accuracy is compromised.

Your application runs on top the phone's operating system and it being a phone shares the CPU time-slices with other software components whose treads cannot be set to "sleep" as they are considered to be core processes. I am not saying this is a factor of latency but it can be - one's phone/tablet is not a purpose made GPS tracking unit which a V-box is.

One's device can lock onto 50 satellites, but if there is this inherent latency on the device then it makes no difference. No software, regardless of cost would overcome this latency. A navigation (Tom-Tom/Garmin) unit may do a better job than your cell-phone in terms of accuracy but it too suffers some degree of latency.

To Phantoms words: "YOU DO NOT GET MORE ACCUTATE"
Sorry, I think you do. The most accurate method would be to establish a reference point on car and set that at the 0 metre mark and using a timer, measure how fast that reference point would get from the 0 mark to the 400 metre mark.

In terms of scaling, using one device to benchmark your cars may yield results based on some scale, it may happen to be an incorrect scale. Having one uncalibrated device yielding consistent results, can only be used to measure delta's and nothing more.

Sorry Mr. Phantom, I don't mean to discredit you, I once used similar applications to the one you have used so I know where you are coming from. I just feel I need to add my 2c and I must say some of the comments directed to your results seem to be immature and silly. You took the time to post them and I appreciate your contribution...Like I said earlier, I do not know much and I may be wrong - please correct me if I am.

Thank you.

 

[Kish2604]

Phantom, personally I also don't particularly like the system you use for the time and data logging when compared to the international standard being the vbox, Ashman makes some valid points in his explanation on it however there is a place for all timing systems in ones arsenal.

Your timing system however accurate or inaccurate it may be compared to others will only be relevant when compared to other cars you test and cannot be compared to manufactures claims,road test results or track events, it will be most useful in comparing the difference from standard road car to a mod for mod difference experienced.

Phantom if you could perhaps direct your testing towards pre and post testing of items like intakes and downpipes or even dealer software updates.

There have been a few comments on this thread that were out of place but lets all try and keep it clean, constructive discussion can only lead to a better understanding of the tech behind these systems.

:thumbs:

 

[@ri]

When I previously posted that this was just an app and implied the results would not be accurate, I was laughed at? Thus I assumed that I had misunderstood, and that it was an actual dedicated hardware device being used (such as the vBox etc.) and not software.

I share the same sentiments as ashman above.

Anyways, I also appreciate the results being posted, and they are very interesting, and please don't take this the wrong way, but I do think we have to compare these side by side with a dedicated hardware device such as a vBox Mini to see if these results have any creditability whatsoever. There seems to be hard conclusions made in these threads from the results of this app, and the fact that they are seeming "too good to be true" with every single car being tested with this app might be telling us something here. But it would definitely be interesting to compare it with a hardware device.

 

[hoosain]

i think the best way to test 1/4 mile would be to test at a universal drag strip where the conditions are the same on the day
i find the times tested by phantom a bit optimistic considering i have full bolt on and only managed 13.1@179 at tarlton and bear in mind this is a n54 335i
a standard 135i was running 14.5 on the same day

 

[Chavoos]

Has anyone tried dynolicious . I find it fairly accurate and a good base to see if mods make a difference.

It has some good reviews showing it fairing well against a VBox e.g

I've used it a few times on my car . And the results are similar to what I achieve at tarlton.

I wud like to test it at a drag strip.
Didn't manage yesterday but Hopefully I can do this drag-dynolicious comparison next time


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Andy1GP]

I mostly read negative comments here. Everyone please bear in mind that Phantom uses this tool to log all of his cars. So the data is all comparable as the testing conditions and tool is very very similar to one another.

I dont know all too much about data logging but why discredit something you havent used before.

For what its worth I drove in both the 118 and 328 today and they are really that quick. The scary part is that his 328i is virtually identical to a f30 330d performance wise.

I for one want to continue seeing these logs posted on fanatics as they are valuable to compare against his other cars.

And to be fair his cars are exceptionally strong with reason

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

 

[Executer]

There`s a lot of guys here that have no idea to the experience and background some people on the forum have, but dont share because of negative remarks as these.

Phantom has more experience on the strip than most users that posted here together.

The tool he uses is certainly accurate, as he has proved this many times before.

We can learn so much if we just give people a chance to share their knowledge, but seems these days every Tom, Dick and Harry is an expert on every subject.

:nonono:

 

[MaX]

@Chavoos - i like using dynolicous and have been using it for about 3 years. There is a vid where they compared the dynolicous results to actual 400m timing equipment and it was bang on. But there are so many external factors that can skew result.

I personally like Phantoms tests and 100% accurate or not, it creates a standard base from where you can compare cars. :thumbs:

 

[dvst8]

There`s a lot of guys here that have no idea to the experience and background some people on the forum have, but dont share because of negative remarks as these.

Phantom has more experience on the strip than most users that posted here together.

The tool he uses is certainly accurate, as he has proved this many times before.

We can learn so much if we just give people a chance to share their knowledge, but seems these days every Tom, Dick and Harry is an expert on every subject.

:nonono:

I agree with what you are saying and yes these tests are interesting, however we as members with strip, building and general car knowledge do not have to accept the results.

As I said before, awesome tests, however until I see these results for myself, it carries no weight. Not saying its impossible, but for me, "seeing is believing".

:thumbs:

 

[UpNcOmiNg!]

I don't know much about electronics and computers and stuff so correct me if I am wrong...the GPS receiver in your cellphone is not as effective as those that one have on purpose-made GPS unit and definitely not as effective as units to the likes of a V-Box...

The receiver in your cellular phone/tablet suffers from a high satellite-to-device latency as its designed to not to consume battery life. In addition to this the the receiver shares "real-estate" with other components on your phone/tablet's motherboard hence reducing its antenna size and ultimately its accuracy is compromised.

Your application runs on top the phone's operating system and it being a phone shares the CPU time-slices with other software components whose treads cannot be set to "sleep" as they are considered to be core processes. I am not saying this is a factor of latency but it can be - one's phone/tablet is not a purpose made GPS tracking unit which a V-box is.

One's device can lock onto 50 satellites, but if there is this inherent latency on the device then it makes no difference. No software, regardless of cost would overcome this latency. A navigation (Tom-Tom/Garmin) unit may do a better job than your cell-phone in terms of accuracy but it too suffers some degree of latency.

To Phantoms words: "YOU DO NOT GET MORE ACCUTATE"
Sorry, I think you do. The most accurate method would be to establish a reference point on car and set that at the 0 metre mark and using a timer, measure how fast that reference point would get from the 0 mark to the 400 metre mark.

In terms of scaling, using one device to benchmark your cars may yield results based on some scale, it may happen to be an incorrect scale. Having one uncalibrated device yielding consistent results, can only be used to measure delta's and nothing more.

Sorry Mr. Phantom, I don't mean to discredit you, I once used similar applications to the one you have used so I know where you are coming from. I just feel I need to add my 2c and I must say some of the comments directed to your results seem to be immature and silly. You took the time to post them and I appreciate your contribution...Like I said earlier, I do not know much and I may be wrong - please correct me if I am.

Thank you.

I just want to know, did you guys ever do any logging and share it on the forum? I don't see how getting into this as you guys are is of any benefit whatsoever. As I have mentioned privately, this is information shared where Phantom has taken time out of his schedule to post up results he thought was relevant and interesting. He has done extensive testing as to where/what/how and this is all using his EXTENSIVE experience, which i'm even more sorry to say, NONE of you have. Full Bolts on cars are not drag cars, so I don't see how any of you have place to speak.
With regards to latency and GPS tracking, go buy a VBOX and run it against the software used and test its accuracy, then comment.
I dont see why such a big "hoo-haa" has to be made over these results or others. I am 100% sure that this gentleman whom you are questioning will outdrive any of you in your own cars any day of the week, which means you probably wont ever achieve his results in any case.

None of those who are questioning him have taken the time to ask the man himself, or take the time to meet him and see what he and his methodologies are. So yeah, you can type fast, datalog it and lets compare our typing speeds.

---

IF you dont believe the results, why not take it as entertainment then?
I mean we all watch Top Gear and we for a fact know that less and less of it is factual and more of it is entertainment these days

 

[131GAV]

I don't know much about electronics and computers and stuff so correct me if I am wrong...the GPS receiver in your cellphone is not as effective as those that one have on purpose-made GPS unit and definitely not as effective as units to the likes of a V-Box...

The receiver in your cellular phone/tablet suffers from a high satellite-to-device latency as its designed to not to consume battery life. In addition to this the the receiver shares "real-estate" with other components on your phone/tablet's motherboard hence reducing its antenna size and ultimately its accuracy is compromised.

Your application runs on top the phone's operating system and it being a phone shares the CPU time-slices with other software components whose treads cannot be set to "sleep" as they are considered to be core processes. I am not saying this is a factor of latency but it can be - one's phone/tablet is not a purpose made GPS tracking unit which a V-box is.

One's device can lock onto 50 satellites, but if there is this inherent latency on the device then it makes no difference. No software, regardless of cost would overcome this latency. A navigation (Tom-Tom/Garmin) unit may do a better job than your cell-phone in terms of accuracy but it too suffers some degree of latency.

To Phantoms words: "YOU DO NOT GET MORE ACCUTATE"
Sorry, I think you do. The most accurate method would be to establish a reference point on car and set that at the 0 metre mark and using a timer, measure how fast that reference point would get from the 0 mark to the 400 metre mark.

In terms of scaling, using one device to benchmark your cars may yield results based on some scale, it may happen to be an incorrect scale. Having one uncalibrated device yielding consistent results, can only be used to measure delta's and nothing more.

Sorry Mr. Phantom, I don't mean to discredit you, I once used similar applications to the one you have used so I know where you are coming from. I just feel I need to add my 2c and I must say some of the comments directed to your results seem to be immature and silly. You took the time to post them and I appreciate your contribution...Like I said earlier, I do not know much and I may be wrong - please correct me if I am.

Thank you.

I just want to know, did you guys ever do any logging and share it on the forum? I don't see how getting into this as you guys are is of any benefit whatsoever. As I have mentioned privately, this is information shared where Phantom has taken time out of his schedule to post up results he thought was relevant and interesting. He has done extensive testing as to where/what/how and this is all using his EXTENSIVE experience, which i'm even more sorry to say, NONE of you have. Full Bolts on cars are not drag cars, so I don't see how any of you have place to speak.
With regards to latency and GPS tracking, go buy a VBOX and run it against the software used and test its accuracy, then comment.
I dont see why such a big "hoo-haa" has to be made over these results or others. I am 100% sure that this gentleman whom you are questioning will outdrive any of you in your own cars any day of the week, which means you probably wont ever achieve his results in any case.

None of those who are questioning him have taken the time to ask the man himself, or take the time to meet him and see what he and his methodologies are. So yeah, you can type fast, datalog it and lets compare our typing speeds.

---

IF you dont believe the results, why not take it as entertainment then?
I mean we all watch Top Gear and we for a fact know that less and less of it is factual and more of it is entertainment these days

---

Nicely said Dev... The thing is each person is entitled to their own opinion on this, but thank you for sharing these logs Phantom as I am sure the intention was there to enlighten us on your findings. They are truly amazing..

 

[Tareeq]

:nonono: Guys why make such a big deal about this? if you felt that the results were off then why not say anything initially? why wait so long to say something?
Anyway Phantom please do not let this discourage you as there are members on the Forum that looks forward to these logs :thumbs:

 

[dvst8]

Ok, im willing to compare with phantom, vbox and his phone app in the same car and his best driving skills.

Let me know when we can test.

:thumbs: