Why is the M6 Faster than the A4
What year car did the other guy have? 93 is speed density, and it does not respond as well to modifications as the mass air does.
There is about 6% or more drivetrain loss between the auto and manual, not to mention if he's a newer LT1, there is less wear and tear on the engine. Lastly, different cars respond differently. Some cars are just plain faster from the factory than others...
There is about 6% or more drivetrain loss between the auto and manual, not to mention if he's a newer LT1, there is less wear and tear on the engine. Lastly, different cars respond differently. Some cars are just plain faster from the factory than others...
Originally posted by 12sec97Z28
What year car did the other guy have? 93 is speed density, and it does not respond as well to modifications as the mass air does.
There is about 6% or more drivetrain loss between the auto and manual, not to mention if he's a newer LT1, there is less wear and tear on the engine. Lastly, different cars respond differently. Some cars are just plain faster from the factory than others...
What year car did the other guy have? 93 is speed density, and it does not respond as well to modifications as the mass air does.
There is about 6% or more drivetrain loss between the auto and manual, not to mention if he's a newer LT1, there is less wear and tear on the engine. Lastly, different cars respond differently. Some cars are just plain faster from the factory than others...
Tuff
I noticed you have no shift kit. That is one of the best mods I ever did. Its better for your tranny, too. Major improvement over a stock a4. Get yourself a stall and some drag radials and an m6 wont have anything on you in a straight line from a dead stop. Nothing against m6's because sometimes I wish I had one
i don't know why he beat you, but the guy who said speed density cars don't respond to mods that well.. my 93 with a little weight loss and a converter, electric water pump, headers, and a tire went 12.5@106 as a best time and normaly went 12.6-12.7@105. stock gear, and everything that touches oil was stock.. i guess mine was just a freak.
Originally posted by lt1camaroman93
i don't know why he beat you, but the guy who said speed density cars don't respond to mods that well.. my 93 with a little weight loss and a converter, electric water pump, headers, and a tire went 12.5@106 as a best time and normaly went 12.6-12.7@105. stock gear, and everything that touches oil was stock.. i guess mine was just a freak.
i don't know why he beat you, but the guy who said speed density cars don't respond to mods that well.. my 93 with a little weight loss and a converter, electric water pump, headers, and a tire went 12.5@106 as a best time and normaly went 12.6-12.7@105. stock gear, and everything that touches oil was stock.. i guess mine was just a freak.
MAF cars compensate better to mods since it measures air from the MAF, SD cars measure load and use preset values in the PROM . Too many mds with no programming on an SD car will make it run like crap and not up to full potential.
IMO, SD cars can be made faster too.
Originally posted by 12sec97Z28
What year car did the other guy have? 93 is speed density, and it does not respond as well to modifications as the mass air does.
There is about 6% or more drivetrain loss between the auto and manual, not to mention if he's a newer LT1, there is less wear and tear on the engine. Lastly, different cars respond differently. Some cars are just plain faster from the factory than others...
What year car did the other guy have? 93 is speed density, and it does not respond as well to modifications as the mass air does.
There is about 6% or more drivetrain loss between the auto and manual, not to mention if he's a newer LT1, there is less wear and tear on the engine. Lastly, different cars respond differently. Some cars are just plain faster from the factory than others...
BTW, it ran 12.82 @ 106 MPH BEFORE I ever lifted a valvecover OR bolted on headers.
Frank
'93 knock modules aren't near as sensative as later units. Very rarely do you have knock related timing retard in a '93. Mine with the CC305/headers, and roller rockers doesn't ever pick up any knock with the factory sensor.
Frank
Frank
It sounds like your car isn't running proper or you didn't get any traction when you raced from the stop. I have this problem now as I am overdue for new tires. From the role, if you were in third you're going to lose because your using to small a gear for that speed.. At 30 mph you can be in first gear, up to 35-40. If you know your going to do from a roll you can manually hold the gear in first, floor it, then up the selector to second before you redline and you'll shift to second.
btw: 93's respond fine to mods, unless your putting in a high flow MAF
its is true about tuning them though, not quite as convenient as 94+ cars
btw: 93's respond fine to mods, unless your putting in a high flow MAF

its is true about tuning them though, not quite as convenient as 94+ cars
I am getting ready to put in the lt4 conversion kit, the heads are at the shop getting ported, this is why I need a chip installed as well. Again I know tha I'm runnin' rich as well. I shore hope that this helps my car. Again thanks all for all of your replies, this board is awesome. Thanks too all
Tuff
Tuff
I have found the opposite to be true. I find most A4s run quicker ETs than M6s. My car ran 13.74 at 100mph in 100% bone stock trim. Most M6s usually run higher trap speeds (101-102) but only run 13.9s in most cases.
I dont know about you guys in the rest of the country, but here in Florida I'm having issues with gasoline. Even though the price is through the roof the quality or something is missing. Depending on the station, sometimes I get gas and it seems like my car goes to a "Drag ***" mode. (Most noticebly when I get Chevron). Just something to look for


