Re: [DML] Re: airbox performance
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DML] Re: airbox performance



I would find this convincing *only* if it were done as a double-blind study; i.e., do multiple randomized runs in which neither the driver nor the timer knows which box is installed on each run.

This is standard procedure in medical research, and for good reason: the human ability to perceive non-existent effects based on the mere fact that you changed something is astounding.

My car, for example, *always* runs better after I've spent a lot of money on it. :-).

The advantage of the dyno test is that there is no human in the loop--neither the dyno nor the car are subject to placebo effects.

--pete lucas
VIN #06703

P.S. -- If you do enough runs, send me the raw data and I would be glad to do the appropriate tests of statistical significance that will tell us the likelihood of getting your results by random chance.

At 9:25 PM -0500 10/11/01, at88mph wrote:
Actually,

I suggest some quarter mile runs. The reason why is b/c the difference is
going to be the air flow, which would be hard to define on a dyno. Now, if
you take the car and put the stock airbox back on and do a quarter mile run,
or even a eight mile run, then do the same with the 'new airbox' you would
get an accurate measurement of what was gained. (and you could calculate
and correct for the varing 60 foot times as well to be completely accurate)


Just a thought,


Duke





Home Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN 


Copyright ProjectVixen.com. All rights reserved.

Opinions expressed in posts reflect the views of their respective authors.
DMCForum Mailing List Archive  DMCNews Mailing List Archive  DMC-UK Mailing List Archive

This site contains affiliate links for which we may be compensated