Chrysler 300C & SRT8 Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Greetings Flashpaq owners...Yes I still have my Flashpaq. Now I have a Flashpaq and Predator. This post is an attempt to avoid having a Flashpaq, Predator, and a G-Tech. I am interested in determining how accurate the Flashpaq is at data logging. If there are any of you that have tested your Flashpaq at the tract or against any third party timer could you please let me know what the results were? From memory, but I can't find any posts to back this up, the Flashpaq's trigger is 1 mph and as a consequence it gives slightly slower ET than the track. Also the Flashpaq clocks the mph at exactly 1/4 mile and the tract clocks it 33' before the 1/4 resulting in a slightly higher mph than the track.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
I have never seen anyone verify the accuracy of flashpaq on any of the major three forums, LXforums, 300Cforums, and Chargerforums.

One thing I don't like about the flashpaq datalogging is each incremental increase in seconds is not consistent. One time increment will be 0.22 seconds, and the next will be 0.20 seconds. This makes it very hard to compare runs and to see when the exact point shifts are occurring, when timing advance reached its peak/highest, etc.

Another more significant problem is time increments are different on different runs. On the first pic below, the time increments are around 0.20 to .22.
On the next run the increment is around 0.54. A difference of half a second between each reading/increment is huge IMO.

This issue is not exactly what you are asking about, but it may effect times depending what time increments the flashpaq chooses to use for a particular run.
Attached are pics of two data logs and shows how the time increments are different between the two runs, and different in the same run.
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Hey Joey!

I hope you're still running those sweet wheels. Thanks for the printouts. I had forgotten that the Flashpaq data logged like that. It was good for a general indicator but especially because you couldn't change any of the settings I never really used it much. The only thing that I ever used the data logging for was the 0-60 and 1/4 mile. But your right, if you consider that there are over 50 sparks per second per cylinder at top rpms for our engine a lot of bad can happen in a half second between samplings. It still amazes me that our engines hold together when you consider the forces at work and the the speed at which everything is happening.

I have never seen anyone verify the accuracy of Flashpaq on any of the major three forums, LXforums, 300Cforums, and Chargerforums.
That's not good news. I may be looking into the cost of a G-Tech after all.:(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
I don't know how accurate G-Tech is, but my gut tells me Flashpaq is probably close to within a tenth or 2 tenths. Why I think flashpaq is probably not perfect is I have made three runs in a row and they all had the exact same time. The odds of me hitting the exact same time 3 runs in a row seems unusual. I am guessing, but I think the flashpaq is logging in increments. It may be rounding up or down at the end of the run, depending on where it is in the logging process. Also with the big gaps and inconsistency in the data logging time increments (0.20 to 0.54 seconds), the tuner may be limited in it's accuracy.
If you get a chance to verify the tuners accuracy, please post your findings.
I know a lot of folks are interested in knowing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I don't know how accurate G-Tech is, but my gut tells me Flashpaq is probably close to within a tenth or 2 tenths.
My experience with the Flashpaq it that is is very consistent and precise however I think that it may have two glaring algorithm errors that effect it's accuracy. The first is the starting trigger speed and the second is the moment it records the 1/4 mph. The errors are not in the accuracy of measurement but in the replication of the track conditions.
Why I think Flashpaq is probably not perfect is I have made three runs in a row and they all had the exact same time. The odds of me hitting the exact same time 3 runs in a row seems unusual.
Don't sell yourself short. Take it as irrefutable evidence of your prowess! :biggrin:
If you get a chance to verify the tuners accuracy, please post your findings. I know a lot of folks are interested in knowing.
Well, hopefully it won't come to that and other members will come forward with thier results. If not, I will most defiantly share.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Greetings Flashpaq owners...Yes I still have my Flashpaq. Now I have a Flashpaq and Predator. This post is an attempt to avoid having a Flashpaq, Predator, and a G-Tech. I am interested in determining how accurate the Flashpaq is at data logging. If there are any of you that have tested your Flashpaq at the tract or against any third party timer could you please let me know what the results were? From memory, but I can't find any posts to back this up, the Flashpaq's trigger is 1 mph and as a consequence it gives slightly slower ET than the track. Also the Flashpaq clocks the mph at exactly 1/4 mile and the tract clocks it 33' before the 1/4 resulting in a slightly higher mph than the track.
I have no idea what the capabilities are with the flashpack, however I have been using a Gtech for several vehicles now and have been nothing but pleased with the results.

To put it one way, which item is more accurate? The one that is a programmer and has an accelerometer added on as a bonus, or the item that is solely made for measuring track times?

I can verify the Gtech horsepower ratings 100%. I Gteched two separate cars that were later dyno'd to within 7hp of the gtech rating. HOWEVER because of the 300's antivibration cabin the gtech does have a little trouble detecting accurate horsepower numbers. But the 1/4 mile and 0-60 times should be right on.

If you want an accurate 1/4 mile and 0-60mph timer, then the Gtech (if properly calibrated) is your best bet. If you want an accurate horsepower number I would recommend getting exhaust first in order help the Gtech accurately detect rpms.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Thanks Landon

But the 1/4 mile and 0-60 times should be right on.
That's good to hear. If I do end up with the G-Tech then it will make a good yard stick to test the accuracy of the Flashpaq. I have heard nothing but good news about the accuracy and reliability of the G-Tech. If I must buy a third data logger it will most likely be a G-Tech.

If you want an accurate 1/4 mile and 0-60mph timer, then the Gtech (if properly calibrated) is your best bet. HOWEVER because of the 300's antivibration cabin the gtech does have a little trouble detecting accurate horsepower numbers. If you want an accurate horsepower number I would recommend getting exhaust first in order help the Gtech accurately detect rpms.
With my current mod's and 225/40/18 tires on stock wheels cabin vibration should be pretty easy.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
That's good to hear. If I do end up with the G-Tech then it will make a good yard stick to test the accuracy of the Flashpaq. I have heard nothing but good news about the accuracy and reliability of the G-Tech. If I must buy a third data logger it will most likely be a G-Tech.

With my current mod's and 225/40/18 tires on stock wheels cabin vibration should be pretty easy.;)
225/40/18. You got pics? That size will really make you look tuner fast.

Speaking of tire size. That is another big variable. I have 255/45/20's, which makes my tuner times slower than it actually is. So I adjusted the speedo with flashpaq. But I wonder how accurate flashpaq's speedo correction is.

I also wonder if flashpaq and diablo secretly mess with the speedo to make our cars appear to be faster then they really are.
But that is just me, the big skeptic. :eek:mfg:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
225/40/18. You got pics? That size will really make you look tuner fast.
Yes, I can take a picture but I've got to warn you...they look silly! :laughing: The things we do for speed.:no: These were my trial run for a track setup, not to be used as a daily driver. I was testing two different theories. One that my calculations for rotating inertia were correct and two, that my gearing was correct. Before I spent big bucks on lighter/smaller/wider etc. tires and wheels and settled on a gearing I wanted to test. This only cost me some inexpensive Coopers. I've only got about 3" of clearance! I am happy to report that my math was right on. With my AWD gearing I wanted to hit 113 mph at the 1/4 mile and my Flashpaq speed was 110 mph with a shift off of 6,600 rpm a blink of an eye after! Based on that alone I think I was pretty close with the Flashpaq.
Speaking of tire size. That is another big variable. I have 255/45/20's, which makes my tuner times slower than it actually is. So I adjusted the speedo with flashpaq. But I wonder how accurate flashpaq's speedo correction is.
That is one of the great things about the Predator, you can enter your width/aspect ratio/wheel and it does the division and gives you a spot on size!
I also wonder if flashpaq and diablo secretly mess with the speedo to make our cars appear to be faster then they really are. But that is just me, the big skeptic. :eek:mfg:
Although it is easy to get jaded when hearing the crescendo of BS put out by the aftermarket I believe that both the Flashpaq and Predator do the math correctly.

* Edit * Joey, I decided that the tires/wheel combo was just too ugly to post. PM sent instead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
261 Posts
Here is my post back from May of 2007:

Spent an evening at the local drag strip and had the FlashPaq plugged in for the some of the quarter miles runs. I then compared the FlashPaq numbers to the real world numbers. Results where consistent for each the runs. Here are the findings from my runs:

The numbers below are the average correction multipliers. By taking the FlashPaq numbers and multiplying by the correction factors below will result in the approximate actual times.

60' ____0.913
330' ___0.983
1/8 mile 0.996 mph @ 1/8 mile 0.977
1000' __1.001
1/4 mile 1.003 mph @ 1/4 mile 0.987

Conclusions: at 60', FlashPaq is not very good. By the 900' mark it was right on and by the 1/4 mile mark, it was a bit too fast. Both the 1/8 and 1/4 mile mph's were over estimated. All in all, FlashPaq does a good job estimating the times (after 60').

Below are the actual numbers from one of the runs:
________Real ___________FlashPaq
60' _____2.070 ___________2.25
330' ____5.788 ___________5.87
1/8 mile _8.860 @ 79.75 ___8.87 @ 82
1000' __11.518 __________11.48
1/4 mile 13.745 @ 102.14__13.67 @ 103

Now get out there and make some runs!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Deep Lava, you are the man!

This is exactly the post I was remembering but I couldn't find it again. I must be search impaired. This also is consistent with my first hand experience, even though I did not run my Flashpaq at the track. I ran my Flashpaq on a flat stretch of road near the track but was never quite sure about road grade.

I recently logged with my Flashpaq a 2.04" 60' on my way to a 12.66" 1/4. Applying your correction to my 60' time gives me a 1.92. While not setting a record it certainly is more consistent with the 2.1 times I was getting at the track before I did my engine work. Applying your correction to my 1/4 mile yields a 12.70 or just a .004 correction. I estimate that the extreme DA at the time helped my by .3" so a 13.00 is likely my DA corrected time. I predict this will be a 12.9 at my track in May as it will probably still have a .1 help at that time.

Very cool. Thank you very much for your reply Deep Lava. It helps restore some much need confidence in my failing memory.:biggrin:

The last I remember you had put CAI, headers and exhaust to your 2WD. Have you added to your mods since then?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
261 Posts
...
The last I remember you had put CAI, headers and exhaust to your 2WD. Have you added to your mods since then?
Just added the 180ºF thermo and tires a while back. I (actually my wife) had a baby 11 months ago only so the only mod within the last year has been the Dynatech Car Seat Adapter :biggrin:

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #14 (Edited)
A Huge Congratulations!

I (actually my wife) had a baby 11 months ago only so the only mod within the last year has been the Dynatech Car Seat Adapter :biggrin:
That is great news! I hope the baby has a Mopar cap that keeps the sun out of his? her? eyes. When you come to a stop does she/he wake up and cry and then fall back to sleep under full throttle? I think you can rig an x-box 360 adapter with pedals and a stick shift into the back screen with that model of Dynatech...can't you?
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top