Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Pity about the loss of boost Blue32 :)

We tuned Andrews car, strapped correctly, with 20psi boost on our Twin Retarder 1000kw Mainline Chassis Dyno, and generated a fairly comfortable 401rwkw @ 7550rpm.

Would be interesting to see the dyno sheet from the competition to see if there was any comparitive wheel slip involved, and the actual setup of the dyno in regards to Baro, Shoot mode selected etc :)

Heres is our raw data -

blue32.jpg

Edited by Martin Donnon
  • Replies 281
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

God damn it

they got my name wrong again

its krishneel prasad or just plain krishy

Thanks steve for lending me the 16.9 rwkw in 5 mins

it was a good day to catch up with the regulars and to see andrews beast on the dyno

those muscle cars were so freaking hot

i was impressed with how the dyno was so close to the graham west dyno

good work boys and will enter next time with some extra goodies

...and not to forget Adrian's fish n chip shop 33, very impressed............ha, now I can see why Joel gets his nickers caught up his bum everytime he mentions E85, lol

I can't wait to get the bigger injectors fitted so that Shaun can do an E85 tune... it WILL be happening before Xmas holidays! :)

Knowing my luck, instead of a 40-50-60kw gain (I recall Joel saying Adrian's 33 jumped to 300+ from ~240) I'll go from 302rwkw to 310 ha-ha.

Hey Martin,

I helped Adam and Strat set a few of the cars up on the dyno', they were strapping them down correctly. Andrew's car ran in Shoot 6F mode.

In my opinion, had Andrew's RB26DETT ran at the boost level it did on the Willall run you've posted, I'm betting the result would have been damn close to your dyno' run. The additional 4psi of boost would have comfortably made up the difference (17.8rwkw) and quite possibly bettered it.

I suggested to Shaun that we put Andrew's car back on again at the end, this time with the boost wound up, but by that stage he wasn't feeling all that crash hot - the XA-XB Coupe's had filled the dyno’ cell with enough 'nasties' to make the lads feel pretty average, even with the extraction fans on.

Once my ‘thing’ has been finished and final dyno' tuning completed, we can always run it on the Willall Mainline for a general comparison. I have a feeling the two dyno's will give very similar results.

It was good to see one or two old faces that I hadn't seen in quite a while, and good to meet a few new ones too – including Andrew/Blue32… even through we crossed paths two days earlier :)

Thanks for the beers after too, Daz.

Good to meet you Matt - I wasn't all that fussed about jumping back on the rollers at the end anyways, I know what it has and thats all that I care about.

Martin - thanks for helping me with the tune and posting up my graph :yes: It should only keep getting better as I upgrade the fuel system to handle the E85 and I can't wait!!

As for the Supra with 487.5 rwkws - a great effort and it truly sounded angry on the dyno. Now I challenge thee to corners and stopping too, lets say.....Mallala??!!

hahaha corners and stopping now that i would pay to see :yes:

and even down the drags you would possibly have in because of launching :P

yeah but he's a cheat Steve.....he eats g-forces for a living!!

I reckon if his ride could do 250kph on turn 4 (at the back) he still wouldn't take his foot of the loud pedal!!

Great to catch up with you all - I had fun although a little boost controller issue robbed me of 4 psi of boost......not to worry I wouldn't have made another 100kws anyways!!! Might have to convert it to run on the good ole fish and chip fuel and spray instant HP all over the intercooler next time :yes:

NOS was worth approx 15rwkw for the supra, however it didn't actually help on the day as it spun the tyres before reaching peak HP anyway - If it had held all the way to 7500 (the tyres let go just over 7100) with the happy gas on the cooler it should have been around 515-525. He was spewing as he's caught the HP bug and was shooting for a dyno sheet with a 5XX on it so we figured we'd put my NOS bottle to good use-shame it didn't come off!! :P

Given that boost is still at 24psi, there's a bit more to go however.

Whats this with the SA Skyline scene letting a Supra beat them? :yes:

Sounds like its time to brush off RH9 and show some of the Toyota fans what > 550rwkw looks like...on Ultimate with no NOS :P

Edited by Martin Donnon
Martin,

The DD dyno appears to read pretty much the same as Graham Wests Mainline. +-1rwkw. IMO its always been fairly well known as one of the lower reading DD Dyno's.

Shaun was running Shoot6F.

Very similar to Willalls Mainline also.

251.1 on Willalls

250.7 on Boostworx

There was a car that competed that day for the domestics that pulled 310rwkw on KPM's dyno and on Boostworx pulled 285rwkw go figure.

Martin is that a threat or a promise :yes:

would you even come to a fellow tunner's workshop?

would be good to see :yes;

edit with that 310 vs 285 statement kpm were probably running less brake on the roller which can inflate a dyno figure or it got some wheel spin

edit with that 310 vs 285 statement kpm were probably running less brake on the roller which can inflate a dyno figure or it got some wheel spin

Lets just say that Boostworx seems to be on the money....283rwkw at KPM for a mates auto BA GT with only the normal mods Tune exhaust underdrive pulleys, if it was a manual maybe but auto.

Martin is that a threat or a promise :P would you even come to a fellow tunner's workshop?

would be good to see :yes;

Sure, Ive known Sean from Boostworx for years, and we get on no problems.

Since RH9 ran its 9.6 @ 150mph in full street trim (save for some MT radials) a couple of years back its been retired from drag race duties, and sees more time at Mallala, where its a real handful and plenty of fun :yes:

I suggested to Shaun that we put Andrew's car back on again at the end, this time with the boost wound up, but by that stage he wasn't feeling all that crash hot - the XA-XB Coupe's had filled the dyno’ cell with enough 'nasties' to make the lads feel pretty average, even with the extraction fans on

I can understand that, that coupe had me crying before it even made it to the rollers, seemed worse than straight Avy, may have been a premium/Av blend?

just a side note my car ran 24 kw higher on the DD than willall's mainline!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...