Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I'll throw up my little 2 cents with this 4WD vs RWD garbage.

On unigroups dyno a few years ago I made 370 RWKW.

One week later I made 361 AWKW on Rigoli's dyno at a Dyno day.

I realise they are different dynos's and stuff but they are my results.

paul u skippy big mass of muscle - you've been hanging out with refaat too long (off topic)

anyway, a dyno should only ever be used to measure gain as every dyno will read differently

paul u skippy big mass of muscle - you've been hanging out with refaat too long (off topic)

anyway, a dyno should only ever be used to measure gain as every dyno will read differently

Haha. He is a unit!

Yeah I realise that. Thats why I said "I realise they are two different machines".

Just got mine retuned.. stock un opened Neo RB25det. 3076, E85 and twin 044's, 80lb deka injectors, nistune and z32.. about to run out of scale on the afm map too.

result was 392 rwkw on 19 psi.

p1010570.jpg

Edited by Simon-R32

I cant believe it, really.

19psi is really low boost for that power level. Especially a .63 housing.

this dyno is ready 50-60kw high........

even if you take 60kw off that result a 3076 wont flow 330rwkw at 19 psi... >_<

so you really think your car is makining 397rwkw on a HUB dyno with STP correction?

considering HUBs dont even read rwkw and STP is the highest correction there is, it would realistically make 310-320rwkw on a mainline dyno. :cheers:

At 19psi you would make 330rwkw tops, that would be pushing it too.

Take it to the track and post your MPH. That will give a clearer idea, rather than having to decipher a weird dyno result.

Or put it on a Mainline.

The AMM dyno strikes again! Go take that full fudge result and pour it over some ice-cream and enjoy it that way. About all its good for.

That dyno is @ the hubs, and you need to take 50-60kw off if you want to get realistic. Stop claiming it as RWKW when it's not.

It is miss leading users of this forum that might otherwise not know better. Not 2 days ago there was a guy i was talking too who was genuinely under the impression that the result was legit and that factory RB25's will hold 350rwkw+ :(

Even @ 330rwkw on E85/.63 - that is pushing then limits of believable. But at least its almost believable rather than outright fudge.

At 19psi you would make 330rwkw tops, that would be pushing it too.

Take it to the track and post your MPH.

Exactly what I said to the same tuner 2 weeks ago on another forum.

This apparent "gun" tuner - was making wild claims that a 3076/.82/19psi made 370rwkw on PULP because it was a "freak" motor. The thing was factory. :rolleyes:

Same as I said then - and will say now - I'll pay the entry fees and a tank of fuel if the car runs 128MPH+. No if's, no buts. Cash is here when the prove is given.

It would be cheaper and easier for a few SAU'ers to chip in $5 each and stick another car on this dyno and dynodynamics or mainline and see what numbers it spits out.

my car has been on it. spat out 411kw. i already know its BS

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

    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
×
×
  • Create New...