Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys well done on a great day, well organised effort, lots of very nice cars too!

I'm happy with the power I made, the trophy's really nice, breathed in too many fumes and had a hang over for hours after and I'm guessing I wasnt alone!

Dissapointed with the manner in the cars were run, firstly the fact that the afr's were not logged is just crazy and far too risky (even lazy), I heard one car lean out to the point it left running on less than six cylinders, also when John was running cars up he was loading them up for way too long prior to WOT, especially cars that were already warm, then having to endure such high revs for what reason I dont understand, engine bay temps wouldve been pretty high!

sorry to turn such a positive day down a little, I wont be takeing my car there again and I heard a few others say the same thing on the day.

let the flamage begin!!!!!!

I'm with ya on that one! this was the only dyno day i have ever been to where the AFR's where not checked. If the next dyno day is held their i wont be in it.

  • Replies 443
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Im with Adrian, too long on the ramp+no AFR checking=possible expensive conclusion

Got 195.4 on Morpowa's DynoDynamics 3 weeks ago, but only 187.8 on the day with no changes

i think hes running yellow jackets like me, i got 189.6 rwkw on 10psi (might have spiked higher, no readout on dyno chart). last dyno run i had 173 on 13psi without coilpacks or dump pipe.

what plug gaps you running vu?

my dyno chart is once again flat mid way... needs a good tune, think there's a few kw in there somewhere too, have a feeling it might crack 200 on 12psi.

Yeah I'm running Yellow Jackets @ 0.8mm gap, going to leave them at 1.1 next service I reckon.

not sure why he didn't use the exh analyzer to log the AFR's (I know the probe has a limited shelf life and is not that cheap to replace), but if there is ever another Dyno Day there again, that'll be a definite pre-requisite

:thumbsup: Seems odd there were no AFR's logged? How is one to know when/if things go south?

when the graph goes like this

louisdyno292-1.jpg

and as i said before, the engine was already broken before i put it on the dyno.

not sure why he didn't use the exh analyzer to log the AFR's (I know the probe has a limited shelf life and is not that cheap to replace), but if there is ever another Dyno Day there again, that'll be a definite pre-requisite

As Pete said, when there is another dyno day, it'll be bigger and better. You concerns are noted and taken on board guys. Even the SAU:SA committee members were busy on their feet all day. Its a learning experience for us all ... and still at the end of the day I thoroughly enjoyed it.

:thumbsup:

I'm pretty sure that at the last pulsar dyno day at boostworx that there was no AFR's logged.

I had a 10mm hole in my in my intercooler piping where a plug had worked it's way out which resulted in Mega rich AFR's (Like <9.0:1) and there was no AFR readings produced. If i had have known i would have pulled the car off after the first run.

At the end of the day it's up to the contestant to make sure that their car is in correct running order. They aren't tuning that car all they are doing is what you are aking them to do; run the car up on the dyno to see what power it's making in it's "current" state of tune. It's not their fault of your cars not running right because all they in effect doing what most people occasionally do on the street or that same as climbing up a steep hill. When you do this you don't know what your AFR's are so you take the risk, same case here.

Edited by D_Stirls
I'm pretty sure that at the last pulsar dyno day at boostworx that there was no AFR's logged.

I had a 10mm hole in my in my intercooler piping where a a plug had worked it's way out which resulted in Mega rich AFR's (Like <9.0:1) and there was no AFR readings produced. If i had have known i would have pulled the car off after the first run.

Did this also occur at the GWW also?

Dissapointed with the manner in the cars were run, firstly the fact that the afr's were not logged is just crazy and far too risky (even lazy), I heard one car lean out to the point it left running on less than six cylinders, also when John was running cars up he was loading them up for way too long prior to WOT, especially cars that were already warm, then having to endure such high revs for what reason I dont understand, engine bay temps wouldve been pretty high.

Definately dissapointing there was no AFR read out, considering Dyno tuners rely on this information to tell what the engine is doing and is safe to continue or not.

When your car was getting run up and was sitting on 5-6000 rpm (well sounded that high anyway) for what seemed like an eternity i was just shaking my head thinking WTF, definately dont blame you for feeling the way you do.

I'm with Chad if the next DD is there i will be a spectator only, the Line can stay in the shed......

Cara, just a suggestion but KPM have a really good set up really clean workshop large screen to watch the runs and plenty of parking out the front, maybe worth a look next time.

Cara, just a suggestion but KPM have a really good set up really clean workshop large screen to watch the runs and plenty of parking out the front, maybe worth a look next time.

i dont think cara will be swayed from john keen.

At the end of the day it's up to the contestant to make sure that their car is in correct running order. They aren't tuning that car all they are doing is what you are aking them to do; run the car up on the dyno to see what power it's making in it's "current" state of tune. It's not their fault of your cars not running right because all they in effect doing what most people occasionally do on the street or that same as climbing up a steep hill. When you do this you don't know what your AFR's are so you take the risk, same case here.

very well said.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • 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...