Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If I had just fitted a nice new BW EFR turbo and wanted to know how much power it produced, I'd happily use any of the respected mainstream dyno options, hub type included.    

  • Like 1
36 minutes ago, whatsisname said:

If I had just fitted a nice new BW EFR turbo and wanted to know how much power it produced, I'd happily use any of the respected mainstream dyno options, hub type included.    

What would matter to me most is a comparison against something I am familiar with.  To me personally Dynapacks/hub dynos are WAY more meaningful than Dyno Dynamics - I have to do conversions and take into account the fact that supposedly semislicks result in different readings to "hard tyres" etc on roller dynos, and that SOME Dyno Dynamics read different... in addition to the fact that I am just generally used to what makes what on a Dynapack.  

I have been tuning using Dynapacks for around 8 years now, and playing with cars which have been tuned/dynod on Dynapacks for 17 so a Dynapack versus a Dyno Dynamics is like comparing speaking English and speaking French to me.  I'm sure the same would apply to most of you, and that's the value of sticking with a given dyno/dyno operator if you can.  

The dyno I actually tune is the same computer as what was used for the first dyno day I ever went to back in 2000, completely irrelevant but still kind of relevant - I can compare a run I did with my Honda Prelude from 2001 with the first Skyline I tuned on ethanol in 2009 with twin turbo V8 300ZX I'll be tuning in the near future, and get a realistic gauge of how their engines all ACTUALLY compare :D

And to get it more to the topic, here is a dyno plot of a S14 with a high compression/ported/E85 SR20DET with a 1.05a/r EFR7670 "all in" on the same dyno (tuned by Prestige's tuner, not me).  This should work out as around 414rwkw on a Dyno Dynamics by the conversion I usually use
No automatic alt text available.

Edited by Lithium
  • Like 1

Irrespective of whether it makes 455.5 or 414kW it is still very impressive response and power for an SR20DET.

It would be handy is there was one international universal calibration standard so dyno data could be compared across the board. It would make it really handy when researching potential upgrades - particularly with the amount of data readily available from the US.   

17 minutes ago, sneakey pete said:

Pretty sure that's exactly what every one of the dyno companies out there said. And then set out to create it. And then there was one more dyno standard. :P

Everyones products are the best and can prove it, lol

The real problem is that roller dynos are easier to get cars on and off quickly, but there is substantial slip at the tyre-roller interface, with accompanying power "loss" and it varies enormously according to a large number of parameters that not everyone can or will control the same way.

Roller dynos are obviously more convenient, particular for dyno days and where quick turn around time between cars is a major consideration.

It is certainly fair and reasonable to expect minor variations in tyre to dyno roller 'loss' between dynos and even one car to the next, not just from slippage but also side wall distortion - low profile, hard side wall vs. high profile, soft side wall. But a delta of over 100+kW is clearly well beyond standardised control methods and is heading firmly into out of calibration or deliberate manipulation territory.

 

 

14 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

2 sorts.  One has a LOAD CELL.  The other is an inertial type.

The type with a load cell does not "bear" any load.  it simply has a means to measure the torque (with the load cell) while dissipating the power in a brake.  The inertial type work by spinning up a heavy mass and calculating the power put in by the time taken to spin it up (hence, inertial type).

 

/rocket surgery.

yeah..nah.

The brake (water/hydraulic/mechanical/retarder) provides a load against the engine via the driveline set by the operator. The engines ability to work against the load is translated via the torque arm onto the load cell which gives you the force measurement. Power runs are done by ramping the load while the car is held at wot, starting at low rpm obviously.

But this aint the dyno thread :4_joy:

/engineering

 

  • Like 2
5 hours ago, VFRegal said:

yeah..nah.

The brake (water/hydraulic/mechanical/retarder) provides a load against the engine via the driveline set by the operator. The engines ability to work against the load is translated via the torque arm onto the load cell which gives you the force measurement. Power runs are done by ramping the load while the car is held at wot, starting at low rpm obviously.

But this aint the dyno thread :4_joy:

/engineering

 

haha,not the Dyno thread, just looks like it ATM

But we were looking at the comparisons between different Turbos and unless everyone can drive the cars to have a chance to feel the difference, Dyno comparisons are the only way I know to do it , I just wanted to try and understand why there are so many variables regarding Dyno Machines.

From what I can work out, you would have to keep using the same dyno if you can and maybe the Hub type is better regardless if they read higher and "could" give you a more consistent  comparison ?

My tune was off and there were a few problems when I dropped the car off but it was recorded. To be fair I will have to use the original tune on the PT6266 against the new tune for the EFR8374 for what it is worth, lol

I did learn a little about Dynos, win win :)

  • Like 1
28 minutes ago, Nismo 3.2ish said:

From what I can work out, you would have to keep using the same dyno if you can and maybe the Hub type is better regardless if they read higher and "could" give you a more consistent  comparison ?

My tune was off and there were a few problems when I dropped the car off but it was recorded. To be fair I will have to use the original tune on the PT6266 against the new tune for the EFR8374 for what it is worth, lol

I did learn a little about Dynos, win win :)

People debate a bit about better, but I feel there is a strong argument that hub dynos offer less variables affecting the final result - so when comparing with other hub dynos the numbers should be pretty legit so long as the same correction method is used.

In terms of yours, just tell us your first thoughts after you give it a cane.  You've done a fair bit of driving on the 6266, the power isn't likely to be insanely different - could be more, could end up being less... but keen to know what you think of it when its done :)   I'm sure you'll call a spade a spade despite the likes of me, Mick and Piggy leering at you hoping you'll like it haha

  • Like 1
10 hours ago, whatsisname said:

But a delta of over 100+kW is clearly well beyond standardised control methods and is heading firmly into out of calibration or deliberate manipulation territory.

Yeah that's probably reasonable, unless there is some big issue with traction or something.

  • Like 1
7 hours ago, VFRegal said:

yeah..nah.

The brake (water/hydraulic/mechanical/retarder) provides a load against the engine via the driveline set by the operator. The engines ability to work against the load is translated via the torque arm onto the load cell which gives you the force measurement. Power runs are done by ramping the load while the car is held at wot, starting at low rpm obviously.

But this aint the dyno thread :4_joy:

/engineering

 

 

You're funny.  Read what I wrote, that you quoted, then read what you wrote in reply.  There is no difference, except that I got there first.  Like being an engineer.  Are you eligible to be a CPEng without having to do all the paperwork?

/real engineering + English comprehension

21 minutes ago, Lithium said:

People debate a bit about better, but I feel there is a strong argument that hub dynos offer less variables affecting the final result - so when comparing with other hub dynos the numbers should be pretty legit so long as the same correction method is used.

In terms of yours, just tell us your first thoughts after you give it a cane.  You've done a fair bit of driving on the 6266, the power isn't likely to be insanely different - could be more, could end up being less... but keen to know what you think of it when its done :)   I'm sure you'll call a spade a spade despite the likes of me, Mick and Piggy leering at you hoping you'll like it haha

Yeah Dan,  Piggy and sidemick are bringing to car home for me, so I am sure they will give it a spirited run to test if it over heats, also sure the recycle bin will get a working over, lol

But I will take it by myself for my first drive, you will now if it is not any better, the silence will be deafening , face washed with tears and quivering lips:unhappy:

There are a few fuel and tuning issues that will be sorted and I decided to have a crank trigger installed.

Piggaz has taken to wearing UGG Boots and smoking now, he keeps mumbling  something about" Miss sheepy" ever since he returned from NZ, :wub:????

1 hour ago, GTSBoy said:

 

You're funny.  Read what I wrote, that you quoted, then read what you wrote in reply.  There is no difference, except that I got there first.  Like being an engineer.  Are you eligible to be a CPEng without having to do all the paperwork?

/real engineering + English comprehension


If you're a real world CPEng then I hope you are doing Grammar as part of your Continuing Professional Development. Because that explanation of dynos was terrible.
I am sure the internet was impressed though.

/Only a MIEAust :( for 17 years
 

Guys, would like to get some advice on efr choices.

The setup will be HKS step 0 2.8l kit and hks vcam step 2 (think it is 264 intake with 8.5mm lift).  on exhaust cam, i was told i need 272 high lift cam so i m planning to get hks step 2 cam.

turbo choices are efr8374 0.92 internal gate or efr9180 1.05. 

Car is mainly a street car but i do hope to be able to bring it to track in the future.  car is a bnr34 runninb 4.1 final drive.  i decided on 8374 initially but after speaking to a few friends who has had experience with the same turbo on a built 2.6l, i am having second thoughts.  

Which would be a better choice between the 2?

 

Thanks

59 minutes ago, gzro said:

Guys, would like to get some advice on efr choices.

The setup will be HKS step 0 2.8l kit and hks vcam step 2 (think it is 264 intake with 8.5mm lift).  on exhaust cam, i was told i need 272 high lift cam so i m planning to get hks step 2 cam.

turbo choices are efr8374 0.92 internal gate or efr9180 1.05. 

Car is mainly a street car but i do hope to be able to bring it to track in the future.  car is a bnr34 runninb 4.1 final drive.  i decided on 8374 initially but after speaking to a few friends who has had experience with the same turbo on a built 2.6l, i am having second thoughts.  

Which would be a better choice between the 2?

 

Thanks

What are your power goals mate? 

Why are you having 2nd thoughts on the 8374?

The 8374 is a beast of a turbo. If a street car id definitely recommend an 8374 with 1.05 rear. On a 2.8 you'll be getting a boot up the ass well under 4000rpm  in 2nd gear and obviously sooner in higher gears. 

My mates 8374 3L combo is spinning all 4 265 ADO8R's at around 3700rpm in 2nd gear. It's f**king awesome! 

4 hours ago, VFRegal said:

/Only a MIEAust :( for 17 years
 

In which case, I wonder how it is that you thought my explanation was a bad one.  It is effectively identical to yours.  Measure torque while dissipating the power in a brake.  How hard do you need it to sound?  Who are you trying to impress?

  • Like 1

calm down and get back to talking about turbos. only reason you wouldn't be happy about the 8374 is if you wanted more than 600ish hp at the wheels. its spinning too fast above that and won't last, not to mention compressor efficiency hits the floor, along with VE when the EMAP skyrockets.

Edited by burn4005
2 hours ago, Mick_o said:

What are your power goals mate? 

Why are you having 2nd thoughts on the 8374?

The 8374 is a beast of a turbo. If a street car id definitely recommend an 8374 with 1.05 rear. On a 2.8 you'll be getting a boot up the ass well under 4000rpm  in 2nd gear and obviously sooner in higher gears. 

My mates 8374 3L combo is spinning all 4 265 ADO8R's at around 3700rpm in 2nd gear. It's f**king awesome! 

600atw would be nice and slightly more, activated via scramble boost when required would be great.

Feedback i have gotten so far is the 0.92 housing fits perfectly on a 2.6l but on a 2.8l with vcam, maybe i should be looking at something slightly bigger.  I already have the 8374 with 0.92 and getting the 1.05 housing alone is not worth it. 

So the option now is to stick with what i have or sell the 8374 and get the 9180 with 1.05 housing.  Cant remember where I read this but some posted that the response between the 2 are almost the same - maybe 500rpm difference?

 

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

    • See if you can thermal epoxy a heatsink or two onto it?
    • The other problem was one of those "oh shit we are going to die moments". Basically the high spec Q50s have a full electric steering rack, and the povo ones had a regular hydraulic rack with an electric pump.  So couple of laps into session 5 as I came into turn 2 (big run off now, happily), the dash turned into a christmas tree and the steering became super heavy and I went well off. I assumed it was a tyre failure so limped to the pits, but everything was OK. But....the master warning light was still on so I checked the DTCs and saw – C13E6 “Heat Protection”. Yes, that bloody steering rack computer sitting where the oil cooler should be has its own sensors and error logic, and decided I was using the steering wheel too much. I really appreciated the helpful information in the manual (my bold) POSSIBLE CAUSE • Continuing the overloading steering (Sports driving in the circuit etc,) “DATA MONITOR” >> “C/M TEMPERATURE”. The rise of steering force motor internal temperature caused the protection function to operate. This is not a system malfunction. INSPECTION END So, basically the electric motor in the steering rack got to 150c, and it decided to shut down without warning for my safety. Didn't feel safe. Short term I'll see if I can duct some air to that motor (the engine bay is sealed pretty tight). Long term, depending on how often this happens, I'll look into swapping the povo spec electric/hydraulic rack in. While the rack should be fine the power supply to the pump will be a pain and might be best to deal with it when I add a PDM.
    • And finally, 2 problems I really need to sort.  Firstly as Matt said the auto trans is not happy as it gets hot - I couldn't log the temps but the gauge showed 90o. On the first day I took it out back in Feb, because the coolant was getting hot I never got to any auto trans issues; but on this day by late session 3 and then really clearly in 4 and 5 as it got hotter it just would not shift up. You can hear the issue really clearly at 12:55 and 16:20 on the vid. So the good news is, literally this week Ecutek finally released tuning for the jatco 7 speed. I'll have a chat to Racebox and see what they can do electrically to keep it cooler and to get the gears, if anything. That will likely take some R&D and can only really happen on track as it never gets even warm with road use. I've also picked up some eye wateringly expensive Redline D6 ATF to try, it had the highest viscosity I could find at 100o so we will see if that helps (just waiting for some oil pan gaskets so I can change it properly). If neither of those work I need to remove the coolant/trans interwarmer and the radiator cooler and go to an external cooler....somewhere.....(goodbye washer reservoir?), and if that fails give up on this mad idea and wait for Nissan to release the manual 400R
    • So, what else.... Power. I don't know what it is making because I haven't done a post tune dyno run yet; I will when I get a chance. It was 240rwkw dead stock. Conclusion from the day....it does not need a single kw more until I sort some other stuff. It comes on so hard that I could hear the twin N1 turbos on the R32 crying, and I just can't use what it has around a tight track with the current setup. Brakes. They are perfect. Hit them hard all day and they never felt like having an issue; you can see in the video we were making ground on much lighter cars on better tyres under brakes. They are standard (red sport) calipers, standard size discs in DBA5000 2 piece, Winmax pads and Motul RBF600 fluid, all from Matty at Racebrakes Sydney. Keeping in mind the car is more powerful than my R32 and weighs 1780, he clearly knows his shit. Suspension. This is one of the first areas I need to change. It has electronically controlled dampers from factory, but everything is just way too soft for track work even on the hardest setting (it is nice when hustling on country roads though). In particular it rolls into oversteer mid corner and pitches too much under hard braking so it becomes unstable eg in the turn 1 kink I need to brake early, turn through the kink then brake again so I don't pirouette like an AE86. I need to get some decent shocks with matched springs and sway bars ASAP, even if it is just a v1 setup until I work out a proper race/rally setup later. Tyres. I am running Yoko A052 in 235/45/18 all round, because that was what I could get in approximately the right height on wheels I had in the shed (Rays/Nismo 18x8 off the old Leaf actually!). As track tyres they are pretty poor; I note GTSBoy recently posted a porker comparo video including them where they were about the same as AD09.....that is nothing like a top line track tyre. I'll start getting that sorted but realistically I should get proper sized wheels first (likely 9.5 +38 front and 11 +55 at the rear, so a custom order, and I can't rotate them like the R32), then work out what the best tyre option is. BTW on that, Targa Tas had gone to road tyres instead of semi slicks now so that is a whole other world of choices to sort. Diff. This is the other thing that urgently needs to be addressed. It left massive 1s out of the fish hook all day, even when I was trying not too (you can also hear it reving on the video, and see the RPM rising too fast compared to speed in the data). It has an open diff that Infiniti optimistically called a B-LSD for "Brake Limited Slip Diff". It does good straight line standing start 11s but it is woeful on the track. Nismo seem to make a 2 way for it.
    • Also, I logged some data from the ECU for each session (mostly oil pressures and various temps, but also speed, revs etc, can't believe I forgot accelerator position). The Ecutek data loads nicely to datazap, I got good data from sessions 2, 3 and 4: https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-2?log=0&data=7 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-3?log=0&data=6 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-4?log=0&data=6 Each session is cut into 3 files but loaded together, you can change between them in the top left. As the test sessions are mostly about the car, not me, I basically start by checking the oil pressure (good, or at least consistent all day). These have an electrically controlled oil pump which targets 25psi(!) at low load and 50 at high. I'm running a much thicker oil than recommended by nissan (they said 0w20, I'm running 10w40) so its a little higher. The main thing is that it doesn't drop too far, eg in the long left hand fish hook, or under brakes so I know I'm not getting oil surge. Good start. Then Oil and Coolant temp, plus intercooler and intake temps, like this: Keeping in mind ambient was about 5o at session 2, I'd say the oil temp is good. The coolant temp as OK but a big worry for hot days (it was getting to 110 back in Feb when it was 35o) so I need to keep addressing that. The water to air intercooler is working totally backwards where we get 5o air in the intake, squish/warm it in the turbos (unknown temp) then run it through the intercoolers which are say 65o max in this case, then the result is 20o air into the engine......the day was too atypical to draw a conclusion on that I think, in the united states of freedom they do a lot of upsizing the intercooler and heat exchanger cores to get those temps down but they were OK this time. The other interesting (but not concerning) part for me was the turbo speed vs boost graph: I circled an example from the main straight. With the tune boost peaks at around 18psi but it deliberately drops to about 14psi at redline because the turbos are tiny - they choke at high revs and just create more heat than power if you run them hard all the way. But you can also see the turbo speed at the same time; it raises from about 180,000rpm to 210,000rpm which the boost falls....imagine the turbine speed if they held 18psi to redline. The wastegates are electrically controlled so there is a heap of logic about boost target, actual boost, delta etc etc but it all seems to work well
×
×
  • Create New...