Jump to content
SAU Community

Injector duty cycle to calculate rough power figure VS actual Dyno graph


djvoodoo
 Share

Recommended Posts

Injector duty cycle to calculate rough power figure VS actual Dyno graph

So, might seem like a dumb question. I know there is a formula for it... Just not sure which is correct. or the math....

If I am seeing a max injector duty cycle of 82% on 700cc injectors (Rb26 - base fuel pressure), in theory, can you compare this calculated HP figure to that of what the Dyno reads out?

Would i say that 1cc = 1HP, so 0.82% of 700CC = 574HP

Is that fairly accurate?

# never was good at math's

Edited by djvoodoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So give or take, we'll say 82% duty cycle on 700cc is roughly 520-550 engine HP. At the wheels you'd be looking at mabee 420ish (or about 315rwkw)

More to the point - What if the dyno reads quite low compared to what you are seeing max injector wise? Can they be compared? I'm guessing fuelling and how much fuel is dialled in at the top end is also a factor which can skew duty?. Lets just say i'm running about 11.5 to 11.8 in the top end AFR's.

In more just curious at how many different ways you can calculate wheel HP other than just a dyno number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought it was 5cc of fuel was required per horse power, so a 550cc injector is good for 110hp per cylinder then multiplied by 6 cylinders was 660hp then times it by .8 if you want to only use 80% duty cycle is 528hp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fairly rough rule, particularly true for RBs, at least RB26s, is that (given 6 injectors) then the cc size of a single injector is the maximum engine power supported by those injectors.  Factory 440cc injectors will run up to about 440HP.  Plus or minus the usual range of variables of course.  It's rough but good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes rough rule for approximating the size of injector you need.. but the OP wants to determine how much power his car is making based on injector DC.. that's obsurd.. just as obsurd as a moron on a Facebook page telling someone to install a resistor pack on their high impednace injectors because their car won't crank over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can actually do a better job if you can measure the airflow rather than the fuel flow.  Do you have afm's? If you can convert the voltage to a flow you can google any number of calculators to convert the air flow to rwhp or engine hp or whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, djr81 said:

You can actually do a better job if you can measure the airflow rather than the fuel flow.  Do you have afm's? If you can convert the voltage to a flow you can google any number of calculators to convert the air flow to rwhp or engine hp or whatever.

I'm using MAP sensor. May as well do a data log session on the Vipec and look at air flow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you want to work out power, drag strip.

x weight can going so y speed in z time and k distance (factor in some basic air drag) - that is much more accurate then working out how much power a motor makes based on air flow and fuel usage.

You need to remember a motor is not 100% efficient, and x air/fuel does not equate to a direct 100% energy transfer to mechanical energy - there are losses such as heat due to inefficiencies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

you want to work out power, drag strip.

x weight can going so y speed in z time and k distance (factor in some basic air drag) - that is much more accurate then working out how much power a motor makes based on air flow and fuel usage.

You need to remember a motor is not 100% efficient, and x air/fuel does not equate to a direct 100% energy transfer to mechanical energy - there are losses such as heat due to inefficiencies.

Certainly will do bud. Just have to work out when!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

you want to work out power, drag strip.

x weight can going so y speed in z time and k distance (factor in some basic air drag) - that is much more accurate then working out how much power a motor makes based on air flow and fuel usage.

You need to remember a motor is not 100% efficient, and x air/fuel does not equate to a direct 100% energy transfer to mechanical energy - there are losses such as heat due to inefficiencies.

The correlation between air flow and horsepower is much closer than that between terminal speed and horsepower.  You don't, for example need to compensate for such minor things as drag coefficients, frontal area, gear change, traction, engine torque characteristics etc etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, djr81 said:

The correlation between air flow and horsepower is much closer than that between terminal speed and horsepower.  You don't, for example need to compensate for such minor things as drag coefficients, frontal area, gear change, traction, engine torque characteristics etc etc. 

+1.  And again, anything you use to estimate "power" is going to be "estimated engine horsepower", not hp @ wheels - and I know from experience that often the calculated results often get heavily question because by nature of how crazy low Oz dynos read the crank hp results which get calculated if done correctly are often much higher than people expect from typical @ wheels readings on a Dyno Dynamics.

A thing no one has mentioned here is fuel as well, if you treat the % duty cycle of x size injector = hp described above for 6 cylinder turbos and are running E85 you will get very optimistic results :)

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share



  • Latest Posts

    • Slimline sub on the rear parcel shelf is doable. Pioneer TS-WX140DA is only 70mm high.   
    • People like Johnny Dose Bro might be laughing at my post because I accidentally added 100mm to my numbers. 350-355 is indeed the lower limit. 450 is off-road Skyline spec.
    • What is the "compromise" that you think will happen? Are you thinking that something will get damaged? The only things you have to be concerned about with spherical jointed suspension arms are; Arguments with the constabulary wrt their legality (they are likely to be illegal for road use without an engineering certificatation, and that may not be possible to obtain). A lot more NVH transmitted through to the passengers (which is hardly a concern for those with a preference for good handling, anyway). Greatly increased inspection and maintenance requirements (see above points, both).   It is extremely necessary to ask what car you are talking about. Your discussion on strut tops, for example, would be completely wrong for an R chassis, but be correct for an S chassis. R32s have specific problems that R33/4 do not have. Etc. I have hardened rubber bushes on upper rear control arms and traction rods. Adjustable length so as to be able to set both camber and bump steer. You cannot contemplate doing just the control arms and not the traction arms. And whatever bushing you have in one you should have in the other so that they have similar characteristics. Otherwise you can get increased oddness of behaviour as one bushing flexes and the other doesn't, changing the alignment between them. I have stock lower rear arms with urethane bushes. I may make changes here, these are are driven by the R32's geometry problems, so I won't discuss them here unless it proves necessary. I have spherical joints in the front caster rods. I have experienced absolutely no negatives and only positives from doing so. They are massively better than any other option. I have sphericals in the FUCAs, but this is driven largely by the (again) R32 specific problems with the motion of those arms. I just have to deal with the increased maintenance required. Given how much better the front end behaves with the sphericals in there.....I'd probably be tempted to go away from my preference (which is not to have sphericals on a road car, for 2 of the 3 reasons in the bulleted list above), just to gain those improvements. And so my preference for not using sphericals (in general) on a road car should be obvious. I use them judiciously, though, as required to solve particular problems.
    • Easiest way to know is to break out the multimeter and measure it when cold, then measure all the resistances again once it gets hot enough to misfire. Both the original ignitor and the J Replace version. Factory service manual will have the spec for the terminal measurements.
    • Yes that sounds right. Cars currently in the shop for the engine work. Will need to remeasure .. but yes I think I must be targeting 45cm from fender. 
×
×
  • Create New...