Jump to content
SAU Community

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

Engine horsepower, yes.  Not chassis dyno horsepower.

FI cars run richer so you may not get quite as much as 1HP per CC.  But good enough for estimating injector requirements.  Maybe slightly less reliable for what you're asking about.

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.

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

There is never going to be an exact science but obviously there has to be something close otherwise picking the correct injector would be s stab in the dark 

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!!!

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. 

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

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


  • Latest Posts

    • The fab work can be as simple as a couple of silicon hoses and clamps to the factory piping. 
    • Just sounds like either way you need to do some fab work to get everything to fit, so why limit yourself at that point? If the GCG high flow option is zero effort in and out swap though I'd probably do that. It's almost certainly lowest risk, lowest cost, etc. The HKS GTIII-RS option that Kapr mentioned is laughably expensive for what it is, they charge the exact same for two turbos on the RB26 so their margins are off the charts on that thing.
    • Intake manifold is not a part of the issue. The turbo bolts to the exhaust manifold. That is easy. But close your eyes and picture the physical situation. That is a T3 flange on the manifold and a T3 flange on the turbo. As long as any new turbo has a T3 flange on the exhaust housing, that exhaust housing will bolt to the exhaust manifold. This places the exhaust housing in the same place as the stock one. But now move your mental attention a little further forward. The location of the compressor housing is set by the length of the turbo's core. The stock turbo had a long core. Let's say that it is..... 100mm long. So that would place the compressor housing 100mm forward of the exhaust housing. But a highflow, might well have a centre core that is shorter. Let's say that it is only 70mm long. Now the compressor housing will be 30mm further back in the engine bay than the stock one. This DOES move the turbo's compressor outlet backwards. It also moves the compressor's inlet backwards. You will very likely have to do some work to both the inlet and outlet piping to make everything connect again. I am not say this to make it out to be a bigger deal than it is. I am just pointing out that "bolt on" is sometimes not quite bolt on. The highflow from GCG that Murray linked above (https://gcg.com.au/turbo-charger-upgrade-skyline-gtst-2iu-xtrgts-s1.html ) uses a core that is the same length as the stock core, and so does not require this extra work. It will look very much like the stock turbo. No-one uses GTR turbos of any flavour (stock, or aftermarket) in a single turbo application on RB20/25. It's not a thing. Yes, people have been putting on GT3076, GTX3076 (and bigger and smaller versions of those) and G30s (of various sizes) onto RB20/25 since forever. But these are not "bolt on". Everything except the 4 bolts to the exhaust manifold change with these. And genuine Garretts are expensive. Non-gen, like Pulsar, etc, are cheaper, variously as good or nearly as good. But still not bolt on. No-one in the right mind would pay for an HKS turbo. Not in this modern day and age. Well, yes, the GCG highflow. You could ask HG what he can do to make the compressor housing sit in the original location. There are surely others doing highflows around the world. And some of the eBay/Temu ones (as reported by Dose) work and don't die. Bit of a lottery though. I would send your turbo to GCG (here in Oz) to be highflowed if you want a trivial no-extra-work option. But seriously, the work required to change inlet and outlet piping is not that hard. That's a boost control problem, not a turbo problem.
    • Thank you all for the replys 🙂 I know that intake would be different but that is one pipe at it is not that hard to get(custom one). I meant mainly bolt to the stock manifold and the turbo elbow. I looked and many sites/forums but they are just "old" with some old HKS turbos from GT-R i guess? What about some Garrets?  Or any other turbo? Is there even a turbo which i can just bolt on? 😄 And yeah i know about that new HKS but that is like 2000k USD without taxes/shipping in here   Iam getting a touch up tune but my "problem" is that on the "not" hot day iam getting peaks around 0,9 bar...and when it was around 15 Celsious i saw peak around 1 bar which is just too much for stock turbo. And of course turbo is old and i like to get some new one for a piece of mind 🙂 
    • I'm working on the assumption that our friend Jasmine here is a Russian (or, possibly Ukrainian) spammer/spambot, based purely on the number of such that I have been having to neuter in the last few weeks. IP address for the OP above was in WA. But that could have been via VPN. Posting at quarter to 4 in the morning is a good sign of being from somewhere in Europe. The last Jasmine that I kicked in the cooch was IP addressed in Ukraine. Even that could have been via VPN, and the bitchbot could have been from Russia, Serbia, China or anywhere. Regardless, was a spambot, so I killed it with fire. The fact that our new friend Jasmine here did not respond in any way to my tart query strongly suggests to me that this OP was just the establishment phase of a user able to be activated for spamming in a week, or 3 or 10.
×
×
  • Create New...