Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Rolled my car onto Bel Garage's dyno yesterday. I have attached torque and power curves.

The most we saw was about 990nm and 390rwkw, but my injectors were more than maxed at that level, so we took out a bit of boost.

awesome result, what setup u running? turbo/s, etc?

how come from 5100rpm its not making anymore power? (not having a dig, just a question)

Edited by StageZilla
awesome result, what setup u running? turbo/s, etc?

how come from 5100rpm its not making anymore power? (not having a dig, just a question)

I wish it made all of it's power by 5100RPM! The aim was not to make peak power anyway, but to get the most area under the curve.

I'm still running the useless laggy peaky GTRS turbos, but somehow, they don't seem so laggy now.

Oh...and the dip towards the top of the rev range is wheelspin on the rollers.

Edited by Mik

awesome result mate. 370+ kw at only 5100rpm is amazing :P

can i ask what type of cams you are running now? and injectors afms?

it must really hammer from about 4500 onwards.

nice! at what boost is it? 1.4? 1.5? these things are supposedly good for nearly 2bar. excellent for a stock stroke 26, would be pulling nice and hard by 4500. once you do your injectors, ive seen these hold power right up to 8grand!

what cams are you running?

beat me to it beer baron :P

Edited by SLY33
awesome result mate. 370+ kw at only 5100rpm is amazing :P

can i ask what type of cams you are running now? and injectors afms?

it must really hammer from about 4500 onwards.

Stock bro, even has a stock airbox .....

Nice results there Mik - Get some larger injectors in there STAT!

Why would traction be an issue? It's only got 370rwkw... :lol: Seriously though...traction is not too bad, but I do have pretty sticky 275s all round and it does like to randomly break traction in 2nd when it comes on boost.

Nick...to be honest, I though 700s would be okay. They are about as big as I would like to go on a daily driven car. I'm also running a bit more rail pressure than I would like.

Also something to note is that the torque figures estimated by these dynologs are apparently pretty accurate....just ask Morgs and WilliamsF1.

Awesome Mik, I'd definately upsize those injectors and pump a bit of boost into it. The new motor sounds like its a good one.

Edit: Mine only made 350kw at BEL which on CRD was 319Kw at all four, as a reference. Has since changed.

Edited by Morgs

I don't really care about the numbers to tell you the truth (although the torque one is interesting).

So your car only made 319 at CRD? That's so odd...after what you made at SMW, and speaking to Jason, I would have expected heaps more than that.

Also, Tommy's car made 330ish at CRD irc and a bit under 300 on Bel's dyno in the same state of tune.

I'm more worried about the shape of the curve and how it drives, which is why we spend a couple of hours on the freeway cleaning up the spool-up.

I'll go to the drags eventually, it will be a while though because I'm flat out with work atm.

yes, but what cams and afms? :D

:)

yes the curve does look very good. and like you said the dyno graph is really only relevant to you. It's just lets you know how much improvment you have been making.

Is that the same dyno Jerry made 240rwkw on with his car?

Nice result - doing anything else to it or are you finished? Whens it go to the drag strip? :D

No Andrew , i expect my car to make about 260-270 rwkw on that dyno, but my car is pretty gutless , just about everyone makes more power than me !

I will let you know what power mine makes on this dyno when she goes on it soon .

(yes, but what cams and afms?)

Beer Baron : refer to post 7 . There is plenty wrong with airboxes when you make that kind of power, but he wants a stock car .

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...