GT40R dyno sheet, finally
#26
Didn't someone on here pull 430rwhp out of the 35r at 15psi or so... Nocab I think... So wouldn't it be possible to see 450rwhp @ 15psi outta the 40rs...
Zach... thanks for the pics your engine bay is very nice.
Can you send the pics of the TPS and CAT(Crank Angle Trigger) as well... And do you take paypal
-Edan
Thanks for posting your dyno. And not bad for tunning yourself... I would probably blow my engine up...
Zach... thanks for the pics your engine bay is very nice.
Can you send the pics of the TPS and CAT(Crank Angle Trigger) as well... And do you take paypal
-Edan
Thanks for posting your dyno. And not bad for tunning yourself... I would probably blow my engine up...
#27
e-mail be the graphs at ddearborn@spymac.com
I'll host them for you.
I'll host them for you.
#28
Originally posted by RICE RACING
Based on your 12psi run you should be over 460rwhp @ 19psi ??? Does it go real rich or pull out lots of timing ?
Oh and 490+ at 22psi based on the 12psi run. Were you boys doing some major mixture changes or playing with timing ? Cause some of the differences in power (both up and down) are not corresponding with the changes in boost pressure. What power is that turbo good for on a 13B rotary ?
Based on your 12psi run you should be over 460rwhp @ 19psi ??? Does it go real rich or pull out lots of timing ?
Oh and 490+ at 22psi based on the 12psi run. Were you boys doing some major mixture changes or playing with timing ? Cause some of the differences in power (both up and down) are not corresponding with the changes in boost pressure. What power is that turbo good for on a 13B rotary ?
Last edited by Zero R; 07-10-04 at 02:30 PM.
#29
Originally posted by Zero R
Running a almost identically sized T78 with a 40R comp wheel Jason put down a little over 500 at 20lbs, that is a different dyno and people have questioned the way he chose to calibrate it, but that's their opinion, and even if it was off by say 10% it would equal right around the 460 number as well. I figured the turbo should be good for the upper range of 400whp@around 20psi it does seem to drop of a little up top, I'm sure a little fiddling here and there will net some increases. 367whp@12psi is not too shaby
Running a almost identically sized T78 with a 40R comp wheel Jason put down a little over 500 at 20lbs, that is a different dyno and people have questioned the way he chose to calibrate it, but that's their opinion, and even if it was off by say 10% it would equal right around the 460 number as well. I figured the turbo should be good for the upper range of 400whp@around 20psi it does seem to drop of a little up top, I'm sure a little fiddling here and there will net some increases. 367whp@12psi is not too shaby
#30
Wargasm is going to host the sheet and my timing map. You'll see my timing on a goofed up spreadsheet. Air fuel ratios are on the bottom of the dyno sheet.
I know giving this information away is like handing your girlfriend to your buddy to have, but hey, since I tuned myself I would like to have some input from you guys.
I know giving this information away is like handing your girlfriend to your buddy to have, but hey, since I tuned myself I would like to have some input from you guys.
Last edited by zkeller; 07-10-04 at 04:26 PM.
#32
Originally posted by zkeller
It sounds like you took the words right out of Dave at KDR's mouth. He showed me other dyno runs for comparisons.
It sounds like you took the words right out of Dave at KDR's mouth. He showed me other dyno runs for comparisons.
#33
nah I wasn't thinking you were when I went back to reread the thread and see what you posted I figured it could be taken that way, I was just merely saying the two would be around where rice was saying and that's all, my feelings on dyno's are simple as long as they are calibrated correctly and settings are correct, what you pull is what you get. All this needs to be corrected for this altitude or this state is garbage to me, I know the why and I know the how, where my problem with it is simple I live up in denver and pull X# but corrected it would be Y#, the problem is I don't live where Y is, and maybe just maybe on Tuesday Z is a 110degress. So if I lived there my car is dynoing less also on that day, and truth of it is I will be making less on that day.
#34
Originally posted by modrx7
Didn't someone on here pull 430rwhp out of the 35r at 15psi or so... Nocab I think... So wouldn't it be possible to see 450rwhp @ 15psi outta the 40rs...
Zach... thanks for the pics your engine bay is very nice.
Can you send the pics of the TPS and CAT(Crank Angle Trigger) as well... And do you take paypal
-Edan
Thanks for posting your dyno. And not bad for tunning yourself... I would probably blow my engine up...
Didn't someone on here pull 430rwhp out of the 35r at 15psi or so... Nocab I think... So wouldn't it be possible to see 450rwhp @ 15psi outta the 40rs...
Zach... thanks for the pics your engine bay is very nice.
Can you send the pics of the TPS and CAT(Crank Angle Trigger) as well... And do you take paypal
-Edan
Thanks for posting your dyno. And not bad for tunning yourself... I would probably blow my engine up...
#35
I have had many cars on my dyno (Mustang) that have since dynoed on a dynojet and put down very similar numbers, so I know its close.
With that said, Zkellers numbers are way off. I would agree with RICE RACING and say that you have alot of timing pulled out or its running to rich.
Jason
With that said, Zkellers numbers are way off. I would agree with RICE RACING and say that you have alot of timing pulled out or its running to rich.
Jason
#37
Originally posted by Jason
I have had many cars on my dyno (Mustang) that have since dynoed on a dynojet and put down very similar numbers, so I know its close.
With that said, Zkellers numbers are way off. I would agree with RICE RACING and say that you have alot of timing pulled out or its running to rich.
Jason
I have had many cars on my dyno (Mustang) that have since dynoed on a dynojet and put down very similar numbers, so I know its close.
With that said, Zkellers numbers are way off. I would agree with RICE RACING and say that you have alot of timing pulled out or its running to rich.
Jason
#40
#41
Looking at the timing at 15 psi (load 200 row), it looks fairly reasonable to me. I run even less timing than that...
Based on the info I have from the dyno sheet, I think that maybe something is pulling a lot of timing. Do you have a log of the actual timing used during the run?
B
Based on the info I have from the dyno sheet, I think that maybe something is pulling a lot of timing. Do you have a log of the actual timing used during the run?
B
#42
Originally posted by zkeller
Rice Racing. You looked at my timing maps, remember?
Rice Racing. You looked at my timing maps, remember?
Just need to nail down if the 360 odd rwhp was an "freak" reading @ 12psi to get a relationship of the other figures. If there is a trend there then it seems like there is some restriction going on somwhere that is not giving yo a linear rise with increasing boost pressure ??
I would not use any more timing at 230kpa even on 100 !
#46
Originally posted by RICE RACING
Your .dat file shows 9.5 deg timing at full load ? Thats a little low for 100oct with that split.
Your .dat file shows 9.5 deg timing at full load ? Thats a little low for 100oct with that split.
Now the timing values in the CAL file are what the engine is seeing.
Make sense?
Last edited by zkeller; 07-11-04 at 12:53 AM.
#48
Originally posted by Wargasm
Looking at the timing at 15 psi (load 200 row), it looks fairly reasonable to me. I run even less timing than that...
Based on the info I have from the dyno sheet, I think that maybe something is pulling a lot of timing. Do you have a log of the actual timing used during the run?
B
Looking at the timing at 15 psi (load 200 row), it looks fairly reasonable to me. I run even less timing than that...
Based on the info I have from the dyno sheet, I think that maybe something is pulling a lot of timing. Do you have a log of the actual timing used during the run?
B
Last edited by zkeller; 07-11-04 at 01:24 AM.
#49
Originally posted by Poweraxel
cool Zach not that many people here in the states run that ecu but its a great unit i hear. Did you use the "Autotune" feature? where it tunes itself? Im sure a couple of more dyno runs and a little more experience you can get those power #'s up higher!
again good to see your car on road especially with over 400rwhp!
cool Zach not that many people here in the states run that ecu but its a great unit i hear. Did you use the "Autotune" feature? where it tunes itself? Im sure a couple of more dyno runs and a little more experience you can get those power #'s up higher!
again good to see your car on road especially with over 400rwhp!
#50
Originally posted by zkeller
Oh yea, I forgot to tell you. Add 8.5 degrees to the timing on the dat file across the board. Autronics does not have a gain adjustment like Haltech and the 3rd gen has a fixed trigger. In order to get the timing zeroed out I had to negate the timing 8.5 degrees in the barametric pressure correction settings. In other words, the dat files may say 10 degrees when in reality the engine is at 18.5.
Now the timing values in the CAL file are what the engine is seeing.
Make sense?
Oh yea, I forgot to tell you. Add 8.5 degrees to the timing on the dat file across the board. Autronics does not have a gain adjustment like Haltech and the 3rd gen has a fixed trigger. In order to get the timing zeroed out I had to negate the timing 8.5 degrees in the barametric pressure correction settings. In other words, the dat files may say 10 degrees when in reality the engine is at 18.5.
Now the timing values in the CAL file are what the engine is seeing.
Make sense?
I cant see any tuning fault/s you must have some other mechanical restriction in the system, be it, turbo, IC, Exhaust etc etc.
Charge temp looks good, timing is good, mixture is good..... job well done