Coz@CZP

iTrader: (24)

We actually had about 5 runs... 2 runs stock, 2 runs w/ the pop charger, and one run w/o any intake. We kept the car hot, and and it's peak operating point. We'll keep trying until we get some positive results from these products. Thanx guys.

sakred

iTrader: (4)

that dyno run seems on the low side as compared to SCC they got over 240 to the rear wheels using 92 octane. i would also like to know the conditions such as temp elevation etc when you did the run.

thanks

hammad

alex30327

Has anyone compared dyno test between the JWT Pop Charger and the K&N Filter?

2003z

iTrader: (7)

actually the numbers look right. Raceboy got 229.9
https://my350z.com/forum/showthread....yno+results+in

Zmeflyby

i hope my car gets 244 to the wheels like scc with 92 octane

GameOver

well, 229*1.15= ~264 @crank thats with a %15 loss in drivetrain

264 @crank vs 287 @crank <as advertised> ......something is funny here.

SCC got:
244*1.15= ~280 which is pretty good AND ITS close to the ADVERTISED 287HP

sooo where did your claimed HP go??



assuming you dynoed ur car at the same conditions SCC did you have a
%23 HP drivetrain loss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
280/229 =~1.23

comparing your numbers with the advertised HP @crank you have a %25 loss in your drivetrain
287<as advertised> / 229 =~1.25

so 229HP is TOO LOW for a RWD car.

%23-%25 lost in your drivetrain??? I dont buy it..........HMMMM, is it an AT ????

If its MT then I dont think your engine is putting 287HP @ crank.


*************this looks to me like the ford recall on some model yr cobras**********

baseg35

Where's the graph?

Coz@CZP

iTrader: (24)

I have to scan it and put it on the web, i'll do it soon.. We might have the heat shield for this saturday, so we might have both up on monday.. Thanx.

sakred

iTrader: (4)

gameover that number was race boys dyno and on that occasion the dyno numbers were low for most all teh cars dynoing because it was 100 degrees out. this gentleman got 332 at the wheels without the intake. which i think is still low. i hope nissan didnt tool the cars they gave SCC because i would want my dyno in the 240hp range.


hammad

dnguyen

Gameover,

That is not the correct way to calculate the hp at the crank. You have to do it in terms of ratios.

232/x = 0.85/1.00

x = 232 * 1.00 / 0.85

where x is the hp at the crank.

229 will get you 269.4 hp.
232 will get you 273 hp.
244 will get you 287 hp.

We also have to remember that not all dyno's are created equal.

McDan

Thanks for posting the results. What octane gas were the cars on? Anyone try mixing in a little race gas? It's not supposed to help factory cars, usually.

Coz@CZP

iTrader: (24)

He was using 91 Octane, we have some race gas there, but we didn't want to cheat :-) We were looking for numbers for everyday drivers, and remember the car is still new, and hasen't been broken into yet, so the number should be around 240. We'll do more tests, and i'll let you guys know.

GameOver

OMGGGGGGGGGG

uhhhh ur right

it shouldve said (287/229)^-1 = % of advertised HP @ crank to the wheels.

or like u posted (229/287) = % of advertised HP @ crank to the wheels = %79 HP is what actually goes to the wheels <%21 lost in drivetrain>

thanks 4 that one

Im sorry if I mislead someone

Coz@CZP

iTrader: (24)

There were a few others who have dynoed, results are pretty much similar... If there were both at same Temp, and altitude, you'd get very close. We'll get some more runs in w/ another 350Z if you'd like. Cause it's looking like we're gonna be doing another one soon w/ a JWT heat sheild. And from what i've heard, it looks positive :-)

Mike@CZP

iTrader: (216)

Bumped!!

woody03

iTrader: (5)

but why?