241.7 RWHP
237.9 RWT

perf. mods: grounding kit, and K&N

3 other Z's dyno'd today also:
2 others with same exact mods: 233HP and 237HP (2nd might be off a little)
1 other was bone stock: 239HP

i feel mine could've be a little higher since i ran with my 19"s...(i can be optimistic, no? )

m

 

I was one of the others in attendance. I'm not giddy about the numbers, nor am I dissappointed. I guess you can call me "satisfied", for now.

237.2 RWHP
234.6 RWT

These are SAE numbers and it was in the 50s when we pulled. My mods are the same as SKiDaZZLe's. K&N, grounding kit and I've got 8,600+ miles.

 

Nice meeting you Skidazzle, Droidekaus, and Michael-Dallas! The S2000 guys were skeptical that Nissan was rating their engines appropriately, but funny thing I didn't hear them say anything afterwards

Mine was the the bone stock Z with 5000 miles.

 

I never understood, what's the difference between standard and SAE? And what is the purpose of correcting? To equalize temperature and elevation differences?

 

I believe SAE is kind of shorthand for SAE Standard, so they would be the same. Most likely, converted to Sea Level, 29.92" Hg, and 15deg C. Thats the aviation 'standard day' It gives a way of comparing results independent of outside conditions.

 

What is the normal power loss from engine to the rear wheels? Is this high, low, about average? Thanks in advance.

 

Conditions for the first car, Michael-Dallas, were 65.5 degrees F and 29.56 inches of mercury. That equates to a 0.98 correction factor.

The last car there, temp was 73.86, pressure 29.52. 0.99 correction factor.

So divide the above given resuls by the correction factors to get the actual numbers measured by the dynojet.

You can see ALL of the dynoes here:
http://www.elistan.com/2003-02-01_dyno_day/

 

if you want to see somthing curious....

take a look at my dyno chart and michael-dallas...

they both have this squiggle around 5500RPM...

neither droidekaus nor silverzman have this squiggle...

it didnt affect max HP, as that was at about 6200RPM, and I have the highest and michael-dallas had the lowest numbers...

the only thing we can come up with is that droidekaus has 8600+ miles and silverzman has over 5000 miles.

michael-dallas has a tad over 3000 miles, and i have barely 4000 miles.

anyone else's graphs look like ours? any ideas why?

mine:
http://www.elistan.com/2003-02-01_dy...chaelS_001.jpg
michael-dallas:
http://www.elistan.com/2003-02-01_dy...chaelD_001.jpg
silverzman:
http://www.elistan.com/2003-02-01_dyno_day/VuD_001.jpg
droidekaus:
http://www.elistan.com/2003-02-01_dy.../BradW_001.jpg

 

So is this in what way is this different from Nissan rating of 287. Are the two different, or the same but mesured at different locations.

 

Think that squiggle could be detonation hitting slightly with the ECU cutting timing?

*shrug*

 

15% or 241/.85 = 283.5 flywheel horsepower.

 

where the dyno is very squigly like that ...it's something with the ignition system. (atleast, that's what the tech where i got my car dynoed told me)

 

not quite proper logic... the 239run(middle of the road on numbers, and a stock car) comes out to 16.7% loss, pretty damn good on a rwd car.

the equation for that is
287-287*X=239

X is loss. you can swap numbers around to get whatever you want, if you wanna see what 15% loss is

X-X*.15=239

then you get what you wanted, which is .85X=239. but this is assuming you know loss to be 15%, which is not true. or atleast not provable. not many rwd cars can boast 15% loss, 16% is pretty incredable.

 

Sheesh, there goes secrecy. You guys missed me racing the Viper GTS and supercharged S2000 on the way to lunch.

Michael.

 

Well I'm going by what I read in magazines and on the internet. I've seen driveline loss figures thown around from a low of 12% to a high of 17% for drivetrain loss (on an Dynojet). If you want an example, C&D July 2001 issue tested a 01 Cobra. The 01 Cobra ran the 1/4 mile in 13.5 @ 105 mph. Being suspicious that they might have a ringer (because of the 99 Cobra hp problem). They ask for a 01 vert for testing and quietly took both cars in for dyno testing. Both cars dyno at 272 rwhp and they said and I quote "If you correct for dirveline losses (about 15 percent) the rear-wheel dyno number correlates to 320 crankshaft hp, exactly as advertised". So you can thown around whatever percentage you want. The average is 15 percent.

 

I read in another post about someone confirming that the ECU in the 350Z "unlocks" a few parameters at 5000 miles....so that might account for the differences in the Dyno's.


just an idea.... I'll look around for the post.

 

15 % is the standard drivetrain loss for a MTX car...so you are correct

 

I'm pretty sure I know what the squiggles are.

First, most of the graphs you see are at "Smoothing 5." It's something the Dynojet software does to smooth out the curve. You should see the graphs at Smoothing 1. There squiggles have a 60hp magnitude!

Anyway, the thing about Michael-Dallas and SKiDaZZLe is that they were the very first two people to have dynoed. The white S2000 that dynoed thrid has lots of squiggles too. Even droidekaus, in position 4, has some squiggles - although the smoothing was able to pretty much eliminate them.

It's not until the 6th car, one of the M3s, that the squiggles go away entirely.

I suspect that their equipment simply wasn't up to operating temp at the very beginning - there's nothing wrong with the cars.

 

That might also explain my Friday-car-like numbers.

My guess is that whoever connected the ignition cable didn't do a good job. Then again, I also think the guy that dynoed my car didn't have the pedal on the floor too!

Michael.

 

shuddap crybaby... you got a slow car... deal with it!