278.3 Rwhp & 249.7 Tq Naturally Aspirated
12-03-2004, 09:23 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
278.3 Rwhp & 249.7 Tq Naturally Aspirated
First off, it was a fairly cold day(upper 40s) so my SAE numbers were handicapped to 265 rwhp. However, the car actually made 278.3 RWHP and 249.7 RTQ. The car dynoed at 249 rwhp, 227 RTQ with a JWT Pop-Charger, Grounding kit, Borla Exhaust & Nismo Cams about a year ago. Today with the addition of a Crawford V.5 plenum, UR Crank Pulley, Nismo Headers,Kinetix resonated Test pipes, and a custom tune by ZCARGARAGE of my XEDE piggyback unit (12.9 A/F 6000-6600 rpm), I produced the numbers below. I can say that the car is so much more powerful, it pulls very hard all the way to redline. I am very impressed!
http://img103.exs.cx/img103/1949/47-DYNO.jpg
http://img103.exs.cx/img103/1949/47-DYNO.jpg
Last edited by 287HP; 12-03-2004 at 09:41 PM.
12-03-2004, 09:52 PM
#4
Registered User
Nice.
Next step might be to swap those Nismo headers for the Crawfords... Mike (mjedens), whom is running Tomei 268 cams, gained tons of power down low when switching out his Nismo headers.
Those aren't a bad design header... just doesn't compliment cams very well.
Next step might be to swap those Nismo headers for the Crawfords... Mike (mjedens), whom is running Tomei 268 cams, gained tons of power down low when switching out his Nismo headers.
Those aren't a bad design header... just doesn't compliment cams very well.
12-03-2004, 11:20 PM
#5
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Stockton, CA
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 287HP
Dynojet 248h! 5th gear runs, Heavy touring rims however!
Dynojet 248h! 5th gear runs, Heavy touring rims however!
Can u tell me something more about the XEDE piggyback unit ?
What does it do? like a stand alone ECU instead of getting ECU reflash?
THanks, Mike
12-03-2004, 11:34 PM
#6
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The xede is not a stand alone unit, it is a piggyback that basically works with the factory ecu. On my car, since it is NA, it intercepts the MAF signal and controls the timing.
Trending Topics
12-04-2004, 09:53 AM
#9
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The nismo headers, resonated test-pipes and borla exhaust is a great combo in my opinion. I had a bunch of people commenting on how nice the car sounds. And absolutely no RASP!!!!!
12-04-2004, 08:21 PM
#12
so your posting a graph in STD rather than SAE? Hmm... I own a dynojet 248 and I must say that I can go out there and turn the correction from SAE to STD on almost all the runs and see significantly higher numbers. SAE is what people use for comparison typically.
STD correction is usually used for misleading #s, such as... you dyno your car at SAE for baseline then STD for post mods that way you can post misleading gains all over the internet.
If you made 265rwhp SAE... thats good power... and in all fairness, your car made 265rwhp and thats that... if you ask me.
But if we are allowed to post STD graphs then my car made 476rwhp and 486lb-ft at 81 degrees outside. (Thats what my 467 graph says if I turn it to STD).
STD correction is usually used for misleading #s, such as... you dyno your car at SAE for baseline then STD for post mods that way you can post misleading gains all over the internet.
If you made 265rwhp SAE... thats good power... and in all fairness, your car made 265rwhp and thats that... if you ask me.
But if we are allowed to post STD graphs then my car made 476rwhp and 486lb-ft at 81 degrees outside. (Thats what my 467 graph says if I turn it to STD).
12-04-2004, 11:48 PM
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phunk,
First off, STD is actually a type of correction factor under SAE which calculates hp based on 29.92 inches of mercury and 60 degrees fahrenheit. Actual numbers are what you car puts down on that particular day with no correction, which will without a doubt be higher or lower depending on weather conditions!!!!!!!!.Now I understand that SAE numbers are more generally used, however, I like to use actual numbers because that is really what my car is putting to the ground. If it is cold out, SAE will be lower, if it is hot out SAE will be higher. A good example is when Jeff@performance nissan tested out the nismo and JWT cams. With the nismo cams, Jeff put down 270 Actual hp to the wheels. With the JWT cams, Jeff put down 263(Actual) to the wheels, but SAE came out to 273. So it can be misleading. The last time I dynoed, it was about 90 degrees out(one of the factors that affect SAE numbers, along with atmospheric pressure and moisture), my car put down 255 actual, but SAE was like 261! The 255 is a real number while, the 261 is calculated. And if you made 476 rwhp actual, then your car is really making 476 rwhp, no bullsh*t! SAE is an estimate of what your car might, and I stress might, make if all of the atmospheric conditions were the same as the SAE uses as a model(77 degrees fahrenheit and 29.29 inches of mercury). Your car, on the day it dynoed put down 476 rwhp, while my car put down 278 rwhp. But hey, whether its 265 rwhp or 278 rwhp, its gonna pull just as hard.
First off, STD is actually a type of correction factor under SAE which calculates hp based on 29.92 inches of mercury and 60 degrees fahrenheit. Actual numbers are what you car puts down on that particular day with no correction, which will without a doubt be higher or lower depending on weather conditions!!!!!!!!.Now I understand that SAE numbers are more generally used, however, I like to use actual numbers because that is really what my car is putting to the ground. If it is cold out, SAE will be lower, if it is hot out SAE will be higher. A good example is when Jeff@performance nissan tested out the nismo and JWT cams. With the nismo cams, Jeff put down 270 Actual hp to the wheels. With the JWT cams, Jeff put down 263(Actual) to the wheels, but SAE came out to 273. So it can be misleading. The last time I dynoed, it was about 90 degrees out(one of the factors that affect SAE numbers, along with atmospheric pressure and moisture), my car put down 255 actual, but SAE was like 261! The 255 is a real number while, the 261 is calculated. And if you made 476 rwhp actual, then your car is really making 476 rwhp, no bullsh*t! SAE is an estimate of what your car might, and I stress might, make if all of the atmospheric conditions were the same as the SAE uses as a model(77 degrees fahrenheit and 29.29 inches of mercury). Your car, on the day it dynoed put down 476 rwhp, while my car put down 278 rwhp. But hey, whether its 265 rwhp or 278 rwhp, its gonna pull just as hard.
Last edited by 287HP; 12-05-2004 at 12:23 AM.
12-05-2004, 09:32 AM
#14
what your saying makes sense... except one thing... like i said it seems that regardless of humidity and temperature it seems that STD numbers always read higher. We always check what it is and I dont recall any times where STD read lower.
I am not trying to be a dick or water down your results... I am just pretty picky about dyno comparisons... people read a lot into dyno comparisons and showing results that are not as 100% consistent and comparable as possible contribute to misinformation. Lots of people dont know there is a difference from dyno to dyno and between what type of correction.
At least your car actually produced a dyno graph with the results you are posting... i see lots of people claiming HP that their car has yet to put to the rollers.
Either way, good work. I guess I am just the dyno ****.
-Charles
I am not trying to be a dick or water down your results... I am just pretty picky about dyno comparisons... people read a lot into dyno comparisons and showing results that are not as 100% consistent and comparable as possible contribute to misinformation. Lots of people dont know there is a difference from dyno to dyno and between what type of correction.
At least your car actually produced a dyno graph with the results you are posting... i see lots of people claiming HP that their car has yet to put to the rollers.
Either way, good work. I guess I am just the dyno ****.
-Charles
12-05-2004, 10:18 AM
#15
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phunk,
I know your not being dick, I am just posting my peak numbers that day, and thats what they were. And since most of us know how hard it is to get NA power out of this car, I was pretty impressed with the 278 it really put down.
I know your not being dick, I am just posting my peak numbers that day, and thats what they were. And since most of us know how hard it is to get NA power out of this car, I was pretty impressed with the 278 it really put down.
12-05-2004, 12:00 PM
#16
Master
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What up fellows.
I took a ride in this mean N/A mother. Let me tell you I think the numbers are wrong too. I think they should be higher. This thing pulled just about like the supercharged Z's I've rode in with 300+rwhp. A wise man once said something (Rob) a car can have 1000rwhp but if it feels slow and is then what's the point. This car may say it has 280 or so but it pulls much harder. This car feels great and sounds great. I would think the 40 or so Horses mine lacks from his feels like 100. If yal can ever get a ride do it. It's bad ***.
Peace!!
I took a ride in this mean N/A mother. Let me tell you I think the numbers are wrong too. I think they should be higher. This thing pulled just about like the supercharged Z's I've rode in with 300+rwhp. A wise man once said something (Rob) a car can have 1000rwhp but if it feels slow and is then what's the point. This car may say it has 280 or so but it pulls much harder. This car feels great and sounds great. I would think the 40 or so Horses mine lacks from his feels like 100. If yal can ever get a ride do it. It's bad ***.
Peace!!
12-05-2004, 02:18 PM
#17
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
barthelb,
Thanks for the reply man!!!! Your car will give mine a run for its money after your cam install, but not after your APS install!!!!!!
Thanks for the reply man!!!! Your car will give mine a run for its money after your cam install, but not after your APS install!!!!!!
Last edited by 287HP; 12-05-2004 at 02:20 PM.
12-05-2004, 02:42 PM
#18
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The GYM!
Posts: 9,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 278.3 Rwhp & 249.7 Tq Naturally Aspirated
Originally posted by 287HP
First off, it was a fairly cold day(upper 40s) so my SAE numbers were handicapped to 265 rwhp. However, the car actually made 278.3 RWHP and 249.7 RTQ. The car dynoed at 249 rwhp, 227 RTQ with a JWT Pop-Charger, Grounding kit, Borla Exhaust & Nismo Cams about a year ago. Today with the addition of a Crawford V.5 plenum, UR Crank Pulley, Nismo Headers,Kinetix resonated Test pipes, and a custom tune by ZCARGARAGE of my XEDE piggyback unit (12.9 A/F 6000-6600 rpm), I produced the numbers below. I can say that the car is so much more powerful, it pulls very hard all the way to redline. I am very impressed!
http://img103.exs.cx/img103/1949/47-DYNO.jpg
First off, it was a fairly cold day(upper 40s) so my SAE numbers were handicapped to 265 rwhp. However, the car actually made 278.3 RWHP and 249.7 RTQ. The car dynoed at 249 rwhp, 227 RTQ with a JWT Pop-Charger, Grounding kit, Borla Exhaust & Nismo Cams about a year ago. Today with the addition of a Crawford V.5 plenum, UR Crank Pulley, Nismo Headers,Kinetix resonated Test pipes, and a custom tune by ZCARGARAGE of my XEDE piggyback unit (12.9 A/F 6000-6600 rpm), I produced the numbers below. I can say that the car is so much more powerful, it pulls very hard all the way to redline. I am very impressed!
http://img103.exs.cx/img103/1949/47-DYNO.jpg
What would be your guesstimate @ crank-hp?
12-05-2004, 03:45 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: coral gables
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 287HP
I did the cams a year ago from from an independent shop, but the guy was a nissan master-tech. The install cost was about 1200 dollars(13 hours).
I did the cams a year ago from from an independent shop, but the guy was a nissan master-tech. The install cost was about 1200 dollars(13 hours).
I have to dyno my car but have the aem intake/injen exhaust and am working on a sponsorship with Alphawerks for their headers/test pipe combo package...
Nice gains overall though
12-05-2004, 03:47 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: coral gables
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Dyno ****...no dyno for you...
Originally posted by phunk
what your saying makes sense... except one thing... like i said it seems that regardless of humidity and temperature it seems that STD numbers always read higher. We always check what it is and I dont recall any times where STD read lower.
I am not trying to be a dick or water down your results... I am just pretty picky about dyno comparisons... people read a lot into dyno comparisons and showing results that are not as 100% consistent and comparable as possible contribute to misinformation. Lots of people dont know there is a difference from dyno to dyno and between what type of correction.
At least your car actually produced a dyno graph with the results you are posting... i see lots of people claiming HP that their car has yet to put to the rollers.
Either way, good work. I guess I am just the dyno ****.
-Charles
what your saying makes sense... except one thing... like i said it seems that regardless of humidity and temperature it seems that STD numbers always read higher. We always check what it is and I dont recall any times where STD read lower.
I am not trying to be a dick or water down your results... I am just pretty picky about dyno comparisons... people read a lot into dyno comparisons and showing results that are not as 100% consistent and comparable as possible contribute to misinformation. Lots of people dont know there is a difference from dyno to dyno and between what type of correction.
At least your car actually produced a dyno graph with the results you are posting... i see lots of people claiming HP that their car has yet to put to the rollers.
Either way, good work. I guess I am just the dyno ****.
-Charles