Kinetix SSV Dyno Results
06-16-2005, 02:33 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kinetix SSV Dyno Results
Installed the Kinetix SSV today and did a set of 3 dyno runs before and after. I threw out the highest and lowest runs of each set and the chart below shows the results. Red is before and blue is after.
Installed pics
Installed pics
06-16-2005, 02:44 PM
#6
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LeMans350z
So did you tune it after the runs?
06-16-2005, 02:59 PM
#7
When swapping plenums, richness usually is a sign of decreased air volume, increased turbulence, or decreased velocity. Typically, we like to see leanness, which is a good sign that the plenum is flowing more higher velocity air...then we can richen it up via the tune. This is what happened when I went from stock to Crawford.
I'd like to see more testing on these plenums. It looks like a very interesting design. It's interesting that your plenum richened up the mixture, but you still gained about 10whp at the peak. Maybe your setup likes a slightly richer mix for more power. Typically, peak power is acheived at between 11.7 and 12.5:1, as a general rule.
Lorca, did you have boost issues between these two runs? Or was your boost issue consistent between the various dyno runs.
I'd like to see more testing on these plenums. It looks like a very interesting design. It's interesting that your plenum richened up the mixture, but you still gained about 10whp at the peak. Maybe your setup likes a slightly richer mix for more power. Typically, peak power is acheived at between 11.7 and 12.5:1, as a general rule.
Lorca, did you have boost issues between these two runs? Or was your boost issue consistent between the various dyno runs.
Trending Topics
06-16-2005, 03:00 PM
#8
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: So Cal
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So no significant gain up until 6300 rpm from this plenum?
I just finished testing one for NA use and had more or less the same finding. Our AF did not change one bit however (one sign that little impact was made by the mod).
I just finished testing one for NA use and had more or less the same finding. Our AF did not change one bit however (one sign that little impact was made by the mod).
Last edited by THX723; 06-16-2005 at 03:03 PM.
06-16-2005, 03:10 PM
#11
Yeah, certainly did look too good to be true. Mine is still sitting in the box ready to install. But even if it doesn't give me a ton of HP gain, it really does look BEAUTIFUL!
That's a lot of cash for mere cosmetics though!
I'm waiting to see Jeremy's dyno results.
That's a lot of cash for mere cosmetics though!
I'm waiting to see Jeremy's dyno results.
06-16-2005, 03:18 PM
#12
can we get the graph to be more normalized?
This was comparing the OEM plenum to the SSV?
You can always lean out the A/F more and probably get even more power... That's what I wanna see. After you tune for the SSV, let's see what power you get
You obviously were tuned pretty well before the SSV
this manifold still has some nice advantages over OEM or crawford or probably the APS tall boy
weighs 10-12 lbs less
less heat soak
capable of direct port nitrous
looks nice
This was comparing the OEM plenum to the SSV?
You can always lean out the A/F more and probably get even more power... That's what I wanna see. After you tune for the SSV, let's see what power you get
You obviously were tuned pretty well before the SSV
this manifold still has some nice advantages over OEM or crawford or probably the APS tall boy
weighs 10-12 lbs less
less heat soak
capable of direct port nitrous
looks nice
Last edited by sentry65; 06-16-2005 at 03:54 PM.
06-16-2005, 03:42 PM
#15
Originally Posted by booger
If he lost boost . You would think that , that alone would make the A/F richen up quite a bit .And it stll made the same or a little more hp . To me it looks real promissing with his normal boost range and a retune
I agree
06-16-2005, 03:43 PM
#17
Originally Posted by booger
If he lost boost . You would think that , that alone would make the A/F richen up quite a bit .And it stll made the same or a little more hp . To me it looks real promissing with his normal boost range and a retune
06-16-2005, 03:52 PM
#18
SFZCC
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lake Worth, FL
Posts: 7,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is the first TT that has done dynos with this plenum the others were SC which is why I backed out not knowing what the results would be for 800 bucks.
Boost issues aside considering that if it lost boost the same on all runs then the gains should still be similar to what they would be if boost held, similar not the same. But maybe the design doesn't like the sudden rush of air coming in and backs up causing turbulence and bad flow, since the TT will flow differently than the SC or NA which build up flow on a steady basis.
Boost issues aside considering that if it lost boost the same on all runs then the gains should still be similar to what they would be if boost held, similar not the same. But maybe the design doesn't like the sudden rush of air coming in and backs up causing turbulence and bad flow, since the TT will flow differently than the SC or NA which build up flow on a steady basis.
06-16-2005, 04:12 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 1,671
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sharif@Forged
Can someone refresh my memory on Kinetix's power claims with this plenum on an F/I car. I recall is was nearly a 75whp increase...but I think there was tuning and other things involved.
