Kinetix SSV Dyno Results - Vortech
06-21-2005 | 12:44 PM
#41
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,052
Likes: 1
From: Charlotte, NC
Originally Posted by SpeedDreamTuner
Guys, just because the car ran richer after the IM, doesn't mean it's not flowing more air. 99% of the boosted cars I tune that do headers run richer even though they're flowing more air. These changes in A/F are not uncommon at all when your dealing with this style of MAF. Further i've noticed that these MAF's are so touchy, even removing and re-installing them can alter the A/F. Unfortuneatly, R4 is a very finicky piece of software. You won't dial it in, in five pulls. It's gonna take time, and your gonna have to try several things. If you initially tuned the car for 7 PSI, it could actually loose boost, yet gain efficiency. If you loose some boost, your gonna run richer. I see it a lot in lot's of different cars. It's no unreasonable to think this IM needs some good tuning to see the full results. If it's got more volume, you probably ate up some boost, nothing more, nothing less.
Tuning an R4 Vortech car, with this IM is a challenge. Probably one of the harder car's i've done. To be succesfull, you need to take your time, do quite a few pulls, and maintain composure. It's easy to get frustrated and go backwards. Trust me, I know. Our shop has done a lot of these intakes. They flat make power, but you gotta have a descent tune to start with. It's all in the tune.
Tuning an R4 Vortech car, with this IM is a challenge. Probably one of the harder car's i've done. To be succesfull, you need to take your time, do quite a few pulls, and maintain composure. It's easy to get frustrated and go backwards. Trust me, I know. Our shop has done a lot of these intakes. They flat make power, but you gotta have a descent tune to start with. It's all in the tune.
06-21-2005 | 12:48 PM
#42
Originally Posted by booger
LeMans350Z.......Did you lose boost after the install ? Or did your boost curve change after the install ? If others are having to have the IM milled and sanded off , so not to cause vacuum leaks . A boost leak , also may cause the A/F to go rich .
I didnt find a boost leak until I preasurized the system with a air compresor . I found a pretty big leak on the Crawford plenum and I wouldnt have found it or even thought it to be leaking there unless I preasurized it .
Also...some one else mentioned that timing may be the cause of it . Hooking up a OBDII could confirm if the ECU is pulling timing at WOT with this IM
I didnt find a boost leak until I preasurized the system with a air compresor . I found a pretty big leak on the Crawford plenum and I wouldnt have found it or even thought it to be leaking there unless I preasurized it .
Also...some one else mentioned that timing may be the cause of it . Hooking up a OBDII could confirm if the ECU is pulling timing at WOT with this IM
So, bottom line... $160 later, I have a perfectly flat (did the flat piece of metal scrape/screech test
), nicely polished manifold...now just need to wait on the stud/gaskets from performance nissan (ordered overnight shipping, so should be here tomorrow), and we'll see where we are
hope this helps!
-nick
06-21-2005 | 12:51 PM
#43
thanks, there's a lot of variables between your last dyno and this one, but that's a little helpful at least
Originally Posted by mcduck
Not taking time to read this entire thread now. Just had my car dynoed yesterday. Only real changes since the last tune is 20K miles, Kinetix SSV vs Crawford V1, and 3.33" pulley vs 3.12" pulley (one size drop).
Here is the previous best graph (blue lines) vs yesterdays final tuning (red lines)
Notes
- had to pull the data into excel to plot the graphs because sets of runs were not in same data format. Sorry if you don't like it, that's just the way it is.
- IMPORTANT!!!! When my car hit 425rwhp/340rwtq before that was at the absolute ragged edge of tuning. Car was running as lean as reasonable and had as much timing pulled as possible. My 418/340 figure from yesterday was on a semi-conservative, safe tune. In fact, it was hit easily once A/F was sorted out. According to the tuning techs, they could get as much as 50 more hp out of my current set up, but didn't recommend pushing it to the limit. Apparently there is room to take an additional 3-4 degrees of timing out and above 5500rpm, my car A/F is in the high 10s. So, I'm hitting the same numbers today, but am doing it much more safely.
- Graph clearly shows increases in area under the curve all the way across, especially in midrange power. There's a nice band where my torque is up 20ftlbs for a sizeable range. This was exactly what I wanted with my upgrades... not more peak power, just more area under the curve
Bottomline, I'm very happy with my set up. Not sure what other Zs are putting down with the 3.12" pulley. It may be close to what I have, but then I'd have to ask how much more power they could get from there. The professional opinion of my tuner (who does a ***LOT*** of Vortech kits) is we could close in 470rwhp with my car, as it is, before it would pop. Of course, it would require more very delicate tuning and probably won't have the longevity it does now.
I honestly think the issues most are seeing are related to the tuning. It one thing to be a good tuner vs someone who is inexperienced. It's an entirely different thing to be a **GREAT** tuner vs a good tuner. After spending the day with my tuner yesterday, I would firmly place them in the GREAT category. They spent a lot of time making minor tweaks and adjustments to get the car exactly where I wanted and keep the power curve smooth.
Will try to check back tomorrow on this thread when I have more time to answer questions.
NOTE: The image of the computer screen was my peak power run for the day, but not my last run. as you may see, there is a considerable "hump" in the A/F at one point and a complimentary dip in power. That was eventually tuned out
Here is the previous best graph (blue lines) vs yesterdays final tuning (red lines)
Notes
- had to pull the data into excel to plot the graphs because sets of runs were not in same data format. Sorry if you don't like it, that's just the way it is.
- IMPORTANT!!!! When my car hit 425rwhp/340rwtq before that was at the absolute ragged edge of tuning. Car was running as lean as reasonable and had as much timing pulled as possible. My 418/340 figure from yesterday was on a semi-conservative, safe tune. In fact, it was hit easily once A/F was sorted out. According to the tuning techs, they could get as much as 50 more hp out of my current set up, but didn't recommend pushing it to the limit. Apparently there is room to take an additional 3-4 degrees of timing out and above 5500rpm, my car A/F is in the high 10s. So, I'm hitting the same numbers today, but am doing it much more safely.
- Graph clearly shows increases in area under the curve all the way across, especially in midrange power. There's a nice band where my torque is up 20ftlbs for a sizeable range. This was exactly what I wanted with my upgrades... not more peak power, just more area under the curve
Bottomline, I'm very happy with my set up. Not sure what other Zs are putting down with the 3.12" pulley. It may be close to what I have, but then I'd have to ask how much more power they could get from there. The professional opinion of my tuner (who does a ***LOT*** of Vortech kits) is we could close in 470rwhp with my car, as it is, before it would pop. Of course, it would require more very delicate tuning and probably won't have the longevity it does now.
I honestly think the issues most are seeing are related to the tuning. It one thing to be a good tuner vs someone who is inexperienced. It's an entirely different thing to be a **GREAT** tuner vs a good tuner. After spending the day with my tuner yesterday, I would firmly place them in the GREAT category. They spent a lot of time making minor tweaks and adjustments to get the car exactly where I wanted and keep the power curve smooth.
Will try to check back tomorrow on this thread when I have more time to answer questions.
NOTE: The image of the computer screen was my peak power run for the day, but not my last run. as you may see, there is a considerable "hump" in the A/F at one point and a complimentary dip in power. That was eventually tuned out
06-21-2005 | 01:05 PM
#44
machupo, give me an email at jamisonl@msn.com and let me see if I can make some sort of accomodation for your troubles.
06-21-2005 | 01:09 PM
#45
Mcduck, very glad to hear about your positive numbers.
Very easily with a product release, good feedback is overlooked, and possible negative feedback is focused on.
Which is good in terms of product improvment and being able to respond to possible problems.
We are listening to ALL the feedback and naturally will work to improve our production and quality control.
Very easily with a product release, good feedback is overlooked, and possible negative feedback is focused on.
Which is good in terms of product improvment and being able to respond to possible problems.
We are listening to ALL the feedback and naturally will work to improve our production and quality control.
06-21-2005 | 01:17 PM
#46
Originally Posted by lsdunique
machupo, give me an email at jamisonl@msn.com and let me see if I can make some sort of accomodation for your troubles.
)
06-21-2005 | 02:25 PM
#47
Sharif, there is no leak like on Machupo's. I installed this one.
McDuck, dynotuner (Ed from Balanced is one of the great dyno tuners you talk about) He is no amatuer.
Jeremy's boost after the install was hitting just around 11psi at redline as per his zietronix when I was riding as a passenger after the install. So if anything, it was higher boost.
As for me earlier saying it could be flowing less, I do believe I also said it was an uneducated guess, and just speculation. Just throwing out ideas.
McDuck, dynotuner (Ed from Balanced is one of the great dyno tuners you talk about) He is no amatuer.
Jeremy's boost after the install was hitting just around 11psi at redline as per his zietronix when I was riding as a passenger after the install. So if anything, it was higher boost.
As for me earlier saying it could be flowing less, I do believe I also said it was an uneducated guess, and just speculation. Just throwing out ideas.
06-21-2005 | 02:55 PM
#48
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,671
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Originally Posted by 2003z
Jeremy's boost after the install was hitting just around 11psi at redline as per his zietronix when I was riding as a passenger after the install. So if anything, it was higher boost.
For me here in Albuquerque, I will show anywhere from -5.0 to -6.0 with key on, vehicle not started and sensors warmed up. So, when datalogging I add anywhere from 2.0 to 2.4 to recorded boost value.
Altitude is just one value that determines your startup value. It took several e-mails and late night phone calls to Zbigniew at Zeitronix to confirm this.
Last edited by SungNamZ; 06-21-2005 at 02:58 PM.
06-21-2005 | 03:19 PM
#49
Originally Posted by Machupo
Just got back from the machine shop -- they had to take off a decent bit of material... not only were there the circular grooves from production, but the entire bottom flange (attaches to collector) was "wavy" and had to be milled.
So, bottom line... $160 later, I have a perfectly flat (did the flat piece of metal scrape/screech test), nicely polished manifold...
now just need to wait on the stud/gaskets from performance nissan (ordered overnight shipping, so should be here tomorrow), and we'll see where we are
hope this helps!
-nick
So, bottom line... $160 later, I have a perfectly flat (did the flat piece of metal scrape/screech test
), nicely polished manifold...now just need to wait on the stud/gaskets from performance nissan (ordered overnight shipping, so should be here tomorrow), and we'll see where we are
hope this helps!
-nick
Is this something you can visibly SEE just by looking at the IM? I have mine still in the box and haven't taken it out yet. I planned on installing it in the next few weeks. If it is something you can see, can you describe it to me. Does anyone have any pics of theirs?
Was yours in the first batch sent out or the second? Mine was in the second.
I can take pics of mine and post them if that would help but I have no idea what I'd be looking at or for.
06-21-2005 | 03:24 PM
#50
As many have probably read, I have been having a lot of boost issues since my Vortech install. WHen Z1 Motorsports did a boost leak test, they found several boost leaks. One of which was located underneath my new Kinetix manifold. I believe Z1 did some grinding to remove the polishing or something to remedy the air leaks there.
06-21-2005 | 03:26 PM
#51
Could the fact that its Stainless Steel , be contributing to the flange not being flat ? Or is the flange to thick to warp when heated [ welded ] ?
In the rush to get all the orders filled , Maybe Kinetic's let some go out that hadn't been checked for a flush fit
In the rush to get all the orders filled , Maybe Kinetic's let some go out that hadn't been checked for a flush fit
Last edited by booger; 06-21-2005 at 03:29 PM.
06-21-2005 | 03:30 PM
#52
Originally Posted by booger
Could the fact that its Stainless Steel , be contributing to the flange not being flat ? Or is the flange to thick to warp when heated [ welded ] ?
In the rush to get all the orders filled , Maybe Kinetic's let some go out that hadn't been checked for a flush fit
In the rush to get all the orders filled , Maybe Kinetic's let some go out that hadn't been checked for a flush fit
06-21-2005 | 04:02 PM
#53
Originally Posted by Dr Bonz
Machupo:
Is this something you can visibly SEE just by looking at the IM? I have mine still in the box and haven't taken it out yet. I planned on installing it in the next few weeks. If it is something you can see, can you describe it to me. Does anyone have any pics of theirs?
Was yours in the first batch sent out or the second? Mine was in the second.
I can take pics of mine and post them if that would help but I have no idea what I'd be looking at or for.
Is this something you can visibly SEE just by looking at the IM? I have mine still in the box and haven't taken it out yet. I planned on installing it in the next few weeks. If it is something you can see, can you describe it to me. Does anyone have any pics of theirs?
Was yours in the first batch sent out or the second? Mine was in the second.
I can take pics of mine and post them if that would help but I have no idea what I'd be looking at or for.
Doc,
was visibly noticable as concentric grooves (swirls, even) on the underside... additional test was to run my fingernail parallel to the grooves and see if you can feel ridges or hear sound from running over the ridges.
As I said, I'll be able to test it as soon as my package from performance nissan arrives, but i'm hopeful
and the power gain I was getting (even with the vac leaks) was awesome!
06-21-2005 | 04:54 PM
#55
Doc, yours looks pretty good -- the way that the machinist demonstrated to me that it was very flat was to take a thin, flat piece of scrap metal and put it on edge (45 degree inclined) and run it along the bottom of the flange (like a shaving razor)... this generated a uniform screeching, no modulation which shows that the metal was in constant contact with the entire flange (not to mention that the striaght cut fit perfectly along the entire piece).
but bottom line up front, your flange looks pretty good, if you can't feel it when you run your fingernail against the swirls (put a little bit of pressure on it) then you should be fine
i'd say try it, just don't be a bufoon like me and really try to torque the bolts down hard and end up braking them (just follow the torque specs in the shop manual -- i can scan the page if you need it)
lmk if you need anything else
EDIT: now that i take another look at the pictures, is there any way you could take a non-flash picture w/ other lighting, at a rather acute angle? that would highlight any ridges if they're there -- thanks!
EDIT 2: I was in the 2nd batch
but bottom line up front, your flange looks pretty good, if you can't feel it when you run your fingernail against the swirls (put a little bit of pressure on it) then you should be fine
i'd say try it, just don't be a bufoon like me and really try to torque the bolts down hard and end up braking them
(just follow the torque specs in the shop manual -- i can scan the page if you need it)lmk if you need anything else
EDIT: now that i take another look at the pictures, is there any way you could take a non-flash picture w/ other lighting, at a rather acute angle? that would highlight any ridges if they're there -- thanks!
EDIT 2: I was in the 2nd batch
Last edited by Machupo; 06-21-2005 at 04:56 PM.
06-21-2005 | 05:15 PM
#56
it will actually create a better seal if you start tightening down from the center, then work out towards the front and back of the flange.
We will include a tightening sequence in the near future
We will include a tightening sequence in the near future
06-22-2005 | 03:11 AM
#58
Sponsor
Forged Internals.com
Forged Internals.com
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,566
Likes: 1
From: Valdosta, GA
Originally Posted by LeMans350z
I am not sure it is worth the effort.
If the intake would have caused a lean condition then I could make more HP with tuning however since it went rich then it would seem I would not be able to make more power with this intake.
I thought that more HP is made by increasing fuel and air. With my dynos is shows that I have way to much fuel after installing the intake. Less air. Then to tune I would be pulling more fuel. Seems backward to me for making more power.
Is this correct?
Thanks,
Jeremy
BTW - Forgot to mention this before but, I had stock Plenum on the car for the 401 run - no crawford, no other kinetix plenum.
If the intake would have caused a lean condition then I could make more HP with tuning however since it went rich then it would seem I would not be able to make more power with this intake.
I thought that more HP is made by increasing fuel and air. With my dynos is shows that I have way to much fuel after installing the intake. Less air. Then to tune I would be pulling more fuel. Seems backward to me for making more power.
Is this correct?
Thanks,
Jeremy
BTW - Forgot to mention this before but, I had stock Plenum on the car for the 401 run - no crawford, no other kinetix plenum.
More airflow + not enough fuel for the given airflow at a certain RPM = Lean
Less or same airflow + more fuel for the given airflow at a certain RPM = Rich
06-22-2005 | 03:36 AM
#59
Originally Posted by lsdunique
Sorry to hear about the troubles.
A vacuum leak will most easily be noticed by a rough idle, or a lower idle. Even a tiny leak will cause a rough idle.
We have since changed the machining on the main flange.
I dont want to jump to any conclusions based on this one dyno, even though it definately should not be ignored.
I have seen one other persons car go richer after adding this mod. The Z has been very tricky in terms of its A/F when modding. Many people have had high flow cats or other mods turn the car richer, while others have the same mods lean out their car. Its not as easy as simple as "richer means less flow"
I doubt this A/F being that rich is a direct effect of the manifold flowing less than factory, because if that was the case we simply wouldnt be seeing the feedback from several other customers.
You can email me at jamisonl@msn.com and maybe we can eliminate some of the possible problems.
A vacuum leak will most easily be noticed by a rough idle, or a lower idle. Even a tiny leak will cause a rough idle.
We have since changed the machining on the main flange.
I dont want to jump to any conclusions based on this one dyno, even though it definately should not be ignored.
I have seen one other persons car go richer after adding this mod. The Z has been very tricky in terms of its A/F when modding. Many people have had high flow cats or other mods turn the car richer, while others have the same mods lean out their car. Its not as easy as simple as "richer means less flow"
I doubt this A/F being that rich is a direct effect of the manifold flowing less than factory, because if that was the case we simply wouldnt be seeing the feedback from several other customers.
You can email me at jamisonl@msn.com and maybe we can eliminate some of the possible problems.
06-22-2005 | 06:43 AM
#60
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,052
Likes: 1
From: Charlotte, NC
Originally Posted by 2003z
Sharif, there is no leak like on Machupo's. I installed this one.
McDuck, dynotuner (Ed from Balanced is one of the great dyno tuners you talk about) He is no amatuer.
Jeremy's boost after the install was hitting just around 11psi at redline as per his zietronix when I was riding as a passenger after the install. So if anything, it was higher boost.
As for me earlier saying it could be flowing less, I do believe I also said it was an uneducated guess, and just speculation. Just throwing out ideas.
McDuck, dynotuner (Ed from Balanced is one of the great dyno tuners you talk about) He is no amatuer.
Jeremy's boost after the install was hitting just around 11psi at redline as per his zietronix when I was riding as a passenger after the install. So if anything, it was higher boost.
As for me earlier saying it could be flowing less, I do believe I also said it was an uneducated guess, and just speculation. Just throwing out ideas.