Injected Performance: Cosworth dyno test at 7000+rpm FI
08-18-2009, 05:44 AM
#101
Turbo Whore
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West suburbs of Chi-town
Posts: 7,303
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
BriGuy, there is a LOT more to making power over 7500 than an intake manifold... such as cams and more importantly exhaust restrictions (This means no cast/log style manifolds and properly sized turbos - no small turbos or turbos in smaller housings) etc. For reference, my personal Z holds peak power almost flat to 8300rpm.
08-18-2009, 08:27 AM
#102
Registered User
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know that, I've just never seen a dyno of a Z with a cosworth in which it really affected top end much. All the dyno's I've seen (not many) have it gaining the same power in the midrange as the top end. While that's all fine and good, it doesn't show me that it flows extremely well with lots of air being pushed through it.
I don't know if he will share that dyno chart though
08-18-2009, 08:44 AM
#103
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Texas, Arizona,Cayman Island
Posts: 5,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know that, I've just never seen a dyno of a Z with a cosworth in which it really affected top end much. All the dyno's I've seen (not many) have it gaining the same power in the midrange as the top end. While that's all fine and good, it doesn't show me that it flows extremely well with lots of air being pushed through it.
08-18-2009, 02:17 PM
#106
Same car, same dyno, same boost, same tuner.
Each block on the dyno chart represents 20hp/tq, so you can see the gains are as low as 20 and high as 40+whp. Any time I can pick up 40whp on the same fuel I am thrilled! I have seen this similar gains multiple times now.
Each block on the dyno chart represents 20hp/tq, so you can see the gains are as low as 20 and high as 40+whp. Any time I can pick up 40whp on the same fuel I am thrilled! I have seen this similar gains multiple times now.
08-19-2009, 05:34 AM
#112
I have done this and believe it is posted somewhere as well. Regardless, you know what gains a plenum spacer makes compared to stock, and you know what Cosworth makes compared to stock.
I also appreciate how the Cosworth cleans up the engine bay and allows for easier access to spark plugs.
I also appreciate how the Cosworth cleans up the engine bay and allows for easier access to spark plugs.
08-19-2009, 05:52 AM
#114
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Texas, Arizona,Cayman Island
Posts: 5,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have done this and believe it is posted somewhere as well. Regardless, you know what gains a plenum spacer makes compared to stock, and you know what Cosworth makes compared to stock.
I also appreciate how the Cosworth cleans up the engine bay and allows for easier access to spark plugs.
I also appreciate how the Cosworth cleans up the engine bay and allows for easier access to spark plugs.
EXACTLY !!
Thats one of the things I love about it...even I can change my spark plugs now
08-19-2009, 06:16 AM
#115
"How does this thing perform compared to a spacer?" is the most common and important question that has been asked for over a year. It is surprising and frustrating that there is still a lack of several independent comparisons between the available spacers versus the Cosworth. It is something that has been requested since before the release of the Cosworth plenum, yet not even Cosworth has shown an effort to prove the performance gains versus a spacer. And the shops that sell the Cosworth plenum don't seem to be very eager to publish many comparison dynos with a spacer involved.
08-19-2009, 06:27 AM
#116
LOL I don't think the forum community has seen hardly any VQ's revved out past 7500RPM with or without a spacer. Setups with big enough turbos that don't drop off before 7000RPM have been few and far between. There is also a lack of dyno comparisons for stock versus spacer in builds making over 650whp.
Last edited by RudeG_v2.0; 08-19-2009 at 06:53 AM.
08-19-2009, 06:33 AM
#117
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Texas, Arizona,Cayman Island
Posts: 5,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"How does this thing perform compared to a spacer?" is the most common and important question that has been asked for over a year. It is surprising and frustrating that there is still a lack of several independent comparisons between the available spacers versus the Cosworth. It is something that has been requested since before the release of the Cosworth plenum, yet not even Cosworth has shown an effort to prove the performance gains versus a spacer. And the shops that sell the Cosworth plenum don't seem to be very eager to publish many comparison dynos with a spacer involved.
I know Sharif gained over 40whp on my Cosworth vs stock....So I would say 32 to 36 whp over spacer if you use those numbers
Last edited by XKR; 08-19-2009 at 06:37 AM.
08-19-2009, 06:50 AM
#118
ya, but the spacer gains were in the stock powerband (under 6500 rpms). The cosworth isnt making 1000$ worth of extra power under 6500 rpms. Above 7300+, it looks great though.
Seems aggro cams and 7500+ rpm redline are in order for the Cosworth to shine.
So you dont need to move the Cosworth at all do change the plugs. Thats really nice.
Seems aggro cams and 7500+ rpm redline are in order for the Cosworth to shine.
So you dont need to move the Cosworth at all do change the plugs. Thats really nice.
08-19-2009, 07:01 AM
#119
I'm going to speculate that the rpms at which the Cosworth comes alive is dependent on the rest of the setup. On my build we had JWT C2 cams, and we picked up HP lower in the rpm range. I do say this with hesitation, though, because when we added the Cosworth we also added turbo blankets, the pathfinder cooling mod, and other little tweaks here and there.
08-19-2009, 07:10 AM
#120
Here are my dyno plots with both the Motordyne spacer and the Cosworth plenum. Unfortunately, these are at different boost levels and with the changes noted above.
Notes:
1. The first one was run on a hot day. Measured RWHP was in the 550's but it weather corrected up to 584 RWHP. The second run was on a moderate day, it measured 609 RWHP, but weather corrected down to 603 RWHP.
2. The person on the first tune (Jack) opened the throttle later than the person doing the second tune (Roger).
3. The dip in the second plot at around 4200 rpm was intentional. The timing was pulled back here and we ran it a little on the rich side to provide safety margin. I was supposed to run homestead the next day (I over-reved the motor playing with WOT shifting, so I didn't make it).
4. I think the torque plateu at 5000 - 5600 rpm is due to the cosworth. Specifically, I venture to say that this is the rpm range at which the Cosworth intake runners are tuned.
Notes:
1. The first one was run on a hot day. Measured RWHP was in the 550's but it weather corrected up to 584 RWHP. The second run was on a moderate day, it measured 609 RWHP, but weather corrected down to 603 RWHP.
2. The person on the first tune (Jack) opened the throttle later than the person doing the second tune (Roger).
3. The dip in the second plot at around 4200 rpm was intentional. The timing was pulled back here and we ran it a little on the rich side to provide safety margin. I was supposed to run homestead the next day (I over-reved the motor playing with WOT shifting, so I didn't make it).
4. I think the torque plateu at 5000 - 5600 rpm is due to the cosworth. Specifically, I venture to say that this is the rpm range at which the Cosworth intake runners are tuned.
Last edited by ttg35fort; 08-19-2009 at 07:15 AM.