TreeZ

iTrader: (23)

Here is my before and after dynos for the MREV2 and ISO 5/16" spacer mods. Pulls were done 10 days apart, so take it for what it's worth. The same dyno was used for both readings, all pertinent info should be on the pics attached.
I wasn't able to get an overlay straight from the shop (problem saving old file), so I put together some quick Exel comparison charts.
Basically, i lost some top end, but gained almost everywhere else on the band, not by as much as I would've liked to see however. Max HP went from around 220 to 214.
But nevertheless, the car is much different on the road as far as power. There is a noticable improvement in the available torque at all RPMs and makes the car much more fun to drive.
The pulls were done on a DYNOmite dyno. I had never heard of it, but it serves the purpose of a comparison tool adequately (to the best of my knowledge). On a side note, I really hope this dyno reads low.
Oh, yeah, both pulls were in 4th gear.

pic on this post are of the baseline pull on 12.19

TreeZ

iTrader: (23)

these are of the run with MREV2 + ISO 5/16 spacer

TreeZ

iTrader: (23)

then the comparisons in Excel, and one of Z on the dyno

TreeZ

iTrader: (23)

i know RPM excel sheet should be x100, so don't bother

gothchick

iTrader: (12)

It looks like MREV2 + Spacer peak numbers were lower than stock? And the numbers under the curve aren't much better. Ouch...

undrgnd

iTrader: (2)

Something's major wrong with these curves. Did you not take it to 7K with the spacer? It looks like the RPMs are way off for the 'after' dyno? No way your horsepower 'died' like that at 6800. I've seen other dynos of MREV2, and none of them fell flat - 5hp max, but yours looks totally hosed. I think you need to work on those Excel charts.

davidv

iTrader: (2)

Thanks for taking the time to post the charts.

Hydrazine

iTrader: (53)

Its always best to do comparative pre/post testing on the same day. Results can easily swing 5-10 HP even the following day. The dyno cannot account for changes the ecu makes based on gasoline quality, oil temperature, coolant temperature, gasoline temperature, air temperature and so on.

Attached is a pre/post plot of the exact same car with the exact same everything. The only difference is that the baseline was done in the morning and the post dyno was done the following day in the afternoon.

The only real variable here was air temperatures effect on the ECU.

After seeing enough variability like this, I installed a Fcon on my NA Z simply so I could get better repeatability for test purposes.

TreeZ

iTrader: (23)

well, i think the car was let off in the higher RPMs. i don't blame the parts for that, and i was more worried about the meat of the curve anyway.
the excel charts are using the numbers from the dyno printout.

Tony offered to pay for the pre/post dyno but under condition that the pulls were done on the same day without removing the car from the dyno. i couldn't pull that off, so i just went ahead and did it.
Even though the graphs don't really show that much gains, i'm very happy with the real world results.

P.S. the only relevant mod i had before this was a set of Labree test pipes.

BakaN20

iTrader: (26)

Nice ride, looks really good! You had your test pipes for both dynos?

Edit: I am going to be around MRC's location for a couple days, hopefully I can get a time slot in to get the dynos done for tony. I'll even try to get videos of the dynos, someone said it makes the car sound like a v8, lol.

TreeZ

iTrader: (23)

thanks!! yeah, my test pipes were on for both runs.
i'm looking forward to your numbers with a more controlled test, good luck!
oh, and the sound is noticably deeper

Mazinger Z

iTrader: (49)

Is this on a rev up or non rev up, thx for posting btw.

undrgnd

iTrader: (2)

Could someone with good dyno expertise please explain the dyno parameters? I would like to understand what is going on here.

It appears that there are significant differences in environmental variables. For example, the 'post' dyno shows an atmospheric pressure of 101 KPa, or about 14.64 psi, which sounds right. The 'pre' dyno shows atmospheric as 47.35 inHG, or about 160 KPa, which is equivalent to 23.25 psi. WTF? This throws off the relative air density for the pre, which could have a significant effect on the calculated engine horsepower and torque.

Unit converter

TreeZ

iTrader: (23)

i would like to know as well.

oh, and its a rev-up bugsbbunny

Hydrazine

iTrader: (53)

Wow! Good find undrgnd. I didn't stop to look at the test conditions in the data columns.

The first set of test conditions, shown in the bottom left, are completely anomolous.

Negative vapor pressure?
Negative humidity?
157% air density?
Impossibly high barometric pressure?

If SAE corrections are applied to pyhsically impossible test conditions, the corrections can't be reliable.

----

TreeZ,

I would ask the Dyno operator what happened. He may have had some kind of hardware malfunction.

RBlover69

iTrader: (2)

Damn...yea something looks wrong with the dyno..i never heard of dynomite....well except for the saying DYNOoooooooooomite lol. Yea..im awaiting the results on a dyno jet or mrcs. Something looks funny on this dyno.

showtypeZ

iTrader: (8)

so would the MREV2 and a 5/16" spacer be the best for an '06 revup or just a different upper plenum be better? I'm trying to follow what's going on up above, but I don't know if ALL are on the RevUp engine or not. I'm staying NA for now. I HAD a Kinetix V+, but I want to do a different route, but with positive gains still. I wanted an SSV, but from what I've been reading on my350Z.com....everyone is saying its crap unless you're FI. So someone with some true knowledge and possibly proof...what's the best option for plenums?

undrgnd

iTrader: (2)

A spacer or any aftermarket plenum will have similar gains. There is plenty of proof referenced on the MD web site. The APS plenum was tested by someone long ago, and it showed enough gains for me to buy it. For the money, you can't beat the spacer.

RBlover69

iTrader: (2)

i have never heard that its crap, ..unless your following the drama that is happening in the rebel vs motordyne thread , but how can something that yields excellent tq gains be bad.

the mrev2 with the 5/16 proved to increase mid range power with a slight sacrifice of top end. So far its proven time after time for the price to be the best solution for the VQ35DER or revup motor .

The 1/2 spacer with the mrev2 showed improved gains over stock but with more emphasis to the top end being enchanced and the mid range not as peak as the 5/16.

I never seen what a aps tall boy plenum does for a revup motor.

And i am also waiting for some other independant reviews on before after dynos on the revup aswell. Because dynos like this threads dont really show what we expected but it looks like something was funny with conditions or some calibration.

13SECZ

iTrader: (4)

I have very similar mods and i hate the way my Hp falls off on top...I have a rev up...

I am looking into other solutions to where I dont lose that middle tq or at least not all of it and am able to make some ponys up top..at least equal or a bit more to my current state....