Z/G Meet & Dyno Day @ Drift Office Sun. 1/20
#202
Originally Posted by jining
I believe my sae corrected was 402/380ish... I think off the top of my head... Somewhat lower then my previous 410/400 that I did on the dyno authority mustang dyno, but that was uncorrected I believe.
I dynoed at 326whp/380wtq on low oil. So i'll re-dyno soon.
I was expecting higher numbers, but every 335 there dynoed around 330whp.
#203
Originally Posted by Pete's 03SVT
Hey everyone, I just wanted to say thanks to everyone for letting my lonely Cobra take part in your meet today. Everyone seems really cool and I hope that I can tag along with Romi to some more meets in the future. Maybe by then I will have my tune dialed in so I'll be making the #'s I should be...
-Pete
-Pete
#204
I heard Drew turned up the boost on his third pull to get 412... Cheaterrr!! :-D
Seriously though, our cars were extremely similar im very surprised.. well i guess it would make sense since we have pretty much the EXACT same setup down to the injector size and brand lol.. at around 8ish psi we made within 2hp basically lol
Seriously though, our cars were extremely similar im very surprised.. well i guess it would make sense since we have pretty much the EXACT same setup down to the injector size and brand lol.. at around 8ish psi we made within 2hp basically lol
Last edited by jining; 01-21-2008 at 10:16 AM.
#205
Originally Posted by Fusion
Nice numbers!
I dynoed at 326whp/380wtq on low oil. So i'll re-dyno soon.
I was expecting higher numbers, but every 335 there dynoed around 330whp.
I dynoed at 326whp/380wtq on low oil. So i'll re-dyno soon.
I was expecting higher numbers, but every 335 there dynoed around 330whp.
#206
Originally Posted by Drewer
Yeah. . .you're piddly 475 ft-lbs and 420 HP were pretty sad.
#207
Originally Posted by DrVolkl
I just realized that this .95 SAE correction is what's messing me up.
A lot of dyno's just leave it at 1...so basically take your # and divide it by .95 to get an idea of what other people may "say" they got.
This gives me 266hp and 200tq, which is exactly what I was expecting. So I guess my mods are working just fine.
If I'm screwing this concept up, someone please chime in.
A lot of dyno's just leave it at 1...so basically take your # and divide it by .95 to get an idea of what other people may "say" they got.
This gives me 266hp and 200tq, which is exactly what I was expecting. So I guess my mods are working just fine.
If I'm screwing this concept up, someone please chime in.
#208
Hey, what's happen'n guys. I'm a day late, but just wanted to say thanks to Patrick for setting the dyno day. To Flea7, thanks for taking a bad pic of me and posting it lol. I'll get you back for that one. BTW, nice meeting all the guys yesterday.
#211
Originally Posted by icedoutis
if i do that, i get the numbers i thought i should be making...433rwhp
But it seems more "right" to me. Like the guy with the G37 was hoping for 280, and if you use my method, he's at 284...
(And with my car, puts me right where about 100 other people with my mods are...so that makes more sense to me)
Overall, doesn't matter, as long as we use the same .95 SAE each time, I know what's working and what isn't...just not as good to brag with! haha
#213
Correction factor stuff. . .and a LOT of random dyno thoughts
I don't mean to be a complete tard, but what does a "95%" correction factor supposedly correct for? I mean specifically, how is the value 95 chosen? Is it a generic means for accounting for pressure, temp, humidity, O2 partial pressure, etc? Isn't correction merely supposed to keep all (same brand) dyno's standardized? Huh. . .
I'm bored, and thinking about all the different dyno's I've done. All dynos were with the following mods:
1/2" motordyne spacer, borla exhaust, z-tube, pop charger, and tuned/flashed by Tadashi at technosquare. (see this post for my dyno "log."
Just doing some scratchpad math, a decent shape '03 5AT VQ (280bhp/270btq) should put 218whp and 210wtq (22% driveline loss).
So, comparatively, all are on Dynojets:
Dyno 1, Costa Mesa, CA, June 4th, 2004, ~50,000 miles, 2 weeks after install of all mods above, 3rd gear, let off at 6600 RPM, tank o' 91octane:
run 1: 245 HP, 221 TQ, Temp ~75*F, Baro 29.91
run 2: 247 HP, 224 TQ, Temp ~76*F, Baro 29.91
run 3: 248.5HP, 227 TQ, Temp ~76*F, Baro 29.92
Dyno 2, Lake Forest, CA, June 5th, 2005, ~65,000 miles, same mods, 3rd gear, let off at 6600RPM (6 gal. 100 octane, ~2 gal. 91 octane, ~97.75 effective?):
run 1: 211 HP, 195 TQ, Temp ~88*F, Baro 29.66
run 2: 217 HP, 197 TQ, Temp ~88*F, Baro 29.66
run 3: 215 HP, 196 TQ, Temp ~88*F, Baro 29.65
Dyno 3, Auburn , WA, January 20th, 2007, ~111,000 miles, same mods, 3rd gear, 4th gear, 4th gear, let off at 6600RPM, 3/4tank of 76 brand 92 octane:
run1: 222.53 HP, 212.81 TQ, 53.81*F, 30.16", 42% humidity, SAE 0.95 (234.24 HP, 224.01 TQ STD)
run2: 218.07 HP, 211.57 TQ, 54.03*F, 30.16", 42% humidity, SAE 0.95 (229.54 HP, 222.70 TQ STD)
run3: 227.77 HP, 221.21 TQ, 54.75*F, 30.16", 42% humidity, SAE 0.95 (239.76 HP, 232.85 TQ STD)
I'm pretty sure the dyno 1 or dyno 2 guys didn't use any STD/SAE correction factor, but I'm also sure the dyno 2 guys didn't know jack about their own dyno. Taking the average of the dyno 3 (needs oil change, cleaned air filter, probably shoulda done an ECU reset considering all the granny driving I'd been doing, just to see) and comparing it to the freshly tuned dyno 1 leads me to believe that my VQ is holding up pretty well over time. I'm going to do a compression and leakdown check prior to my vortech install, so I'll let everyone know how it goes.
Carry on, gentlemen.
I'm bored, and thinking about all the different dyno's I've done. All dynos were with the following mods:
1/2" motordyne spacer, borla exhaust, z-tube, pop charger, and tuned/flashed by Tadashi at technosquare. (see this post for my dyno "log."
Just doing some scratchpad math, a decent shape '03 5AT VQ (280bhp/270btq) should put 218whp and 210wtq (22% driveline loss).
So, comparatively, all are on Dynojets:
Dyno 1, Costa Mesa, CA, June 4th, 2004, ~50,000 miles, 2 weeks after install of all mods above, 3rd gear, let off at 6600 RPM, tank o' 91octane:
run 1: 245 HP, 221 TQ, Temp ~75*F, Baro 29.91
run 2: 247 HP, 224 TQ, Temp ~76*F, Baro 29.91
run 3: 248.5HP, 227 TQ, Temp ~76*F, Baro 29.92
Dyno 2, Lake Forest, CA, June 5th, 2005, ~65,000 miles, same mods, 3rd gear, let off at 6600RPM (6 gal. 100 octane, ~2 gal. 91 octane, ~97.75 effective?):
run 1: 211 HP, 195 TQ, Temp ~88*F, Baro 29.66
run 2: 217 HP, 197 TQ, Temp ~88*F, Baro 29.66
run 3: 215 HP, 196 TQ, Temp ~88*F, Baro 29.65
Dyno 3, Auburn , WA, January 20th, 2007, ~111,000 miles, same mods, 3rd gear, 4th gear, 4th gear, let off at 6600RPM, 3/4tank of 76 brand 92 octane:
run1: 222.53 HP, 212.81 TQ, 53.81*F, 30.16", 42% humidity, SAE 0.95 (234.24 HP, 224.01 TQ STD)
run2: 218.07 HP, 211.57 TQ, 54.03*F, 30.16", 42% humidity, SAE 0.95 (229.54 HP, 222.70 TQ STD)
run3: 227.77 HP, 221.21 TQ, 54.75*F, 30.16", 42% humidity, SAE 0.95 (239.76 HP, 232.85 TQ STD)
I'm pretty sure the dyno 1 or dyno 2 guys didn't use any STD/SAE correction factor, but I'm also sure the dyno 2 guys didn't know jack about their own dyno. Taking the average of the dyno 3 (needs oil change, cleaned air filter, probably shoulda done an ECU reset considering all the granny driving I'd been doing, just to see) and comparing it to the freshly tuned dyno 1 leads me to believe that my VQ is holding up pretty well over time. I'm going to do a compression and leakdown check prior to my vortech install, so I'll let everyone know how it goes.
Carry on, gentlemen.
#214
Originally Posted by Drewer
I don't mean to be a complete tard, but what does a "95%" correction factor supposedly correct for? I mean specifically, how is the value 95 chosen? Is it a generic means for accounting for pressure, temp, humidity, O2 partial pressure, etc? Isn't correction merely supposed to keep all (same brand) dyno's standardized? Huh. . .
#220
Originally Posted by first350
doesn't sound like it