early dyno results
03-18-2011, 02:41 PM
#556
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Lake Tahoe, Ca
Posts: 749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congrats on the build & engineering,
I also would be interested in the oiling fix kit. Are you going to make one for after market sale? Put me down for one.
I also would be interested in the oiling fix kit. Are you going to make one for after market sale? Put me down for one.
03-18-2011, 03:09 PM
#557
Rennlist Member
certainly true for the tail pipe reading, but the in header sensor, its pretty accurate. the problem is that its an average of all 4 cylinders, sometimes not even measuring the other side of the engine. It is extremely fast, but there is no stabilization, but then again, its real life too. thats how cars accelerate. I would rather have one tuned for the dyno than just stedy state , unless the steady state carries over to rolling through the RPM at a fast pace. (unless thats how you run your car.... only at bonneville. 
)
we found that the tail pipe reading was about .5 point leaner than actual, plus, those things need to be calibrated too! going WOT, with no 02 is fine too. no change in power. it truely is open loop.
)we found that the tail pipe reading was about .5 point leaner than actual, plus, those things need to be calibrated too! going WOT, with no 02 is fine too. no change in power. it truely is open loop.
I've found that you have to be very careful with dyno fuel mixtures readings. The engine passes so quickly through those numbers that the readings are not necessarily accurate. Those A/F numbers that are in the 10's and 11's are actually about 12.5-13.0, if you go to those individual cells and hold the power steady.
Same thing happens when I tune on my Mustang Chassis Dyno. I'm able to hold things longer and more accurately tune an "individual point". If we go from the Mustang over to a DynoJet, the dynojet guy will always "freak" out at how far off the mixtures are.
I've found a Dynojet just a bit better than nothing, when it comes to tuning A/F mixtures...nothing has enough time to stabilize, when the engine sweeps so quickly through an RPM range.
Same thing happens when I tune on my Mustang Chassis Dyno. I'm able to hold things longer and more accurately tune an "individual point". If we go from the Mustang over to a DynoJet, the dynojet guy will always "freak" out at how far off the mixtures are.
I've found a Dynojet just a bit better than nothing, when it comes to tuning A/F mixtures...nothing has enough time to stabilize, when the engine sweeps so quickly through an RPM range.
03-18-2011, 03:17 PM
#558
I understand the fix was to replace the Oil with Aunt Jemima Pancake syrup. Then with routing the Oil plumbing thro the passenger quater window, down through the drivers legs and out through the rear window and vented with a large funnel. With the air travelling past this funnel the air pressure difference created vacuum within the Cylinder heads and stopped the oil from exiting from the Oil containers still left on the auto parts shelves. The only draw back at present which I understand Greg is in the middle of heavy negiotations, is the need to stop at every International House of Pancakes to full up on engine fluids. He is standing strong trying to make a deal with IHOP that all 928 owners will buy at least 50 gallons of syrup per year and in return all will get a free happy face pancake per month. Lets all get behind this very important deal and show our support and picket every IHOP this weekend to support Gregs endeavour.
03-18-2011, 03:28 PM
#559
Former Sponsor
We are going to make a kit. Andy's "system" was a prototype version and works great. It is a bit "complex/combersome" for anything that has a stock style intake system. Measurements of what was going on, with the oil, revealed no weaknesses in what we created, but did indicate where we could make it less complex.
We will be doing a system for Rob Edward's car, in the next few weeks, with the changes to make it less complex. Then we will have a reasonable kit.
You, because of what you use your car for and how it gets driven, will be #1 on my list. I assume that you do "routine" rod bearing inspections, every year. I'd encourage you to take the pan off and do this, before you make any changes. We wouldn't want to "cure" a problem, only to have "old damage" spoil an engine.
03-18-2011, 05:10 PM
#561
Former Sponsor
Yes. Good idea. If you get to the point where you need to move forward, I could modify a pan and you could go ahead and bolt that on...what we are doing there isn't going to change.
03-18-2011, 05:19 PM
#562
Rest in Peace
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bird lover in Sharpsburg
Posts: 9,903
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I would find that funny if it did not hit so close to home.
Or get our kit of "Metric Oil Pan Wingnuts"......I developed them, specifically for this engine....I'm actually not sure I know how many times the oil pan has been off, on this engine. Rob Edwards walked in one day...I'd just put the thing back on...and he pointed out an obvious problem with A/C conflict. I looked at him, drooped my head, and began to remove the pan.
Yes. Good idea. If you get to the point where you need to move forward, I could modify a pan and you could go ahead and bolt that on...what we are doing there isn't going to change.
Yes. Good idea. If you get to the point where you need to move forward, I could modify a pan and you could go ahead and bolt that on...what we are doing there isn't going to change.
03-18-2011, 05:31 PM
#564
Former Sponsor
certainly true for the tail pipe reading, but the in header sensor, its pretty accurate. the problem is that its an average of all 4 cylinders, sometimes not even measuring the other side of the engine. It is extremely fast, but there is no stabilization, but then again, its real life too. thats how cars accelerate. I would rather have one tuned for the dyno than just stedy state , unless the steady state carries over to rolling through the RPM at a fast pace. (unless thats how you run your car.... only at bonneville. )
)Our readings are obviously taken through the headers, while on the engine dyno. When I asked about those readings, before, both the dyno operator and the programmer said the same thing, instantly: that the engine moved through the rpms so quickly that those readings were inaccurate.
I thought about this, some, since the first time I saw this (not on this engine, not on this dyno session....this is not my first dance.)
I've found that while Sharktuning, I can get the midrange of the engine so lean that it "pings" while accelerating through. I've found that if I set my "target" mixtures richer, the problem will go away.
We did go back, on this engine, and recheck steady state at a bunch of points.
Mixtures seem fine and the peak torque is highest, set the way it is. I really can't see the point of leaning it down, so that some gauge reads "better". What happens when he drives up the Grapevine in the 4,500 rpm range at constant throttle and decides to pass someone, giving it full throttle, without downshifting?
Seems like your way might make holes in pistons.
03-18-2011, 05:56 PM
#565
Rennlist Member
not true, in my case either as Ive raced my engine more than andersons and still no holes! the proof is in the plugs an in the cylinderheads and pistons when disassembled. they looked exactly like they should for an engine with 110 race days, and 30,000 street miles. Also, you dont think i was going up the grapevine to see anderson before the RA race, and didnt floor it a bunch of times from 4500rpm??? no pinging
with my new engine, 2 years later. no holes as well, and fuel air readings from the dyno show it to be 11:1. WOT operation shows it to be fat with the look of the plugs, but not dangerously fat. lots of black stuff, but at the track , things look pretty clean, just on the darker side than before.
To your point, i wouldnt tune to be accurate with the 02 sensor bung and dyno runs, but certainly with a little saftey margin built in, its fine. Now, i dont agree with your operator. we had a scope on the 02 sensor, and its readings are almost immediate, and I havent heard any reason other than intuitiveness that shows why that wouldnt be true. think about it, it hunts full rich to full lean 10 times a second. its responding very quickly. test it with fuel cut off switch vs no fuel cut off switch and same kind of results.
I think what you are saying is that you set your target AFRs a little richer and that is probably for saftey without hurting performance too much.
Im sure there is some lurking power because my engine is just safe and fat, but it sure beats the chance that if I was on the hairy edge and something went a little off, that i burned those holes in the pistons you talk about!
again, if i wanted to test my theory, i could. you know you can just ride the brakes at full throttle and keep a steady rpm very easily at WOT. next time I dyno, ill do this and see if the AFR changes at that rpm for a 5 second hold of WOT rpm. This will verify your "dyno operator's " theory.
if it doesnt change vs the dynamic run, than that claim is bs, right?
Mark
the proof is in the plugs an in the cylinderheads and pistons when disassembled. they looked exactly like they should for an engine with 110 race days, and 30,000 street miles. Also, you dont think i was going up the grapevine to see anderson before the RA race, and didnt floor it a bunch of times from 4500rpm??? no pingingwith my new engine, 2 years later. no holes as well, and fuel air readings from the dyno show it to be 11:1. WOT operation shows it to be fat with the look of the plugs, but not dangerously fat. lots of black stuff, but at the track , things look pretty clean, just on the darker side than before.
To your point, i wouldnt tune to be accurate with the 02 sensor bung and dyno runs, but certainly with a little saftey margin built in, its fine. Now, i dont agree with your operator. we had a scope on the 02 sensor, and its readings are almost immediate, and I havent heard any reason other than intuitiveness that shows why that wouldnt be true. think about it, it hunts full rich to full lean 10 times a second. its responding very quickly. test it with fuel cut off switch vs no fuel cut off switch and same kind of results.
I think what you are saying is that you set your target AFRs a little richer and that is probably for saftey without hurting performance too much.
Im sure there is some lurking power because my engine is just safe and fat, but it sure beats the chance that if I was on the hairy edge and something went a little off, that i burned those holes in the pistons you talk about!
again, if i wanted to test my theory, i could. you know you can just ride the brakes at full throttle and keep a steady rpm very easily at WOT. next time I dyno, ill do this and see if the AFR changes at that rpm for a 5 second hold of WOT rpm. This will verify your "dyno operator's " theory.
if it doesnt change vs the dynamic run, than that claim is bs, right?
Mark
Not true in this case, from what I've seen.
Our readings are obviously taken through the headers, while on the engine dyno. When I asked about those readings, before, both the dyno operator and the programmer said the same thing, instantly: that the engine moved through the rpms so quickly that those readings were inaccurate.
I thought about this, some, since the first time I saw this (not on this engine, not on this dyno session....this is not my first dance.)
I've found that while Sharktuning, I can get the midrange of the engine so lean that it "pings" while accelerating through. I've found that if I set my "target" mixtures richer, the problem will go away.
We did go back, on this engine, and recheck steady state at a bunch of points.
Mixtures seem fine and the peak torque is highest, set the way it is. I really can't see the point of leaning it down, so that some gauge reads "better". What happens when he drives up the Grapevine in the 4,500 rpm range at constant throttle and decides to pass someone, giving it full throttle, without downshifting?
Seems like your way might make holes in pistons.
Our readings are obviously taken through the headers, while on the engine dyno. When I asked about those readings, before, both the dyno operator and the programmer said the same thing, instantly: that the engine moved through the rpms so quickly that those readings were inaccurate.
I thought about this, some, since the first time I saw this (not on this engine, not on this dyno session....this is not my first dance.)
I've found that while Sharktuning, I can get the midrange of the engine so lean that it "pings" while accelerating through. I've found that if I set my "target" mixtures richer, the problem will go away.
We did go back, on this engine, and recheck steady state at a bunch of points.
Mixtures seem fine and the peak torque is highest, set the way it is. I really can't see the point of leaning it down, so that some gauge reads "better". What happens when he drives up the Grapevine in the 4,500 rpm range at constant throttle and decides to pass someone, giving it full throttle, without downshifting?
Seems like your way might make holes in pistons.
03-18-2011, 06:22 PM
#566
Rennlist Member
you know you can just ride the brakes at full throttle and keep a steady rpm very easily at WOT.
03-18-2011, 06:31 PM
#567
Former Sponsor
not true, in my case either as Ive raced my engine more than andersons and still no holes! the proof is in the plugs an in the cylinderheads and pistons when disassembled. they looked exactly like they should for an engine with 110 race days, and 30,000 street miles. Also, you dont think i was going up the grapevine to see anderson before the RA race, and didnt floor it a bunch of times from 4500rpm??? no pinging
with my new engine, 2 years later. no holes as well, and fuel air readings from the dyno show it to be 11:1. WOT operation shows it to be fat with the look of the plugs, but not dangerously fat. lots of black stuff, but at the track , things look pretty clean, just on the darker side than before.
To your point, i wouldnt tune to be accurate with the 02 sensor bung and dyno runs, but certainly with a little saftey margin built in, its fine. Now, i dont agree with your operator. we had a scope on the 02 sensor, and its readings are almost immediate, and I havent heard any reason other than intuitiveness that shows why that wouldnt be true. think about it, it hunts full rich to full lean 10 times a second. its responding very quickly. test it with fuel cut off switch vs no fuel cut off switch and same kind of results.
I think what you are saying is that you set your target AFRs a little richer and that is probably for saftey without hurting performance too much.
Im sure there is some lurking power because my engine is just safe and fat, but it sure beats the chance that if I was on the hairy edge and something went a little off, that i burned those holes in the pistons you talk about!
again, if i wanted to test my theory, i could. you know you can just ride the brakes at full throttle and keep a steady rpm very easily at WOT. next time I dyno, ill do this and see if the AFR changes at that rpm for a 5 second hold of WOT rpm. This will verify your "dyno operator's " theory.
if it doesnt change vs the dynamic run, than that claim is bs, right?
Mark
the proof is in the plugs an in the cylinderheads and pistons when disassembled. they looked exactly like they should for an engine with 110 race days, and 30,000 street miles. Also, you dont think i was going up the grapevine to see anderson before the RA race, and didnt floor it a bunch of times from 4500rpm??? no pingingwith my new engine, 2 years later. no holes as well, and fuel air readings from the dyno show it to be 11:1. WOT operation shows it to be fat with the look of the plugs, but not dangerously fat. lots of black stuff, but at the track , things look pretty clean, just on the darker side than before.
To your point, i wouldnt tune to be accurate with the 02 sensor bung and dyno runs, but certainly with a little saftey margin built in, its fine. Now, i dont agree with your operator. we had a scope on the 02 sensor, and its readings are almost immediate, and I havent heard any reason other than intuitiveness that shows why that wouldnt be true. think about it, it hunts full rich to full lean 10 times a second. its responding very quickly. test it with fuel cut off switch vs no fuel cut off switch and same kind of results.
I think what you are saying is that you set your target AFRs a little richer and that is probably for saftey without hurting performance too much.
Im sure there is some lurking power because my engine is just safe and fat, but it sure beats the chance that if I was on the hairy edge and something went a little off, that i burned those holes in the pistons you talk about!
again, if i wanted to test my theory, i could. you know you can just ride the brakes at full throttle and keep a steady rpm very easily at WOT. next time I dyno, ill do this and see if the AFR changes at that rpm for a 5 second hold of WOT rpm. This will verify your "dyno operator's " theory.
if it doesnt change vs the dynamic run, than that claim is bs, right?
Mark
Forgive me, but I'm not going to go over and even discuss this with the owner of the DTS dyno, who's done literally thousands of race engines, and tell him that he is wrong about how his $250,000 dollars worth of equipment works...because Mark Kibort says so.
I'm also not going to change this engine....you might note that there isn't a big lack of torque, nor are there any obvious torque "peaks or valleys", in the rpm range where you think the engine is rich.
03-18-2011, 06:38 PM
#568
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Lake Tahoe, Ca
Posts: 749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tim:
We are going to make a kit. Andy's "system" was a prototype version and works great. It is a bit "complex/combersome" for anything that has a stock style intake system. Measurements of what was going on, with the oil, revealed no weaknesses in what we created, but did indicate where we could make it less complex.
We will be doing a system for Rob Edward's car, in the next few weeks, with the changes to make it less complex. Then we will have a reasonable kit.
You, because of what you use your car for and how it gets driven, will be #1 on my list. I assume that you do "routine" rod bearing inspections, every year. I'd encourage you to take the pan off and do this, before you make any changes. We wouldn't want to "cure" a problem, only to have "old damage" spoil an engine.
We are going to make a kit. Andy's "system" was a prototype version and works great. It is a bit "complex/combersome" for anything that has a stock style intake system. Measurements of what was going on, with the oil, revealed no weaknesses in what we created, but did indicate where we could make it less complex.
We will be doing a system for Rob Edward's car, in the next few weeks, with the changes to make it less complex. Then we will have a reasonable kit.
You, because of what you use your car for and how it gets driven, will be #1 on my list. I assume that you do "routine" rod bearing inspections, every year. I'd encourage you to take the pan off and do this, before you make any changes. We wouldn't want to "cure" a problem, only to have "old damage" spoil an engine.
Bearing were good in the fall race and I will check them after the race in May.
Thanks
03-18-2011, 06:54 PM
#569
Rennlist Member
Greg,
Com'mon, you know what I'm saying. By the way, there are a lot of guys with $250,000 pieces of equipment that dont know what they are doing with them, or at least dont know how they work.
My point is ONLY this. he says there is a lag in response. Im GUESSING that there isnt. I can prove this on the dyno by doing a run and then doing a run that freezes the rpm climb to steady state. would that satisfy your curiousity?
btw, i never said the engine was rich.
Now, the real question is how long did you accelerate through the RPM?
when I do a dyno in 4th on a 248e, it takes about 7 seconds
what kind of "lag" did they see for running though the RPM range?
Again, I can do the test too. its not rocket science. Ill run it on the dyno through a 7 second pull. then do another and hold it at 4500rpm forexample.
Im not saying, by any streatch you are doing it wrong, or your tune is not safe and accurate, Im saying that accelerating dyno could still work, but not give the fine tuning you provide. mine is a shotgun kill for safety. I have no idea how much tune would help my engine. I suspect, quite a lot, since the only think i did was make it safe.
Com'mon, you know what I'm saying. By the way, there are a lot of guys with $250,000 pieces of equipment that dont know what they are doing with them, or at least dont know how they work.
My point is ONLY this. he says there is a lag in response. Im GUESSING that there isnt. I can prove this on the dyno by doing a run and then doing a run that freezes the rpm climb to steady state. would that satisfy your curiousity?
btw, i never said the engine was rich.
Now, the real question is how long did you accelerate through the RPM?
when I do a dyno in 4th on a 248e, it takes about 7 seconds
what kind of "lag" did they see for running though the RPM range?
Again, I can do the test too. its not rocket science. Ill run it on the dyno through a 7 second pull. then do another and hold it at 4500rpm forexample.
Im not saying, by any streatch you are doing it wrong, or your tune is not safe and accurate, Im saying that accelerating dyno could still work, but not give the fine tuning you provide. mine is a shotgun kill for safety. I have no idea how much tune would help my engine. I suspect, quite a lot, since the only think i did was make it safe.
I'm going to bow to your superior knowledge/experience here....
Forgive me, but I'm not going to go over and even discuss this with the owner of the DTS dyno, who's done literally thousands of race engines, and tell him that he is wrong about how his $250,000 dollars worth of equipment works...because Mark Kibort says so.
I'm also not going to change this engine....you might note that there isn't a big lack of torque, nor are there any obvious torque "peaks or valleys", in the rpm range where you think the engine is rich.
Forgive me, but I'm not going to go over and even discuss this with the owner of the DTS dyno, who's done literally thousands of race engines, and tell him that he is wrong about how his $250,000 dollars worth of equipment works...because Mark Kibort says so.
I'm also not going to change this engine....you might note that there isn't a big lack of torque, nor are there any obvious torque "peaks or valleys", in the rpm range where you think the engine is rich.
Last edited by mark kibort; 03-18-2011 at 07:11 PM.
03-18-2011, 06:57 PM
#570
Rennlist Member
Just dont tell greg this, you migh embarrass him for not knowing a simple way to do static tuning on the dyno.
(Greg, im joking, so dont get your panties in a knot)Oh, to his defence, not that he needs any, if you did his level of tune on the dyno, you would need a bunch of rear brake pads and a fire extiquisher too!