Re: 928 going to the dyno on 11-20-03 1:15pm and we are testing the eRAM too
11-18-2003, 08:21 PM
#1
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Re: 928 going to the dyno on 11-20-03 1:15pm and we are testing the eRAM too
Going to the dyno with the 82 race car and the new euro intake on Thursday, at 1:25pm at Mustang Ranch on el camino in Santa Clara , Ca
we will also be tesing the eRAM electric supercharger as well as the e-charger on a 911 3.2 liter
anyone in the area is welcome to stop on by
email me if you have any questions or need directions.
mkibort@compuserve.com
MK
we will also be tesing the eRAM electric supercharger as well as the e-charger on a 911 3.2 liter
anyone in the area is welcome to stop on by
email me if you have any questions or need directions.
mkibort@compuserve.com
MK
11-18-2003, 08:35 PM
#2
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mansfield, TX
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can not wait to see what you find on the eRAM. I'm on the edge of my seat to hear this. Hoping for good news and I'll be adding that soon.
One on each side on the 928???? Hmmm.
One on each side on the 928???? Hmmm.
11-19-2003, 08:26 PM
#4
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
yes, we are on for 1:30 tomorrow. quite a stir on the pelican parts 911 list. those guys are brutal. if the eRAM doesnt perform as usual, Im in trouble.
big day planned. the gold Weissach 82 with euro intake, and an 83 911 and an 84 911 all going dynoing tomorrow!!!!
MK
big day planned. the gold Weissach 82 with euro intake, and an 83 911 and an 84 911 all going dynoing tomorrow!!!!
MK
11-24-2003, 03:56 PM
#7
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
It worked as expected, given scots electrical situation. battery dead. almost didnt make the appoinment. had to jump the car to even get it on the dyno. looks like the eRAM worked as the torque went up 10ftlbs from 3000 to 4500rpm after that, the mixuture went dangerously lean and the power remained constant.
so, im posting not to boast about the eRAM performance , but to warn that the euro intake can make enough extra hp to tax the fuel system. I didnt see this problem, as my tests with my 4.7, i ran a dyno run with out the eRAM and fuel regs, but no fuel ratio tuning. got 230hp. went to sacremento for a tuning session and installed the fuel regs., got 236hp and the fuel was good 13.5. tuned to 12.5 :1 and the eRAMs and gained hp up to 242hp,, and I forget the torque gains.
anyway, is the fuel regs seem to be a nessasary adder with the euro intake. now, the other possibilty,is that the volage running so low, its possible that the afm voltage to the ecu could have shorten the duration of the injectors, unless there is some type of regulation of that voltage, independent of the system voltage. Ive measured the AFM voltage with engine not running vs running and full positon voltage can be 1 volt different.
anway, we will be back to the dyno to test more.
mk
so, im posting not to boast about the eRAM performance , but to warn that the euro intake can make enough extra hp to tax the fuel system. I didnt see this problem, as my tests with my 4.7, i ran a dyno run with out the eRAM and fuel regs, but no fuel ratio tuning. got 230hp. went to sacremento for a tuning session and installed the fuel regs., got 236hp and the fuel was good 13.5. tuned to 12.5 :1 and the eRAMs and gained hp up to 242hp,, and I forget the torque gains.
anyway, is the fuel regs seem to be a nessasary adder with the euro intake. now, the other possibilty,is that the volage running so low, its possible that the afm voltage to the ecu could have shorten the duration of the injectors, unless there is some type of regulation of that voltage, independent of the system voltage. Ive measured the AFM voltage with engine not running vs running and full positon voltage can be 1 volt different.
anway, we will be back to the dyno to test more.
mk
Originally posted by Tony
Well, MArk is usually pretty quick on the keyboard to post times and results etc. Makes you wonder huh!!
Well, MArk is usually pretty quick on the keyboard to post times and results etc. Makes you wonder huh!!
Trending Topics
11-24-2003, 04:07 PM
#9
Addict
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Green Bay Wisconsin
Posts: 951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting. Usually when the air/fuel gets leaner the HP and TQ go significantly down. In this case the power went up. Hmmnnn?
I'm assuming this was the 911 dyno sheet? It says "baseline" on the dyno sheet, is this with the eram?
I'm assuming this was the 911 dyno sheet? It says "baseline" on the dyno sheet, is this with the eram?
11-24-2003, 04:43 PM
#10
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
no, this was the 928 sheet.
air fuel went very lean, hp was close to the same as baseline (and I have 3 baseline runs mirror image of each other, even fuel to air )
then, the hp is constant, even though the mixuture went way lean!!! 16:1!!
now, its my contention to say that if not for an eRAM on this lean system, we would have seen a BIG drop in HP as you go this lean. it is common knowledge that as you go lean, you see bigger drops in HP than if you go rich of stoich. (ie 14.7:1)
we also had only 10volts on the eRAM, where normally, the voltage is min 13.5 to 14 depending on the car. (even my older 928s)
Mk
air fuel went very lean, hp was close to the same as baseline (and I have 3 baseline runs mirror image of each other, even fuel to air )
then, the hp is constant, even though the mixuture went way lean!!! 16:1!!
now, its my contention to say that if not for an eRAM on this lean system, we would have seen a BIG drop in HP as you go this lean. it is common knowledge that as you go lean, you see bigger drops in HP than if you go rich of stoich. (ie 14.7:1)
we also had only 10volts on the eRAM, where normally, the voltage is min 13.5 to 14 depending on the car. (even my older 928s)
Mk
Originally posted by Tim Murphy
Interesting. Usually when the air/fuel gets leaner the HP and TQ go significantly down. In this case the power went up. Hmmnnn?
I'm assuming this was the 911 dyno sheet? It says "baseline" on the dyno sheet, is this with the eram?
Interesting. Usually when the air/fuel gets leaner the HP and TQ go significantly down. In this case the power went up. Hmmnnn?
I'm assuming this was the 911 dyno sheet? It says "baseline" on the dyno sheet, is this with the eram?
11-24-2003, 05:12 PM
#11
Rennlist Member
Mark,
In order to evaluate a gain, any gain, the two curves must be very close to each other with and without the modification.
For example, we are about to go into a testing session using a different manifold, We will baseline iwth a specific fuel curve, add the manifold, then get back that specific fuel curve. Otherwise, the results are invalid. If we change the fule curves, then the test is invalid.
Also, when we get lean, we get higher HP, up to about 14.0 +/-.2 in a 4 valve.
A littel richer for a two valve make a bit more power.
Marc
DEVEK
In order to evaluate a gain, any gain, the two curves must be very close to each other with and without the modification.
For example, we are about to go into a testing session using a different manifold, We will baseline iwth a specific fuel curve, add the manifold, then get back that specific fuel curve. Otherwise, the results are invalid. If we change the fule curves, then the test is invalid.
Also, when we get lean, we get higher HP, up to about 14.0 +/-.2 in a 4 valve.
A littel richer for a two valve make a bit more power.
Marc
DEVEK
11-24-2003, 05:49 PM
#12
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
From your lead, thats what we did. 3 runs, right after each other, very very close together. Kind of like this one we did on devek days with and then lastly without the eRAM. (generally, we do it the other way, but we did want to see what would happen when we turned off the eRAM and just did a run. (all very close to each other as far as time)
I wonder why the 4 valvers like 14:1 and the 2 valve like 12.5 :1. doesnt make a lot of sense, but there must be a reason if it is true. bottomline, we saw 3hp gain going from 13.5:1 to 12:5 to one at Kieths dyno.
there is nothing conclusive with this run, except for the fact the eRAM run ran 10ft lbs more torque, and the fuel ratios were not changed until 4500rpm , then it went way lean and the hp was constant.
we will do this again on a healthy car later with regulators
can we do this with one fuel regulator and a S4 damper or 84ish damper on the other side? do the 2 valvers have to have 2 regulators????(adjustable) to fix the fuel ratios?
Mk
I wonder why the 4 valvers like 14:1 and the 2 valve like 12.5 :1. doesnt make a lot of sense, but there must be a reason if it is true. bottomline, we saw 3hp gain going from 13.5:1 to 12:5 to one at Kieths dyno.
there is nothing conclusive with this run, except for the fact the eRAM run ran 10ft lbs more torque, and the fuel ratios were not changed until 4500rpm , then it went way lean and the hp was constant.
we will do this again on a healthy car later with regulators
can we do this with one fuel regulator and a S4 damper or 84ish damper on the other side? do the 2 valvers have to have 2 regulators????(adjustable) to fix the fuel ratios?
Mk
Originally posted by marc@DEVEK
Mark,
In order to evaluate a gain, any gain, the two curves must be very close to each other with and without the modification.
For example, we are about to go into a testing session using a different manifold, We will baseline iwth a specific fuel curve, add the manifold, then get back that specific fuel curve. Otherwise, the results are invalid. If we change the fule curves, then the test is invalid.
Also, when we get lean, we get higher HP, up to about 14.0 +/-.2 in a 4 valve.
A littel richer for a two valve make a bit more power.
Marc
DEVEK
Mark,
In order to evaluate a gain, any gain, the two curves must be very close to each other with and without the modification.
For example, we are about to go into a testing session using a different manifold, We will baseline iwth a specific fuel curve, add the manifold, then get back that specific fuel curve. Otherwise, the results are invalid. If we change the fule curves, then the test is invalid.
Also, when we get lean, we get higher HP, up to about 14.0 +/-.2 in a 4 valve.
A littel richer for a two valve make a bit more power.
Marc
DEVEK
11-25-2003, 12:51 AM
#13
Instructor
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Pensacola,Florida
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what RWHP and TQ gain did the 1982 car get with the Euro Intake parts? Thats all I want to know, is if i'm going to get those 40hp gains i've heard. But if not, its ok as long as its atleast 30hp gain lol. Just wanna here what the gains were made and i'll be a happy camper.
Thanks guys
Cory J
Thanks guys
Cory J
11-25-2003, 01:24 PM
#14
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern Kentucky
Posts: 1,446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kibort...the AFM is self correcting for the car's voltage at any given point. It is simply a voltage divider circuit that drops some of the 12-13 or so volts and returns what is left over back as a reference wire....don't have the schematics with me right now, but the resistor is shown in the AFM diagram. They call it a "Ratio Metric" meter
Anyway, this reference wire is then compared to the position of the flap on the resistor, in short it is a % of the reference wire voltage....this is how the AFM self compensates for variances in the car's voltage. Doesn't matter if the reference wire is 7 or 8 volts, because max scale deflection on the flap will peak at the reference wire voltage at any given point. The L-Jet just compares the two voltages to decide on how much fuel gets dropped in.
When I made my MAF conversion I had Split Second build in a regulated 8 volt reverence wire that I later dropped to 7.7 volts for tuning reasons (because of the MAF sensor's curve). The weak link with my setup is that is system voltage drops too low I am in big trouble as the car won't run because it goes way rich. Yes, it happened when that French POS alternator I had took a big dump. But that aside, the MAF and new intercooler was the best $ I ever spent on the car. The AFM is a cool device and works well for 70's technology, but throttle response is SO much better with the MAF, there is really no comparison at all. To spend $500.00 not have to cut up the car's wiring and have a crude method of fuel tuning is money very well spent. Call Mark at Split Second and he will hook you up. You can also do RPM based fueling with this PSC1, so it is a 2D device, not 1D like the AFM. Right now I am running a 1D transfer program that works like a champ.
I have finally made a better fuel metering system for the Bastard! Replace that AFM and give that L-Jet what it needs to feed that thing properly. Crank up your fuel pressure, then tune it out for superior low speed throttle response with an MAF and calibrator. Get in touch with me if you want more details.
Anyway, this reference wire is then compared to the position of the flap on the resistor, in short it is a % of the reference wire voltage....this is how the AFM self compensates for variances in the car's voltage. Doesn't matter if the reference wire is 7 or 8 volts, because max scale deflection on the flap will peak at the reference wire voltage at any given point. The L-Jet just compares the two voltages to decide on how much fuel gets dropped in.
When I made my MAF conversion I had Split Second build in a regulated 8 volt reverence wire that I later dropped to 7.7 volts for tuning reasons (because of the MAF sensor's curve). The weak link with my setup is that is system voltage drops too low I am in big trouble as the car won't run because it goes way rich. Yes, it happened when that French POS alternator I had took a big dump. But that aside, the MAF and new intercooler was the best $ I ever spent on the car. The AFM is a cool device and works well for 70's technology, but throttle response is SO much better with the MAF, there is really no comparison at all. To spend $500.00 not have to cut up the car's wiring and have a crude method of fuel tuning is money very well spent. Call Mark at Split Second and he will hook you up. You can also do RPM based fueling with this PSC1, so it is a 2D device, not 1D like the AFM. Right now I am running a 1D transfer program that works like a champ.
I have finally made a better fuel metering system for the Bastard! Replace that AFM and give that L-Jet what it needs to feed that thing properly. Crank up your fuel pressure, then tune it out for superior low speed throttle response with an MAF and calibrator. Get in touch with me if you want more details.
11-25-2003, 04:15 PM
#15
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Originally posted by John..
Kibort...the AFM is self correcting for the car's voltage at any given point. It is simply a voltage divider circuit that drops some of the 12-13 or so volts and returns what is left over back as a reference wire....don't have the schematics with me right now, but the resistor is shown in the AFM diagram. They call it a "Ratio Metric" meter
Anyway, this reference wire is then compared to the position of the flap on the resistor, in short it is a % of the reference wire voltage....this is how the AFM self compensates for variances in the car's voltage. Doesn't matter if the reference wire is 7 or 8 volts, because max scale deflection on the flap will peak at the reference wire voltage at any given point. The L-awesome information. where were you when I was doing the conversion!!!
by the way, i still have the adapter and the euro air box for anyone wanting to keep things stock and use the MAF, butkeep the US U and air box. ( air box, adapter, maf, adapter, special aluminum adapter, then U) in order of how it all fits, and allows the hood to shut! (some of you know what i mean)
great info. so, you contend that the AFM was working and generating the proper signal regardless of voltage. would have been a great test to have boosted the voltage , and done a run to see for sure. but we were so lean, we were all worried about melting pistons
thanks,
MK
When I made my MAF conversion I had Split Second build in a regulated 8 volt reverence wire that I later dropped to 7.7 volts for tuning reasons (because of the MAF sensor's curve). The weak link with my setup is that is system voltage drops too low I am in big trouble as the car won't run because it goes way rich. Yes, it happened when that French POS alternator I had took a big dump. But that aside, the MAF and new intercooler was the best $ I ever spent on the car. The AFM is a cool device and works well for 70's technology, but throttle response is SO much better with the MAF, there is really no comparison at all. To spend $500.00 not have to cut up the car's wiring and have a crude method of fuel tuning is money very well spent. Call Mark at Split Second and he will hook you up. You can also do RPM based fueling with this PSC1, so it is a 2D device, not 1D like the AFM. Right now I am running a 1D transfer program that works like a champ.
I have finally made a better fuel metering system for the Bastard! Replace that AFM and give that L-Jet what it needs to feed that thing properly. Crank up your fuel pressure, then tune it out for superior low speed throttle response with an MAF and calibrator. Get in touch with me if you want more details.
Kibort...the AFM is self correcting for the car's voltage at any given point. It is simply a voltage divider circuit that drops some of the 12-13 or so volts and returns what is left over back as a reference wire....don't have the schematics with me right now, but the resistor is shown in the AFM diagram. They call it a "Ratio Metric" meter
Anyway, this reference wire is then compared to the position of the flap on the resistor, in short it is a % of the reference wire voltage....this is how the AFM self compensates for variances in the car's voltage. Doesn't matter if the reference wire is 7 or 8 volts, because max scale deflection on the flap will peak at the reference wire voltage at any given point. The L-awesome information. where were you when I was doing the conversion!!!
by the way, i still have the adapter and the euro air box for anyone wanting to keep things stock and use the MAF, butkeep the US U and air box. ( air box, adapter, maf, adapter, special aluminum adapter, then U) in order of how it all fits, and allows the hood to shut! (some of you know what i mean)
great info. so, you contend that the AFM was working and generating the proper signal regardless of voltage. would have been a great test to have boosted the voltage , and done a run to see for sure. but we were so lean, we were all worried about melting pistons
thanks,
MK
When I made my MAF conversion I had Split Second build in a regulated 8 volt reverence wire that I later dropped to 7.7 volts for tuning reasons (because of the MAF sensor's curve). The weak link with my setup is that is system voltage drops too low I am in big trouble as the car won't run because it goes way rich. Yes, it happened when that French POS alternator I had took a big dump. But that aside, the MAF and new intercooler was the best $ I ever spent on the car. The AFM is a cool device and works well for 70's technology, but throttle response is SO much better with the MAF, there is really no comparison at all. To spend $500.00 not have to cut up the car's wiring and have a crude method of fuel tuning is money very well spent. Call Mark at Split Second and he will hook you up. You can also do RPM based fueling with this PSC1, so it is a 2D device, not 1D like the AFM. Right now I am running a 1D transfer program that works like a champ.
I have finally made a better fuel metering system for the Bastard! Replace that AFM and give that L-Jet what it needs to feed that thing properly. Crank up your fuel pressure, then tune it out for superior low speed throttle response with an MAF and calibrator. Get in touch with me if you want more details.