Interesting Dyno Day
06-22-2012, 11:00 PM
#62
Race Car
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 4,247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't that the truth! Understood on not needing more power, but as far as safety factor on your pulse width, I would certainly look for a little more room. The Nurburgring is near sea level. Are you taking your car there? Do you drive anywhere that takes you near sea level? IF no, then ok. But even if there's a chance, I would swap out to some large injectors. There are some 95lb'ers on this forum for $250 that might give you that little extra safety factor.
06-23-2012, 01:14 AM
#63
Rennlist Member
Patrick, You have been fantastic on this forum. I don't think anyone thinks you meant anything more than you just trying to figure out what is going on. It was necessary to write your specs. All understood and well and good. 
Unfortunately Patrick, this is what I have been PMing you about for so long. You are truly just not making the power you should. You are down about 40hp. at that psi. End of story.
I Highly suggest doing 3 things. The first one is very easy and may negate the second two.
1. GO to the 1/4mile track like everyone else is saying. That just might be a silly conservative dyno and misleading. You do NOT have to Launch / start crazy. Just give it a wimpy start. MPH is what we need to see and MPH is not affected too much by the starts - it is a little, but no matter what, we all will know right away what your RWHP is (close estimate) If you give us the Altitude of the track and the temp. And the weight of the car with you in it.
You should run between 119-122 mph. at 23psi in that set up. - Giving estimations on your weight and altitude. I ran 124mph with 410 rwph at 2500lbs weight with me in it. I believe you weigh 2700 with you in it right?
If you indeed run 113-115 mph. I suggest the next three things. Easiest to hardest
1. VERIFY your TURBO! You said your turbo was dropping psi at the top end?! A GT3076R would not do that. It has plenty more ceiling to go and would not run out of steam anywhere near that psi. on this set up. I know you think I might be crazy, but verify turbine diameters Inducer and exducer.. Same for the compressor. I work for a manufacturer. Believe me when I say they make mistakes and put wrong parts that are similar, or just get a little mixed up. It happens. And it is Important to check/verify ALL your basics first. It's the best standard I have ever done in problem solving. Be sure of the obvious, is what I like to say.
2ndly. If it is indeed the correct turbo, something else is holding you back. Check everything else. Restrictions, compression, leak downs, boost leaks, etc.
3. Go back to the stock cam. I don't think what you have is helping you out at all. I truly think it is hurting you, especially in a road race scenario. Maybe your set up with this cam actually is the power loss?! Too much overlap and boost is blowing out your exhaust?! Weirder things have happened.
Like I said, you have almost the exact same set up I did. The only difference is the Turbine housing. I had a .63 A/R. I had full 23psi of boost by 3300 rpms. Yours is much laggier, but I think it has to do with other things and not the .82. that might make you lag to 3600 full boost. Right now you're into the 4K rpm range, and that is just not where it should be. Something is certainly wrong there, and I would start with going back to the stock cam. Or just a cam with a little more lift. Don't change the duration.
Patrick, your set up can easily reach 450whp. You paid for it. You should have it. DanaT cannot hit any higher power levels without larger injectors. He truly needs to change them out now and retune if he plans on diving anywhere lower in Altitude. Just for the sake of keeping his motor together. - Dana... you hearing this? And it leaves room for more power in the future of course. Everyone wants that.
Also, the timing tables looked ok. a bit conservative, but good. Rogue? You know way more than I on that one. Suggestions?
Unfortunately Patrick, this is what I have been PMing you about for so long. You are truly just not making the power you should. You are down about 40hp. at that psi. End of story.
I Highly suggest doing 3 things. The first one is very easy and may negate the second two.
1. GO to the 1/4mile track like everyone else is saying. That just might be a silly conservative dyno and misleading. You do NOT have to Launch / start crazy. Just give it a wimpy start. MPH is what we need to see and MPH is not affected too much by the starts - it is a little, but no matter what, we all will know right away what your RWHP is (close estimate) If you give us the Altitude of the track and the temp. And the weight of the car with you in it.
You should run between 119-122 mph. at 23psi in that set up. - Giving estimations on your weight and altitude. I ran 124mph with 410 rwph at 2500lbs weight with me in it. I believe you weigh 2700 with you in it right?
If you indeed run 113-115 mph. I suggest the next three things. Easiest to hardest
1. VERIFY your TURBO! You said your turbo was dropping psi at the top end?! A GT3076R would not do that. It has plenty more ceiling to go and would not run out of steam anywhere near that psi. on this set up. I know you think I might be crazy, but verify turbine diameters Inducer and exducer.. Same for the compressor. I work for a manufacturer. Believe me when I say they make mistakes and put wrong parts that are similar, or just get a little mixed up. It happens. And it is Important to check/verify ALL your basics first. It's the best standard I have ever done in problem solving. Be sure of the obvious, is what I like to say.
2ndly. If it is indeed the correct turbo, something else is holding you back. Check everything else. Restrictions, compression, leak downs, boost leaks, etc.
3. Go back to the stock cam. I don't think what you have is helping you out at all. I truly think it is hurting you, especially in a road race scenario. Maybe your set up with this cam actually is the power loss?! Too much overlap and boost is blowing out your exhaust?! Weirder things have happened.
Like I said, you have almost the exact same set up I did. The only difference is the Turbine housing. I had a .63 A/R. I had full 23psi of boost by 3300 rpms. Yours is much laggier, but I think it has to do with other things and not the .82. that might make you lag to 3600 full boost. Right now you're into the 4K rpm range, and that is just not where it should be. Something is certainly wrong there, and I would start with going back to the stock cam. Or just a cam with a little more lift. Don't change the duration.
Patrick, your set up can easily reach 450whp. You paid for it. You should have it. DanaT cannot hit any higher power levels without larger injectors. He truly needs to change them out now and retune if he plans on diving anywhere lower in Altitude. Just for the sake of keeping his motor together. - Dana... you hearing this? And it leaves room for more power in the future of course. Everyone wants that.
Also, the timing tables looked ok. a bit conservative, but good. Rogue? You know way more than I on that one. Suggestions?
As for the turbo 'falling off', not this one Bruce. I think that was in reference to the setup some time ago with the .63 housing. As you can see in the chart, it made power virtually all the way to redline and the boost curve holds solid. As you and others have mentioned, the cam and exhaust are possibly hurting. My feeling was that for a track car having power from 4000rpm upwards isn't a bad thing so perhaps everything has just shifted over a bit to the rhs but not actually down? I don't know.
Anyway, I wasn't trying to make this about my car. More, just trying to understand the differences and somehow creating some comparable parity so we could sort of gauge each other's builds across the globe. Not withstanding, dynos and conditions are still subjective. Mostly the number is useful for tuning purposes. It would seem that the best form of judgement is trap speed and say 100-200kmh (62-120mph) times. Thanks for the time to explain stuff guys. Much appreciated.
06-23-2012, 01:29 AM
#64
Rennlist Member
I wouldn't concern yourself to much about the dyno numbers patrick, there is nothing 'wrong' with your car, we have shared the same dyno enough in the past to know that. For most dyno operators they will reduce there income if they have a 'low reading' dyno.
06-23-2012, 01:46 AM
#65
Race Car
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 4,247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm very tempted to try the 1/4 mile one day but there are a few things preceding that. Fixing the car being one of them! Then there's the matter of possibly/probably installing the new motor during this process anyway.
As for the turbo 'falling off', not this one Bruce. I think that was in reference to the setup some time ago with the .63 housing. As you can see in the chart, it made power virtually all the way to redline and the boost curve holds solid. As you and others have mentioned, the cam and exhaust are possibly hurting. My feeling was that for a track car having power from 4000rpm upwards isn't a bad thing so perhaps everything has just shifted over a bit to the rhs but not actually down? I don't know.
Anyway, I wasn't trying to make this about my car. More, just trying to understand the differences and somehow creating some comparable parity so we could sort of gauge each other's builds across the globe. Not withstanding, dynos and conditions are still subjective. Mostly the number is useful for tuning purposes. It would seem that the best form of judgement is trap speed and say 100-200kmh (62-120mph) times. Thanks for the time to explain stuff guys. Much appreciated.
As for the turbo 'falling off', not this one Bruce. I think that was in reference to the setup some time ago with the .63 housing. As you can see in the chart, it made power virtually all the way to redline and the boost curve holds solid. As you and others have mentioned, the cam and exhaust are possibly hurting. My feeling was that for a track car having power from 4000rpm upwards isn't a bad thing so perhaps everything has just shifted over a bit to the rhs but not actually down? I don't know.
Anyway, I wasn't trying to make this about my car. More, just trying to understand the differences and somehow creating some comparable parity so we could sort of gauge each other's builds across the globe. Not withstanding, dynos and conditions are still subjective. Mostly the number is useful for tuning purposes. It would seem that the best form of judgement is trap speed and say 100-200kmh (62-120mph) times. Thanks for the time to explain stuff guys. Much appreciated.
Of course.. fixing the car has to be done for any of this to happen. Have you decided on the new body parts yet?
Last edited by 95ONE; 06-23-2012 at 03:05 PM.
06-23-2012, 03:28 AM
#66
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Patrick haven't you been using the same dyno? The one that seems to pride itself on low-numbers?
Bruce is right, run a 1/4mi, just take off softly and only worry about MPH.
06-23-2012, 06:00 AM
#67
Rennlist Member
It's the same type of dyno but a different shop. During the rebuild process it sort of morphed into using some different people and shifting to Motec etc. It is actually possible that they were a bit conservative due to not knowing these particular motors. When they found it was 8:1 c/r they were a bit shocked. So they might have decided to move up in boost and not go crazy on timing, but I don't think so. Remembering that these guys are used to running a lot more than 23psi on a regular basis. I would have liked to run the motor on the old dyno that we used to use...but a wall got in the way before I had the chance. Anyway I apologise for taking up too much thread space. Although it's good to invoke discussion like in Refresh's Head thread.
06-23-2012, 01:30 PM
#68
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't that the truth! Understood on not needing more power, but as far as safety factor on your pulse width, I would certainly look for a little more room. The Nurburgring is near sea level. Are you taking your car there? Do you drive anywhere that takes you near sea level? IF no, then ok. But even if there's a chance, I would swap out to some large injectors. There are some 95lb'ers on this forum for $250 that might give you that little extra safety factor.
Beyond that, low boost setting is enough for the street. Tires spin anways on low boost setting.
06-23-2012, 01:34 PM
#69
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A dragstrip has a good timing system and are flat.
06-23-2012, 03:09 PM
#70
Race Car
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 4,247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And, I didn't see it as an impossibility since my friend and I have plans to ship our cars over there and back on a container to go run the Nurburgring. Kinda one of those bucket list things.
Yeah, street tires don't hold well on the lower gears. I have forgotten. It's been so long since I've driven mine.
06-23-2012, 08:52 PM
#71
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHAT!? Mine came with the James Bond Aqua Rover option. Yours didn't?
And, I didn't see it as an impossibility since my friend and I have plans to ship our cars over there and back on a container to go run the Nurburgring. Kinda one of those bucket list things.
Yeah, street tires don't hold well on the lower gears. I have forgotten. It's been so long since I've driven mine.
And, I didn't see it as an impossibility since my friend and I have plans to ship our cars over there and back on a container to go run the Nurburgring. Kinda one of those bucket list things.
Yeah, street tires don't hold well on the lower gears. I have forgotten. It's been so long since I've driven mine.
You will also have to be in Bremerhaven to claim the car. It more complicated than one would think.
06-23-2012, 09:09 PM
#72
Rennlist Member
I would say 60-120 times are a much worse prediction than 1/4 mile. How accurate is the timing system? How do you know you are starting at 60 and not 62? How do you know you are ending at 120 and not 115? How are you accounting for speedo error and also speed resolution (you can't read 0.1mph on the speedo). How do you account for many roads not being flat?
A dragstrip has a good timing system and are flat.
A dragstrip has a good timing system and are flat.
Do you have LSD in your car?
