Weltmeister UK.."We build excitment Pure PS no BS"
04-27-2006, 02:20 PM
#16
Intermediate
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Not disclosed
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jean
I thank you for your welcome and reply that, it was not I who posted the link, I would see no reason to do so. However I did need to reply to the comments that suggested things were "fishy", which were/are bandied about without foundation. As to your question of lb/min or flow on stock turbos etc. I only reported what I saw on the 996GT2. The 993TT in question runs 529BHP [560lb-ft]on BP 97 Ultimate, 538 [575lb-ft] on Shell Optimax and 550 [600+ lb-ft] on the newly released BP 102 tested by BP at our facility back to back, with BP 97 Ultimate. I bought the Ultimate randomly to ensure fairness. So the 993TT does mid 525+ on whatever fuel you put in it but the difference lies in the boost curve and the mid rpm urge between our cars and those from Germany. We simply map differently from them.
Of course we are unable to "race for pink slips" as the cars are not ours to gamble with but we will gladly run with data logging at future events.
Cheers
Allan
I thank you for your welcome and reply that, it was not I who posted the link, I would see no reason to do so. However I did need to reply to the comments that suggested things were "fishy", which were/are bandied about without foundation. As to your question of lb/min or flow on stock turbos etc. I only reported what I saw on the 996GT2. The 993TT in question runs 529BHP [560lb-ft]on BP 97 Ultimate, 538 [575lb-ft] on Shell Optimax and 550 [600+ lb-ft] on the newly released BP 102 tested by BP at our facility back to back, with BP 97 Ultimate. I bought the Ultimate randomly to ensure fairness. So the 993TT does mid 525+ on whatever fuel you put in it but the difference lies in the boost curve and the mid rpm urge between our cars and those from Germany. We simply map differently from them.
Of course we are unable to "race for pink slips" as the cars are not ours to gamble with but we will gladly run with data logging at future events.
Cheers
Allan
04-27-2006, 02:35 PM
#17
Intermediate
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Not disclosed
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TB993tt
Allan
A run of my car on your chassis dyno will NOT lay this accuracy issue to rest - I have tried to explain it to you many times before, but you just don't believe it.
A run of my car on your chassis dyno will NOT lay this accuracy issue to rest - I have tried to explain it to you many times before, but you just don't believe it.
We measure Porsche cars through the OBD port as Dyno Dynamics are really quite sophisticated, compared with some others, so all data is taken straight from the ECU.
As for running the car not proving anything, I disagree. We could arrange a covenient time for a car similar to yours to be there when you are and run ours and then benchmark yours. The chassis vs engine dyno debate is quite irrelevant for me as it is our integrity and accuracy you & others have called into question is it not ?
I do not disagree that running a 10 second powertest will produce a set of numbers that are different to those produced by a really hot engine that has run full load for 10 mins on an engine dyno. Sadly an engine dyno can never emulate the ridiculous location that Porsche chose for the engine and all of its inherant drawbacks of cooling, heat soak etc. A chassis dyno comes closest to real world conditions on a 993. And how often do we drive a W.O.T. for 10 mins ??
Perhaps we run the cars cooler than any other tuner ? We have 22000 CFM blowing from head on, 20,000 CFM blowing down directly on to the intercooler/engine deck lid/rear screen area and we have 80,000 CFM being drawn over the car from behind, fed in at normal air pressure and ambient temps at front. The dyno cell has a complete change of air every 3.2 seconds. Cold dense air into an engine operating at the perfect temp will result in good numbers but remember that is what happens on the road.
I know not but it would do no harm to compare ?
Allan
04-27-2006, 02:49 PM
#18
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by uk trucks
TB
We measure Porsche cars through the OBD port as Dyno Dynamics are really quite sophisticated, compared with some others, so all data is taken straight from the ECU.
As for running the car not proving anything, I disagree. We could arrange a covenient time for a car similar to yours to be there when you are and run ours and then benchmark yours. The chassis vs engine dyno debate is quite irrelevant for me as it is our integrity and accuracy you & others have called into question is it not ?
I do not disagree that running a 10 second powertest will produce a set of numbers that are different to those produced by a really hot engine that has run full load for 10 mins on an engine dyno. Sadly an engine dyno can never emulate the ridiculous location that Porsche chose for the engine and all of its inherant drawbacks of cooling, heat soak etc. A chassis dyno comes closest to real world conditions on a 993. And how often do we drive a W.O.T. for 10 mins ??
Perhaps we run the cars cooler than any other tuner ? We have 22000 CFM blowing from head on, 20,000 CFM blowing down directly on to the intercooler/engine deck lid/rear screen area and we have 80,000 CFM being drawn over the car from behind, fed in at normal air pressure and ambient temps at front. The dyno cell has a complete change of air every 3.2 seconds. Cold dense air into an engine operating at the perfect temp will result in good numbers but remember that is what happens on the road.
I know not but it would do no harm to compare ?
Allan
We measure Porsche cars through the OBD port as Dyno Dynamics are really quite sophisticated, compared with some others, so all data is taken straight from the ECU.
As for running the car not proving anything, I disagree. We could arrange a covenient time for a car similar to yours to be there when you are and run ours and then benchmark yours. The chassis vs engine dyno debate is quite irrelevant for me as it is our integrity and accuracy you & others have called into question is it not ?
I do not disagree that running a 10 second powertest will produce a set of numbers that are different to those produced by a really hot engine that has run full load for 10 mins on an engine dyno. Sadly an engine dyno can never emulate the ridiculous location that Porsche chose for the engine and all of its inherant drawbacks of cooling, heat soak etc. A chassis dyno comes closest to real world conditions on a 993. And how often do we drive a W.O.T. for 10 mins ??
Perhaps we run the cars cooler than any other tuner ? We have 22000 CFM blowing from head on, 20,000 CFM blowing down directly on to the intercooler/engine deck lid/rear screen area and we have 80,000 CFM being drawn over the car from behind, fed in at normal air pressure and ambient temps at front. The dyno cell has a complete change of air every 3.2 seconds. Cold dense air into an engine operating at the perfect temp will result in good numbers but remember that is what happens on the road.
I know not but it would do no harm to compare ?
Allan
The ridiculous numbers like the 870NM is indicative that something weird is going on when you are tuning using the rollers - you are tuning "for" the rollers as it were. I am certain you are doing it unwittingly, but my experience based on watching EVERYONE else says the components you strapped to that GT2 will not give it more than 780NM.
The simple test as I said before is the clutch - IS IT A STANDARD CLUTCH - if yes then in 3rd gear upwards will fry it as soon as you hit peak torque......... this is what REAL 800NM torque will do.
Is this happening ?
04-27-2006, 03:08 PM
#19
Intermediate
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Not disclosed
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TB
The clutch is not slipping yet. However I can see two things here,
1] You simply do not believe it possible for us to achieve higher numbers for significantly less outlay than the amounts charged by our German counterparts. I explained that we map all of our cars differently to conventional UK/German historic methods. We run boost in the mid range and less at peak revs than they do, hence differing charecteristics to their cars.
2] You seem to have no confidence in putting your [RS Tuning] car, which you defend so vigourously, under scrutiny on our allegedly innacurate dyno. If our machine is so innacurate it will record high numbers for your car.
Currently quoted as 541 BHP & 736Nm. If our machine overstates it could be as high as 850Nm ?????
If however your car is mapped very conservatively that will show up also.
We are overlooking the fact that all of our powertests are run in "Shootout mode" where not only are the numbers repeatable, the operator has no mechanism to influence the outcome.
We tune exceptionally fast Mitsubishi Evo's and have had all of this nonsense from them, "It cant be done, they are fudging the numbers etc" Sadly they had a shootout 30-130 day at Bruntingthorpe recently and guess what, our cars were : Evo 8MR 1st 2nd 3 rd fastest. Evo8 non MR 1st & 3rd fastest. Evo 7 fastest, Evo3 fastest ??? Why would our cars be faster on a 30-130 data logged run, because we have more torque and better driveability.
Nuff said 4 now
Allan
The clutch is not slipping yet. However I can see two things here,
1] You simply do not believe it possible for us to achieve higher numbers for significantly less outlay than the amounts charged by our German counterparts. I explained that we map all of our cars differently to conventional UK/German historic methods. We run boost in the mid range and less at peak revs than they do, hence differing charecteristics to their cars.
2] You seem to have no confidence in putting your [RS Tuning] car, which you defend so vigourously, under scrutiny on our allegedly innacurate dyno. If our machine is so innacurate it will record high numbers for your car.
Currently quoted as 541 BHP & 736Nm. If our machine overstates it could be as high as 850Nm ?????
If however your car is mapped very conservatively that will show up also.
We are overlooking the fact that all of our powertests are run in "Shootout mode" where not only are the numbers repeatable, the operator has no mechanism to influence the outcome.
We tune exceptionally fast Mitsubishi Evo's and have had all of this nonsense from them, "It cant be done, they are fudging the numbers etc" Sadly they had a shootout 30-130 day at Bruntingthorpe recently and guess what, our cars were : Evo 8MR 1st 2nd 3 rd fastest. Evo8 non MR 1st & 3rd fastest. Evo 7 fastest, Evo3 fastest ??? Why would our cars be faster on a 30-130 data logged run, because we have more torque and better driveability.
Nuff said 4 now
Allan
04-27-2006, 05:25 PM
#21
Intermediate
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Not disclosed
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rassell
From memory, the last "Bone stock" 996TT to cross our threshold was 413.9 BHP close enough to 414 BHP for me [c420PS]. Cannot recall the torque !
We then put on a Tubi, BMC filter & a Revo programme tuned to the car and it left with 498 BHP & 540lb-ft.
It was significantly faster than when it came in, owner v.happy.
Regards
Allan
From memory, the last "Bone stock" 996TT to cross our threshold was 413.9 BHP close enough to 414 BHP for me [c420PS]. Cannot recall the torque !
We then put on a Tubi, BMC filter & a Revo programme tuned to the car and it left with 498 BHP & 540lb-ft.
It was significantly faster than when it came in, owner v.happy.
Regards
Allan
04-27-2006, 05:47 PM
#22
Nordschleife Master
I went back and retested a stock 2003 GT2 with only an exhaust and 100cell cats and it produced 404rwhp on the Dynapack Dyno I use for all of my testing. This is with stock programming and 6k miles. This is the same test, same dyno that I did the MoTeC M600 GT2 engine on. The IAT of the MoTeC GT2 was 26c at the beginning of the run and 38c at the end of an 18 second run.
Toby, if you are testing your engine with inlet air temps of 55 degrees C, then that is not the same as the engine produces in real driving situations. On a track, I shut the engine down by 60c IAT and I normally see them in the 40-50c range depending on ambient air temp for a non Secan intercooled engine.
Toby, if you are testing your engine with inlet air temps of 55 degrees C, then that is not the same as the engine produces in real driving situations. On a track, I shut the engine down by 60c IAT and I normally see them in the 40-50c range depending on ambient air temp for a non Secan intercooled engine.
04-27-2006, 07:36 PM
#23
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Thread Starter
Somehow this got a bit off base..
The key fact remains that no matter what Weltmeister does in the areas of mapping, it cannot get anywhere close, even remotely, to the torque numbers shown. If one fails to recognize that there is a problem with those numbers, it is because he either does not know or does not want to.
A GPS based run will certainly clarify this, provided the runs are made with the same 870 NM car discussed here. The clutch part is the best proof in my eyes, it would go in a blink of an eye before even you get to boost at full pressure in 3rd or 4th...
Funny this reminds me of a test done by GT Purely Porsche on a DMS 600 BHP GT2 by a British magazine (with an AX22), and the numbers were not that much better than a stock GT2, and MUCH slower than the numbers shown by TB's 540HP on his AX22 runs.
The key fact remains that no matter what Weltmeister does in the areas of mapping, it cannot get anywhere close, even remotely, to the torque numbers shown. If one fails to recognize that there is a problem with those numbers, it is because he either does not know or does not want to.
A GPS based run will certainly clarify this, provided the runs are made with the same 870 NM car discussed here. The clutch part is the best proof in my eyes, it would go in a blink of an eye before even you get to boost at full pressure in 3rd or 4th...
Funny this reminds me of a test done by GT Purely Porsche on a DMS 600 BHP GT2 by a British magazine (with an AX22), and the numbers were not that much better than a stock GT2, and MUCH slower than the numbers shown by TB's 540HP on his AX22 runs.
04-28-2006, 12:17 AM
#24
Intermediate
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ax22 runs are only directly comparable when done on the same day, under same conditions and on the same venue. Too many factors can influence the results such as gradient, ambient temp, headwind, bodywork, weight, shift speed, aero package etc.
I believe we should look at the main point of this thread which is whether the weltmeister GT2 can produce the torque figures claimed for it on the dynosheet with the components installed on the car. Most here say it's impossible so either the dyno is wildly optimistic or weltmeister has done what other Porsche gurus haven't managed. This is simple enough to prove or disprove. TB993tt, why don't you just bring your megabuck, MAHA dynoed, SECAN intercooled ubermeistermonster to the said dyno and do a SAME DAY back to back dyno with stock 993tt, 996tt, 996GT3 and the Weltmeister Cheapskate REVO tune and get some runs done. This will answer the question on whether or not the said dyno is accurate and whether the Weltmeister car really does have a clutch busting 870 NM of torque. Hopefully the questions, bickering, gossipping and snide comments can end once and for all.
All this talk about championships won, datalogs from 3 different continents, 10minute wide open throttle runs, heat soak, Nordschliefe victories blah blah blah is just smokescreen b/s. An airfield day with a datalog system will also be great if it ever happens since there have been so many false starts on this happening but that would only answer the question of which car is faster in a straight line but not necessarily which is more powerful (see the first paragraph for the reasons)
I believe we should look at the main point of this thread which is whether the weltmeister GT2 can produce the torque figures claimed for it on the dynosheet with the components installed on the car. Most here say it's impossible so either the dyno is wildly optimistic or weltmeister has done what other Porsche gurus haven't managed. This is simple enough to prove or disprove. TB993tt, why don't you just bring your megabuck, MAHA dynoed, SECAN intercooled ubermeistermonster to the said dyno and do a SAME DAY back to back dyno with stock 993tt, 996tt, 996GT3 and the Weltmeister Cheapskate REVO tune and get some runs done. This will answer the question on whether or not the said dyno is accurate and whether the Weltmeister car really does have a clutch busting 870 NM of torque. Hopefully the questions, bickering, gossipping and snide comments can end once and for all.
All this talk about championships won, datalogs from 3 different continents, 10minute wide open throttle runs, heat soak, Nordschliefe victories blah blah blah is just smokescreen b/s. An airfield day with a datalog system will also be great if it ever happens since there have been so many false starts on this happening but that would only answer the question of which car is faster in a straight line but not necessarily which is more powerful (see the first paragraph for the reasons)
04-28-2006, 03:42 AM
#25
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Official Jack off extinguisher
Posts: 1,173
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Dear FM9,
TB993tt is a end user, not a shop and there is no need for him to make exorbitant claims to sell his services or to pimp the shop who does the engine work on his car. I echo a suggestion earlier to participate in the German Tuner Grand Prix , bring your 1000hp Evo and some xxxx hp 993/996 turbo's and finish in the Top three and you will gain serious respect on a public forum. If you are left in the dust or decide not to participate it would come as no surprise that your claims will be critized or ridiculed. Human nature I guess.
BTW, RS is literally in bed with Bosch and it makes me laugh when you mention that REVO has the answer to "alternative tuning for midrange torque", in a nutshell, the doors that are open for RS will never be explored by REVO even with the biggest bribe in hand.
TB993tt is a end user, not a shop and there is no need for him to make exorbitant claims to sell his services or to pimp the shop who does the engine work on his car. I echo a suggestion earlier to participate in the German Tuner Grand Prix , bring your 1000hp Evo and some xxxx hp 993/996 turbo's and finish in the Top three and you will gain serious respect on a public forum. If you are left in the dust or decide not to participate it would come as no surprise that your claims will be critized or ridiculed. Human nature I guess.
BTW, RS is literally in bed with Bosch and it makes me laugh when you mention that REVO has the answer to "alternative tuning for midrange torque", in a nutshell, the doors that are open for RS will never be explored by REVO even with the biggest bribe in hand.
04-28-2006, 06:07 AM
#26
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by uk trucks
2] You seem to have no confidence in putting your [RS Tuning] car, which you defend so vigourously, under scrutiny on our allegedly innacurate dyno. If our machine is so innacurate it will record high numbers for your car.
Currently quoted as 541 BHP & 736Nm. If our machine overstates it could be as high as 850Nm ?????
Currently quoted as 541 BHP & 736Nm. If our machine overstates it could be as high as 850Nm ?????
Originally Posted by FM9
TB993tt, why don't you just bring your megabuck, MAHA dynoed, SECAN intercooled ubermeistermonster to the said dyno and do a SAME DAY back to back dyno with stock 993tt, 996tt, 996GT3 and the Weltmeister Cheapskate REVO tune and get some runs done. This will answer the question on whether or not the said dyno is accurate and whether the Weltmeister car really does have a clutch busting 870 NM of torque. Hopefully the questions, bickering, gossipping and snide comments can end once and for all.
The reason for NOT putting my car on your chassis dyno is that I don't think it will prove anything.
These high end chassis dynos appear to be able to accuarately reproduce the power/torque numbers from engines which have been developed and mapped by manufacturers on engine dynos - so therefore your dyno I fully expect WOULD give my numbers as the 541/736NM
The problem appears to be when a tuner maps the engine using the chassis dyno in a certain way, the torque numbers appear to go crazy.
There is so much experience and evidence which makes the 870NM completely impossible culmulating in the simple rating on the stock clutch - if you go 100NM [and what you are claiming is probably nearer 150NM over] over the rating it will slip as SOON as you hit peak torque, there is no leeway, IT WILL SLIP - been there done that !
As has been pointed out, I am an end user, I have no financial interest in promoting any tuner.
I am just amazed that the engineers at Weltmiester are not similarly interested in how they are managing to "beat" the chassis dynos accuracy.
We WILL settle this, even if I have to pay for the Bruntingthorpe run myself.
04-28-2006, 06:17 AM
#27
Intermediate
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Pole Position,
Your post is what usually happens whenever anyone dares to suggest an alternative to any of the "established" Porsche tuning gurus on Rennlist and many other boards which is "why don't u bring ur car to xyz grand prix event or how many seconds to lap the Nordschliefe".
This is not relevant to the question in this post which is "does the Weltmeister car produce that much torque with those components." The question or claim wasn't "can Weltmesiter win the Nurburgring 24hrs, Supercup and Tuner GP in 2006 or some such ridiculous boast".
TB993tt is an end user but has made it his personal crusade to belittle and undermine many many tuners who have been very helpful to this community. This is his chance to prove once and for all that the Weltmeister dyno is untrustworthy or not or whether operating parameters were fudged or not. I for one am very interested in the outcome. The invitation has been given and the effort needed for it to happen isn't huge. What's stopping this???
Your post is what usually happens whenever anyone dares to suggest an alternative to any of the "established" Porsche tuning gurus on Rennlist and many other boards which is "why don't u bring ur car to xyz grand prix event or how many seconds to lap the Nordschliefe".
This is not relevant to the question in this post which is "does the Weltmeister car produce that much torque with those components." The question or claim wasn't "can Weltmesiter win the Nurburgring 24hrs, Supercup and Tuner GP in 2006 or some such ridiculous boast".
TB993tt is an end user but has made it his personal crusade to belittle and undermine many many tuners who have been very helpful to this community. This is his chance to prove once and for all that the Weltmeister dyno is untrustworthy or not or whether operating parameters were fudged or not. I for one am very interested in the outcome. The invitation has been given and the effort needed for it to happen isn't huge. What's stopping this???
04-28-2006, 06:45 AM
#28
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Thread Starter
Even if it does not prove anything, this thread is becoming interesting reading..
A few clarifications, I don't see anyone having an interest in undermining any tuners..I picked up a dyno chart from another forum that so bluntly proves the (ir)relevance of the numbers shown in it, that it literally made me laugh. I have seen many dyno charts posted here that can be criticized in a way or another, no big deal, we are here for the fun.. but this is really out of whack!! Just as I can praise the same tuners for what they do, the reverse is also true, no big deal it is for the good of the final consumer..
FM9...established Porsche tuners? I have yet to see an engine as bastardized as mine and far from Porsche culture or establishment, we are talking about truth in the numbers here, and what can be done vs. what cannot..
Performance numbers are what matters..The conditions for the runs that you mentioned and their impact on an AX22 (or other) reading are absolutely true, however does that stop you from comparing cars based on magazine numbers? If the numbers you see are tenths apart, there isno point debating, but when on a 60-150mph run you see a car beating another by almost 3 seconds, while the beaten car is claimed to have the same or better lb/HP then you have to question (referring to my earlier post).. I have done many runs with the AX, and they are all within reasonable margin of error , some were done with different tires, slopes, heat, etc.. the same for TB's runs, tenths are ok.. It will be funny to see what happens in their UK shootout, because the DMS cars were very close to the Weltmeister car at the VMAX, while TB's car is putting 200ft distance on those DMS GT2s in as little as a 60-150mph run (based on magazine data I agree)..
I have never seen or know TB or his car, but data speaks for itself.. And this dyno chart is still making me laugh outloud everytime I see it.. But that's just me and my physics, those darn turbos won't get you there Weltmeister!!.
A few clarifications, I don't see anyone having an interest in undermining any tuners..I picked up a dyno chart from another forum that so bluntly proves the (ir)relevance of the numbers shown in it, that it literally made me laugh. I have seen many dyno charts posted here that can be criticized in a way or another, no big deal, we are here for the fun.. but this is really out of whack!! Just as I can praise the same tuners for what they do, the reverse is also true, no big deal it is for the good of the final consumer..
FM9...established Porsche tuners? I have yet to see an engine as bastardized as mine and far from Porsche culture or establishment, we are talking about truth in the numbers here, and what can be done vs. what cannot..
Performance numbers are what matters..The conditions for the runs that you mentioned and their impact on an AX22 (or other) reading are absolutely true, however does that stop you from comparing cars based on magazine numbers? If the numbers you see are tenths apart, there isno point debating, but when on a 60-150mph run you see a car beating another by almost 3 seconds, while the beaten car is claimed to have the same or better lb/HP then you have to question (referring to my earlier post).. I have done many runs with the AX, and they are all within reasonable margin of error , some were done with different tires, slopes, heat, etc.. the same for TB's runs, tenths are ok.. It will be funny to see what happens in their UK shootout, because the DMS cars were very close to the Weltmeister car at the VMAX, while TB's car is putting 200ft distance on those DMS GT2s in as little as a 60-150mph run (based on magazine data I agree)..
I have never seen or know TB or his car, but data speaks for itself.. And this dyno chart is still making me laugh outloud everytime I see it.. But that's just me and my physics, those darn turbos won't get you there Weltmeister!!.
04-28-2006, 08:53 AM
#29
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread. I have no commercial connection with Weltmeister. I have been there on a number of occasions to post graphs on my site from shootouts of up to 30 cars a day, mainly 944's, but also GT3, 993 GT3 etc.
I have witnessed standard factory cars including GT3, GT2, 996TT, 968, 928GTS etc putting down figures that were uncannily close to manufacturers figures. I have also seen 'modified' cars produce less power ...
My other connection with Weltmeister is that I use their Dyno extensively in the development of my own 944 Turbo, so have spent many, many hours in the cell with Chris Davies accepting or rejecting modifications.
My car may only be currently just over 400 BHP and 360 lb/ft, but in the earlier stages of development it had power runs on other UK dynos which without exception displayed higher figures than the Dyno Dynamics. This is also the same of other cars that I know.
This suits me because when I quote the power of my car as being recorded on the DD, I am quite confident that it will outperform a similarly (indicated) powered car whose power was recorded on alternative UK dynos.
During the many runs we performed on the DD, I also questioned the assumption that the cell would calculate similar results in different gears. I can confirm that runs in 3rd and 4th gear have been almost identical. I have also experienced repeatability between different tuning sessions where I have reloaded a previous map (the car has full standalone management) and got a virtually identical graph.
While not an AX22, my car is fitted with a G-Tech RR. On several occasions I have tested the car on a 1 mile flat (yes, I have tested both directions) on the way home from a Weltmeister session and the graphs and figures have been surprisingly close. This could not be said of my previous road tuning setup - a road race accelerometer and software.
My own tuning methods are different to other 944 tuners, and development of my car is privately funded. My background was in Group A RS500 tuning so I do appreciate repeatability of figures and have also in the past compared wildly over optimistic dyno figures with more realistic figures.
I know for certain that of I left Weltmeister on a really bad day with (theoretically) 200 BHP, I could stop off on the way back down the motorway at another establishment and cheer myself up with a reading of probably nearer 240 BHP on a different set of rollers .... (been there and done that as well ...)
I will re-confirm that I have no commercial connection with Allan or Weltmeister, but would like to bring a different perspective to the discussion.
Rick.
I have witnessed standard factory cars including GT3, GT2, 996TT, 968, 928GTS etc putting down figures that were uncannily close to manufacturers figures. I have also seen 'modified' cars produce less power ...
My other connection with Weltmeister is that I use their Dyno extensively in the development of my own 944 Turbo, so have spent many, many hours in the cell with Chris Davies accepting or rejecting modifications.
My car may only be currently just over 400 BHP and 360 lb/ft, but in the earlier stages of development it had power runs on other UK dynos which without exception displayed higher figures than the Dyno Dynamics. This is also the same of other cars that I know.
This suits me because when I quote the power of my car as being recorded on the DD, I am quite confident that it will outperform a similarly (indicated) powered car whose power was recorded on alternative UK dynos.
During the many runs we performed on the DD, I also questioned the assumption that the cell would calculate similar results in different gears. I can confirm that runs in 3rd and 4th gear have been almost identical. I have also experienced repeatability between different tuning sessions where I have reloaded a previous map (the car has full standalone management) and got a virtually identical graph.
While not an AX22, my car is fitted with a G-Tech RR. On several occasions I have tested the car on a 1 mile flat (yes, I have tested both directions) on the way home from a Weltmeister session and the graphs and figures have been surprisingly close. This could not be said of my previous road tuning setup - a road race accelerometer and software.
My own tuning methods are different to other 944 tuners, and development of my car is privately funded. My background was in Group A RS500 tuning so I do appreciate repeatability of figures and have also in the past compared wildly over optimistic dyno figures with more realistic figures.
I know for certain that of I left Weltmeister on a really bad day with (theoretically) 200 BHP, I could stop off on the way back down the motorway at another establishment and cheer myself up with a reading of probably nearer 240 BHP on a different set of rollers .... (been there and done that as well ...)
I will re-confirm that I have no commercial connection with Allan or Weltmeister, but would like to bring a different perspective to the discussion.
Rick.
