Dyno
#1
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Dyno
Can dyno pulls be started from a complete stop, or at least from a very low rpm start? The times I've done dynos the runs have started from ~2000 rpm. Is traction on the drums the issue?
#3
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Dock many good dyno's can edit the software so that the run can start earlier. With my Dynapack I can start applying load at lets say 1500 RPM and start the data at 1550 or any RPM that I set. You have to have enough torque to start the hubs turning.. And also enough to hold it.. With the hubs bolted to the dyno, we hop isn't a issue.. Insist on disconnecting your drive-shaft on every dyno except a Mustang..
#5
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Thanks Kevin -
Until we get a chassis dyno on the 997 Turbo, we have to evaluate it's power curves based on the data released by Porsche. As I understand it, this data is from an engine dyno and shows the great low-end torque the new turbos make. All of the 996 Turbo dynos I have, many from EVO, are from a chassis dyno. These dynos don't start as low in the rpm range as the Porsche graph, so I can't evaluate the difference in low-end torque between the two cars. From what I have been able to extract from the available data, the 996 Turbo with GIAC Stage 2 is generating the same power as the 997 Turbo from ~3500-4000 rpm. Above 4000 rpm the Stage 2 makes better power.
The current data shows the 997 Turbo making better power below 3500 rpm, but that's because the 996 dynos I have don't start until ~2200 rpm, so it's "behind" in terms of building boost.
Here's the data I have (based on a dyno from EVO)...rounded to the nearest 10, and obviously not entirely scientific. Just a point of discussion. The data for the 997 Turbo is from an engine dyno started at ~1200 rpm. The 996 Turbo Stage 2 data is from a chassis dyno starting at ~2200 rpm. I converted the 996 Turbo numbers to flywheel numbers by using a correction factor of .875 (a 12.5% drive train loss). At each listed rpm the value listed is the +/- power of the 996 Turbo versus the 997 Turbo...
Torque
2500...-170
3000...-115
3500... -35
4000...even
4500... +25
5000... +30
5500... +50
6000... +20
Horsepower
3000... -70
3500... -40
4000... +10
4500... +25
5000... +35
5500... +35
6000... +30
Obviously, if a correction factor of 15% is used, the numbers would be more favorable for the 996 Turbo...but I decided to go conservative.
Until we get a chassis dyno on the 997 Turbo, we have to evaluate it's power curves based on the data released by Porsche. As I understand it, this data is from an engine dyno and shows the great low-end torque the new turbos make. All of the 996 Turbo dynos I have, many from EVO, are from a chassis dyno. These dynos don't start as low in the rpm range as the Porsche graph, so I can't evaluate the difference in low-end torque between the two cars. From what I have been able to extract from the available data, the 996 Turbo with GIAC Stage 2 is generating the same power as the 997 Turbo from ~3500-4000 rpm. Above 4000 rpm the Stage 2 makes better power.
The current data shows the 997 Turbo making better power below 3500 rpm, but that's because the 996 dynos I have don't start until ~2200 rpm, so it's "behind" in terms of building boost.
Here's the data I have (based on a dyno from EVO)...rounded to the nearest 10, and obviously not entirely scientific. Just a point of discussion. The data for the 997 Turbo is from an engine dyno started at ~1200 rpm. The 996 Turbo Stage 2 data is from a chassis dyno starting at ~2200 rpm. I converted the 996 Turbo numbers to flywheel numbers by using a correction factor of .875 (a 12.5% drive train loss). At each listed rpm the value listed is the +/- power of the 996 Turbo versus the 997 Turbo...
Torque
2500...-170
3000...-115
3500... -35
4000...even
4500... +25
5000... +30
5500... +50
6000... +20
Horsepower
3000... -70
3500... -40
4000... +10
4500... +25
5000... +35
5500... +35
6000... +30
Obviously, if a correction factor of 15% is used, the numbers would be more favorable for the 996 Turbo...but I decided to go conservative.