A.W.E. Tuning - 997 GT2 Product Development - 14 October 2008
11-03-2008, 04:08 PM
#31
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
good point Toby. I think the main limitation is that a typical chassis dyno run will be in 4th gear, but even on the street I don't think the 997tt can generate full boost by the advertised 1950 rpm in 4th either. So then would it be fair to contend that the chassis dynos are accurate for 4th gear and less accurate for the loads encountered at 5th and 6th? I would entertain this would explain why the Switzer car does as anticipated up to ~150mph but after that we see the ugly faults arise.
I would have thought a decent full boost curve could be achieved by 3rd gear upwads (at least on my 993tt running up from low revs in third was enough to slip the clutch as it passed through 4250rpm which was always a good indicator of maximum torque
) on the road.I understood that most of these power runs are the equivalent of 2nd gear runs in terms of loading ?
Whilst the engine dyno braking method is obviously the gold standard (it is how Porsche do it) there are plenty of tuners doing it like AWE I just wonder how the shortcomings manifest themselves ? It seems modern engine programming does seem to be able to be made to "patch" over most issues maybe because the advanced knock control safety features which are still in place and rapidly protect the engine in those high load situations or in extreme like the Switzer car when the throttle shuts down completely to prevent "melt down"
I would love to see this set up run on a Maha LPS3000 like the one Manthey have, it would be very revealing just how real the new power/torque curves are....
My Manthey Maha power measurement run taking ~23 seconds of loading (note this braked the engine up to around 770NM of torque at 1.1bar boost @ 4500rpm during the run) !!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=K3EU5J_TIsM
11-04-2008, 12:01 PM
#32
user
Thread Starter
I apologize for not responding to some questions. I have a tight schedule since I leave for SEMA today. I return on Monday the 10th.
Here is some final data. Overall we are very pleased.
Final boost curves, Stock GT2 vs AWE GT2 vs 700S
Final EGT curves, Stock GT2 vs AWE GT2 vs 700S
Final IAT curves. This sheet shows stock GT2 ICs with our hardware/GIAC and how they do with back to back runs and with a 5 minute cooldown:
This sheet shows AWE ICs with our hardware/GIAC and how they do with back to back runs and with a 5 minute cooldown:
Basically, both react about the same regarding heat soak, but ours maintain a much lower overall temperature (~30+ F temp drop!)
Here is some final data. Overall we are very pleased.
Final boost curves, Stock GT2 vs AWE GT2 vs 700S
Final EGT curves, Stock GT2 vs AWE GT2 vs 700S
Final IAT curves. This sheet shows stock GT2 ICs with our hardware/GIAC and how they do with back to back runs and with a 5 minute cooldown:
This sheet shows AWE ICs with our hardware/GIAC and how they do with back to back runs and with a 5 minute cooldown:
Basically, both react about the same regarding heat soak, but ours maintain a much lower overall temperature (~30+ F temp drop!)
11-04-2008, 12:21 PM
#34
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
11-04-2008, 12:31 PM
#35
user
Thread Starter
11-05-2008, 07:34 AM
#37
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
OK, the lack of loading by the chassis dyno for me renders all the ECU tuning completely meaningless and the actual dyno run may or may not mean that this car will accelerate as the dyno shows for a second gear run......
What I am trying to get my head round is what the data on the intercoolers means. On the face of it the AWE units look magical but I wonder if the testing method is flawed.
One has to come at this on the basis that most of us on here think Porsche are top engineers and know what they are doing and know how to test and spec up all their components. I also have knowledge from my preffered tuner RS that from their extensive testing on intercoolers (mainly done for racing purposes) ended up with them comissioning the mega expensive Secan stuff which cost about $20K for a set.
Am I right in saying that the only 100% real way of testing the effectiveness of an intercooler on one of these cars is by running it on the road and doing one intercooler against another back to back under the same conditions ?
The problem with the AWE method above is that there is a fixed speed airflow blowing in reverse through the intercooler from that electric blower. Just how much is that airflow ? could it replicate what ? 30mph ?
The problem with that fixed 30mph airflow is it doesn't increase in speed as the revs climb on the dyno so by definition the standard I/Cs cannot be performing how they do on the road...
If we take it that this dyno run replicates the loading of a 2nd gear run then by 6500rpm there should be a ~65mph flow through the intercoolers NOT the paltry 30mph - surely Porsche designed the stock units to work with the correct airflow ?
The question then raised is yes the AWE units seem to perform brilliantly for this 2nd gear dyno run with 30mph continuous airflow but will they or will they not perform equally as well (compared to the stock units) with the correct airflow ?
And of course what about higher gears and even more airflow ? the GT2 manages 204mph which indicates it is making all its 530PS at full speed so the stock I/Cs MUST be doing something right ?
The only proper testing I have ever seen was done by Phelix on his tuned 993tt - he logged all relevant parameters accurately up to ~180mph.
The stock I/Cs were at a disadvantage in this test as the car was running a lot more boost than standard (1.1+bar vs 0.8bar stock) but the results are still interesting.
The first diagram below is for the stock intercooler and the one below that is for a special one made with some special cores from Marston. It is worth pointing out that the people at Marston claimed that their cores were cutting edge technology and as good as Secan - and they were expensive at $10K for the intercooler.
There is no second gear run to compare with the AWE run but the first bit of acceleration is in 3rd gear up to 90mph consider the airflow at 90mph compared to that ~30mph fan.....
The stock I/C has a max temp of 35DegC at 90mph and the Marston 32DegC. During the 4th gear spurt (to 125mph) the stock I/C manages 46degC and Marston 43DegC
So not a whole lot of difference when the correct airflow is put through the cores...
When the Secan was tested it became obvious why they were so expensive
the max temp in 3rd gear was 26DegC and in 4th gear was 32DegC....
I so want to believe in these cheap intercoolers but am I alone in wanting to see proper testing ?
What I am trying to get my head round is what the data on the intercoolers means. On the face of it the AWE units look magical but I wonder if the testing method is flawed.
One has to come at this on the basis that most of us on here think Porsche are top engineers and know what they are doing and know how to test and spec up all their components. I also have knowledge from my preffered tuner RS that from their extensive testing on intercoolers (mainly done for racing purposes) ended up with them comissioning the mega expensive Secan stuff which cost about $20K for a set.
Am I right in saying that the only 100% real way of testing the effectiveness of an intercooler on one of these cars is by running it on the road and doing one intercooler against another back to back under the same conditions ?
The problem with the AWE method above is that there is a fixed speed airflow blowing in reverse through the intercooler from that electric blower. Just how much is that airflow ? could it replicate what ? 30mph ?
The problem with that fixed 30mph airflow is it doesn't increase in speed as the revs climb on the dyno so by definition the standard I/Cs cannot be performing how they do on the road...
If we take it that this dyno run replicates the loading of a 2nd gear run then by 6500rpm there should be a ~65mph flow through the intercoolers NOT the paltry 30mph - surely Porsche designed the stock units to work with the correct airflow ?
The question then raised is yes the AWE units seem to perform brilliantly for this 2nd gear dyno run with 30mph continuous airflow but will they or will they not perform equally as well (compared to the stock units) with the correct airflow ?
And of course what about higher gears and even more airflow ? the GT2 manages 204mph which indicates it is making all its 530PS at full speed so the stock I/Cs MUST be doing something right ?
The only proper testing I have ever seen was done by Phelix on his tuned 993tt - he logged all relevant parameters accurately up to ~180mph.
The stock I/Cs were at a disadvantage in this test as the car was running a lot more boost than standard (1.1+bar vs 0.8bar stock) but the results are still interesting.
The first diagram below is for the stock intercooler and the one below that is for a special one made with some special cores from Marston. It is worth pointing out that the people at Marston claimed that their cores were cutting edge technology and as good as Secan - and they were expensive at $10K for the intercooler.
There is no second gear run to compare with the AWE run but the first bit of acceleration is in 3rd gear up to 90mph consider the airflow at 90mph compared to that ~30mph fan.....
The stock I/C has a max temp of 35DegC at 90mph and the Marston 32DegC. During the 4th gear spurt (to 125mph) the stock I/C manages 46degC and Marston 43DegC
So not a whole lot of difference when the correct airflow is put through the cores...
When the Secan was tested it became obvious why they were so expensive
the max temp in 3rd gear was 26DegC and in 4th gear was 32DegC....
I so want to believe in these cheap intercoolers but am I alone in wanting to see proper testing ?
11-06-2008, 10:17 PM
#39
Instructor
Toby,
We're testing in 4th gear, not 2nd.
A full pull takes ~12 seconds, which is realistic for street acceleration in that gear.
We verify all dyno OBD data on the street. Our baseline street IAT temps and EGTs were very similar to what we saw on the dyno, so we know we are tuning with relevant data. We will confirm again on the street in modified mode.
Our fans produce ~60mph at the outlets, and are much more effective in providing the velocity of air needed for realistic cooling than a high speed fan placed only at the front of the car.
Loading the car higher at lower rpms results in clutch chatter, which not only is an undesireable mechanical abuse, but is also an indication of unrealistic loading that does not mimic street conditions.
We have always been the biggest critic of tuning shops using their dyno carelessly. It is not a stand alone tuning tool and must be operated in a way that produces results that simulate street operation, or the data is absolutely meaningless.
As you have seen from client provided data, our results are not "dyno dependent" and can be backed up by top speed runs even in hostile ambient conditions. We regularly test and acquire data from our products on the race track.
I understand your skepticism regarding chassis dyno results. It saddens us that such a useful tool can make such a bad name for the industry when used by unscrupulous or untrained operators. For the record, we conduct literally dozens of runs per development iteration to ensure result consistency. We do not simply run the car once or twice and pick the best results to display to the public.
As you and I discussed via PM, I believe the huge price differential that exists between our parts and some of the Euro parts is simply due to targeted market size. We sell globally and base our pricing on a large volume target market vs what some of the Euro tuners are doing. I am fully confident that our products perform equally if not better than products costing multiple times what ours do.
We're testing in 4th gear, not 2nd.
A full pull takes ~12 seconds, which is realistic for street acceleration in that gear.
We verify all dyno OBD data on the street. Our baseline street IAT temps and EGTs were very similar to what we saw on the dyno, so we know we are tuning with relevant data. We will confirm again on the street in modified mode.
Our fans produce ~60mph at the outlets, and are much more effective in providing the velocity of air needed for realistic cooling than a high speed fan placed only at the front of the car.
Loading the car higher at lower rpms results in clutch chatter, which not only is an undesireable mechanical abuse, but is also an indication of unrealistic loading that does not mimic street conditions.
We have always been the biggest critic of tuning shops using their dyno carelessly. It is not a stand alone tuning tool and must be operated in a way that produces results that simulate street operation, or the data is absolutely meaningless.
As you have seen from client provided data, our results are not "dyno dependent" and can be backed up by top speed runs even in hostile ambient conditions. We regularly test and acquire data from our products on the race track.
I understand your skepticism regarding chassis dyno results. It saddens us that such a useful tool can make such a bad name for the industry when used by unscrupulous or untrained operators. For the record, we conduct literally dozens of runs per development iteration to ensure result consistency. We do not simply run the car once or twice and pick the best results to display to the public.
As you and I discussed via PM, I believe the huge price differential that exists between our parts and some of the Euro parts is simply due to targeted market size. We sell globally and base our pricing on a large volume target market vs what some of the Euro tuners are doing. I am fully confident that our products perform equally if not better than products costing multiple times what ours do.
11-07-2008, 06:59 AM
#40
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Toby,
We're testing in 4th gear, not 2nd.
A full pull takes ~12 seconds, which is realistic for street acceleration in that gear.
We verify all dyno OBD data on the street. Our baseline street IAT temps and EGTs were very similar to what we saw on the dyno, so we know we are tuning with relevant data. We will confirm again on the street in modified mode.
Our fans produce ~60mph at the outlets, and are much more effective in providing the velocity of air needed for realistic cooling than a high speed fan placed only at the front of the car..
We're testing in 4th gear, not 2nd.
A full pull takes ~12 seconds, which is realistic for street acceleration in that gear.
We verify all dyno OBD data on the street. Our baseline street IAT temps and EGTs were very similar to what we saw on the dyno, so we know we are tuning with relevant data. We will confirm again on the street in modified mode.
Our fans produce ~60mph at the outlets, and are much more effective in providing the velocity of air needed for realistic cooling than a high speed fan placed only at the front of the car..
If 4th gear then the "on road" air flow will be ~125mph at the top of 4th gear so again your ~60mph fan is in no way replicating what happens on the road and is not giving a fair showing to the stock intercooler.
Porsche changed the I/C from 996tt to 996GT2 and it is widely berated on the likes of 6Speed as being no better but lets face it NOONE has actually tested it ! I for one believe that Porsche make those sorts of changes for a reason !
The only comments I read from someone who appears to have tested your intercoolers is that 997ttguru guy on 6speed who says:
we've clearly seen on our tests that (AWE) intercoolers do not have any effect until 230-240 km/h,
Now we don't know what tests he has done but his statement completely contradicts what your charts show above ! PLEASE you do some back to back ones like the ones I posted above - please SHUT ME UP and show that your I/Cs work better than stock and do it in way (like above) which is truely representative ie on the road....
We have always been the biggest critic of tuning shops using their dyno carelessly. It is not a stand alone tuning tool and must be operated in a way that produces results that simulate street operation, or the data is absolutely meaningless.
As you have seen from client provided data, our results are not "dyno dependent" and can be backed up by top speed runs even in hostile ambient conditions. We regularly test and acquire data from our products on the race track.
I understand your skepticism regarding chassis dyno results. It saddens us that such a useful tool can make such a bad name for the industry when used by unscrupulous or untrained operators. For the record, we conduct literally dozens of runs per development iteration to ensure result consistency. We do not simply run the car once or twice and pick the best results to display to the public.
As you and I discussed via PM, I believe the huge price differential that exists between our parts and some of the Euro parts is simply due to targeted market size. We sell globally and base our pricing on a large volume target market vs what some of the Euro tuners are doing. I am fully confident that our products perform equally if not better than products costing multiple times what ours do.
As you have seen from client provided data, our results are not "dyno dependent" and can be backed up by top speed runs even in hostile ambient conditions. We regularly test and acquire data from our products on the race track.
I understand your skepticism regarding chassis dyno results. It saddens us that such a useful tool can make such a bad name for the industry when used by unscrupulous or untrained operators. For the record, we conduct literally dozens of runs per development iteration to ensure result consistency. We do not simply run the car once or twice and pick the best results to display to the public.
As you and I discussed via PM, I believe the huge price differential that exists between our parts and some of the Euro parts is simply due to targeted market size. We sell globally and base our pricing on a large volume target market vs what some of the Euro tuners are doing. I am fully confident that our products perform equally if not better than products costing multiple times what ours do.
I really would like to see some proper intercooler testing tho'
11-07-2008, 07:40 AM
#41
From what I recall the stock intercoolers are clamped with plastic ends which may be subject to leakage from continued high boost track runs. I believe the AWE units are fully welded aluminum ends, a great piece of mind if running jarring track sessions.
In regards to AWE/GIAC's software, my past experiences with my Audi S4 (twin turbo) have proved to me their tuning capabilities.
In regards to AWE/GIAC's software, my past experiences with my Audi S4 (twin turbo) have proved to me their tuning capabilities.
11-07-2008, 09:36 AM
#42
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I think logging a run with one stock IC and on AWE IC - each with a thermal sensor in the outflow tank would be a neat test. It would eliminate any possible argument for inter-testing variation. I would imagine since the ECU reads the combined IAC off the y-pipe that it would be relatively safe, unless there is an excessive difference in flow between the two banks (unlikely). Even a contact thermal sensor on the exterior silicone hoses off the outflow tanks may work (albeit suboptimal).
11-07-2008, 12:59 PM
#43
Instructor
The Maha "power measurement" pull is 4th gear also and takes 23s on my 993tt, a lot of that time is taken up as the Maha fights against the torque and loads the engine in the mid range ~3000rpm , this brings on the boost and torque and heat (IATs) surely this is needed to really replicate what the engine will be seeing on the road.
If 4th gear then the "on road" air flow will be ~125mph at the top of 4th gear so again your ~60mph fan is in no way replicating what happens on the road and is not giving a fair showing to the stock intercooler.
:
If 4th gear then the "on road" air flow will be ~125mph at the top of 4th gear so again your ~60mph fan is in no way replicating what happens on the road and is not giving a fair showing to the stock intercooler.
:
But neither is the "150mph" Maha fans, because that fan is directed at the front of the car and by the time the air actually reaches the side intercooler duct intakes it is flowing much slower. I've witnessed that first hand in a Maha demonstration cell at a now defunct California tuner. When testing there for a magazine, we had to run over to GIAC to grab their smaller fans to bring IATs back down to a realistic level. Just pointing out that the Maha has a lot of inherent flaws when used "as directed".
Do not forget that we accumulated lots of data on various race tracks here when developing our products on our 997TT, so we have seen ~160mph speed (legally).
Now we don't know what tests he has done but his statement completely contradicts what your charts show above ! PLEASE you do some back to back ones like the ones I posted above - please SHUT ME UP and show that your I/Cs work better than stock and do it in way (like above) which is truely representative ie on the road....
Like I said, we always do before and after street testing with products to confirm our dyno data. We will do some "after" test on the GT2, but they will not be with ICs alone. We have another car coming in in the next couple weeks that we can do that test on. But we have never seen an inconsistency between dyno and street on any car we did product development on.
I have to catch a flight but will check in on this thread later this weekend.
11-07-2008, 01:53 PM
#44
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I was citing the Maha as an example of a chassis dyno which has the ability to load up the engine from low revs and produce a proper (Porsche engine dyno like) torque curve (with the realistic heating of the air at lower revs due to the earlier onset of boost) instead of the low load curve which yours and most others get.
No chassis dyno can really test the intercooler like a proper road test, even the Manthey facility which has outside ambient air blowing from everywhere, this one of the very few chassis dyno set ups in existance which can give Porsche engine dyno equivalent torque curves and they are limited by the amount of real torque which can be harnessed on the rollers (seems to be about 770NM
)
No chassis dyno can really test the intercooler like a proper road test, even the Manthey facility which has outside ambient air blowing from everywhere, this one of the very few chassis dyno set ups in existance which can give Porsche engine dyno equivalent torque curves and they are limited by the amount of real torque which can be harnessed on the rollers (seems to be about 770NM
)
11-07-2008, 02:57 PM
#45
http://www.6speedonline.com/forums/9...twin-30rs.html
"I had the good fortune of seeing this car on Monday while dropping off one of my cars. The fabrication work is superb and the attention to detail as good as any I have seen. Tym said that the twin GT35R's should be good to beyond 750 rwhp but without forged internals the hp will be "capped" around that figure. A fantastic build. It should sound like a banshee on boost with the waste-gate venting to the atmosphere. Enjoy!"
Anyway can't wait to see what AWE does with this car, GT2's are stout even from the factory!