Welcome to the SR20 Community Forum - The Dash.
Register
SR20 forum logo

Thread: Budget Build

+ Reply To Thread
Posts: 221-230 of 386
2009-02-25 17:23:58
#221
Its getting all hot and bothered in here. One thing Jun is good for is sparking controversy. This is the busiest I have seen the VVL section get in a long time.
2009-02-25 17:25:12
#222
Originally Posted by snickers
A big problem with Dynapacks is that they can not and will not take into effect the rolling resistance and power loss from the wheels. The other is that because the Dynapac measures TQ output and has to convert to HP, there is calculation error there that can be off.

A dyno can only be as accurate as it is calibrated to do so. It is VERY VERY easy to mess something up and get high numbers and not know it. the biggest problem is where the IAT sensor is placed. Most of the time it is getting false heat from the computer, monitor or the sun.

About 2 months ago I went around to about 5 dyno's around the area and dyno'd my 99% bone stock RSX-S. Dynojets, dynapacks you name it. All the Dynojets SAE were within 3whp of each other at 176-178whp and 130tq. I'm sure if i measured tire temps and pressures and made sure they were equal, then they would all be the same.

The first dynapack I went to, the first pull was 192whp, and the second 199whp... thats over 20whp gain SAE TO SAE. Then we put it on standard to see the "uncorrected" numbers and it dropped to 187whp. That means that it is seeing super high air temps or humidity or something else. I did have the "glitch" that all dynapacks do from time to time but i knew about it so i just did another run to get rid of it.

All in all the dynapack 4000 and the 2000 both were 7-8% higher SAE to SAE than a dynojet was. And that was nearly a direct comparison between them.

Another thing to back this up is that my friends 1995 EG hatch with a K24 in it was making 328whp on a dynapack 4000 and that was with "the glitch" at the track he was only running 11.5 @ 116mph.

My friend/ business partner, was running 325whp on a dynojet in a 2400lb car but he was consistently pulling well over 120mph with 3 whp less BUT 300lbs more? same trans, same gear ratios, same slicks. They redyno'd on a dynojet and lost almost 30whp. from 328 to 299 just that easy, then it was easy to see why their car was slower mph than the heavier one.

It is possible to correect a Dynapack to read the same as a dynojet, or within about 1-2% which is good, but not all can be done this way.

Dynapacks are awesome for tuning because you can load the car up and tune cell by cell, row by row. Dynojets are better and more accurate run to run to get the same readings over and over. I did 47 runs on 2 dynapacks never turning the car off ( on each pack) and i NEVER got a consistent run back to back where as on the dynojet i did 4 runs back to back non stop in a row and got a 1whp varriation.

I know a lot of people prefer dynapack numbers, but it is too easy to get hyped up and then go to the track and be dissapointed.

Another thing i've noticed about sr20ve motor setups is that most, and almost all of them with great setups "200whp+" setups all make 200whp at almost exactly 7000rpm. 6900-7100 on average. donttazmebro's car makes it at about 6300rpm or so which is about 10% sooner and oh look, thats 10% more displacement.

The dyno that Jun posted was making 200whp at about 6300rpm so either it had a stroker crank in it, or like i was thinking, the numbers were dynapack so you need to lower by 7-8% to correct. and when you do so (after removing the glitch pyramid) you get about 205whp DYNOJET and now you are making 200whp @ 7000rpm give or take. Just something i've noticed with nearly ALL good VVL setups.



so dynojets are better...hmm so many ppl r gonna be sad after this thread.
i'll use my butt dyno to tell me if i gained any power after i install parts. Im so confused now i dont even wanna bother dynoing my shyt after im done.
2009-02-25 17:29:32
#223
Here is the original dyno of 231 WHP




Here is what the dyno should look like with 221 WHP

2009-02-25 17:29:37
#224
Originally Posted by donttazmebro
A dyno is a tuning tool

The desire for a corrected dyno is to more accurately compare a dynojet across the country or a dynopack across the country.
I'm not trying to add to the confusion in this thread, but since we're on the topic of dynos and accuracy I thought I'd take a moment to explain my feelings on dyno accuracy.
I've heard it said many times that the actual numbers spit out by a dyno are less important than their repeatability. Basically, who cares if it says you make 100 WHP as long as it shows increases and decreases properly?
Well, I care God dammit, and I'll tell you why.

Many items at our disposal (turbos, injectors, etc) have well known HP potential, limits and behavior based on power output. If the dyno says I'm making 310 WHP on a T28 at 15 psi then I know I'm getting to the edge of what this turbo is capable of. I can make an informed decision on my tuning based on this. If the dyno says I'm making 270 WHP on a T28 at 15 psi and that's accurate then it tells me many other things. If it is "just reading low" and I'm really at 310 WHP then I'm pissed off because I can't trust the dyno output and make decisions accordingly.

I'll say this, for me at least, the desire for a corrected dyno is much more than just to accurately compare a dyno across the country. Dyno accuracy is essential for engine tuning. Mountains of information becomes useless without it.
2009-02-25 17:32:12
#225
Originally Posted by BenFenner


I'll say this, for me at least, the desire for a corrected dyno is much more than just to accurately compare a dyno across the country. Dyno accuracy is essential for engine tuning. Mountains of information becomes useless without it.


BAM!
2009-02-25 18:05:57
#226
Originally Posted by TheRealNighthog
Its getting all hot and bothered in here. One thing Jun is good for is sparking controversy. This is the busiest I have seen the VVL section get in a long time.


^It was like 25 people in here at one point
2009-02-25 18:34:09
#227
numbers are for pub talk. its all how the car drives and who is driving it that counts. well done anyway jun
2009-02-25 18:46:03
#228
Originally Posted by DEAD
my boy sylar doing what he does best. break it down bro


I try man and it's about time.

Originally Posted by snickers
A big problem with Dynapacks is that they can not and will not take into effect the rolling resistance and power loss from the wheels. The other is that because the Dynapac measures TQ output and has to convert to HP, there is calculation error there that can be off.

A dyno can only be as accurate as it is calibrated to do so. It is VERY VERY easy to mess something up and get high numbers and not know it. the biggest problem is where the IAT sensor is placed. Most of the time it is getting false heat from the computer, monitor or the sun.

About 2 months ago I went around to about 5 dyno's around the area and dyno'd my 99% bone stock RSX-S. Dynojets, dynapacks you name it. All the Dynojets SAE were within 3whp of each other at 176-178whp and 130tq. I'm sure if i measured tire temps and pressures and made sure they were equal, then they would all be the same.

The first dynapack I went to, the first pull was 192whp, and the second 199whp... thats over 20whp gain SAE TO SAE. Then we put it on standard to see the "uncorrected" numbers and it dropped to 187whp. That means that it is seeing super high air temps or humidity or something else. I did have the "glitch" that all dynapacks do from time to time but i knew about it so i just did another run to get rid of it.

All in all the dynapack 4000 and the 2000 both were 7-8% higher SAE to SAE than a dynojet was. And that was nearly a direct comparison between them.

Another thing to back this up is that my friends 1995 EG hatch with a K24 in it was making 328whp on a dynapack 4000 and that was with "the glitch" at the track he was only running 11.5 @ 116mph.

My friend/ business partner, was running 325whp on a dynojet in a 2400lb car but he was consistently pulling well over 120mph with 3 whp less BUT 300lbs more? same trans, same gear ratios, same slicks. They redyno'd on a dynojet and lost almost 30whp. from 328 to 299 just that easy, then it was easy to see why their car was slower mph than the heavier one.

It is possible to correect a Dynapack to read the same as a dynojet, or within about 1-2% which is good, but not all can be done this way.

Dynapacks are awesome for tuning because you can load the car up and tune cell by cell, row by row. Dynojets are better and more accurate run to run to get the same readings over and over. I did 47 runs on 2 dynapacks never turning the car off ( on each pack) and i NEVER got a consistent run back to back where as on the dynojet i did 4 runs back to back non stop in a row and got a 1whp varriation.

I know a lot of people prefer dynapack numbers, but it is too easy to get hyped up and then go to the track and be dissapointed.

Another thing i've noticed about sr20ve motor setups is that most, and almost all of them with great setups "200whp+" setups all make 200whp at almost exactly 7000rpm. 6900-7100 on average. donttazmebro's car makes it at about 6300rpm or so which is about 10% sooner and oh look, thats 10% more displacement.

The dyno that Jun posted was making 200whp at about 6300rpm so either it had a stroker crank in it, or like i was thinking, the numbers were dynapack so you need to lower by 7-8% to correct. and when you do so (after removing the glitch pyramid) you get about 205whp DYNOJET and now you are making 200whp @ 7000rpm give or take. Just something i've noticed with nearly ALL good VVL setups.



Only thing I can say is the packs at XX have a built in weather station that automatically feeds into the main comp running the dynapack software. It's hard to PURPOSELY fake out the packs at XX. When I want spongy numbers I'll take it to the Mustang roller. And of course there will be less discrepancy with a huge roller dyno. The packs are waaaay more accurate. You also really have to have an accurate tach signal for the packs so you can synch the dyno proper, as the packs often dont have a tach pickup (why would they need one there is no tire slippage).
2009-02-25 18:49:54
#229
Originally Posted by MR-4Door-SR20DE
^Man you don't have to spell out nothing for me. I asked a simple question and that was it. You digging to much. Forget I ever asked. I already stated that I'm still doing my research as I make my DE to VE crossover. It's not all about power for me. I like to know what parts interchange and such. The new technology I was speaking of would be a new motor that would compete with the K. I asked you about the N1 because I don't have any experience with them as of right now. Don't try to use my VE question to try and give a overall view of my intelligence. That is weak. I will make 200WHP on my VE when the time comes.

/


Not digging at all man. If you do your research (and you come across as someone trying to learn and do well) there is no doubt you will reach your goals. Please don't take my post as a slight. As far as a new motor, what can they really change? If you think about it, it's all stuff you yourself can do. It just takes time and money. What it comes down to is power is power and there are standard methods to make it.
2009-02-25 18:51:16
#230
Originally Posted by TheRealNighthog
Only thing Jun is good for is sparking controversy.


DING
+ Reply To Thread
  • [Type to search users.]
  • Quick Reply
    Thread Information
    There are currently ? users browsing this thread. (? members & ? guests)
    StubUserName

    Back to top