Hey everyone, I'm planning on having my car tuned later this month. It's running rich and sorta crappy at the moment (think it needs coil packs, will determine later this week thanks to a loaned set). I believe there's more in it (could possibly be wrong, who knows?), but I have a question.... The last time the car was on the dyno, it made 340rwkw. The car is making this power and still running extremely rich, so I am assuming if it was leaned out a bit and perhaps a bit of timing advance (if possible without pinging), I could possibly get a bit more power on the same level of boost, 21psi. The thing I'm worried about is that I have head bolts in my engine rather than studs. I have heard that 350rwkw is basically the limit of bolts and any higher, studs should be used. Is this a FACT? Does anyone have any evidence (anecdotal or validated) that the VG needs studs above 350rwkw, or is it one of those things where most people have erred on the side of caution just in case? If there is a legitimate cause for concern, I'll still have the car tuned and hopefully have it leaned out a bit, I'll just try to see if I can maintain the 340rwkw or so by running less boost. I would like more if it's possible to push the limit safely obviously, but I won't risk anything if there is a good chance that the bolts will give up. Thanks for any advice.
Slow day at the office Mike? Still waiting for one of you wiseguys to explain how they fudge figures...
I didn't say anything about fidged figures. Printout says what it says, no more, no less. My point is simply that the mods and the figure don't add up. From the dyno day at UAS, I want to see a stock zed with 14psi (cat back and IC's) make between 220 and 230 (because we all know that this is pretty common and accepted baseline), and then I want to see 270kw at 11psi on 28rs's and then I want to see Procky's make similar to his dyno sheet from MRC. If they do, awesome, if they don't, well ner ner I told you (not you Rob, the forum) so. Call me a skeptic, but hey, that's what I do for a living. If something doesn't add up, I call BS until someone proves it to me.
This is the frustrating part. You have $200k worth of brand new, fully featured fully automated dyno with no room for operator error (that incidentally was purchased only last month as an upgrade from their old dyno dynamics) that says the car does XYZ, and you're "calling bullshit" as you put it based on...............? And the "arbiter" in this scenario is going to be John's dyno on Saturday? This alone speaks volumes towards your ignorance of both dynos and their operators. And you know what that's fine, because you have no experience with either workshop or tuner and were the roles reversed I'd be equally ignorant of QLD based operators. The frustrating part as I said is the "calling bullshit" (and in the process undermining one of the most honest operators in town AND putting down a nice bloke and fellow enthusiast) based on nothing but your assumptions.
At the end of the day, the dyno graph is just a bit of paper with a number on it. What does it mean? Nothing. My dyno reading at Mercury Motorsport says 284kw @ 16 or 17. I call bullshit on that also, but that's what the paper says. I also have another graph saying 250kw @ 13. So? The proof will be in the pudding. Multiple cars, same day, same dyno. This is the only way to compare dyno numbers. We all know that a stock tt with boost will net 220-230kw. That is accepted and a fair baseling do you not agree? Assuming this happens at UAS, everything else will fall into place. Are you running yours at the dyno day?
Read between the lines all you like, undermining a workshop I have never visited? No. Putting someone down? No. Questioning the stated output? Yes. If anyone is being butthurt it is their own fault. Sprouting OMG I have XXX @ such a low psi, see look at my dyno sheet. Dyno day is the day for a reality check for some people. I look forward to seeing the resulty and (the possibility of) being proven wrong. I seem to remember a few bees in bonnets about a certain NZ dyno figure fairly recently... Same shit, different packet IMO.
Post both sheets -can probably give a reasonable explanation if all the info is available. Mercury Motorsports I can see on their website use a dyno dynamics so the "output" if you like is going to be very much dependent on operator input. Anyway like I said post both sheets and it can probably be better explained. Sure. If I run 20 cars on a mainline I will get one set of results, the same 20 cars on a dyno dynamics I will get another result, the same 20 cars on a dynapack I will get another result. So which one is right? Simple answer is all and best to understand how and why these figures were reached before making comparisons. Better yet if I run 18 cars on a Dyno Dynamics, 1 car on a dynapack and 1 on a mainline which one are you suggesting is right? If I am to understand what you have written above we would consider the figures from the DD to be "accurate", even though the industry generally accepts that the mainline (aka dynolog) would read "lower" and the dynapak would read "higher". Truth is you would have to run all 20 cars on all 20 dynos before you could make comparisons between them. Correlation (or strength in numbers if you like) doesn't prove anything. I'm sure you know this. No I don't agree but anyway. The cars will be running on a Dyno Dynamics on Saturday. The three things that are going to have the biggest influence are accuracy of ambient temps, where the inlet air temp sensor is placed, and what mode the dyno is run in. Any one of these variables can influence a "high" or "low" result, or an "accurate one". The mainline dyno that Logan's car was tuned on (and mainline incidentally are generally accepted to read lower than Dyno Dynamics -back this up with your own research if you like) don't have so many variables for the operator and are generally considered more accurate. If you have a look at OEM and equipment manufacturers and serious "tuning" shops (as opposed to workshops that have dynos) you will find they are fast becoming the dyno of choice because of this accuracy and reliability. Maybe maybe not. Running out of fuel flow on high boost for some reason -which is a bit of a worry when there is supposed to be 500lph of fuel, hoping it's just a wiring issue with one of the pumps and to get it sorted in time. If can't get high boost running I will run it on low provided it's safe. Still makes plenty of power just not enough to go home with a trophy. Anyway this conversation is becoming somewhat redundant. It's an easy thing to sit back and stir the pot without referencing or supporting your allegations. Mike if you genuinely believe that "calling bullshit" (your words not mine) and publicly questioning the validity of their claims isn't undermining or putting them down then I owe you the sincerest of apologies. Discussions related to the accuracy of comparisons between dynapak hub style dynos and dyno dynamics chassis style dynos. If you refuse to acknowledge the difference then I really am wasting my time here...
270 @ 11 is high. Right or wrong, it is high. Is that what the output says? Yes. But it is still high. Is it correct? Sure, that's what the output says. But it is still high. Do not confuse 'correct' with 'accurate'. Any power figure from any dyno on any day is 'correct', because that's what the output says. Stock turbo + boost will make 220-230. Experience tells us this. Run 20 cars on a Mainline. If 10 of them are stock turbo + cat back + IC's and they all make 225ish, I would accept all other outputs of zeds of varying mods to be ballpark accurate (acceptable). Do the same on a DD. Do 10 on one and 10 on the other. Sure they are all 'correct', but the 'accurate' set would be the set that shows a stock zed to be 170-180 and/or a boosted stock turbo zed @ ~220. The key is having a baseline, which experience (and history) tells us that a stock zed with boost will make ~220-230. A stock boost tt will make ~170-180. We know this. You know this (well you should). Dyno fudging does not even come into this as far as I am concerned. It's the baseline that is the indicator. Example. Ztoy made 240kw on stock engine (stock ECU) @ 11 psi. Normally I would call BS, but it was run same day same dyno as many others, with a few clean baselines. Result on it's own, many would call BS. Sometimes there are just freak motors. Such is life. For the record, here is my sheet from mercury. Correct? Or accurate? Seat of pants says not accurate
At a glance I can see it's running in shoot mode 6F (six cylinder forced induction) which is going to read a little higher than if it was run in shoot mode 6. For the record most of the dynos that you are comparing to are run in 6 because John's doesn't have a 6F. Where was the intake air temp sensor? If it was a dyno day I'd bet money that they didn't put it in the filter in the path of the intake air where it's supposed to be (according to DD) -not that I give a shit but this again influences the result on this particular dyno. All details that affect the validity of your "baseline".
If the stock bolts wouldn't be able to keep up you should notice that the coolant pressure builds up in line with the torque the engine makes. If the engine has not been freshly rebuild and you don't know if the head bolts were torqued correctly, you can re-torque them. Just don't loosen them all the way or you could wreck the head gasket.
