VH45-Z32 First pass Dyno Results

The following is the first pass dyno results (180kwrw) for my VH45-Z32 conversion with a VH45 gearbox installed with a 3 inch exhaust.
This 180KWrw translates to about 270KW at the engine which is what was expected based on my calculations. By the way this 180KW is what you can expect from a 6l SS Commodore.
Note that the AFR runs quite rich at the top end, hence a new fuel ratio map (to come) could potentially increase the final figure to 190kwrw to 200kwrw.
For a manual this results means 200KWrw is possible.



The following diagram is the torque curve ... twice that for the V6 NA.

 

What is the VH redlining at? will you be looking to upgrade the cams at all?

 

niceeeee

 

How did you calculate that 180kw at the wheels equates to 270 at the flywheel?

A 90kw drivetrain loss is fairly substantial.

 

180rwkw should equate to 300bhp shouldnt it???

 

good result

and even more important, how does that engine sound when its revving out, oh yeah!!:bow2::drool:

 

I had a 5.7l maloo and now driving a 5.7ltr SS with extractors and dynod @ 205rwkw. Iv seen some with a smiple chip putting out 250rwkw.

I honestly thought these VH45 could pull 250rwkw which would have been impressive. Even 180rwkw is pretty good same as a stock TT.

Drive it around for a while so you get the feel of all the extra power from your NA then, give a couple of turbos a try! they aint all that bad....you might even find it more exciting to drive.

Nice Work - keep it up :thumbup:

 

33% loss
it sounds like alot but im guessing its an auto and the standard vh45 auto would be lazy as the infinity was for comfort so probably about right

 

Good stuff! :thumbup:

Aftermarket cams aren't real common for the VH's. You can get regrinds from NZ and a company in the states called Mazworks are currently developing new grinds for them. They are also making kits to bolt the VH into S13's with the Z32 gearbox

 

Well, I'm not an expert, but that kinda loss sounds crazy.

 

id say the VH45's 180rwkw would equate to around 230fwkw MAX!!

its a manual i think - so the drivetrain is the same or very similar to a stock zed as far as im aware. And in the Z's 220kw = 180-190rwkw.

 

Bang for buck

180 sounds great with all that torque.....and the sound.........So whats the bang for buck for the rest of us whom might consider this? you gained 50kw for $???

 

answers to your questions

Answers to your Questions

# The engine in its current configuration is bog-standard. It has not even had a 100kkm service performed at this stage (even though all the parts have been purchased and are ready to be installed). The only things changed were the fluids and spark plugs. The timing belt, water pump, guides, and cam seals will be replaced at the first service. Mark?s objective was to have the engine installed in the car, then run it for a month or two, then do a major service (just like it was a normal car). That way, it gives some time to detect any problems (plus time for Mark to strip down his VH45).

# Gearbox is more luxury than sport ? not quite try, Mark?s research (since he will be using the same engine-gearbox-SAW combination for his twin-turbo R31) indicates that the Q45 / President actually starts off in 2nd gear; there is a button for it to start in 1st gear. Also I am using a SAW kit and I have experienced that the SAW gearbox controller is significantly more sporty / aggressive / responsive than the OEM gearbox controller. For example with my V6 I had a problem with my speed sensor on the Wiseman?s Ferry Road bumping the speed reading to zero which (because of the way the SAW kit was configured at the time returned to 1st gear) resulted in the gearbox changing from 4th to 1st at 80km/hr and buzzing the engine (Mark built a very strong V6 engine). I replaced the SAW with the OEM for the remainder of the journey. Even the passenger noted how slower the car was throw the rev range and to change gears; standing starts to 100km/hr showed that the OEM gearbox was almost a second slower than the SAW. So to me it appears that the ?sportiness? of the Nissan gearbox is more of a factor of software programming rather than mechanical configuration.

# 90kw (i.e. 33%) seems to be a large amount of loss. If you do some internet searching you will find that the loss for automatic gearboxes is generally given as approximately 30% and manuals being in the 20-25% range. Hence I use a factor of 2/3 for an automatic and 3/4 for a manual, as it makes the calculation relatively easy to determine. This factor works well enough for me; for examine the Z32-V6-Na (standard) is quoted at 167kw(eng). When the following modifications are considered; 98oct fuel compared to 91oct is a 1-2% increase so about 1-2kw, a pod filler is 5-10kw so about 7kw, and a lighten under-drive pulley is 5-10kw so about 7kw. So 167 + 1 + 7 + 7 = 182kw. My car dynode at 118-122kwrw (depending on timing adjustment)? 182 / 3 x 2 = 121 kwrw. Hence 33% is an accurate enough factor for estimating a Nissan engine and gearbox (given the common time period / ago of the z32 and the VH45). so the V6-NA 120 / 3 liter = 40kwrw per liter ?. Hence for 4.5 liter is 40 x 4.5 = 180kwrw, which is what the car dynoed at. So theoretically if a good well tuned Z32-V6TT dynoed at 250KWrw than one could reasonable expect 375 KWrw from a VH45TT.

 

Now we are throwing estimates everywhere. Let stick to the facts...the car pulled 180rwkw.

A good automatic TT zed in good condition (300hp) will pull around 180rwkw.

So thats 223kw (Engine) - 180rwkw = 20% loss for the autos?

Am i wrong.......?


Im really happy that you got this done and hope you engine all the extra power and awesome to have a V8 in the zed. But personally and this is just my opinion i really wouldnt be able to justify $13k+ maybe more....for an extra 50rwkw and a fairly quite grunt the VH45 engine produces...


But all in all your car is uniqe now and will go much better around the twisties :zlove::biggrin::biggrin:

 

I'm going to disagree, based on a number of reasons, but we'll go with a physical example. My car, when I got it and had it dynoed on 6psi (buggered det sensor), I got 159rwkw. Based on the 25% loss theory, I should have had 212kw at the motor. On a rich 6psi? I doubt it. I'd say closer to 180kw with a 15% drivetrain loss.

I've also dyno tested a stock '90 850i BMW auto with 150,000km on the dial showing a 162rwkw. It came out with 213kw standard, Thats slightly less that 25% with the shittest gearbox in the world.

But you can't use individual cars as examples. Mine for example had thermofan and lightened flywheel, plus low viscosity oil, and good oil in the gearbox and diff. Loss's through fluids are often forgotten but can give you a significant gain in power loss, especially as you significantly increase the torque and rpm of the motor, as drive train loss increase linear to engine power, even small percentages you carve off will talk big numbers at the wheels.

So...all in all, a 30% figure in my opinon is over exagerated. Yes auto box's suck HP like nothing else. But read about testing of the VG30DETT with a manual box, in stock form showing less than 18%. Rwkw followed by engine dyno.

I just can't see a 33% drivetrain loss on a modern(ish) engine. With modern oils.

 

Yes...you are wrong. Auto TT's had 280 hp (210 kW) and 283 ft?lbf (384 N?m). And I've never dyno'd one, but a healthy one would pull less than 180rwkw.

 

forgot the auto came out with smaller turbos...still drivetrain loss would still equate to around the 20% figure.

210-170=20%....i also cant see 33%

 

To do the actual swap, I'm sure I will. Under $5k anyway. It's all the other stuff that's going to cost me Bodykit, suspension, respray, roll cage, new wheels, tuning gear, lots of extras for the engine that aren't necessary but nice Mine won't be as... comfy as Steve's.

How well do you know the engine you just spent a fortune chucking in? VH's don't have cam belts, they have 3 chains. No cam seals and the VVT solenoids are just sealed with goo. What year is your VH?

Chain is not specified to be replaced, ever... Tensioners every 100K along with engine mounts at 150K And that's about it. Gotta love these engines

Make sure that your mechanic torques the crank pulley bolt up to the required spec too (I believe that it is 260 ftlb's) other wise you WILL kill the engine as the oil pump drive sprocket isn't keyed and is just an assembley fit. It relies on the friction between the crankpulley and the right hand side cam chain sprocket to transfer the torque to the pump for some bizzare reason.

I'm not convinced with your 33% driveline losses either. The gearbox internally is nearly identical to the Z32 TT and Patrol 'box's so it is unlikely that you will be loosing any more power through it compared to any other auto. And have you got a useable torque value? It isn't measured in thousands of Newtons last time I checked What diff are you running too?

 

I have been told 30% and I calculated approximately 33% for an Automatic

Firstly, Mark (MRC) told me that he expects 30% loss for an auto and approximately 22% for a manual ... I respect his knowledge a significantly lot more than the majority of people posting on this forum.

Secondly my own calculations ...
Nissan standard NA V6 = 168.0 kwfw (Nissan Australia)
Pod filter = 4.5 kwfw (Stillen)
Underdrive Pulley = 6.5 kwfw (Stillen)
98oct fuel = 2.0 kwfw (1-2% Shell & Mobile)
TOTAL = 181 kwfw

Car dyno at = 118 kwrw

Gearbox losses = ((181 - 118) / 181) x 100 = 34.8 %