Dyno results
- Thread starter TRACKMKIII
- Start date
- Status
Well before I really think about spraying I need some tools to tune it. I have been looking at some wide band o2 sensor setups and rising rate fuel pressure regulators. after I am sure i am running at 100% about it.s383mmber1 said:
agreed my motor is far more heavily worked then that and makes 80rwhp less, yes it has a dodgy tune but it isn't going to gain 80rwhp from a better tune.Tire Shredder said:
Something seems amiss, kudos if its genuine, but that mod list isn't that big for a power level like that.:aigo:
7MA61 said:
There is nothing "amiss"!! If you are making 80 less rwhp and is "far more heavily worked on" then something is wrong because our motors easliy produce that number stock!! The video and sheet are coming.
depends how much material was removed in the head IMO. that and i think he was talking earlier about a higher compression with a smaller headgasket, dont know if he went with it
7MA61 said:
my engine isn't worked on(i think), and it produced only 74 hp less with a Taurus crankshaft(that blew my engine later:icon_razz ):icon_bigg
Maybe I'll test it once more in the near future.:naughty:
Torque is measured and the horsepower is calculated with that forumla by the machine.
If you lay down 250 lb/ft at 5200 rpm, the horsepower must be the same.
Get that dyno up and full mod list. The numbers are very good.
Yeah as I originally said and as Nick just said, if you are making 253tq @5200 then you have to be making 250 hp @ 5200.
The equation works regard less of where you are measuring the tq from (wheels, or flywheel). there is no way to physically measure HP all that can be measured is TQ then HP is calculated from that.
Regardless of what you are testing, TQ and HP will always be the same at 5252 RPM's so at 5200 RPM's they will be very close as I have pointed.
The other thing is that if you are making 236 hp at 5400 RPM, then you would be making 229.5 tq at the same 5400 RPM. So thats about a 24 ft/lb loss for only 200 rpm differance and yeah it is possible, but having ported head and 3" exhaust that motor should really be starting to come alive in the 5000 to 6000 rpm range not falling on its face even with stock cams.
The equation works regard less of where you are measuring the tq from (wheels, or flywheel). there is no way to physically measure HP all that can be measured is TQ then HP is calculated from that.
Regardless of what you are testing, TQ and HP will always be the same at 5252 RPM's so at 5200 RPM's they will be very close as I have pointed.
The other thing is that if you are making 236 hp at 5400 RPM, then you would be making 229.5 tq at the same 5400 RPM. So thats about a 24 ft/lb loss for only 200 rpm differance and yeah it is possible, but having ported head and 3" exhaust that motor should really be starting to come alive in the 5000 to 6000 rpm range not falling on its face even with stock cams.
That isn't dropping away. Plunging like a Jimmy Carter stock market is what he was refering too. Like a 5.0 Mustang engine.
That torque curve looks really good infact.
That torque curve looks really good infact.
crazy stuff in this post.
as already stated, something is wrong- whether they used the wrong number of cylinders or the dyno is WAY out of cal or something else weird. your best bet is to hit another dyno....
as already stated, something is wrong- whether they used the wrong number of cylinders or the dyno is WAY out of cal or something else weird. your best bet is to hit another dyno....
drjonez said:
That is what I was starting to think, but I don't know of many other dynos in my area. I talked to the operator and he offered my 3 more runs for free this friday just to make sure.
- Status