The final let down for the n/a FC (dyno)
04-16-02, 07:05 PM
#1
The final let down for the n/a FC (dyno)
Well i just came back from getting my s-afc tuned in at Excessive motorsports. Once again it was a great learning experience. Ralph (The owner) spent way more time with me/on the dyno than i ever payed for. We actually spent 4hrs....playing with timing and the s-afc.
This time we hooked up a air temp sensor in the intake, along with the wide band again.
Let me also say that the 6 ports are working, as with the vdi. Ralph watched them, just to make shure.
But anyways what i've learned is that air tempature plays a realy large role in hp. Timing does'nt play as large as a deal as i thought. Tire pressure and even how hard the car is tied down will affect power output. I gained 10lbs of torque just from backing off the straps a little! And last but no least, the dyno does'nt lie. Well it can, but we where being as honest as we possiable could be.
The car put down 167rwhp@7,500rpms, and 122ft lbs@6,500. Whats funny is we leaned it way out....way out....with very little gain in hp. Whats also funny is that last time on the dyno, i made my peak 157rwhp at 8,000.
With much tuning the cars mid range is %100 more responsive, and the torque curve is pretty much flat. It feels much quicker in the mid range too.
On one dyno run it put down 174 (2?) hp, but the wieght he had the dyno loaded with was off. It was suppose to be 2250, but ended up 2,500lbs for some odd reason. And we stopped the run at 7k rpms.
Once again, it was a let down, as i was hoping for atleast 170rwhp, but o-well.
I'll post some pictures of the dyno run hopefully tomorow.
Later, CJ
Hey, what type of hp do stock T2s put down? Bolth 87-88s, and 89-91s?
This time we hooked up a air temp sensor in the intake, along with the wide band again.
Let me also say that the 6 ports are working, as with the vdi. Ralph watched them, just to make shure.
But anyways what i've learned is that air tempature plays a realy large role in hp. Timing does'nt play as large as a deal as i thought. Tire pressure and even how hard the car is tied down will affect power output. I gained 10lbs of torque just from backing off the straps a little! And last but no least, the dyno does'nt lie. Well it can, but we where being as honest as we possiable could be.
The car put down 167rwhp@7,500rpms, and 122ft lbs@6,500. Whats funny is we leaned it way out....way out....with very little gain in hp. Whats also funny is that last time on the dyno, i made my peak 157rwhp at 8,000.
With much tuning the cars mid range is %100 more responsive, and the torque curve is pretty much flat. It feels much quicker in the mid range too.
On one dyno run it put down 174 (2?) hp, but the wieght he had the dyno loaded with was off. It was suppose to be 2250, but ended up 2,500lbs for some odd reason. And we stopped the run at 7k rpms.
Once again, it was a let down, as i was hoping for atleast 170rwhp, but o-well.
I'll post some pictures of the dyno run hopefully tomorow.
Later, CJ
Hey, what type of hp do stock T2s put down? Bolth 87-88s, and 89-91s?
04-16-02, 07:30 PM
#2
...
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Um... What kind of car/mods do you have?
167RWHP is nothign to be dissapointed about. That puts you at 195-200 HP at the Flywheel (with 15% loss).... Same amount as a stock 89-91 TII
.
167RWHP is nothign to be dissapointed about. That puts you at 195-200 HP at the Flywheel (with 15% loss).... Same amount as a stock 89-91 TII
.
04-16-02, 08:50 PM
#5
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe he still have the following setup:
Dual 2" manderl bent exhaust, cone style K&N. Removed double throttle, and coolant flow to TB. Ported black elbo before TB and mass air meter. Ported upper, middle, and lower intake manifold. Pineapple Racing 6 port sleeves, Mildly ported 13B built by Pineapple Racing, jacobs ignition wires, Auto meter A/F meter. T2 fuel pump, Hi-6 and S-AFC.
So the extra 10hp was achieved by leaning out the fuel mixture using the s-afc. Looks like torque # went down a bit as it was 125ft lbs last time.
Dual 2" manderl bent exhaust, cone style K&N. Removed double throttle, and coolant flow to TB. Ported black elbo before TB and mass air meter. Ported upper, middle, and lower intake manifold. Pineapple Racing 6 port sleeves, Mildly ported 13B built by Pineapple Racing, jacobs ignition wires, Auto meter A/F meter. T2 fuel pump, Hi-6 and S-AFC.
So the extra 10hp was achieved by leaning out the fuel mixture using the s-afc. Looks like torque # went down a bit as it was 125ft lbs last time.
04-16-02, 08:57 PM
#6
Full Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
167's not that bad. You can run with stock TII's without any of the headaches (blown engines, boost coming on in the middle of a corner, etc.) Looks like you've done a good job of putting things together in a way they work.
04-16-02, 10:04 PM
#7
I came, I saw, I boosted.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's really not bad output ... and your car wieghs only 2250 lbs???
Damn... that's why you are in nice low 14's.
Well... you are at the same level as an S5 TII, and doing faster in the 1/4!
I think you can still get more.
I am not really a huge fan of the true dual exhaust...here's proof.
I have seen a few situations where, in bench dyno tuning an engine, people have gotten the MOST power out of their N/A by tuning the length of headers.... These guys saw something like a 20 hp jump by shortening their stock length headers to about 12 inches or something.
Much more power than a duel setup they initially ran.
These short runners then go into a single pipe (Can't remeber the size- 2 1/2" or 3")
Definately, the ehxuast tuning field carries the most potential.
I'd love to see the comparison in your A/F and dyno charts between before tuning the AFC and after. (Gotta post the A/F chart too!)
BTW- I talked to a guy from racing beat that says the best ratios they found is about 12.8 for the midrange, going to about 14:1 up high!
Damn... that's why you are in nice low 14's.
Well... you are at the same level as an S5 TII, and doing faster in the 1/4!
I think you can still get more.
I am not really a huge fan of the true dual exhaust...here's proof.
I have seen a few situations where, in bench dyno tuning an engine, people have gotten the MOST power out of their N/A by tuning the length of headers.... These guys saw something like a 20 hp jump by shortening their stock length headers to about 12 inches or something.
Much more power than a duel setup they initially ran.
These short runners then go into a single pipe (Can't remeber the size- 2 1/2" or 3")
Definately, the ehxuast tuning field carries the most potential.
I'd love to see the comparison in your A/F and dyno charts between before tuning the AFC and after. (Gotta post the A/F chart too!)
BTW- I talked to a guy from racing beat that says the best ratios they found is about 12.8 for the midrange, going to about 14:1 up high!
Trending Topics
04-16-02, 11:19 PM
#10
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QUOTE]Originally posted by Bambam7
I think you can still get more.
I am not really a huge fan of the true dual exhaust...here's proof.
I have seen a few situations where, in bench dyno tuning an engine, people have gotten the MOST power out of their N/A by tuning the length of headers.... These guys saw something like a 20 hp jump by shortening their stock length headers to about 12 inches or something.
Much more power than a duel setup they initially ran.
[/QUOTE]
I recall Mr. Yaw was saying that the shorter header length (or collecting earlier) will up the hp in the top end for street ported motor, something about pos. & neg. pressure wave and the timing of the exhaust port closing. I wonder if anyone sells those "short" single headers for a bpu NA.
I think you can still get more.
I am not really a huge fan of the true dual exhaust...here's proof.
I have seen a few situations where, in bench dyno tuning an engine, people have gotten the MOST power out of their N/A by tuning the length of headers.... These guys saw something like a 20 hp jump by shortening their stock length headers to about 12 inches or something.
Much more power than a duel setup they initially ran.
[/QUOTE]
I recall Mr. Yaw was saying that the shorter header length (or collecting earlier) will up the hp in the top end for street ported motor, something about pos. & neg. pressure wave and the timing of the exhaust port closing. I wonder if anyone sells those "short" single headers for a bpu NA.
04-17-02, 12:22 AM
#13
NA Powah, Every Hour!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sacramento, CA, U S of A
Posts: 1,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yo,
Hey, I just put down 140RWHP, so don't get yourself all in the dumps. I'm still low man on the totem pole! *grin* Keep the faith!
KS
1989 GTUs "NA ain't about big numbers...except in the 1/4 mile. *wink*"
Hey, I just put down 140RWHP, so don't get yourself all in the dumps. I'm still low man on the totem pole! *grin* Keep the faith!
KS
1989 GTUs "NA ain't about big numbers...except in the 1/4 mile. *wink*"
04-17-02, 08:02 AM
#16
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would be damn proud of anywhere in the 160 to 170 range. If you wanted huge horsepower numbers; you basically bought the wrong car. The overall driving pleasure is what makes an NA RX-7 an excellent machine. 170 to the wheels is probably as much as you need unless you are drag racing it. I have no idea what my car could put down but after some thought; I don't think I even care how much power some machine says my car is making. The dyno is a TOOL to tune your car; not to decide wheather it is fast or not. You need to determine the strength of your car on your own.
04-17-02, 08:23 AM
#17
i am not a girl
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: CT
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pp13bnos
have u been to the 1/4 track, if so what did u run with your current setup and 167 to the wheels and if your car weights 2250 u should be WAY faster tehn low low 14's as someone has mentioned...coudl u aslo post the dyno sheet with the a/f numbers?
have u been to the 1/4 track, if so what did u run with your current setup and 167 to the wheels and if your car weights 2250 u should be WAY faster tehn low low 14's as someone has mentioned...coudl u aslo post the dyno sheet with the a/f numbers?
04-17-02, 09:31 AM
#18
My car does'nt weigh 2,250lbs...or even 2500lbs. It was just the wieght that my car was pulling against. He just had it set wrong....or actually he set it right except the computer changed it back for some reason. I dunno, like he said, dyno's are very touchy inputs. I could never rip out extra stuff on my daily driver to make it lighter. Maybe the extra tire, and junk like that..but never the a/c, ps, sound deadening stuff, etc. I enjoy comfort to much. 
About the higher hp when it was running rich- When we leaned it out, it still made more that the 157rwhp@8k. It just happend that it made even more down a little lower.
For the timing it made max difference of about 3rwhp over tomuch advace (loosing topend) vs to much retarding (lose mid range, and bottom end)
The reason why i was kinda bummed is that i was hoping for atleast 170rwhp.
BamBam, like i said in anouther post, every car is different. My car realy liked being ran very lean. (Probably tired of being ran so rich ) It made best power at around 13.5 down low, to 14.25 up top. My s-afc is set at like, -20% before 5k rpms, then it richens up to -%16, (VDI opens) for a breif second then back down to -%24, going down to -%30 at redline.
Hopefully today i'll get the dyno graph pictured...however i did'nt grab the 02 readings. sorry bambam.
With a untuned s-afc, i turned a 15.1@95 (94.89 or .??)
Hopefully within a month i'll be buying some drag radials from turbojeff on the forum....then i'll be in the mid 14s hopefully....maybe low 14s???
Like i said up above, the mid range is so much more responsive and quicker.
Later, CJ
About the higher hp when it was running rich- When we leaned it out, it still made more that the 157rwhp@8k. It just happend that it made even more down a little lower.
For the timing it made max difference of about 3rwhp over tomuch advace (loosing topend) vs to much retarding (lose mid range, and bottom end)
The reason why i was kinda bummed is that i was hoping for atleast 170rwhp.
BamBam, like i said in anouther post, every car is different. My car realy liked being ran very lean. (Probably tired of being ran so rich
) It made best power at around 13.5 down low, to 14.25 up top. My s-afc is set at like, -20% before 5k rpms, then it richens up to -%16, (VDI opens) for a breif second then back down to -%24, going down to -%30 at redline.Hopefully today i'll get the dyno graph pictured...however i did'nt grab the 02 readings. sorry bambam.
With a untuned s-afc, i turned a 15.1@95 (94.89 or .??)
Hopefully within a month i'll be buying some drag radials from turbojeff on the forum....then i'll be in the mid 14s hopefully....maybe low 14s???
Like i said up above, the mid range is so much more responsive and quicker.
Later, CJ
04-17-02, 01:45 PM
#19
mad scientist
Originally posted by pp13bnos
With a untuned s-afc, i turned a 15.1@95 (94.89 or .??)
Hopefully within a month i'll be buying some drag radials from turbojeff on the forum....then i'll be in the mid 14s hopefully....maybe low 14s???
Like i said up above, the mid range is so much more responsive and quicker.
Later, CJ
With a untuned s-afc, i turned a 15.1@95 (94.89 or .??)
Hopefully within a month i'll be buying some drag radials from turbojeff on the forum....then i'll be in the mid 14s hopefully....maybe low 14s???
Like i said up above, the mid range is so much more responsive and quicker.
Later, CJ
04-17-02, 02:01 PM
#20
I came, I saw, I boosted.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-30% at redline- .. Holy CRAP!!!!
There is definately something different between our two cars!!
I remeber another N/A that got the most gain by RICHENING his S-AFC by about +8 at redline! (His 6 ports weren't opening though!)
What does your lo throttle look like??
Oh- and about the headers... I would definately cut a chunk out of mine (quieter too), but I've got this pesky turbo to go on soon....
I can't wait to see the new graph and A/F numbers.(Whenever you can get em)
Where did you settle the timing on?
A question- you have an A/F gauge runnning off your stock o2 sensor right?
Have you even noticed any difference in it's readings?
I'm just trying to convince others that the stock o2 sensor is useless for tuning.
There is definately something different between our two cars!!
I remeber another N/A that got the most gain by RICHENING his S-AFC by about +8 at redline! (His 6 ports weren't opening though!)
What does your lo throttle look like??
Oh- and about the headers... I would definately cut a chunk out of mine (quieter too), but I've got this pesky turbo to go on soon....
I can't wait to see the new graph and A/F numbers.(Whenever you can get em)
Where did you settle the timing on?
A question- you have an A/F gauge runnning off your stock o2 sensor right?
Have you even noticed any difference in it's readings?
I'm just trying to convince others that the stock o2 sensor is useless for tuning.
Last edited by Bambam7; 04-17-02 at 02:03 PM.
04-17-02, 02:09 PM
#21
i am not a girl
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: CT
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by pp13bnos
With a untuned s-afc, i turned a 15.1@95 (94.89 or .??)
Hopefully within a month i'll be buying some drag radials from turbojeff on the forum....then i'll be in the mid 14s hopefully....maybe low 14s???
Like i said up above, the mid range is so much more responsive and quicker.
Later, CJ
With a untuned s-afc, i turned a 15.1@95 (94.89 or .??)
Hopefully within a month i'll be buying some drag radials from turbojeff on the forum....then i'll be in the mid 14s hopefully....maybe low 14s???
Like i said up above, the mid range is so much more responsive and quicker.
Later, CJ
u should be in the mid 14's with that number
what was your 60'
04-17-02, 05:29 PM
#22
R/T .640
60' 2.488
330 6.574
1/8 9.887
MPH 73.43
1000 12.769
1/4 15.178
94.84 mph
That was my best run on a "green" track. Like i said in an anouther post the track was slick.
After the last time i tuned on the dyno (the time is was realy rich) i removed it because it was'nt very accurate.
As for the dyno sheets, all i have is the print out of the 167 run. The air fuel ratios where correct, so i did'nt feel i needed them.
About the timing....uuuuhhhhh....we did'nt have a timing light, so we just played with it. Basically we kept advacing it until it started laying down up top. So, to be hoest, i have no idea of what the timing realy is. Not to mention, your motor has alot more port than mine does...so it probably would like even more timing than mine.
This saterday, i hope to go back to the track. This time with some 225/50/15s vs my old bald 205/60/15s. Hope to run in the high 14s. I'm going to race my buddy is his first gen that has a street ported 13B with a 48mm webber, Racing beat exaust etc...etc. Last time i ran him on the street it was pretty close. Should be fun.
CJ
60' 2.488
330 6.574
1/8 9.887
MPH 73.43
1000 12.769
1/4 15.178
94.84 mph
That was my best run on a "green" track. Like i said in an anouther post the track was slick.
After the last time i tuned on the dyno (the time is was realy rich) i removed it because it was'nt very accurate.
As for the dyno sheets, all i have is the print out of the 167 run. The air fuel ratios where correct, so i did'nt feel i needed them.
About the timing....uuuuhhhhh....we did'nt have a timing light, so we just played with it. Basically we kept advacing it until it started laying down up top. So, to be hoest, i have no idea of what the timing realy is.
Not to mention, your motor has alot more port than mine does...so it probably would like even more timing than mine.This saterday, i hope to go back to the track. This time with some 225/50/15s vs my old bald 205/60/15s. Hope to run in the high 14s. I'm going to race my buddy is his first gen that has a street ported 13B with a 48mm webber, Racing beat exaust etc...etc. Last time i ran him on the street it was pretty close. Should be fun.
CJ
04-17-02, 05:43 PM
#23
We also checked to see if my low throttle setup was close. Ralph said it was perfect. We did'nt even have to change a thing. I think i have it set at like +5% at idle (warms up a little smoother) then like -4% at 2k, then like -7% at 3k. Then like like -%5 at 4k.
The funny thing about my car is that it ran fine with the stock ecu until i nailed the throttle. After that, it was just like the ecu decided to dump about %30 more fuel than i realy needed. I mean there was no surging, good gas milage, nice drive ability under normal driving conditions....just when the car was WOT would it run realy rich. Go figure
CJ
The funny thing about my car is that it ran fine with the stock ecu until i nailed the throttle. After that, it was just like the ecu decided to dump about %30 more fuel than i realy needed. I mean there was no surging, good gas milage, nice drive ability under normal driving conditions....just when the car was WOT would it run realy rich. Go figure
CJ
04-17-02, 06:15 PM
#24
I came, I saw, I boosted.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep... I believe a lot of the problems with these cars all boil down to electrical.
Sensor having different ground stregths will send diferent signals to the ECU. I really don't like the ground setups on these cars, they really allow for a lot of signal corruption of grounds start to go.
I would say try grounding your TPS, pressure sensor, and AFM together, then to the chassis- but I don't think you want to screw up your dyno tune!!
It's funny seeing the dyno charts, and the A/F charts of different cars, and seeing how freaking DIFFERENT they are, even on very similar setups. Some guys run crazy rich in the midrange, others are too lean... some cars don't react well to being at the proper mixtures that you would assume.
It's just plain funny.
I'm buying a bicycle. (A 1 speed at that!)
Sensor having different ground stregths will send diferent signals to the ECU. I really don't like the ground setups on these cars, they really allow for a lot of signal corruption of grounds start to go.
I would say try grounding your TPS, pressure sensor, and AFM together, then to the chassis- but I don't think you want to screw up your dyno tune!!
It's funny seeing the dyno charts, and the A/F charts of different cars, and seeing how freaking DIFFERENT they are, even on very similar setups. Some guys run crazy rich in the midrange, others are too lean... some cars don't react well to being at the proper mixtures that you would assume.
It's just plain funny.
I'm buying a bicycle. (A 1 speed at that!)