Dyno from Chile - 94ŽJDM - Comments Welcome...
08-11-10, 01:05 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dyno from Chile - 94ŽJDM - Comments Welcome...
Hi guys,
I just took my 94ŽJDM Type R to Dyno on Monday.
Results didnŽt impressed me but am "kind" of satisfied. Anyway, first the facts:
- K&N Intake
- ARC Stock Mount Intercooler (showed VERY POOR cooling capabilities after 3 tries)
- Full Exhaust (Downpipe - Midpipe - No Cat - 5Zigen Exhaust)
- Rich Man non seq conversion
- Apexi AVCR (plugged but not functional, we found it at the dyno)
- Stock ECU (think so, came from Japan with it)
253.5 RWHP on second pass, after that intercooler got VERY hot and number were below that.
After this test I installed a Knight Sport chipped ECU, donŽt know anything about it, donŽt have any specs for it.
255.4 RWHP on first pass, interccoler still very hot, and a WEIRD FALL on HP curve.
Any idea why this fall in power ?? No fuel maybe ??
The wideband used for dyno had very slow reaction, and after the fall you see also a fall on AFR.
Both ECUŽs get to 8300RPM, and for both ECUŽs the turbo lag seems to be excessive.
Decided not to use the chipped ECU and use the stock one.
Any advice on my next mod ?? Am thinking about a better Intercooler, play with Boost a little bit and probably fuel ??
Any comment is welcome.
I just took my 94ŽJDM Type R to Dyno on Monday.
Results didnŽt impressed me but am "kind" of satisfied. Anyway, first the facts:
- K&N Intake
- ARC Stock Mount Intercooler (showed VERY POOR cooling capabilities after 3 tries)
- Full Exhaust (Downpipe - Midpipe - No Cat - 5Zigen Exhaust)
- Rich Man non seq conversion
- Apexi AVCR (plugged but not functional, we found it at the dyno)
- Stock ECU (think so, came from Japan with it)
253.5 RWHP on second pass, after that intercooler got VERY hot and number were below that.
After this test I installed a Knight Sport chipped ECU, donŽt know anything about it, donŽt have any specs for it.
255.4 RWHP on first pass, interccoler still very hot, and a WEIRD FALL on HP curve.
Any idea why this fall in power ?? No fuel maybe ??
The wideband used for dyno had very slow reaction, and after the fall you see also a fall on AFR.
Both ECUŽs get to 8300RPM, and for both ECUŽs the turbo lag seems to be excessive.
Decided not to use the chipped ECU and use the stock one.
Any advice on my next mod ?? Am thinking about a better Intercooler, play with Boost a little bit and probably fuel ??
Any comment is welcome.
08-11-10, 01:24 PM
#2
So you didn't change boost between the two ECUs? At the same boost levels, the numbers should be pretty close.
And running those mods with the stock ECU is lunacy (unless you have limited your boost to 10psi and controlled creep).
What boost are you running?
And running those mods with the stock ECU is lunacy (unless you have limited your boost to 10psi and controlled creep).
What boost are you running?
08-11-10, 01:38 PM
#3
First of all at what PSI? I'm assuming 10 psi given that you did a pull on the stock ECU. Or at least YOU BETTER BE AT 10 psi.. For 10 psi with a hot air intake and an inefficient IC I'd say 253 is pretty good.
The knightsport ECU dyno looks very horrible IMO. Good call on ditching that ECU.... IMO if you want to increase the boost and there are not any competent tuners near you get yourself a pettit unlimited ECU raise the boost to 13 psi max.
Ditch that IC...and intake they both suck. Get a box style intake that doesnt suck hot air from you radiator. As far as your IC if you can afford it go Vmount. I didn't feel like spending all that money and ditching my AC so I run an godspeed SMIC with a pettit duct + a vented hood with a GT35R turbo and I'm very happy with it's cooling properties.
When you go non seqquential expect the lag and extended threshold... Rchman's typically yield you 10 psi at 3800 RPMS. Some people claim thay don't get lag and have a threshold of 3K RPMs but I yet haven't seen any proof of their claims.
The knightsport ECU dyno looks very horrible IMO. Good call on ditching that ECU.... IMO if you want to increase the boost and there are not any competent tuners near you get yourself a pettit unlimited ECU raise the boost to 13 psi max.
Ditch that IC...and intake they both suck. Get a box style intake that doesnt suck hot air from you radiator. As far as your IC if you can afford it go Vmount. I didn't feel like spending all that money and ditching my AC so I run an godspeed SMIC with a pettit duct + a vented hood with a GT35R turbo and I'm very happy with it's cooling properties.
When you go non seqquential expect the lag and extended threshold... Rchman's typically yield you 10 psi at 3800 RPMS. Some people claim thay don't get lag and have a threshold of 3K RPMs but I yet haven't seen any proof of their claims.
08-11-10, 01:50 PM
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boost was untouched (uncontrolled) on both ECUŽs.
10.9 on stock ECU, and 11.9 on Knight Sport ECU. (as dyno shows)
AVCR was not working at the time of testing, installation issues probably.
The problem with stock ECU is the fuel control you mean ??
08-11-10, 02:08 PM
#5
For all you know you were knocking on the Knight Sport ECU and the computer pulled timing. Or you could have just had a misfire. Maybe your ignition system couldn't ignite the mixture which was richer on the KS computer.
Honestly I think the first dyno sheet (stock ECU) looks fine. What were you expecting? You don't know what a stock FD would do on that dyno. For all you know you've picked up 20-30 horsepower over what a stock car would dyno. As for the lag, well what did you expect? It's non sequential. Better boost control would probably help some though. I honestly think you could leave the car the way it is (except maybe with a better intercooler) and it will be fun and reliable for a long time.
Does the ARC intercooler work with a stock airbox and stock ducting?
Honestly I think the first dyno sheet (stock ECU) looks fine. What were you expecting? You don't know what a stock FD would do on that dyno. For all you know you've picked up 20-30 horsepower over what a stock car would dyno. As for the lag, well what did you expect? It's non sequential. Better boost control would probably help some though. I honestly think you could leave the car the way it is (except maybe with a better intercooler) and it will be fun and reliable for a long time.
Does the ARC intercooler work with a stock airbox and stock ducting?
08-11-10, 02:10 PM
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For all you know you were knocking on the Knight Sport ECU and the computer pulled timing.
Honestly I think the first dyno sheet (stock ECU) looks fine. What were you expecting? You don't know what a stock FD would do on that dyno. For all you know you've picked up 20-30 horsepower over stock.
Honestly I think the first dyno sheet (stock ECU) looks fine. What were you expecting? You don't know what a stock FD would do on that dyno. For all you know you've picked up 20-30 horsepower over stock.
Knocking on the KS ECU ?? ThatŽs the big curve fall in HP ??
08-11-10, 02:13 PM
#7
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all at what PSI? I'm assuming 10 psi given that you did a pull on the stock ECU. Or at least YOU BETTER BE AT 10 psi.. For 10 psi with a hot air intake and an inefficient IC I'd say 253 is pretty good.
The knightsport ECU dyno looks very horrible IMO. Good call on ditching that ECU.... IMO if you want to increase the boost and there are not any competent tuners near you get yourself a pettit unlimited ECU raise the boost to 13 psi max.
Ditch that IC...and intake they both suck. Get a box style intake that doesnt suck hot air from you radiator. As far as your IC if you can afford it go Vmount. I didn't feel like spending all that money and ditching my AC so I run an godspeed SMIC with a pettit duct + a vented hood with a GT35R turbo and I'm very happy with it's cooling properties.
When you go non seqquential expect the lag and extended threshold... Rchman's typically yield you 10 psi at 3800 RPMS. Some people claim thay don't get lag and have a threshold of 3K RPMs but I yet haven't seen any proof of their claims.
The knightsport ECU dyno looks very horrible IMO. Good call on ditching that ECU.... IMO if you want to increase the boost and there are not any competent tuners near you get yourself a pettit unlimited ECU raise the boost to 13 psi max.
Ditch that IC...and intake they both suck. Get a box style intake that doesnt suck hot air from you radiator. As far as your IC if you can afford it go Vmount. I didn't feel like spending all that money and ditching my AC so I run an godspeed SMIC with a pettit duct + a vented hood with a GT35R turbo and I'm very happy with it's cooling properties.
When you go non seqquential expect the lag and extended threshold... Rchman's typically yield you 10 psi at 3800 RPMS. Some people claim thay don't get lag and have a threshold of 3K RPMs but I yet haven't seen any proof of their claims.
What if I make a custom box for the Intake ?? Problem is actual filters are side by side, and not one above to the other like IŽve seen in boxes, I canŽt use the Damians Intake shield for example...
Trending Topics
08-11-10, 02:19 PM
#8
It could be is a problem with the dyno. Now that I think about it, I've used a Land & Sea Dynomite before (the one you have here) and it can flake out sometimes. Otherwise it could be knock or at least noise from the sensor that was interpreted as knock. Look at dyno sheets of other (non rotary) cars that have decent knock control systems and you can see the power dropping way off in some cases. Now we'd know for sure if we had a log of your ignition timing, but only a couple people here have been logging a stock ECU by tapping into the factory diagnostic protocol.
Think about it. It's not a major drop in boost. It could be misfire--if it's bad enough, you would have heard it... it sounds a little like a piston engine that's not on all cylinders. It's ignition related (misfire or knock retard) or a dyno hardware problem.
Think about it. It's not a major drop in boost. It could be misfire--if it's bad enough, you would have heard it... it sounds a little like a piston engine that's not on all cylinders. It's ignition related (misfire or knock retard) or a dyno hardware problem.
Last edited by arghx; 08-11-10 at 02:20 PM. Reason: logging
08-11-10, 02:40 PM
#12
look at the AFR graph... it looks fine. I don't see what your complaint is about the graph or the wideband??? There are no fueling problems to be seen. Stock ECU fueling is fine when the boost levels are appropriate.
Look at that AFR curve. That looks like a gazillion other logs from cars (not just Rx-7) with factory turbos and stock ECU. And the KS one is rich enough. It reminds me of the AFR's on a stock Evo dyno.
Look at that AFR curve. That looks like a gazillion other logs from cars (not just Rx-7) with factory turbos and stock ECU. And the KS one is rich enough. It reminds me of the AFR's on a stock Evo dyno.
08-11-10, 02:45 PM
#13
here is a dyno sheet of a 100% bone stock Evo X. it only shows boost pressure and AFR. I got it off the Evo X forums a while back.
That's how many stock ECU's do things... they have a delay before they richen the mixture for high load operation. It looks "wrong" or "messed up" to people who don't deal with factory calibrations much but there are a gazillion cars with factory turbos and a warranty that do this. Now your KnightSport ECU has a little lean spot on tip-in and just generally doesn't look like as good of a tune as stock.
That's how many stock ECU's do things... they have a delay before they richen the mixture for high load operation. It looks "wrong" or "messed up" to people who don't deal with factory calibrations much but there are a gazillion cars with factory turbos and a warranty that do this. Now your KnightSport ECU has a little lean spot on tip-in and just generally doesn't look like as good of a tune as stock.
08-11-10, 02:59 PM
#14
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting..!!!
Thanks ..!!!
My complain is they found a wrong Wideband reading at the Muffler tip; found out later is beacuse of an small crack in the back of the exhaust welding.
So the used a very long wideband sniffer, "raped" the exhaust with the sniffing pipe and got it to smell right from the midpipe.
The Dyno operator explained the reading on AFRŽs is delayed in a couple of hundred of RPMŽs because of this, slow Wideband reading.
So right at the HP fall you see the boost failure and 200 RPM later the AFRŽs also goes down.
It means the HP loss is right at the point of low AFRŽs.
Did I explain myself ??
Thanks ..!!!
My complain is they found a wrong Wideband reading at the Muffler tip; found out later is beacuse of an small crack in the back of the exhaust welding.
So the used a very long wideband sniffer, "raped" the exhaust with the sniffing pipe and got it to smell right from the midpipe.
The Dyno operator explained the reading on AFRŽs is delayed in a couple of hundred of RPMŽs because of this, slow Wideband reading.
So right at the HP fall you see the boost failure and 200 RPM later the AFRŽs also goes down.
It means the HP loss is right at the point of low AFRŽs.
Did I explain myself ??
08-11-10, 03:06 PM
#15
The Dyno operator explained the reading on AFRŽs is delayed in a couple of hundred of RPMŽs because of this, slow Wideband reading.
So right at the HP fall you see the boost failure and 200 RPM later the AFRŽs also goes down.
It means the HP loss is right at the point of low AFRŽs.
So right at the HP fall you see the boost failure and 200 RPM later the AFRŽs also goes down.
It means the HP loss is right at the point of low AFRŽs.
As for the HP loss corresponding to the low AFR's... well that could mean a bunch of things. The low AFR's (due to the programming in the KS computer) could be causing the HP loss. Something else (like misfire, which I couldn't hear in the video) could be causing the HP loss and the low AFR's at the same time. The ECU could be pulling timing due to knock, which is causing the loss in hp, and the AFR's could be related to that or unrelated to that. Or the dyno could have been messing up.
It's pretty hard to tell exactly what happened because we don't have any kind of data log directly from the ECU. If this were a Subaru I would be able to use a $100 cable to get the factory computer to tell how many degrees of timing were being pulled in response to knock, the target AFR in the ECU, the target boost level in the ECU, all sorts of things like that.
08-11-10, 03:33 PM
#16
The intercooler is not ducted well at all.. Whats with the big hole on the right side of the stock duct? That should be sealed with something like the aluminum plate on the left. Also, better sealing around the face of the intercooler itself will help.
You have quite a few mods there running on stock ecu (full exhaust, open intake, better smic) . Nonetheless, you seem to be controlling boost adequately and your AFR's are looking OK.
.... surprising no one has been screaming about getting a PFC or "you'll blow your motor", like in my other thread "anyone running this setup". But I guess you are... even had dyno and AFR hooked up awhile running stock ecu.
Maybe because my setup has bnr's, and yours is stock twins? maybe thats what tips everyone's boiling point? lol
You have quite a few mods there running on stock ecu (full exhaust, open intake, better smic) . Nonetheless, you seem to be controlling boost adequately and your AFR's are looking OK.
.... surprising no one has been screaming about getting a PFC or "you'll blow your motor", like in my other thread "anyone running this setup". But I guess you are... even had dyno and AFR hooked up awhile running stock ecu.
Maybe because my setup has bnr's, and yours is stock twins? maybe thats what tips everyone's boiling point? lol
08-11-10, 04:56 PM
#17
Full Member
Very interesting results you got there - I'm considering going for a similar setup.
Currently I have a 92 JDM RX7, with the only mod being an intake (a twin pod setup like yours, pretty poor quality considering they are largely sucking hot air).
My dyno graphs can be found here:
https://www.rx7club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=404
The fuelling is very similar, which makes sense given that we are both running stock ECU.
However, an important thing to note is the steady boost at high RPMs. However look at my boost curve and there is a notable dropoff to 8psi at 5500rpm (I thought this was due to a vacuum hose, but I have fixed that and it still remains, and other people with stock cars report the same thing). Evidently your exhaust mods are working well.
For me they did the dyno runs with the hood open - this will massively improve the performance of crappy intake setups like ours. I suggest your next mod be some form of boxing & ducting or an off the shelf setup (after fixing your intercooler duct). I know my next mod is :P
However, given the mods, I would expect more than 253 rwhp. I know hp figures vary greatly from dyno to dyno, so it may be worth going to a different dyno next time to get an approximation. Or perhaps ask the operator if his dyno is known to under-read.
Currently I have a 92 JDM RX7, with the only mod being an intake (a twin pod setup like yours, pretty poor quality considering they are largely sucking hot air).
My dyno graphs can be found here:
https://www.rx7club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=404
The fuelling is very similar, which makes sense given that we are both running stock ECU.
However, an important thing to note is the steady boost at high RPMs. However look at my boost curve and there is a notable dropoff to 8psi at 5500rpm (I thought this was due to a vacuum hose, but I have fixed that and it still remains, and other people with stock cars report the same thing). Evidently your exhaust mods are working well.
For me they did the dyno runs with the hood open - this will massively improve the performance of crappy intake setups like ours. I suggest your next mod be some form of boxing & ducting or an off the shelf setup (after fixing your intercooler duct). I know my next mod is :P
However, given the mods, I would expect more than 253 rwhp. I know hp figures vary greatly from dyno to dyno, so it may be worth going to a different dyno next time to get an approximation. Or perhaps ask the operator if his dyno is known to under-read.
08-11-10, 05:10 PM
#18
Did they get any AIT data. From the video they didn't have the cooling air for the dyno located close enough to the car front. No air flow over the intercooler would be detrimental to a good pull. Based upon your comment on the hot intercooler it's begging for more air. For sure another 8 to 10 percent could be had with a denser charge.
08-11-10, 05:16 PM
#19
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The intercooler is not ducted well at all.. Whats with the big hole on the right side of the stock duct? That should be sealed with something like the aluminum plate on the left. Also, better sealing around the face of the intercooler itself will help.
You have quite a few mods there running on stock ecu (full exhaust, open intake, better smic) . Nonetheless, you seem to be controlling boost adequately and your AFR's are looking OK.
.... surprising no one has been screaming about getting a PFC or "you'll blow your motor", like in my other thread "anyone running this setup". But I guess you are... even had dyno and AFR hooked up awhile running stock ecu.
Maybe because my setup has bnr's, and yours is stock twins? maybe thats what tips everyone's boiling point? lol
You have quite a few mods there running on stock ecu (full exhaust, open intake, better smic) . Nonetheless, you seem to be controlling boost adequately and your AFR's are looking OK.
.... surprising no one has been screaming about getting a PFC or "you'll blow your motor", like in my other thread "anyone running this setup". But I guess you are... even had dyno and AFR hooked up awhile running stock ecu.
Maybe because my setup has bnr's, and yours is stock twins? maybe thats what tips everyone's boiling point? lol
08-11-10, 05:23 PM
#20
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, most of the feedback from you guys points to the IC bad performance and Intake heat sucking setup.
I think is something I can easily fix and duct the air better and make some kind of heat shield for the twins.
Does anybody knows how this ARC stock mounting IC works in other setups ??
As far as fueling it seems to be on the safe side for while.
As a summary:
- Fix the damn IC air duct..!!!
- Make a shield for the twin filters
- DonŽt boost beyond 10PSI with stock ECU
Anyway to get rid of lag on non seq??
I think is something I can easily fix and duct the air better and make some kind of heat shield for the twins.
Does anybody knows how this ARC stock mounting IC works in other setups ??
As far as fueling it seems to be on the safe side for while.
As a summary:
- Fix the damn IC air duct..!!!
- Make a shield for the twin filters
- DonŽt boost beyond 10PSI with stock ECU
Anyway to get rid of lag on non seq??
08-11-10, 05:23 PM
#21
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very interesting results you got there - I'm considering going for a similar setup.
Currently I have a 92 JDM RX7, with the only mod being an intake (a twin pod setup like yours, pretty poor quality considering they are largely sucking hot air).
My dyno graphs can be found here:
https://www.rx7club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=404
The fuelling is very similar, which makes sense given that we are both running stock ECU.
However, an important thing to note is the steady boost at high RPMs. However look at my boost curve and there is a notable dropoff to 8psi at 5500rpm (I thought this was due to a vacuum hose, but I have fixed that and it still remains, and other people with stock cars report the same thing). Evidently your exhaust mods are working well.
For me they did the dyno runs with the hood open - this will massively improve the performance of crappy intake setups like ours. I suggest your next mod be some form of boxing & ducting or an off the shelf setup (after fixing your intercooler duct). I know my next mod is :P
However, given the mods, I would expect more than 253 rwhp. I know hp figures vary greatly from dyno to dyno, so it may be worth going to a different dyno next time to get an approximation. Or perhaps ask the operator if his dyno is known to under-read.
Currently I have a 92 JDM RX7, with the only mod being an intake (a twin pod setup like yours, pretty poor quality considering they are largely sucking hot air).
My dyno graphs can be found here:
https://www.rx7club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=404
The fuelling is very similar, which makes sense given that we are both running stock ECU.
However, an important thing to note is the steady boost at high RPMs. However look at my boost curve and there is a notable dropoff to 8psi at 5500rpm (I thought this was due to a vacuum hose, but I have fixed that and it still remains, and other people with stock cars report the same thing). Evidently your exhaust mods are working well.
For me they did the dyno runs with the hood open - this will massively improve the performance of crappy intake setups like ours. I suggest your next mod be some form of boxing & ducting or an off the shelf setup (after fixing your intercooler duct). I know my next mod is :P
However, given the mods, I would expect more than 253 rwhp. I know hp figures vary greatly from dyno to dyno, so it may be worth going to a different dyno next time to get an approximation. Or perhaps ask the operator if his dyno is known to under-read.
08-11-10, 05:38 PM
#22
Full Member
My IC is the stock one - which has great flow, but not the best cooling capacity. We did a few runs, but I didn't check the intake temperatures nor even do a touch test on the IC. However, given the decent sized fan they had, I would be suprised if it was getting hot. The stock IC is OK for stock setups - anything more does need something bigger.
08-11-10, 05:52 PM
#23
Proper boost control tuning with a 3 port boost control solenoid (such as what comes on your AVCR) will improve spool at least somewhat. Right now your boost control plumbing (factory 2 port solenoid and restricter) as well as the programming itself (duty cycle maps built into the ECU) is designed for sequential twins.
08-11-10, 11:51 PM
#24
If your current IC is ducted properly then it should work ok at your boost and power level during actual driving. I agree with those who have suggested getting cold air to the intake; it is better than adding IC capacity to offset it. ECU #1 looks good. IMO, the KS appears to be too rich; hence the 'hiccup' in the power curve--which may improve if you get the IAT's down.
