Megasquirt 183.5 hp, 138.8 tq NA
183.5 hp, 138.8 tq NA
Well, after 9 months of procrastinating, I went to the dyno to tune the car. The results were pretty good considering this engine made 160 at the crank stock: 183.5 hp, 138.8 tq (dynojet).
For reference, it made 169 hp, 137 tq on the stock ECU on a dyno dynamics a long time ago with 6* of advance dialed in on the CAS.
Relevant mods include removed air pump, 5/6 ports, sleeves, actuators. Cold intake, header, exhaust, no cat. MS1 v2.2, error*s daughter board.
Blue = VDI in high RPM mode
Red = VDI in low RPM mode
As you can see, VDI in low RPM mode went lean and STILL made more torque <5k rpms than high rpm mode. If I can get the VDI working again (electric air pump), then I can add fuel there to bring the torque up, restoring the midrange. The weirdness at 4300ish is the injector staging - which I moved down to 2500 rpms to be a non-factor (after I got home from the dyno). We developed a good fuel map (thought their A/F meter was wacky - the LC-1 on the car was reading better), then tweaked spark to find what the car liked. We went through 25 runs to do so, including testing the stock air filter, no air filter, and leading/trailing split changes. I'm going to look for a filter with more area and less restriction - there were gains all over with no filter at all. It was really cool, but I went there on a budget so I had to stop at 2 hours.
It liked more advance (28 ish) and less fuel (13.5) below 6k, and less advance (26) and more fuel (12.8) above 6k. The attached MSQ is with staging at 4300, though I later moved it to 2500 to remove that dip.
For reference, it made 169 hp, 137 tq on the stock ECU on a dyno dynamics a long time ago with 6* of advance dialed in on the CAS.
Relevant mods include removed air pump, 5/6 ports, sleeves, actuators. Cold intake, header, exhaust, no cat. MS1 v2.2, error*s daughter board.
Blue = VDI in high RPM mode
Red = VDI in low RPM mode
As you can see, VDI in low RPM mode went lean and STILL made more torque <5k rpms than high rpm mode. If I can get the VDI working again (electric air pump), then I can add fuel there to bring the torque up, restoring the midrange. The weirdness at 4300ish is the injector staging - which I moved down to 2500 rpms to be a non-factor (after I got home from the dyno). We developed a good fuel map (thought their A/F meter was wacky - the LC-1 on the car was reading better), then tweaked spark to find what the car liked. We went through 25 runs to do so, including testing the stock air filter, no air filter, and leading/trailing split changes. I'm going to look for a filter with more area and less restriction - there were gains all over with no filter at all. It was really cool, but I went there on a budget so I had to stop at 2 hours.
It liked more advance (28 ish) and less fuel (13.5) below 6k, and less advance (26) and more fuel (12.8) above 6k. The attached MSQ is with staging at 4300, though I later moved it to 2500 to remove that dip.
Last edited by dbgeek; Sep 30, 2008 at 06:01 AM.
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
From: Va Beach or IN, indianapolis
very nice pete. did peter help you out on this dyno?
i still want to do a little more to my board before going to a dyno with it . like the dual vr build to it. and also a boost sensor which i think i needed from the start.so yeah i still have a while to go yeat. but grats to you on dyno run ! are you looking for a bigger numbers? like a 200whp NA???
i still want to do a little more to my board before going to a dyno with it . like the dual vr build to it. and also a boost sensor which i think i needed from the start.so yeah i still have a while to go yeat. but grats to you on dyno run ! are you looking for a bigger numbers? like a 200whp NA???
At the dyno, we tried AFRs from 12.3 up to 13.8 across the board to create the final map. Then we ran 22, 24, 26, 27, 28, and 30 degrees advance to find what it liked. It turned out to like it leaner down low and richer up top; more advance down low, to less advance up top.
Monty, while I'd love to get to 200 rwhp, I don't think the NA can breathe enough to do it. I would have to port to get any more power than 190 (what it did without a filter). I think I can pick up a bit across the entire range with a higher surface area gauze-type filter.
In the end, it is a track car, so I'm not going to spend much more time on the dyno to tweak it out. I went there with an idea of how the maps might come out, but I was disproven by the dyno results. As Peter says - give it what the engine wants, not what you think it needs. And no, he was not there to dyno with me.
Monty, while I'd love to get to 200 rwhp, I don't think the NA can breathe enough to do it. I would have to port to get any more power than 190 (what it did without a filter). I think I can pick up a bit across the entire range with a higher surface area gauze-type filter.
In the end, it is a track car, so I'm not going to spend much more time on the dyno to tweak it out. I went there with an idea of how the maps might come out, but I was disproven by the dyno results. As Peter says - give it what the engine wants, not what you think it needs. And no, he was not there to dyno with me.
One thing to be careful about when tuning on a dynojet:
Since it doesn't hold a load, you can sometimes tune for best power on the dynojet, but then end up having too much advance or too little fuel on the street.
I've seen a few cases where a car that was tuned on a dynojet ended up blowing its engine on the track/street.
Usually when I'm helping someone dyno tune, I try to go somewhere that has a mustang or other load-holding dyno.
Ken
Since it doesn't hold a load, you can sometimes tune for best power on the dynojet, but then end up having too much advance or too little fuel on the street.
I've seen a few cases where a car that was tuned on a dynojet ended up blowing its engine on the track/street.
Usually when I'm helping someone dyno tune, I try to go somewhere that has a mustang or other load-holding dyno.
Ken
Trending Topics
Ken,
I agree about the load-holding point, but this is one of the few dynos within an hour of my home, so I had to make due. I also datalog on the track and let the LogViewer adjust the table for AFRs after the session. I will use the AFRs we came up with on the dyno to continue to adjust the map.
I will add that I increased fuel and reduced advance from what I have been running at the track, so I can't say that it will be any worse off than before.
Pete
I agree about the load-holding point, but this is one of the few dynos within an hour of my home, so I had to make due. I also datalog on the track and let the LogViewer adjust the table for AFRs after the session. I will use the AFRs we came up with on the dyno to continue to adjust the map.
I will add that I increased fuel and reduced advance from what I have been running at the track, so I can't say that it will be any worse off than before.
Pete
Last edited by dbgeek; Oct 1, 2008 at 04:57 PM.
You can generally keep timing fairly high until you near your torque peak. Around there you have to back it down a little bit. Once you pass torque peak however you can typically advance it a bit again. Some people don't realize this so their max advance is constant above a certain rpm when it may actually be able to run a few more degrees advanced at points.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post






