Dyno test 13B PP
09-05-03, 10:33 PM
#51
Undercover
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On mine im just going to go with the Berg set up. The IDA's are very nice to tune and are very easy to use. I can see why the DCOE is appealing because of price but i think there is more pwr to be made from perfectly tuned berg down draft. The 13b I building should put out from 300-330 at the shaft. I know that sounds like quite a bit, but most of there are quite a few guys that have already been making this much pwr with similar set ups.
Lasse wankel-
Just curious if you are using the high angle ports like racing beats or the low angles like the MFR housings? I have been using the low angles with pretty good success. are you guys using roughly the same intake port timeing as the mfr or lower on the housing?
Also you were saying more about the slide throttles, im quite interested. Could you share any more info on how it has been working and if it is a near duplicate to the MFR one?
CJG
Lasse wankel-
Just curious if you are using the high angle ports like racing beats or the low angles like the MFR housings? I have been using the low angles with pretty good success. are you guys using roughly the same intake port timeing as the mfr or lower on the housing?
Also you were saying more about the slide throttles, im quite interested. Could you share any more info on how it has been working and if it is a near duplicate to the MFR one?
CJG
Last edited by Rotortuner; 09-05-03 at 10:35 PM.
09-06-03, 12:17 AM
#52
Originally posted by Rotortuner
On mine im just going to go with the Berg set up. The IDA's are very nice to tune and are very easy to use. I can see why the DCOE is appealing because of price but i think there is more pwr to be made from perfectly tuned berg down draft. The 13b I building should put out from 300-330 at the shaft. I know that sounds like quite a bit, but most of there are quite a few guys that have already been making this much pwr with similar set ups.
Lasse wankel-
Just curious if you are using the high angle ports like racing beats or the low angles like the MFR housings? I have been using the low angles with pretty good success. are you guys using roughly the same intake port timeing as the mfr or lower on the housing?
Also you were saying more about the slide throttles, im quite interested. Could you share any more info on how it has been working and if it is a near duplicate to the MFR one?
CJG
On mine im just going to go with the Berg set up. The IDA's are very nice to tune and are very easy to use. I can see why the DCOE is appealing because of price but i think there is more pwr to be made from perfectly tuned berg down draft. The 13b I building should put out from 300-330 at the shaft. I know that sounds like quite a bit, but most of there are quite a few guys that have already been making this much pwr with similar set ups.
Lasse wankel-
Just curious if you are using the high angle ports like racing beats or the low angles like the MFR housings? I have been using the low angles with pretty good success. are you guys using roughly the same intake port timeing as the mfr or lower on the housing?
Also you were saying more about the slide throttles, im quite interested. Could you share any more info on how it has been working and if it is a near duplicate to the MFR one?
CJG
09-23-03, 04:04 PM
#53
Senior Member
Thread Starter
At last we gonna dyno our 13B PP motor this weekend. On Saturday we begin with the Weber 56.5mm carb on gasoline and try 3 different primary systems. Then on Sunday (if not the engine is broke) we switch to the Methanol setup with slide throttle injection. Keep you informed what happened next week.
09-29-03, 04:49 PM
#54
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Well know i have dyno our PP motor w/ weber and gasoline. It didn't begin so good with the carb flooding becausse of a 4mm Grose jet needle valve not functioning so good. After the bugs were sorted out we began testing with 50mm id primaries 600 mm long and tune the carb with F-2 emulsion tube 235 main 160 air it didn't like the F-7. The motor liked ign 20L-19T best tried 22-21 but lost 5-7 hp. Anyway the real nightmare were the plugs were i usally have 9s they were fouled immediately tried 7s the same after a 260-265 hp pull. So we decided to go with NGK BP5ES plugs and the engine responded with 280 hp at 9400 rpm. Now the real problem is directly after the pull i pulled the plugs out and could easily hold them in my hand! That is 280 hp and no sign of thermal heat on the plugs. Exhaust temp was 900-920Celsius. Can anyone explained this to me? The last motor i dynoed in July had 276 hp and NGK 9s and i can say those plugs couldn't you hold for long very hot! So i am quite dissapointed with this dyno session we were hoping for 320 hp but boy were we wrong! I also dyno tested on Saturday with the alcohol set up but i am gonna do a new topic of that tomorrow.
09-30-03, 01:31 AM
#55
Undercover
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your intake leangth doesnt really make sense to me. You said it was 600mm long? i converted that to about 23 inches, that cant be right. and if you meant 60 mm that only like 2.5 inches. What was the leangth. With the weber down drafts, an intake leangth of about 175mm works real good. Also how is you exhaust set up? You really should be able to get up to around 300 FWHP.
CJG
CJG
09-30-03, 01:41 AM
#56
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Oh sorry! 600mm is of course the exhaust primary length with a 50mm id. The intake manifold length is 125mm long with 50mm long air horns. Engine responded with smaller 46mm chokes before 49mm better torque and hp. Have you any theories about the cold plugs?
09-30-03, 03:27 AM
#57
Adolf Hitler Verfechter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Northern South Africa
Posts: 969
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi.
If i may answer this question.
I`am not that good with PP ,but i have had great success on BP`s.The first one is : R6725-11.5 They are very expensive,and strictly race only Before using,the engine will have to be started,and brought to operating temp with a more conventional plug example : B8es.
The other option is : BR10eix .These plugs are iranium,which tends to last longer.The heat range also works very well.
Hope this helps a bit ?
Karis
If i may answer this question.
I`am not that good with PP ,but i have had great success on BP`s.The first one is : R6725-11.5 They are very expensive,and strictly race only Before using,the engine will have to be started,and brought to operating temp with a more conventional plug example : B8es.
The other option is : BR10eix .These plugs are iranium,which tends to last longer.The heat range also works very well.
Hope this helps a bit ?
Karis
09-30-03, 09:39 AM
#58
Try a shorter header! Primary header length of 12.5 inches should help. The collector should be 2.25 id and lead into a megaphone with a 4 inch exit.
Last edited by crispeed; 09-30-03 at 09:52 AM.
09-30-03, 10:31 AM
#59
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Originally posted by crispeed
Try a shorter header! Primary header length of 12.5 inches should help. The collector should be 2.25 id and lead into a megaphone with a 4 inch exit.
Try a shorter header! Primary header length of 12.5 inches should help. The collector should be 2.25 id and lead into a megaphone with a 4 inch exit.
10-01-03, 12:23 AM
#60
Originally posted by Lasse wankel
We have a similar exhaust in our car which we will test in the dyno next time. What chokes and jets are you using in Traviesos engine? Is there any benefit to go with a longsystem on a PP?
We have a similar exhaust in our car which we will test in the dyno next time. What chokes and jets are you using in Traviesos engine? Is there any benefit to go with a longsystem on a PP?
The PP seem to prefer the short system.
We use to run the 44 mm chokes but the carb was annular discharge so it flowed pretty well I guessed.
It responded and made best power with 245 mains and 85 air correctors with the F-2 emulsion tubes. The design of the carb made it neccessary to run the small air correctors to maintain proper air/fuel ratio at high rpm's. It made best power at 13.2 to 13.4:1 a/f ratio.
The carb/intake/port combination made decent power with a broad power band and low rpm torque peak actualy better suited for road racing than for drag racing. When we converted to FI the power went up by 30 rwhp. We lost some power below 8K rpm and the torque peaked higher but was now in the rpm band of the motor and better suited our type of racing. Before the peak torque was never being used because the motor was always running at higher rpms where torque dropped off. With the present combination the redline is around 10.6k rpm and never drops below 9k rpm during shifting. The torque peaked right around 9k rpm also and is pretty flat from 8.5k rpm to 10k rpm.
Converting to methanol gave an additional 30 rwhp on the entire rpm band without making any changes to take advantage of the fuel being used.
The last dyno resulted in 298 rwhp and 165 rwtq.
10-01-03, 11:24 AM
#62
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Originally posted by crispeed
We're not running the Weber anymore! It's been injected and on methanol for some time now.
The PP seem to prefer the short system.
We use to run the 44 mm chokes but the carb was annular discharge so it flowed pretty well I guessed.
It responded and made best power with 245 mains and 85 air correctors with the F-2 emulsion tubes. The design of the carb made it neccessary to run the small air correctors to maintain proper air/fuel ratio at high rpm's. It made best power at 13.2 to 13.4:1 a/f ratio.
The carb/intake/port combination made decent power with a broad power band and low rpm torque peak actualy better suited for road racing than for drag racing. When we converted to FI the power went up by 30 rwhp. We lost some power below 8K rpm and the torque peaked higher but was now in the rpm band of the motor and better suited our type of racing. Before the peak torque was never being used because the motor was always running at higher rpms where torque dropped off. With the present combination the redline is around 10.6k rpm and never drops below 9k rpm during shifting. The torque peaked right around 9k rpm also and is pretty flat from 8.5k rpm to 10k rpm.
Converting to methanol gave an additional 30 rwhp on the entire rpm band without making any changes to take advantage of the fuel being used.
The last dyno resulted in 298 rwhp and 165 rwtq.
We're not running the Weber anymore! It's been injected and on methanol for some time now.
The PP seem to prefer the short system.
We use to run the 44 mm chokes but the carb was annular discharge so it flowed pretty well I guessed.
It responded and made best power with 245 mains and 85 air correctors with the F-2 emulsion tubes. The design of the carb made it neccessary to run the small air correctors to maintain proper air/fuel ratio at high rpm's. It made best power at 13.2 to 13.4:1 a/f ratio.
The carb/intake/port combination made decent power with a broad power band and low rpm torque peak actualy better suited for road racing than for drag racing. When we converted to FI the power went up by 30 rwhp. We lost some power below 8K rpm and the torque peaked higher but was now in the rpm band of the motor and better suited our type of racing. Before the peak torque was never being used because the motor was always running at higher rpms where torque dropped off. With the present combination the redline is around 10.6k rpm and never drops below 9k rpm during shifting. The torque peaked right around 9k rpm also and is pretty flat from 8.5k rpm to 10k rpm.
Converting to methanol gave an additional 30 rwhp on the entire rpm band without making any changes to take advantage of the fuel being used.
The last dyno resulted in 298 rwhp and 165 rwtq.
10-04-03, 11:32 AM
#63
Undercover
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am kinda curious about the big increase when you went to the FI. Is the TB you guys went to quite a bit larger than the 51? Does the new TB have larger throats?
CJG
CJG
Originally posted by crispeed
We're not running the Weber anymore! It's been injected and on methanol for some time now.
The PP seem to prefer the short system.
We use to run the 44 mm chokes but the carb was annular discharge so it flowed pretty well I guessed.
It responded and made best power with 245 mains and 85 air correctors with the F-2 emulsion tubes. The design of the carb made it neccessary to run the small air correctors to maintain proper air/fuel ratio at high rpm's. It made best power at 13.2 to 13.4:1 a/f ratio.
The carb/intake/port combination made decent power with a broad power band and low rpm torque peak actualy better suited for road racing than for drag racing. When we converted to FI the power went up by 30 rwhp. We lost some power below 8K rpm and the torque peaked higher but was now in the rpm band of the motor and better suited our type of racing. Before the peak torque was never being used because the motor was always running at higher rpms where torque dropped off. With the present combination the redline is around 10.6k rpm and never drops below 9k rpm during shifting. The torque peaked right around 9k rpm also and is pretty flat from 8.5k rpm to 10k rpm.
Converting to methanol gave an additional 30 rwhp on the entire rpm band without making any changes to take advantage of the fuel being used.
The last dyno resulted in 298 rwhp and 165 rwtq.
We're not running the Weber anymore! It's been injected and on methanol for some time now.
The PP seem to prefer the short system.
We use to run the 44 mm chokes but the carb was annular discharge so it flowed pretty well I guessed.
It responded and made best power with 245 mains and 85 air correctors with the F-2 emulsion tubes. The design of the carb made it neccessary to run the small air correctors to maintain proper air/fuel ratio at high rpm's. It made best power at 13.2 to 13.4:1 a/f ratio.
The carb/intake/port combination made decent power with a broad power band and low rpm torque peak actualy better suited for road racing than for drag racing. When we converted to FI the power went up by 30 rwhp. We lost some power below 8K rpm and the torque peaked higher but was now in the rpm band of the motor and better suited our type of racing. Before the peak torque was never being used because the motor was always running at higher rpms where torque dropped off. With the present combination the redline is around 10.6k rpm and never drops below 9k rpm during shifting. The torque peaked right around 9k rpm also and is pretty flat from 8.5k rpm to 10k rpm.
Converting to methanol gave an additional 30 rwhp on the entire rpm band without making any changes to take advantage of the fuel being used.
The last dyno resulted in 298 rwhp and 165 rwtq.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Jeff20B
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
73
09-16-18 07:16 PM
