Great HP numbers, but the torque seems low .

 

what boost?

 

I think it was set to 720 on the dynojet making the torque cut in half. You can actually multiply the torque by 2 to get the correct torque #

 

??? hmmmm never heard that, is this theory supported by Dynojet or based on calculation?

 

it happens when the rpm pickup isnt setup right.

its seeing the rpm as double so the torque as 1/2

 

Still doesn't add up .... 240 x 2 is way too much tq. 240 x 1 is way too little. Am I wrong? Shouldn't the tq be around 330ish??? this is abt what you get with the 175 x 2, but someone please explain the 240 rating.

 

the 240 is a spike if you look close.. innacurate.. maybe clutch slip or just a bad reading... look closer at the graph

 

ditto

 

ANSWER HIM ><

 

Boost??? and what type of gas??? Split timing at????

 

as im pretty well experienced on Dynojet machines i was interested in hearing what they had to say...
Based on what DynoJet said the 720 degree RPM setting will not cause the torque to cut by half. The problem is that Crisp6 has a graph versus Wheel speed and not Engine Speed. This graph can be off a bit sometimes.. The only way the versus wheel speed graph will be accurate for comparison sakes is if his versus RPM graph is accurate . Adjusting the RPM setting is mainly used for synching purposes as to match the dynojet to the actual engine speed if there synch correctly the torque will be accurate. rotaries can be goofy to synch sometimes as theres alot of "noise" you must use 2 secondary pickups or use the Optical sensor pick up.


Crisp: can you have your dyno shop give you a versus engine speed graph?

 

I can't read the graph too well. But if the hp is 400 at 100 mph, the torque would be 363. If the horsepower is 400 at 110 mph then the torque is approx. 330. These numbers were calculated using the horsepower torque formula and 1 mph approximately equal to 58 rpm.

 

I spoke to Chris on the phone about these dyno results.....the 439 rwhp was at 16 psi.

 

Well, I made 506/387@23, 480/370@20, and 449/331@18, on a .81 P trim 67, so the 330 would be right there. That was on 111 octane right up is on this forum. Carl

 

439 sounds about the norm for that with around 16lbs, we saw a little bit more but that could be porting or anything etc. As for the torque you're probably at around 330ish best bet for pickup is the optical, the difference we have seen is well worth it.

 

If it is a standard graph, then why is there a 1.02 correction, something odd there... what is your elevation?

 

really? so by setting up the trigger wrong, the torque would stay the same? I'm sure that there're a few dyno charts out there showing stock rx7's making 5xxrw tq on dynojet. I remembered seeing one of my dyno chart years ago making close to 1000rwtq simply by setting the trigger wrong during the dyno pull. Maybe dynojet can explain how my 13B is making more torque than a 2JZ?

 

Hey Carl,
I thought your 506rwhp was made @25psi and your 449rwhp was made @ 20psi? Am I missing something or you accidently posted it wrong on the other thread?

 

The 240 # is incorrect like what NYT said. If you trace the torque curve, you'll see that the average is around 160-175rwtq. when you multiply it by two, you'll see that the actual (estimated) torque is around 320rwtq and 350rwtq, which matches up the boost level he claimed. If I have to guess, the 320rwtq one is probably around 13-14psi and the other is around 16-18psi. I think I heard that the car was tuned by Judge ito so I'm sure that Ito can tell you more about a/f ratio and timing more than anyone else. I do remember that it was tuned on pump gas last I talked to them.

 

I think your missing my point, if the customer doesnt have a clean tach reading the torque #'s will be off, period. If you seen a RX7 with 1000 RWTQ id bet the tach signal was picking up noise. The key point is once the dyno jet pick up is sync with the car and is picking up clean across the rev band there should be no doubling of torque. I am saying the Torque CAN be wrong. Thats why if Crisp can provide the dyno versus Engine Speed you can see if the tach was off.

 

The numbers were what my AVCR was set to, later when we looked at the data logs those(23/18) were the true pressures measured by the haltech. The 480 was on a Dynapack two weeks later, the exact boost we sustained was 20.60lbs+/- (1.4xx bar) I will add that sheet to my Teamfc3s page, as it has more accurate RPM numbers, we hold "X" rpm, and then set the dyno to that RPM, thus less room for error. Those dynos are scaled differently, basicly a vertical line at ~4500-5500rpm. there was no correction, and the temps were 103 in the shade(we were in the sun), so the SAE number would have been a tad higher. Anyway, I think I already corrected myself on the thread, and since I am not trying to set some record, I did not talk too much about it. Had I increased the duty cycle it would have held higher, but once we busted 500, we decided to call it a day, and let other guys tune that were waiting. Thanks, Carl

 

Wow, those numbers are pretty good. I got fed up with my setup and decided to go with Steves GR67 kit....Steve just doesn't know about it yet. Looking forward to putting the money down for such a well designed kit.

 

Is this on the 1/2 bridge engine I heard on the phone?

 

Wait a sec, are you contradicting yourself a little here? This is what you wrote previously.



As for the 1000rwtq on my car, The number was double as stated previously since someone changed my trigger settings to 180 when I was making the pull. it will cut the rpm by half making it think I was only maxing out at 4krpm instead of 8krpm. My car usually make around 500rwtq consistantly. The most was 590rwtq at 5600rpm and 650rwhp at 6400rpm, that was back in the days with my T66.