New Dyno Numbers!!!
07-01-07, 12:57 PM
#53
Original Gangster/Rotary!
iTrader: (213)
Wow, that is some serious power, congrats man 
And I agree, that dyno chart looks *very* good.
What fuel pump setup are you running again? That's one thing that will hold me back from running over 20 psi.
And I agree, that dyno chart looks *very* good.
What fuel pump setup are you running again? That's one thing that will hold me back from running over 20 psi.
07-01-07, 01:22 PM
#54
Full Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maryland
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is 600rwhp impressive coming from 2 rotor on race gas by today's standards? Nope.
But breaking 500rwhp on 93 octane without AI is cool, and making 604rwhp and 479 torque using a single 63mm compressor wheel is surprising (to me at least, regardless of the boost levels)
IMHO a better way to gauge how much power you can expect has to do more with fuel used and the flow of the turbo. This car would have made the same peak power running a street port given the fuel and turbo that was used. The only real difference would've been the boost levels. Running 27psi in the mid range was all that this turbo could do and as the revs increased the flow needed to increase to maintain 27psi which as you can see the turbo was incapable of doing hence the boost dropping down to 23psi.
But breaking 500rwhp on 93 octane without AI is cool, and making 604rwhp and 479 torque using a single 63mm compressor wheel is surprising (to me at least, regardless of the boost levels)
IMHO a better way to gauge how much power you can expect has to do more with fuel used and the flow of the turbo. This car would have made the same peak power running a street port given the fuel and turbo that was used. The only real difference would've been the boost levels. Running 27psi in the mid range was all that this turbo could do and as the revs increased the flow needed to increase to maintain 27psi which as you can see the turbo was incapable of doing hence the boost dropping down to 23psi.
congrats 
but te numbers need some clarification and comment so people can understand what is going on 
Your car ran 27.88psi and droped to 23 odd psi at maximum power?
Now I from personal experience after 30 dyno runs on a friends car can tell EVERYONE this fact.
IF your car is set to make the boost at power peak all the way through the revs prior to that point OR it ramps up to that peak power boost point you will never make the same power as you did with a mid range higher boost setting
We made 578rwhp on 21.5psi mid range boost curve with 18 psi at maximum power, and you can NEVER get anywhere near that when ramping up to 18 or even 20 psi at peak revs if you dont have the big push in mid range revs, your power will ALWAYS be alot lower. its the boost urge that lags behind a few hundred RPM that makes a big difference to the peak figure regardless if you hit the same peak boost at the measured maximum.
So for a full bridge port running 27+psi droping to 23psi and making 600rwhp on a dynojet on C16 its nothing miraculous at all in summary, by comparison my friend makes 578rwhp on a dyno dynamics runing 21psi droping down to 18psi on a half bridge with pump fuel and water injection...... I'll go dig up the power graph so you can compare
taken from AI section
but te numbers need some clarification and comment so people can understand what is going on Your car ran 27.88psi and droped to 23 odd psi at maximum power?
Now I from personal experience after 30 dyno runs on a friends car can tell EVERYONE this fact.
IF your car is set to make the boost at power peak all the way through the revs prior to that point OR it ramps up to that peak power boost point you will never make the same power as you did with a mid range higher boost setting
We made 578rwhp on 21.5psi mid range boost curve with 18 psi at maximum power, and you can NEVER get anywhere near that when ramping up to 18 or even 20 psi at peak revs if you dont have the big push in mid range revs, your power will ALWAYS be alot lower. its the boost urge that lags behind a few hundred RPM that makes a big difference to the peak figure regardless if you hit the same peak boost at the measured maximum.
So for a full bridge port running 27+psi droping to 23psi and making 600rwhp on a dynojet on C16 its nothing miraculous at all in summary, by comparison my friend makes 578rwhp on a dyno dynamics runing 21psi droping down to 18psi on a half bridge with pump fuel and water injection...... I'll go dig up the power graph so you can compare
taken from AI section
07-01-07, 01:34 PM
#55
Junior Member
iTrader: (34)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why cant you guys just be happy for the guy? he just got over 600 whp 2 rotor on a GT40r. now in my opinion that is impressive. it seems like everytime someone posts up there new numbers everybody (riceracing in particular) tell them "oh, well we made this much with this setup" or "you should have made this much power" or "you dont need that big of a port" blah, blah, blah. cut the guy a break!!
mr2foryou, i hope you have alot of fun with that much power. i thought my car made alot, and it is fast as hell, i cant imagine what that kind of power feels like. be safe!!
mr2foryou, i hope you have alot of fun with that much power. i thought my car made alot, and it is fast as hell, i cant imagine what that kind of power feels like. be safe!!
07-01-07, 03:27 PM
#56
600+rwhp club member
Thread Starter
07-01-07, 03:28 PM
#57
600+rwhp club member
Thread Starter
The fuel pump setup is one walbro in-tank and an external walbro.
07-01-07, 03:33 PM
#58
600+rwhp club member
Thread Starter
why cant you guys just be happy for the guy? he just got over 600 whp 2 rotor on a GT40r. now in my opinion that is impressive. it seems like everytime someone posts up there new numbers everybody (riceracing in particular) tell them "oh, well we made this much with this setup" or "you should have made this much power" or "you dont need that big of a port" blah, blah, blah. cut the guy a break!!
mr2foryou, i hope you have alot of fun with that much power. i thought my car made alot, and it is fast as hell, i cant imagine what that kind of power feels like. be safe!!
mr2foryou, i hope you have alot of fun with that much power. i thought my car made alot, and it is fast as hell, i cant imagine what that kind of power feels like. be safe!!
I can't imagine what it feels like either as I'm on a pump tune now. Ray did take me around the block on high boost and c16 and it was not fun in the passenger seat. VERY SCARY to say the least.
07-01-07, 07:33 PM
#60
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Look the simple facts are the car WONT do 600rwhp on 23.55psi NEVER EVER, but it WILL do it running 27.88psi then falling back to 23.55psi
It will only do it runing closer to 2 bar boost, read the post, better yet get your dyno tuner to verify what I am saying and repost a solid 23.55psi sheet You will find its a far lower power figure
Your power is a function of running massive boost in mid range then tapering off simple as that
Its a good figure but relative to what has happend 10 years ago not realy so why all the bandwagon jumping????????
It will only do it runing closer to 2 bar boost, read the post, better yet get your dyno tuner to verify what I am saying and repost a solid 23.55psi sheet
You will find its a far lower power figureYour power is a function of running massive boost in mid range then tapering off simple as that
Its a good figure but relative to what has happend 10 years ago not realy so why all the bandwagon jumping????????
07-01-07, 07:44 PM
#61
That's what matters the most. Your satisfaction and enjoyment.
Everyone else can just speculate or dream and wish for the same satisfaction.
Also much props to Ray for a job well done again. The rotary community needs a lot more people like Ray who knows what it takes to get the job done.
There are so much people that are still living in 'D NILE'.
Everyone else can just speculate or dream and wish for the same satisfaction.
Also much props to Ray for a job well done again. The rotary community needs a lot more people like Ray who knows what it takes to get the job done.
There are so much people that are still living in 'D NILE'.
07-01-07, 08:02 PM
#62
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
The only denial is the self delusional thoughts of making something at a point that takes into no consideration of the fundamentals of mechanical engineering
(27.88psi to 23.55psi from 5k to 7.5k) does not equal 23psi at 7.5k and 604rwhp
Its pretty basic
& for the seemingly daily re invention of performance parameters running 28psi or 32psi on a bridge port no one can match (MPH) what people did on a street port running 19.1 psi LOL go figure *albeit with 10 years of advantage and infinate skill levels LOL*!
(27.88psi to 23.55psi from 5k to 7.5k) does not equal 23psi at 7.5k and 604rwhp
Its pretty basic
& for the seemingly daily re invention of performance parameters running 28psi or 32psi on a bridge port no one can match (MPH) what people did on a street port running 19.1 psi LOL go figure *albeit with 10 years of advantage and infinate skill levels LOL*!
07-01-07, 08:10 PM
#63
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
In a nut shell you cant CLAIM to make that power (604) on 23psi, for its nothing more than a claim not backed up by the own evidence you have posted.
Hence my posts
I have done my bit by posting you a sheet of a similar boost pattern and also given you experience of trying to make that same power by only using that boost at peak power (and no more prior to that peak power boost level) and it wont ******* happen.
If any of you have a brain for the basic understandings of thermodynamics and how engines work you will see why this is the case, but if you dont no worries, all you have to do if you still doubt it is actualy GO DO IT then post back a solid 23psi graph
You will quickly find out that it wont happen, keeping it real in an ever growing bandwagon hyped up world
Its not having a go at anyone, its about being real with what your trying to convince people about. Your trying to decive people into thinking your making massive power at only X boost with no consideration to the fact that the higher boost your running prior to your power peak has a massive influence on the power at later revs ..... in the most inocent it shows your in capability to convey the engineering facts, in the most sinister its blantant bandwagoning while thinking inteligent people have no idea/option but to believe the hype? so which is it?
Hence my posts
I have done my bit by posting you a sheet of a similar boost pattern and also given you experience of trying to make that same power by only using that boost at peak power (and no more prior to that peak power boost level) and it wont ******* happen.
If any of you have a brain for the basic understandings of thermodynamics and how engines work you will see why this is the case, but if you dont no worries, all you have to do if you still doubt it is actualy GO DO IT then post back a solid 23psi graph
You will quickly find out that it wont happen, keeping it real in an ever growing bandwagon hyped up world
Its not having a go at anyone, its about being real with what your trying to convince people about. Your trying to decive people into thinking your making massive power at only X boost with no consideration to the fact that the higher boost your running prior to your power peak has a massive influence on the power at later revs ..... in the most inocent it shows your in capability to convey the engineering facts, in the most sinister its blantant bandwagoning while thinking inteligent people have no idea/option but to believe the hype? so which is it?
Last edited by RICE RACING; 07-01-07 at 08:22 PM.
07-01-07, 08:49 PM
#64
Front Range Express
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mr2foryou- congrats on getting the most out of your set-up without blowing the motor.
rice- I learned a couple of important things from your critical analysis.
rice- I learned a couple of important things from your critical analysis.
07-01-07, 09:26 PM
#65
Full Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maryland
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think maybe you missed my point. Boost pressure is only one part of the picture, as I'm sure you know that pressure and flow (volume) are two different things. Does his car make 604rwhp@23.Xpsi? Yes, as you can see it did. Would his car make the same 600rwhp running a solid 23.Xpsi evenly across the board? IMO yes. The main difference you would see would be that the torque would be much lower "if" it only went to 23psi and held that for the compete run. A given turbo can only move X amount of air, it's not relevant whether it takes 27 psi or 23 psi to force the volume of air through the engine to produce 600rwhp. The porting is the reason the boost is lower for the given power output, but nothing is free (the idle suffers). Using boost pressure is not a good way to gauge "expected" power output unless the porting is the same, as it is only a measurement of the air "backing up" and not being able to get through the engine.
Speaking of A&L and a bit of history, their are undisclosed specs to his engine. Was his engine a street port that made 550rwhp@19 psi? Maybe it did, but there's more to it then just a "street port". For example, what compression rotors did they use to achieve that? I can tell you considering Peter sponsored his RX-7 and it was not some off the shelf stock 3rd Gen. rotor or a 63mm compressor wheel. My point is who cares what boost level it took? If that was done using only 93 octane it would be impressive, but it was done using C-16 and a much higher flowing turbo.
Speaking of A&L and a bit of history, their are undisclosed specs to his engine. Was his engine a street port that made 550rwhp@19 psi? Maybe it did, but there's more to it then just a "street port". For example, what compression rotors did they use to achieve that? I can tell you considering Peter sponsored his RX-7 and it was not some off the shelf stock 3rd Gen. rotor or a 63mm compressor wheel. My point is who cares what boost level it took? If that was done using only 93 octane it would be impressive, but it was done using C-16 and a much higher flowing turbo.
07-01-07, 09:39 PM
#66
...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: md
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RICE RACING, you are not the end all be all of the rotary tuning community, nor are you the only wealth of information for the forums, whenever someone posts about their wonderful experience and numbers, you seem to have to jump on your soap box and try to get some kind of attention. You seem to have have this agenda of trying to break down one's tune, dyno, build and compare with someone elses setup, mainly yours, you know what, NOT everyone is going to tune like you, nor use the same method of engine build parts, porting, etc...does it mean its wrong, of course not, does it mean its better than your way, of course not. Why can't you just give congrats and LET IT BE, there is no need to go into "well this dyno graph needs to be explained so people know whats really going on"...we all can read a dyno and see that the turbo ran out of breath up top....and I am sure that if the customer wants more power, then they will get a turbo capable of flowing the volume up top to hold the boost curve flat across to redline. As long as the customer is happy, and felt to share their results and experience, thats all that matters. Really, you come across like you are trying to prove some hidden agenda that is NOT there with these results. I really wish you would realize these things. Just FYI, Forcefed7 is the builder and tuner of that car.
Are you so insecure that you feel the need to hi-jack Dee's thread and then bash on him saying he is trying to fool people with his results, he is just happy and posting what the car made, there is no hidden agenda that he is trying to pull off, man you really need to come off of it and stop all your negative crap. You know what, since you seem to want to show off, why dont you take the same turbo, same motor and then proceed to make more, I really would like you to do that.
Are you so insecure that you feel the need to hi-jack Dee's thread and then bash on him saying he is trying to fool people with his results, he is just happy and posting what the car made, there is no hidden agenda that he is trying to pull off, man you really need to come off of it and stop all your negative crap. You know what, since you seem to want to show off, why dont you take the same turbo, same motor and then proceed to make more, I really would like you to do that.
Last edited by BLitzed33; 07-01-07 at 09:57 PM.
07-01-07, 09:51 PM
#67
600+rwhp club member
Thread Starter
Point is, RICE, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I have the dyno sheet posted for all to see. Blatantly obvious at the bottom of the dyno sheet where the boost numbers are, that it hit 27.88psi peak; however, the car still did the 604rwhp figure at 23psi. Not trying to get anyone to believe anything here as I've posted it all for anyone to look at and criticize.
Thanks for the support Ray.
Thanks for the support Ray.
07-01-07, 09:56 PM
#68
600+rwhp club member
Thread Starter
Thanks Greg.
To Everyone, I'm just excited about the whole experience. I have been through alot with this car(been trying to build it for 2 1/2 years now) and it's finally come together. 27.88psi or 23.55psi; makes no difference to me. I made 600+rwhp and I'm ecstatic about that. Ray is the most knowledgeable person with rotaries that I've ever met and he has my business for life. I trust what he says and if he says that in his opinion, my car would do 604 at 23psi for the whole run, then that's what I'll believe.
To Everyone, I'm just excited about the whole experience. I have been through alot with this car(been trying to build it for 2 1/2 years now) and it's finally come together. 27.88psi or 23.55psi; makes no difference to me. I made 600+rwhp and I'm ecstatic about that. Ray is the most knowledgeable person with rotaries that I've ever met and he has my business for life. I trust what he says and if he says that in his opinion, my car would do 604 at 23psi for the whole run, then that's what I'll believe.
07-01-07, 10:07 PM
#69
Dee CONGRATS man. That's going to be a sick ride. I can tell you from EXPERIENCE that even with all the power in the world you wont put down good ETs unless you have a built rearend and correctly setup suspension. LOL Look I ran an 11.9 @ 132mph..... Oh and now I have a new goal to beat next summer. My car is unhold since I just bought an R6.
And RICE RACING quit pissing in everyone's cheerios. You are a COMPLETE ASSBAG..... enough said
And RICE RACING quit pissing in everyone's cheerios. You are a COMPLETE ASSBAG..... enough said
07-01-07, 10:18 PM
#71
600+rwhp club member
Thread Starter
Thanks Phil. I know I need suspension and everything else. I'll be in touch with Ray as I'm going to find out what he feels is necessary for me to run to see some good times. That's a nice trap speed you got there.
