Dyno Charts!!
- Thread starter T666YPR
- Start date
notice u got your dyno done in eastcoast customs, is that the lisburn one in n.i?? how much did they charge you for the dyno run?sydney said:
Last dyno when it was n/a.
Spec
J's 60rs exhaust
Rbc
Toda mani
Gruppe m
Kpro mapped by paul west.
Kpro wasnt mapped for the toda and now its turbo'd with a toda exhaust. If i had the toda mani and exhaust together mapped by paul it could of been the most powerful n/a dc5 on forum without cams. Other readout is with nos
BONE STOCK DC5 tested on DYNAPACK SAE
Bone-stock DC5 tested the other week, with great thanks to Paul (user:Bee) on here for use of his gleaming DC5. Hp is at the wheels/axles.
STOCK DC5 - force scaled graph
STOCK DC5 - Auto scaled graph (Autoscaling increases the graphical resolution via the scale for the tuner)
STOCK DC5 - Auto scaled graph, torque and HP shown seperately
DC5 Stock VS FN2 Stock (Dashed line is FN2)
Bone-stock DC5 tested the other week, with great thanks to Paul (user:Bee) on here for use of his gleaming DC5. Hp is at the wheels/axles.
STOCK DC5 - force scaled graph
STOCK DC5 - Auto scaled graph (Autoscaling increases the graphical resolution via the scale for the tuner)
STOCK DC5 - Auto scaled graph, torque and HP shown seperately
DC5 Stock VS FN2 Stock (Dashed line is FN2)
- Messages
- 8,229
nice will,
im not at all familiar with hub dynos so some questions as it seems a little lower than i would have expected (only 10 or so hp)
- the max rpm seems low?
- the speed seems low? what gear was it in?
-what is the temp reading, IAT or coolant?
im not at all familiar with hub dynos so some questions as it seems a little lower than i would have expected (only 10 or so hp)
- the max rpm seems low?
- the speed seems low? what gear was it in?
-what is the temp reading, IAT or coolant?
All data on the right hand side is telling you the variables from where the yellow cursor line is.C&S Evo7 said:
Air temp ambient was 41F, as for coolant temp, I waited until the fan tripped on then made sure the gearbox upto temp, when the fan switched off I comenced the run. Max rpm is 8400 so that it wouldnt HIT the limiter. Test was in 4th gear, not that it matters.
AS for the hub dynos/roller dynos and how they work... heres a basic explanation of the two.
Roller dynos have a pre-calibrated mass (of the roller(s)) in the software, it knows this, it measures the rate of acceleration and using newtons second law of motion (which is Force = Mass x Acceleration) it works out a force (torque). Then, by way of inductive RPM pickup or CALCULATE or TYPED or FOUND gear ratio it uses the
well known formula 'hp = rpm x torque / 5252 formula' to work out the hp.
Now the dynapack systems are essentially just digitally controlled hydraulic pump-heads where the fluid outlet/inlet can be electronically controlled. On these pump-heads amongst other technology there are calibrated digital pressure gauges in each dynapack pod. It literally DIRECTLY measures the torque at the axles then divides that by the overall drive ratio to have to engine torque after losses. It also works out the HP from this directly measured torque!.... you could argue theres no more accurate method.
Utilising SAE correction method, a power correction is applied to standardise the results to a 'standard day' which is why DYNAPACK is so repeatable any day of the year.
The 'TC' 1.00 is the total correction factor you can apply to graphs, like for instance if you put a TQ into honda and they came back telling you there was 15% drivetrain losses on a k20a engine then you could change that number to 1.15 to represent that. Theres so many different ways of working out/estimating engine HP that this is the only accurate way of showing it IF the information is available. Otherwise its much better to simply look at whp.
tricker_Luke's dyno Graphs
Before (a similar spec basemap) vs. after
Same graph force-scaled
Stock DC5 vs. tricker_Luke's DC5
I'm very impressed with the performance of the spoon manifold in conjunction with Luke's other mods! great performance from bolt-ons!
If you'd like your DC5 dyno tuning then give me a call on 07500 702615 / 01302 215337 or email me info@rdt.tv
Will@RDT
Before (a similar spec basemap) vs. after
Same graph force-scaled
Stock DC5 vs. tricker_Luke's DC5
I'm very impressed with the performance of the spoon manifold in conjunction with Luke's other mods! great performance from bolt-ons!
If you'd like your DC5 dyno tuning then give me a call on 07500 702615 / 01302 215337 or email me info@rdt.tv
Will@RDT
Guest
Will,
That graph is interesting ,
is the STOCK DC5 graph an actual test on Trickers STD car before any mods or is it someone elses car?
:?
That graph is interesting ,
is the STOCK DC5 graph an actual test on Trickers STD car before any mods or is it someone elses car?
:?
The 'stock DC5 graph' is exactly that... a graph of completely stock DC5. SAEpaul hughes said:
By the way Paul I advised somone to contact regading BC Pro exhausts for another K-swapped civic xthumbup
IIRC spec was Spoon manifold & full exhaust system, RBC, Hondata gasket, generic short air induction. The induction arm was what surprised me, I really thought it would pull high temps and not perform but this wasnt the case. Very impressed with the spoon manifold. Best I've tested on stock blocksdc5ian said:
Guest
Cheers Will for the recommendation,
At first i thought the graphs were before and after on the same car,and was impressed by the 60bhp jump midrange.
I think its the scaling of the graphs that is making it look odd, if you take specific points and compare them to the initial graphs posted for A.N.Other stock DC5 they are the same but scaled differently.
We have seen lots of widely ranging bhp on std cars.
on lukes ,What do you reccon the corrected F/W HP is Will,? around 250?
At first i thought the graphs were before and after on the same car,and was impressed by the 60bhp jump midrange.
I think its the scaling of the graphs that is making it look odd, if you take specific points and compare them to the initial graphs posted for A.N.Other stock DC5 they are the same but scaled differently.
We have seen lots of widely ranging bhp on std cars.
on lukes ,What do you reccon the corrected F/W HP is Will,? around 250?
The scaling on the last two are force scaled for a couple of reasons... so that everyone can see...
1. hp/torque intersect at 5252rpm and 2. it makes them easier to read.
During tuning i prefer to use the other data screens (see first graph) since the auto-scaling emphasises the graphs to aid tuning accuracy, i also posted the other data screen to show no correction has been applied.
what page is the other stock graph you refer to on? id like to see that. I took the highest reading of the three tests i recorded once the engine and gearbox was upto temperature.
As for Lukes fwhp/bhp figure I wouldnt want to guess, theres simply too many variables and varied methods (that are all flawed) between dyno manufacturers for any of the bhp numbers to be comparable between different dynos. The only relistic method is to have an engine dyno and chassis dyno by the same manufacturer and test both ways to see what a perticular engine loses.
Which is why im a true believe in whp numbers. And a good example of this is that dynojet, mustang dyno and superflow dynos in inertia only mode all consistantly give results within three whp of each other on SAE correction on any day. This was extensively tested and proven by superflow. And its because theyre using basic physics and SAE correction to measure and standardise the power without XYZ correction for flywheel hp.
1. hp/torque intersect at 5252rpm and 2. it makes them easier to read.
During tuning i prefer to use the other data screens (see first graph) since the auto-scaling emphasises the graphs to aid tuning accuracy, i also posted the other data screen to show no correction has been applied.
what page is the other stock graph you refer to on? id like to see that. I took the highest reading of the three tests i recorded once the engine and gearbox was upto temperature.
As for Lukes fwhp/bhp figure I wouldnt want to guess, theres simply too many variables and varied methods (that are all flawed) between dyno manufacturers for any of the bhp numbers to be comparable between different dynos. The only relistic method is to have an engine dyno and chassis dyno by the same manufacturer and test both ways to see what a perticular engine loses.
Which is why im a true believe in whp numbers. And a good example of this is that dynojet, mustang dyno and superflow dynos in inertia only mode all consistantly give results within three whp of each other on SAE correction on any day. This was extensively tested and proven by superflow. And its because theyre using basic physics and SAE correction to measure and standardise the power without XYZ correction for flywheel hp.
Guest
Will,
My era is 1980s onwards and we only had water brakes back then so we always used wheel bhp. but these days the young lads all want to hear Engine hp. Thats why i asked but its really irrelevant as you know its only a comparison on the day and not a race win trophy..
I agree with everything that you say technically but most normal people dont understand what we do and maybe cant understand without training, we know that the sae is supposed to compensate, and we know that back to back is the only sure way to make comparisons and we do it on race cars, but punters cant afford to do this day after day so we have to make a best comparison on what customers buy and compare on their limited terms as best we can..a thankless task you will no doubt agree.
I used an earlier graph in the post page previous. but its not relevant as its not the same car or the same day..so it doesnt help punters decide on what products to purchase, it only fudges their belief that they will get that hp gain by fitting that individual mod or mods.
We should end this now by agreeing that dynos are a comparison machine on the day..not an everlasting league table of constant variables.
Happy tuning,(if there is such a thing) :-k
Paul,
My era is 1980s onwards and we only had water brakes back then so we always used wheel bhp. but these days the young lads all want to hear Engine hp. Thats why i asked but its really irrelevant as you know its only a comparison on the day and not a race win trophy..
I agree with everything that you say technically but most normal people dont understand what we do and maybe cant understand without training, we know that the sae is supposed to compensate, and we know that back to back is the only sure way to make comparisons and we do it on race cars, but punters cant afford to do this day after day so we have to make a best comparison on what customers buy and compare on their limited terms as best we can..a thankless task you will no doubt agree.
I used an earlier graph in the post page previous. but its not relevant as its not the same car or the same day..so it doesnt help punters decide on what products to purchase, it only fudges their belief that they will get that hp gain by fitting that individual mod or mods.
We should end this now by agreeing that dynos are a comparison machine on the day..not an everlasting league table of constant variables.
Happy tuning,(if there is such a thing) :-k
Paul,
I know most of the young enthusiasts are dead-set on bhp but theres so many variables you just cant compare one car to another. you could have DD brand dyno in runmode XYZ for the type of car (fwd for example non turbo) that adds a set percentage (estimated losses) against that run mode... but then between two identical stock cars for example, one may have a bearing on the way out or a shot driveshaft joint and it'll assume the percentage losses are the same (well... the DD designers assume this is a constant due to the way they 'found' these values, looking at the average percentage difference on a range of stock vehicles to make their bhp reading read close to the factory) when in actual fact the car with maintenance required will read lower with higher drivetrain losses becasue of the extra drag.... but then put both these ficticious stock cars on a mustang/dynojet/superflow dyno in inertia only mode, do the run then use 'clutch power' and let the drivedrain decelerate naturally, then when the negative hp is measured this way and itt adds it ontto the dyno-run you'll see the car with maintenance required reads More bhp. whereas the WHP will read correct in terms of which is putting more power to the ground. i know yyou know about tthis Paul but I'm writing it for other members benefit.
When it comes to the fact a dyno is a tuning tool and yes for comparison purposes X brand dyno to X brand (not y or z brand) then I certainly agree. But with regard to repeatability I've tested one car months apart to compare the results and with the same coolant temp and gearbox temp the results were aproximately 1hp down peak power, the graph was practically a trace. Remember i dont have the variables the roller dynos have with rolling resistance which affects these things for example tyres/tyre-pressures/camber/caster/alignment/toe and thats before I mention strapping points/length of straps/tension and position on the roller if single drum or if the tension is so that the car can climb a cradle-roller. We'll have to agree to disagree on this topic as I stand by my comments/statements.
Will@RDT
When it comes to the fact a dyno is a tuning tool and yes for comparison purposes X brand dyno to X brand (not y or z brand) then I certainly agree. But with regard to repeatability I've tested one car months apart to compare the results and with the same coolant temp and gearbox temp the results were aproximately 1hp down peak power, the graph was practically a trace. Remember i dont have the variables the roller dynos have with rolling resistance which affects these things for example tyres/tyre-pressures/camber/caster/alignment/toe and thats before I mention strapping points/length of straps/tension and position on the roller if single drum or if the tension is so that the car can climb a cradle-roller. We'll have to agree to disagree on this topic as I stand by my comments/statements.
Will@RDT
Guest
Will,
Your right bud and thats what i have said all along, i only pointed out that you were comparing on the same graph,a car that had mods done, with someone elses car that didnt, and the starting points of both std cars might have been up to 15bhp different anyway.
we have had 350bhp NA showing when a clutch drags or wheels spin.
look at this top blue line fire off...
well happy on the first run :lol:
Your right bud and thats what i have said all along, i only pointed out that you were comparing on the same graph,a car that had mods done, with someone elses car that didnt, and the starting points of both std cars might have been up to 15bhp different anyway.
we have had 350bhp NA showing when a clutch drags or wheels spin.
look at this top blue line fire off...
well happy on the first run :lol:
here is mine, ARC, RRC ported, standard throttle body, standard manifold and cat plus Toda Cat back. mapped by Paul W at TDI North, any comments welcome, the map is really smooth and feels much like standard, but a lot quicker!!
It did make 252 before warming up and 180 lb ft
Nice numbers, mate! soon will have my car mapped by Paul, really expecting good resultsTimB said:
here is mine, ARC, RRC ported, standard throttle body, standard manifold and cat plus Toda Cat back. mapped by Paul W at TDI North, any comments welcome, the map is really smooth and feels much like standard, but a lot quicker!!
It did make 252 before warming up and 180 lb ft
what fuel were you running?
97/98 ron, so good results, Paul was well pleasedBLaCkDC5R said:Nice numbers, mate! soon will have my car mapped by Paul, really expecting good resultsTimB said:
here is mine, ARC, RRC ported, standard throttle body, standard manifold and cat plus Toda Cat back. mapped by Paul W at TDI North, any comments welcome, the map is really smooth and feels much like standard, but a lot quicker!!
It did make 252 before warming up and 180 lb ft
what fuel were you running?