|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,631
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,631 |
First off, I know the dyno is a tool to tune, and see what kinda differences mods have to your car. Yes, there are viables like temp, ect...
Now, here is a quote I have from Eric G. So if anyone knows there Math Science skills help us get this figured out.
""I dynoed on a MAHA dyno at superchips facility. The dyno had two rollers instead of one. I believe this is because this dyno shows actual loss of power that your tranny and other components can rob. Not sure though but i think this dyno is one of the most expensive ones out there. Its made in Germany i believe...like BMWs. he he
It also measures in NM (newton meters?) and there is a formula for computing it but i cant remember it. After the custom tune i got 176.5hp and 232nm torque. Again i cant remember what that comes out to.""
Merlin
281hp 324tq
Timing 14' FP 36,24lbs,190lph,75Maf,65tb,cobra upper&lower,B303, GT-40 Crate with X al heads, Mac shorties, Off Road H,2chamber Flow's dumped, Tokico 5wys, Hotichkis Ctrl Arms, Alum Drive shaft, 3.73, Sub Frame,Steeda Tri-Ax, 94 Seats Drivers side powered.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 443
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 443 |
Originally posted by Merlin:
First off, I know the dyno is a tool to tune, and see what kinda differences mods have to your car. Yes, there are viables like temp, ect...
Now, here is a quote I have from Eric G. So if anyone knows there Math Science skills help us get this figured out.
""I dynoed on a MAHA dyno at superchips facility. The dyno had two rollers instead of one. I believe this is because this dyno shows actual loss of power that your tranny and other components can rob. Not sure though but i think this dyno is one of the most expensive ones out there. Its made in Germany i believe...like BMWs. he he
It also measures in NM (newton meters?) and there is a formula for computing it but i cant remember it. After the custom tune i got 176.5hp and 232nm torque. Again i cant remember what that comes out to."" To convert newton meters to foot lbs. you need to multiply by 0.7375622. That would be 232nm multiplied by 0.7375622 that equels 171.11443 ft. lbs. You see that doesnt look right. You cannot compair readings from different machines, it is invalid data. You cannot even compair readings from 2 machines that are the same brand and model. I'm getting the feeling that most people do not understand this! Anybody that tells you they can measure the drivetrain loss's because of the # of rollers the machine has is not being truthfull! Drivetrain loss's are educated guess's at best. A chassis dyno will tell you if your clutch is sliping, but as far as it being able to tell you any other loss's such as frictional loss's etc. it can not do it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,682
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,682 |
Originally posted by RedSVT:
To convert newton meters to foot lbs. you need to multiply by 0.7375622. That would be 232nm multiplied by 0.7375622 that equels 171.11443 ft. lbs. You see that doesnt look right. You cannot compair readings from different machines, it is invalid data. You cannot even compair readings from 2 machines that are the same brand and model. I'm getting the feeling that most people do not understand this! Anybody that tells you they can measure the drivetrain loss's because of the # of rollers the machine has is not being truthfull! Drivetrain loss's are educated guess's at best. A chassis dyno will tell you if your clutch is sliping, but as far as it being able to tell you any other loss's such as frictional loss's etc. it can not do it. those readings may not be gospel, but you can't argue there was not an OBVIOUS gain. even eric g. said, he was taking it easy putting it in 2nd gear because of all the new found tq. again, i am not trying to sell/push/etc these headers... just offering a solution to the guys need for more tq.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 443
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 443 |
Originally posted by bret:
those readings may not be gospel, but you can't argue there was not an OBVIOUS gain. even eric g. said, he was taking it easy putting it in 2nd gear because of all the new found tq. again, i am not trying to sell/push/etc these headers... just offering a solution to the guys need for more tq. Ok Bret, but I'm not saying there is NO improvement. Lets go with that #. Now what are you comparing that # to? What machine was THAT # from?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,631
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,631 |
Eric had the car dyno'd and it should be one of the excel spreed sheets before the headers. But then your looking at issues. Weather (Humid KC) temp, milage, operating temp, different typo of dyno ect.... But it is a base to see where your heading... Up or down... A good mod you can feel in the car like the Y-pipe, but a dyno is always nice to show Originally posted by RedSVT:
Ok Bret, but I'm not saying there is NO improvement. Lets go with that #. Now what are you comparing that # to? What machine was THAT # from?
Merlin
281hp 324tq
Timing 14' FP 36,24lbs,190lph,75Maf,65tb,cobra upper&lower,B303, GT-40 Crate with X al heads, Mac shorties, Off Road H,2chamber Flow's dumped, Tokico 5wys, Hotichkis Ctrl Arms, Alum Drive shaft, 3.73, Sub Frame,Steeda Tri-Ax, 94 Seats Drivers side powered.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 329
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 329 |
Originally posted by scooby757: Okay RedSVT.
First, thanks for the link. Very informative, lots of content. I'm still going through it all.
I don't know if I came off the wrong way or not, but I wasn't trying to suggest you were full of crap in your thinking. In fact I believe I stated I agreed with almost all of it.
In reference to 50+ ft.lbs. of torque
loss being "rare". I meant that it depends on the engine in question to some degree as
to the level of "loss". Rather than a number
of specific output lost in this case.[ a small block chevy]. It might be easier to relate it in percentage of loss, to equate it to other engines. In other words, if this
increase was on an engine with a baseline torque peak of 200ft.lbs. thats +25%. If it began the test with 450ft.lbs. it's +11%.
This may help people relate the "typical" gains to a contour engine more easily.
Again, I'm not trying to discredit you or Ed's. They obviously know what they are talking about. In fact, the source of my info about length, bends, packaging and flow was referenced on the site. The only one I saw with a positive mention so far. [I've not finished the entire site yet.]
Smokey Yunick. I'm sure you're familiar with the name, and reputation. The book I owned was titled
"power secrets". I picked it up in the mid 80s, and haven't read anything more current
from him since, so it's possible he had changed his views since that time.
Guess I better check.
Btw. If you have time, I'd be interested in seeing a pic of the ones you assembled on your tour. And if you wouldn't mind sharing...the diameters, lengths etc. you ended up using. If not, a pic or two would be cool. Thanks.How about it Red? Got a pic to share?
blk.99svt
n.e.Ohio
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,050
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,050 |
You know, I think that b*tching everyone out because someone questioned your integrity is the wrong attitude. At least keep your guns on target.
As far as $1000 tune, I didn't say anything about that ****. I only said that each part should be dyno'd separate and together to verify its effectiveness. And I also said that I dont think tuning will help headers too much unless intake work was also done.
Those are my opinions and I'm entitled to them as much as you are. NO ONE can convince anyone else that they are correct if they act the way you are.
I have no quarrel with you so calm down. I don't want to see you kicked off, and if your pride is so high that you say 'so what', then so be it.
warmonger
You can call me anything you like as long as it's nice.(all lies accepted)
99 Silver Frost SVT. #226 of 2760
Engine: 3.0 power!
Unique Stuff: Sunroof control module (#1 of 9)
Car Audio: Loaded and loud!
Check them out at
http://home.earthlink.net/~twilson1726
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,248
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,248 |
I said this already but the reason Eric gs dyno DID NOT PROVE the merit of the SHM headers is because it was looking at a custom chip. With the SHM headers/y-pipe/custom catback other mods he was at 165 HP and 160 lb/ft. Plenty of people have made that with no mods or just a Y-pipe. The custom burn chip put him at 176/171, very nice but THE CUSTM BURN CHIP MAY HAVE BOOSTED HIM THAT MUCH WITHOUT THE HEADERS - we just do not know. No body else has done a dyno tuned chip on this forum to know, but I suspect with just the Y-pipe/catback intake a dyno burned chip would provide nice gains. You simply cannot draw any conclusion about the headers (maybe they are worth the bux, maybe not).
1999 Amazon Green SVT Contour (#554/2760)
Stock SVT Duratec V6 with:
Intake- K&N filter/75mm MAF meter
Exhaust- MSDS Y-pipe/Bassani catback
Durability-Ford "dual mode" damper, Mobil 1/K&N oil filter
179.2 FWHP at 6900 RPM
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,631
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,631 |
Good point Dan. That slipped my mind.... Originally posted by Dan Nixon:
I said this already but the reason Eric gs dyno DID NOT PROVE the merit of the SHM headers is because it was looking at a custom chip. With the SHM headers/y-pipe/custom catback other mods he was at 165 HP and 160 lb/ft. Plenty of people have made that with no mods or just a Y-pipe. The custom burn chip put him at 176/171, very nice but THE CUSTM BURN CHIP MAY HAVE BOOSTED HIM THAT MUCH WITHOUT THE HEADERS - we just do not know. No body else has done a dyno tuned chip on this forum to know, but I suspect with just the Y-pipe/catback intake a dyno burned chip would provide nice gains. You simply cannot draw any conclusion about the headers (maybe they are worth the bux, maybe not).
Merlin
281hp 324tq
Timing 14' FP 36,24lbs,190lph,75Maf,65tb,cobra upper&lower,B303, GT-40 Crate with X al heads, Mac shorties, Off Road H,2chamber Flow's dumped, Tokico 5wys, Hotichkis Ctrl Arms, Alum Drive shaft, 3.73, Sub Frame,Steeda Tri-Ax, 94 Seats Drivers side powered.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 392
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 392 |
This is grounds for SERIOUS speculation, but it should also be noted that eric g could put down 5.9 second 0-60 runs on the gtech WITH a passenger after the headers, where as, I could only manage 6.1's in my admittedly quick E1 with just my skinny self in it.  He had something, and im sure it was torque. Also I belive Matt Galusha (sp?) dynoed the highest torque out of 8 svt's on our se-ceg dyno day. He was the only one with headers.
|
|
|
|
|
