Dyno runs- Very happy

Posts

Post 79273 by madness on 2006-02-09 14:49:11

Just got back from VT, after having some testing and power runs done. Car ran fine and showed 250 bhp @ the wheels along with a massive 433nm torque @ the wheels!! hopefully i can post the maps up later .... A massive thanks go to adam and hamish . (especially hamish for holding the fire extinguisher !! ) :B_steerin

Post 79285 by volvotuning on 2006-02-09 15:53:54

LOL, another one with a fuel leak!!! :) I sent you the charts. Adam.

Post 79289 by Murphy on 2006-02-09 16:00:42

that is very good - over 300 lb/ft !!!!!!

Post 79306 by madness on 2006-02-09 17:13:31

yeah :slap: only a little one....... here's the charts Image Image Image Image

Post 79307 by madness on 2006-02-09 17:15:19

[QUOTE=Murphy]that is very good - over 300 lb/ft !!!!!![/QUOTE] :B_steerin

Post 79316 by Vikingxl on 2006-02-09 18:17:54

What is it with these fuel leaks?

Post 79318 by Titch on 2006-02-09 18:27:55

alrighty, thoso are impressive figures. what have you done under the bonnet if you dont mind me asking.

Post 79333 by JUDGENINJA on 2006-02-09 19:14:47

Power run - was it with or without NOS...?

Post 79337 by Ross9 on 2006-02-09 19:26:13

Indeed, very impressive figures, congratulations. Couple of questions: 1. Did the runs start from 3500 and up, ie the pedal wasn't pressed until then? as I assume the runs were done with the nitrous on and to the best of my knowledge your still on the standard turbo, so the threshold for boost would be about 1000rpm lower, even more so with the nitrous aiding the spool up. 2. Is it just a case of the turbo running out of puff near the end I take it, ie the wheel power is the same(ish) from 4500 to 6500rpm as the torque tails off with the rpm rising, we found the same with Jacqs resulting in high torque with relatively lower bhp (415nm and 260bhp at the fly, wheel bhp peak was 235 but we dont have the curve to work out wheel torque lower down the range) basically due to the boost and torque tailing off. 3. How much gas were you running on top of the 1.3 bar out of curiosity? 4. Whats the spec these days , it would save all of the above questions :P lol Again though, very good figures. Ross

Post 79346 by t5tart on 2006-02-09 19:51:25

one day you gonna have to show me where vt is

Post 79399 by madness on 2006-02-09 22:01:45

[QUOTE=Ross9]Indeed, very impressive figures, congratulations. Couple of questions: 1. Did the runs start from 3500 and up, ie the pedal wasn't pressed until then? as I assume the runs were done with the nitrous on and to the best of my knowledge your still on the standard turbo, so the threshold for boost would be about 1000rpm lower, even more so with the nitrous aiding the spool up. 2. Is it just a case of the turbo running out of puff near the end I take it, ie the wheel power is the same(ish) from 4500 to 6500rpm as the torque tails off with the rpm rising, we found the same with Jacqs resulting in high torque with relatively lower bhp (415nm and 260bhp at the fly, wheel bhp peak was 235 but we dont have the curve to work out wheel torque lower down the range) basically due to the boost and torque tailing off. 3. How much gas were you running on top of the 1.3 bar out of curiosity? 4. Whats the spec these days , it would save all of the above questions :P lol Again though, very good figures. Ross[/QUOTE] cheers Ross!! i was reluctant to start the run at lower rpm for saftey with the nitrous. we tried from 3000 i think but it was basically the same. i.m not sure about the torque drop off, might be due to the timing advance from the ecu ? one of the reasons for the dyno run was a problem with the boost backing off but we seem to have sorted that one! the fuel leak was from the nos distributor pipes and was sorted after some tinkering. i guessed something somewhere would happen - it hasn't run since august! the last graph is without nos and the first the direct comparison with and without. the spec is still the same as before - standard turbo and 50 bhp rated jets on the nos . although the exact jet sizes which produced the perfect air/fuel ratio will definately remain top secret! darren- i meant to say i was going but forgot ! sorry :slap:

Post 79437 by t5tart on 2006-02-09 23:39:17

no probs matey i was up north on business today anyhow next time eh?? need to get mine on the dyno and checked out

Post 79485 by Mrsmopp on 2006-02-10 12:20:17

Great news Jamie!! Thats a storming T4 you got there!! I bet your chuffed to bits with her!! Looking forward to seeing her at the strip out performing alsorts of exotica (and a few T5's lol) x

Post 79505 by siamblue on 2006-02-10 13:40:14

Very impressive runs Madness, The S40 are great looking cars, better than the S70 IMHO, Can't wait too see her in March :) Gary

Post 79565 by t5tart on 2006-02-10 16:36:45

I saw her today hehehehehehehe very nice work under the hood

Post 79645 by Ross9 on 2006-02-10 20:15:36

[QUOTE=madness]cheers Ross!! i was reluctant to start the run at lower rpm for saftey with the nitrous. we tried from 3000 i think but it was basically the same. i.m not sure about the torque drop off, might be due to the timing advance from the ecu ? one of the reasons for the dyno run was a problem with the boost backing off but we seem to have sorted that one! the fuel leak was from the nos distributor pipes and was sorted after some tinkering. i guessed something somewhere would happen - it hasn't run since august! the last graph is without nos and the first the direct comparison with and without. the spec is still the same as before - standard turbo and 50 bhp rated jets on the nos . although the exact jet sizes which produced the perfect air/fuel ratio will definately remain top secret! darren- i meant to say i was going but forgot ! sorry :slap:[/QUOTE] Excellent mate, no worries on the exact jet sizes etc, it's good thinking that you fiddled with them to get the AFR you were after. Cheers for the reply and posting the graphs etc. Ross

Post 79749 by madness on 2006-02-11 09:42:32

not a problem ross. i was just pleased to see the figures i guessed it must have had.