Dyno run this morning....

[DVSMR2]

well guys, i finally got the thing on the dyno, lets just say some ppl were very confused, very afraid, and very impressed, all at the same time...

not many showed much interest till after its first run, then suddenly they all realised it wasnt "just another mr2" and came rushing to find out what it had in it...

http://file038b.bebo.com/1/large/2007/10/20/03/2691557904a5869942471l.jpg

the figures are a bit hard to read but they read
114.1RWKW and 627NM torque
which is a whole assload of torque for a stock engine!! and the torque curve itself is flatter than paris hilton, 550NM at 2000rpm and 627NM and 4500rpm

certainly cant moan at that one!!
it was 100NM more than ANY of the naturally aspirated JZA80s managed as well as a comparison

[Garbe]

Need these figures in English - it's all a bit NZ to me :freak3:

[snowtigger]

bhp bhp bhp feet and pounds please metric is a swear word does my head in trying to convert it soding eu brussels no back of u bunch of foreigners a pint is a pint not 750 fluid mille liter .

[GaryA]

About 155 rwhp and 462 lbft !!!!!!!! Sure you didn't put a diesel in it !

[biteme]

That torque figure is BMW 3 litre diesel territory.

I'd go to another dyno for comparison. I can believe the rwhp, but the torque seems further out than Paul's vernier calipers...

[loadswine]

Is that on a bog standard 3vz-fe?

[sketchy]

yes its a standard 3vz-fe...10 degrees advance on ignition timing.
no AFM mod...other than his exhaust, banks have a pipe and muffler each
I asked him after he showed me the plot too...

[Garbe]

I'd have thought that 155 RWHP is about right ?

[biteme]

Yeah I agree Garbeage. 155rwbhp and around 17% transmission loses will give you 181bhp - so that's pretty much spot on to be fair, 4bhp shy - with xx miles on the engine is pretty healthy.

Its' the torque. It's twice what it should be almost. Fair play though - must be a hell of a ride :)

[sketchy]

153rwhp is the number it shows on the graph he sent me

[biteme]

that's nigh on the same, 17% of 2bhp is smaller than Owen's IQ, I'd not worry about that lol

[AlunJ]

What RPM does the peak horsepower come in at? Can calc the torque at that point, see if the figure is accurate.

Edit: 463 ft lb at 4500 rpm works out as 400bhp. There's something wrong with either your dyno operatives methods or equipment, as the stated torque figure doesn't match the claimed horsepower or the graph.

[millentubby]

463 ft/lb...that's mahoosive. Must be a miscalculation surely?

Just for reference -there's an awesome conversion thingy I found here.

http://www.iplas.com/converter.htm

If only they had a v6 - into - mk1 converter on that page :D

[DVSMR2]

isnt there some sort of equation that you use to correct the torque figure to the actual torque, like divide by final drive or something like that if im remembering right??

i was more just looking at it compared to other cars run that day there and i had more than almost all of them, esp down low in the rpm.

but as i say im sure there is something your meant to do to correct it down, but the curve obviously is going to look exactly the same still just with lower numbers

[AlunJ]

The final drive etc should be taken into account during the dyno session, when they select the gear the dyno pull is done in, with the printout being a display of power output with a calculated 1:1 drive (using either gearbox reference data, or a wheel-based RPM measuring system to work it out).

TBH without a lot of data about how the run was performed, there's not many comments that can be made. But that run says the 3vz is putting out more torque than a Gen1 Dodge Viper (the gen1 Viper runs in at 630Nm). Something's off somewhere, sorry mate :(

[biteme]

Aye, the runs are usually done in 4th IIRC on the '2

[Driftin_AW]

that torque figure is definitely on the piss. Something about NZ dyno operators is that most of them seem to be completely retarded when it comes to properly setting up a dyno. While it's possible that torque was applied to the dyno (you could do 600Nm if your engine only had 100Nm, your final drive was 4:1 and you were in a gear with a ratio of 0.67 - which is around 2nd or 3rd on most cars IIRC), but that's not what your engine is developing. Fortunately power isn't effected by gearing so it doesn't effect the power figures, but you'll need to get a calculator out to find out your real torque.

I saw an evo 3 for sale that advertised he had 1200Nm of torque once, so don't feel bad :)

[biteme]

was he selling it with 3 spare engines or something lol lol

[DVSMR2]

lol dnt worry malcolm i dont feel bad about that, the dyno operator should :lol:
as i said further up i was sure it needed some sort of corection on it, why on earth people cant just set the bloody dyno up right to begin with ill never know! lol
would be easier if they did then the figure would have been corrected back properly and would be the right number!!

but LOL at the evo guy, thats class, all class

[sketchy]

but LOL at the evo guy, thats ass, all ass

are you sure you did not misspell anything?:moon:

[rattymr2]

[QUOTE=johnny g]That torque figure is BMW 3 litre diesel territory.

QUOTE]

or 2.4 litre Alfa territory (chipped of courselol )

[biteme]

Ooh yea, the 2.4JTD really does respond well to remapping. 246bhp I've seen them at :)

[rattymr2]

arse dyno says about 225hp. this was the most i could find when looking at tuning companies. 246hp would be nice but you're getting into gearbox blowing territory then.

[biteme]

It's not the power the shags the boxes, it's le torque! :)

[rattymr2]

but to get the power you increase the torque. not sure on the clutches either.

good fun though.

[snowtigger]

got one for sale yes its a 2.4 jtd sportwagon yes you can chip it but clutches and gearboxes dont last upsets the bmw drivers and boy racers though hhehe also get the six speed one its a lot more economicall on the motorway.