WE MADE TARGET WHP!!!! (almost...)

Printable View

06-10-2011, 11:20 AM
mossaidis

WE MADE TARGET WHP!!!! (almost...)

Shout out to Matt Kessler from Kessler Engineering (http://www.kesslerengineering.com/Dyno/Dyno.htm) and Mark from Applied Flow for all their smarts, help and work in getting "the little red civic" more powerful than ever!

Taget whp for the civic: 132.8 whp

We recorded 132.5 whp & 114 wtq, noon June 9, 2011!

Sweet Jezus!

Now if I can only learn how to drive.... It's been 10 months since I have been behind the wheel. June 17-18th at LRP will be interesing!
06-10-2011, 12:00 PM
Z3_GoCar

Really good numbers, and on a Dynapack unit too.
06-10-2011, 12:02 PM
rhygin

Cool... so now you have more power than Jeff's Saturn at 152 crank HP.

Should be bad fast
06-10-2011, 12:03 PM
JLawton

114 for torque??? My refrigerator has more torque than that!!!

he he he............

.
06-10-2011, 12:14 PM
CRallo

target meaning "process" I assume?

nice dude!

looks like my stocker ain't gonna cut it anymore... I've got that HP and 350 extra lbs! :( and my stump puller can't rev!

and yea... I thought this was funny too!

Quote:

Originally Posted by JLawton

114 for torque??? My refrigerator has more torque than that!!!

he he he............

.
06-10-2011, 12:57 PM
Ed Funk

Who needs torque when Honduhs will rev to 9000:rolleyes:
06-10-2011, 02:02 PM
mossaidis

LOL! rev limit is at 7800 and I will shifting at 7400. peak torque is at 5100 rpm. We should be able to raise the torque numbers given that we have the s300 which provides tuning in relation to throttle postion (or so I understand). So, I will keep my fingers crossed on mid-range power... after a few weekends.

(Stupid electric motor f7%Ken joke, rat-rabid carriage-return-making-in-his-posts ITA-leaving-bastard ex-saturn-driving Jeff!!!).... So Mr Lawton, at least you can't say that your wheel nuts have more torque than my motor. at least I have more chp than your saturn... :006: LOL!

It's a d-series motor which is a work-horse which has more torque in relation to higher revving B's. Besides getting a solid built motor, having the 4.9 FD gave us a 15% boost across the entire rpm range. Still it's a Hunda.

Chris! Ask me how many times I was chasing Max Lingenfeld's rear bumper on the straight-away at LRP???? HINT: "MANY" And once Max put that FD in, he walked away from me every lap. Your 240sx has lots of potential! And given that its ITA, we have lots cars in different stages of being built - plenty of competition at each layer of the pack!

Matt is surgical yet the biggest surprise to this entire build was my injectors... I sent them to marren to get checked, cleaned and balanced. My mouth dropped when I got the results back... two injectors were bad, but not bad enough for me to take notice. Kevin Ruck ran into similar issues before ARRC in his DX. So send in your injectors to get checked out!!!! I am NOT a company spokeperson.
06-10-2011, 02:11 PM
Jeremy Billiel

40% engine multiplier coming soon! LOL
06-10-2011, 02:16 PM
mossaidis

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Billiel

40% engine multiplier coming soon! LOL

That's not funny... :mad1:Don't give the masses any ideas.
06-10-2011, 02:28 PM
Jeremy Billiel

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossaidis

That's not funny... :mad1:Don't give the masses any ideas.

If you were a fair, thoughtful, well respected IT driver you would also submit your engine specs and dyno sheets to the ITAC so that all cars can be equal.

You should get no benefit of doing good work and beating the ITAC derived multiplier.

:D:D:D
06-10-2011, 02:34 PM
mossaidis

LOL! I have not exceeded the ITAC derived multipler... I have simply met it with a proper built and lots of matched bolt-ons. I can post my build sheets and dyno output to ITAC w/o hestiation. So are you posting yours as well?

EDIT: Oh yeah, you have no rat in this race... LOL! So can everyone else post their build sheets right? Shane? Andy? Funk? Jim? Tim? ...teehee
06-10-2011, 03:15 PM
tom91ita

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Billiel

40% engine multiplier coming soon! LOL

as i recall, the assumed mulitplier for the ITA honda is already over 40%.

that is, if you take the weight and work backwards, you end up in the 42-44% range, iirc.
06-10-2011, 03:35 PM
JLawton

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossaidis

EDIT: Oh yeah, you have no rat in this race... LOL!

Ziiiiiing!!! Nice one!!

Yeah, more guys are stepping it up in the North East. No winning with a half assed build!!

.
06-10-2011, 03:55 PM
Z3_GoCar

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossaidis

Shout out to Matt Kessler from Kessler Engineering (http://www.kesslerengineering.com/Dyno/Dyno.htm) and Mark from Applied Flow for all their smarts, help and work in getting "the little red civic" more powerful than ever!

Taget whp for the civic: 132.8 whp

We recorded 132.5 whp & 114 wtq, noon June 9, 2011!

Sweet Jezus!

You do realize that's like 152 whp on a dynojet...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Billiel

40% engine multiplier coming soon! LOL

Sounds like it's going to be a 50% adder, or a reclass to ITS :D
06-10-2011, 04:07 PM
mossaidis

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom91ita

as i recall, the assumed mulitplier for the ITA honda is already over 40%.

that is, if you take the weight and work backwards, you end up in the 42-44% range, iirc.

I believe 38% for the CRX si D16a6 engine. For the D16z6 (and probably the other VTEC D16's unless in ITB) it's 25% and for good reason... I have a 10/10th build and I am more or less there, within +/- 1 whp depending on the day, the dyno settings, etc.

Here's the math.

2270 lbs (process weight) - 50 lbs DW adder = 2220 lbs
2220 lbs / 0.98 FWD subractor = 2265 lbs (if unadjusted)
2265 lbs / 14.5 lb/chp ratio = 156.2 chp
156.2chp * 0.85 standard driveline ratio loss = 132.7 process whp

OR

156.2 chp - 125 stock chp = 31.2 chp upgrade via IT allowed mods
31.2 chp / 125 stock chp = 24.96% or ~ 25%
06-10-2011, 04:10 PM
mossaidis

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z3_GoCar

You do realize that's like 152 whp on a dynojet...

Sounds like it's going to be a 50% adder, or a reclass to ITS :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z3_GoCar

Really good numbers, and on a Dynapack unit too.

No more from you, "Z3_GoCar"... BANNED! j/k

dynojets read 10% above packs and 10% above SAE reality - true? no idea.
06-10-2011, 04:25 PM
Z3_GoCar

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossaidis

No more from you, "Z3_GoCar"... BANNED! j/k

dynojets read 10% above packs and 10% above SAE reality - true? no idea.

Get the smilie too:023:

There's a couple of threads in the tech section, the jet's generally 13% greater than a pack's reading. What does it mean? Don't know, and I've been thinking about it all morning. As far as tuning goes, the pack is the way to go and that's why I continue to use my dyno shop.
06-10-2011, 04:29 PM
JeffYoung

That's just not correct (about dynojets reading higher than dynapacks).

All dynos have a variety of operator input corretion factors that can skew the results in any direction the owner wants. I've seen paks read lower than jets, and vicey versa.

Only thing you can tune against is the same dyno.

For the ITAC, we have to look long and hard at dyno data to make sure we get things right.
06-10-2011, 04:36 PM
Z3_GoCar

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeffYoung

That's just not correct (about dynojets reading higher than dynapacks).

All dynos have a variety of operator input corretion factors that can skew the results in any direction the owner wants. I've seen paks read lower than jets, and vicey versa.

Only thing you can tune against is the same dyno.

For the ITAC, we have to look long and hard at dyno data to make sure we get things right.

Agreed that the "tuning paramaters" can be used to skew the dynojet's lower, but I'm sure you remember replying to this....

Quote:

Originally Posted by underpressure

I typed this up for another forum last year. Enjoy.

Preface:
Ok I'm going to supply some information based upon my 13+years of working with chassis dynos. I'm going to keep this as factual as possible w/ as little bias as possible, I invite any of the other dyno reps to posts or shop owners who have a dyno.

First off I will state my current position. I am the southeastern USA sales rep for Dyno Dynamics. In the past I have worked w/ dyno from various mfgs. All of these dynos I have had extensive experience with. Dyno Dynamics, Dynojet, Superflow, and Mustang. I have working knowledge of Roto-Pak, Dyna-Pak, Bosch, and Maha.

This is key, an number is just that, a number.
It doesn't matter wether a dyno reads 400hp on 1 mfg's dyno or 3 apples, 2 oranges, and a kumquat on some other mfg's dyno. A dyno is a tuning tool. The purpose of a dyno is to simulate real world conditions to help tuners. What is important is to see how change made to the vehicle affect it's power output. So your tuner makes a change and now you make 405hp or 3 apples, 2 oranges, and 2 kumquats.
A gain is a gain, a loss is a loss, period.
Numbers are only good for pissing matches and bench racing.

Now on to the comparison:
Here is how the various mfg dynos relate to one another. This is just a comparison of numbers output assuming the same vehicle on the dyno.

The industry leader in number output by far is Dynojet. Their marketing in the mid-90's specifically used the larger output numbers as a selling item.

Next is Mustang, generally about 7% less than Dynojet numbers.

Superflow is about 3% less than Mustang.

Dyna-Pak and Dyno Dynamics are about 3% less than Superflow.

Ok lets make this point again to make sure it's clear. The SAME CAR on the DIFFERENT DYNOS. So our test vehicle output on the various dynos are as follows:

Dyno Dynamics 200hp
Superflow 206hp
Mustang 214hp
Dynojet 226hp

This is assuming the dyno operator has not changed any of the parameters of the dyno. All of the dynos software incorporates parameters that are operator definable. These adjust the displayed power output. In other words the operator can "adjust" the output of the dyno to display any number desired. By adjusting weather station parameters, external corrections factors, inertia compensation, or any one of a dozen different factors the output number can be modified. The number can be modified to display anything from 10% of measure power to 300%. So our 200hp example vehicle can after a pull display peak power of 20hp or 600hp w/ just a couple of keystrokes.

Key Fact: Just because the dyno spits out a number, it doesn't means squat without knowing ALL of the correction factors.

Some dyno operators adjust the output of their dynos to closely match the highest numbers in the industry, Dynojet. This is not an attempt to defraud the customer. It is just that customers have a false notion that a bigger number means more power. But as you have seen, numbers mean nothing.

If anyone has any questions about dyno operations or which type of dyno is better or worse please start another thread & I will be more than happy to answer any questions.
06-10-2011, 06:46 PM
CRallo

Damn dude! Excited about your car much?! :p Yo
U are all over this thread!!! Its good to see man! I'm glad that you are psyched!

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossaidis

Chris! Ask me how many times I was chasing Max Lingenfeld's rear bumper on the straight-away at LRP???? HINT: "MANY" And once Max put that FD in, he walked away from me every lap. Your 240sx has lots of potential! And given that its ITA, we have lots cars in different stages of being built - plenty of competition at each layer of the pack!

How many? :p

well his engine wasn't stock... Nissan built mine 22 years ago and someone gave it to me for free! :D That said, comparing my DL1 files to Andy's and Jeff's, it doesn't hold me back at LRP too much... My biggest issue is the slower corners, but Jeff already told me I'm going too fast on the back half of the track, even though I'm still taking it easy :D LOL BUT I've only driven my car at LRP in one session with good(but still not new) tires, so it will come... Work is conflicting with the June race and maybe the July race, but look for us at the NARRCoffs!
06-10-2011, 10:29 PM
raffaelli

Quote:

Originally Posted by JLawton

Ziiiiiing!!! Nice one!!

Yeah, more guys are stepping it up in the North East. No winning with a half assed build!!

.

There will be a certain blue and yellow crx packing some hp and torque at lrp.
06-10-2011, 11:24 PM
tom91ita

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossaidis

I believe 38% for the CRX si D16a6 engine. For the D16z6 (and probably the other VTEC D16's unless in ITB) it's 25% and for good reason... I have a 10/10th build and I am more or less there, within +/- 1 whp depending on the day, the dyno settings, etc.

Here's the math.

2270 lbs (process weight) - 50 lbs DW adder = 2220 lbs
2220 lbs / 0.98 FWD subractor = 2265 lbs (if unadjusted)
2265 lbs / 14.5 lb/chp ratio = 156.2 chp
156.2chp * 0.85 standard driveline ratio loss = 132.7 process whp

OR

156.2 chp - 125 stock chp = 31.2 chp upgrade via IT allowed mods
31.2 chp / 125 stock chp = 24.96% or ~ 25%

i'll accept your math above that is saying 156.2 Crank HP. but since the 90-91's were rated at 108 hp, then 156.2/108 = 1.446

so call it a 45% multiplier.

nice hp numbers btw. and thanks for sharing.
06-11-2011, 08:34 AM
mossaidis

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRallo

Damn dude! Excited about your car much?! :p Yo
U are all over this thread!!! Its good to see man! I'm glad that you are psyched!

maybe a little...

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRallo

How many? :p

I SAID MANY DAMNIT!!! now stop reminding me... j/k (i crack myself up)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRallo

Work is conflicting with the June race and maybe the July race, but look for us at the NARRCoffs!

No wgi? no njmp? pooh...
06-11-2011, 08:59 AM
mossaidis

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom91ita

i'll accept your math above that is saying 156.2 Crank HP. but since the 90-91's were rated at 108 hp, then 156.2/108 = 1.446

so call it a 45% multiplier.

nice hp numbers btw. and thanks for sharing.

Tom, those numbers were posted selfishly for my car. Here is the 90-91 Civic/CRX Si/Ex as far as I know it.

2250 lbs (process weight) - 50 lbs DW adder = 2200 lbs
2200 lbs / 0.98 FWD subractor = 2244 lbs (if unadjusted)
2244 lbs / 14.5 lb/chp ratio = 154.8 chp
154.8 chp * 0.85 standard driveline ratio loss = 131.6 process whp

OR

154.8 chp - 108 stock chp = 46.8 chp upgrade via IT allowed mods
46.8 chp / 108 stock chp = 43.3% or ~ 43%

wow, that's crazy though there's probably more weight adders that I am NOT aware of. It's been posted on it.com before lots of time, it was well know that the Honda advertised lower than real chp for the D16a6.

there was a guy that knows a guy that said his CRX Si "did 135whp but on a Dynojet". That second guy was not Moser but another well respected CRX dude. if unaltered that dynojet posted 10% higher than real whp, then perhaps 122whp, about 9 whp below target. My suggestion is to talk to Moser or King Motorsports to see how much they were off the mark. Otherwise, I would call that extra 150 lbs "reward weight" for driving a d16a6. (sorry)
06-11-2011, 11:12 AM
CRallo

That's okay, you're allowed! ;)

:p

Maybe and maybe (mostly depends on $$)... But WGI is very much about power and I don't know T-Bolt very well yet(and my teammate has never driven it)

Oh and If YOU could get those numbers, they should proly through a lil extra weight at it just to be safe! :p

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossaidis

maybe a little...

I SAID MANY DAMNIT!!! now stop reminding me... j/k (i crack myself up)

No wgi? no njmp? pooh...
06-11-2011, 11:24 AM
CRallo

Someone else's Honda been working out?

Should be some good racing! :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by raffaelli

There will be a certain blue and yellow crx packing some hp and torque at lrp.
06-11-2011, 01:11 PM
mossaidis

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRallo

Oh and If YOU could get those numbers, they should proly through a lil extra weight at it just to be safe! :p

the car weighs 2308 with 5/8 tank of gas and a 200lbs driver w/ gear. So, it's 38 lbs overweight. When I asked Matt if there's anything we can do to lose weight, he said: "you, you're a fat ass". He's right again.
06-11-2011, 01:28 PM
vicktorvolpe

He would tell you that.....I thought it was good we have both #12 cars in his shop at the same time.

See you at LRP Mickey. I think I owe you a full gas can.
06-11-2011, 02:25 PM
CRallo

+1 that Matt WOULD say that! LOL I was thinking the same thing before I even scrolled down!

So who has the number reserved for ITA? Or do you two arm wrestle over it? :p

Quote:

Originally Posted by vicktorvolpe

He would tell you that.....I thought it was good we have both #12 cars in his shop at the same time.

See you at LRP Mickey. I think I owe you a full gas can.
06-11-2011, 02:59 PM
CRallo

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossaidis

the car weighs 2308 with 5/8 tank of gas and a 200lbs driver w/ gear. So, it's 38 lbs overweight. When I asked Matt if there's anything we can do to lose weight, he said: "you, you're a fat ass". He's right again.

Wait! What does 5/8's of a tank of gas have to do with anything?! That's what we start with for J when he is in the car...
06-11-2011, 03:16 PM
JLawton

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossaidis

. When I asked Matt if there's anything we can do to lose weight, he said: "you, you're a fat ass". He's right again.

Welcome to the club. You just paid the Kessler "Stupid Tax". You say something stupid, Matt is gonna make you pay!!

:023:

You guys, LRP is so NOT about the horse power in ITA. There are so many other things you have to do right, to be fast...........
06-11-2011, 05:26 PM
JeffYoung

Yep, that was 4 years ago, I've done a fair amount of reading on dynos since then, and while it is correct on the differences on how dynos operate, it's totally wrong on "set in stone" differences between what a motor reads on this dyno or that.

Seriously.

It is NOT accurate, in anyway, to say that a particular type of dyno always reads higher or lower than another.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z3_GoCar

Agreed that the "tuning paramaters" can be used to skew the dynojet's lower, but I'm sure you remember replying to this....
06-12-2011, 09:13 AM
Andy Bettencourt

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeffYoung

Yep, that was 4 years ago, I've done a fair amount of reading on dynos since then, and while it is correct on the differences on how dynos operate, it's totally wrong on "set in stone" differences between what a motor reads on this dyno or that.

Seriously.

It is NOT accurate, in anyway, to say that a particular type of dyno always reads higher or lower than another.

True, we have had SM's validate our Pack on Jets and they were within 1%. We also have developed a 'correction factor with the cooling water on and off.
06-12-2011, 11:08 AM
vicktorvolpe

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRallo

+1 that Matt WOULD say that! LOL I was thinking the same thing before I even scrolled down!

So who has the number reserved for ITA? Or do you two arm wrestle over it? :p

I run my #12 meotter in SM & SM2 now. I never ran it in ITA (I'm just here because of the fun I used to have with the volvo's when SSM and ITB were in the same group).

I only run ITA in enduros....and I don't do that that well.