Kitcat Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 I saw some (to me) fascinating dyno results posted under an different thread yesterday. So fascinating, in fact, that I thought they deserved their own thread. And to get things started, i have posted my X-Flow's numbers from a 4 years ago. They're my engine's pre-tuneup figures. The post tune up sheet is lost. Numbers were the same but A/F ratio was back to a safe level. 20110603070635617.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 no longer my car :sadangel:, but it's Arya's, and here are the numbers before I put long tubes headers on... I figure another 30 horses are to be found with the headers. http://www.usa7s.com/forum/uploads/20070104_085316_Dyno2.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowss7 Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Ok, here's my dyno sheet for the Rover K series. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scannon Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The first run on this sheet is with the Link ECU. The second is with the Hydra Nemesis. No other changes to the car, same dyno, same tech, one year apart. Since the second tune I have removed the catalytic converter and added water/methanol injection. The water/methanol injection system comes with an additional PC board that turns on the flow at 4 psi boost and sends a more aggressive timing and fueling map to the Hydra. I'm estimating these two changes are worth about 30 more HP. Sorry about it being turned sideways. Once you open it just rotate it once clockwise. Link vs Hydra dyno plots1.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slomove Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) Keep in mind when quoting U.K. based dyno runs that they often (or always?) include certain powertrain loss to estimate crank hp and are not the rear wheel power numbers. For further comparison here the results (earlier posted on another thread) of a more local shootout: http://lh5.ggpht.com/_242PlvPtVpE/SxMlkjN3VsI/AAAAAAAAA3Q/Zoe4cHf82co/AllDynoResults.jpg Edited July 6, 2011 by slomove Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmaxcliff Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Here is a 2.3 Duratec with SBD goodies. I have improved the mapping since these runs were made. The runs shown are how I got the car vs. the first couple of tries at improvement. Peak power may be up but low and mid-range is definitely better now. Maybe I will go back to the dyno sometime. The car was built in SoCal and whoever mapped it there was totally out to lunch. I am an old guy that has never mapped an engine before and even I did a better job! It must be all of those Weber jet changes I have done..... and my FAST meter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmaxcliff Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 looks like I need to learn a little about posting images so they can be read clearly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mondo Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) Here's my stock 2005 honda 2.2 with long tube header & short cold air intake (told I could get a few more ponies if it was longer)... 216hp & 152lbs of pretty flat torque (no VTEC surge). Funny how you have to resize the picture to trick the site in letting you post it a 2nd time.. unless there's another way. Edited July 6, 2011 by Mondo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlumba81 Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 I just clicked the attachment for a larger view and it showed up fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rnr Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Here's my stock 2005 honda 2.2 with long tube header & short cold air intake (told I could get a few more ponies if it was longer)... 216hp & 152lbs of pretty flat torque (no VTEC surge). Interesting reading. I just dyno'd mine with a roughly 2.3L capacity, 2.0L head, same headers and intake as you and got 204 hp and 145 lb/ft and VTEC set to 5700. This is with the SDS ECU and was on the 9th pull so we were having a few heat soak issues. IIRC Jim Rankin got 202 hp on the same dyno running the same config as you but with the stock ECU. http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3183/5844518308_2d02d6044e.jpg Dyno Curve (204 whp and 145 lb/ft) by rnair, on Flickr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slomove Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Interesting reading. I just dyno'd mine with a roughly 2.3L capacity, 2.0L head, same headers and intake as you and got 204 hp and 145 lb/ft and VTEC set to 5700. Don't take all that too seriously. 204 0r 216 is probably well within the margin of error, considering equipment calibration (or lack of calibration), possible "optimistic settings", normal measurement uncertainty, temperature, humidity, hub vs. roller and whatever. I have yet to see a NIST traceable dyno measurement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mondo Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 I had a piggyback unit (Apexi) for the stock ECU and was able to lower the VTEC... got similar results as yours. We're all in the same ballpark HPwise with a stock honda motor. Using the AEM, the torque is flatter without loss of power. It allows more fiddling, like timing, which the piggyback didn't. Not a big deal with stock motor, but I'm kind of working my way to a turbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danilo Posted July 17, 2011 Share Posted July 17, 2011 (edited) In my 40 + years of observations Small shop dynos are sold as 'profit centres' inaccuacy/inconsistency is expected. Don't put much credence in dyno sheets. You really wanna Turbo? I just tripped over an interesting factoid (presumably it's accurate ?) A Saab 2.3 engine (94 to 98 Only!) is a whopping 20 lbs Heavier than an S2000 engine. Odd as it's Block is cast Steel (neither Iron Nor Ali with liners) Clever Swedes . The Saab being complete with turbo and ALL ancillaries.. I was amazed. Saab engine, oem is at the bottom of it's potential Performance curve however. It has massive inherent strength reserves, clearly Swedes were Very conservative engineers. Honda is highly tuned oem... Not a lot of reserve left at all imo. Used Saab engines are worth Beer money to buy outright.. true. Yes I own a couple, so there is some bias :-) No dissing Hondas', I also have a new Honda 600RR and an Acura in the garage :-) The ECU setup on a Saab is absolute Genuis.. true. They have No Air mass meter, the ECU uses the Sparkplugs as Sensors, analysing after EACH spark event on each plug and adjusting for timing and fuel delivery and boost on each cylinder ..constantly. Swede overkill basically but V effective. Not likely you will find this on some goofy aftermarket ECU, that isn't worth more than your car to buy . A simple DIY ECU tune (there is even a "wizard' pgm to do this' ) brings power up to 280 hp with no hardware upgrades required. That's 20/22psi boost by the way. Low boost high HP numbers are always erm 'suspect' IMO as are TQ numbers that are lower than Hp ones. That's also well over 320 ft lbs. Frankly dunno if the Honda box can absorb double, let alone triple it's oem Torque.. But then a seven has lowish intertial mass and some fit Bike engine units with some although imo frenetic success. 400 hp is for the taking , requiring only a larger (ie: Holset ) turbo and higher rate Siemens injectors... 25/28psi boost levels though. Approx $1k in brand new bits, plus a bespoke Intercooler may be needed to fit in the seven I would expect. Dunno HOW one would get a competently sized one in Any Seven in any event.. but that applies to any turbo setup in any seven. Lunatics have reached 600 hp and one tuner is claiming to running this on the street.. that I find dubious, but not the hp achieved. Long babble :-) Just saying that there are; as always, Alternates sometimes Very good ones, often overlooked. Edited July 17, 2011 by danilo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mondo Posted July 17, 2011 Share Posted July 17, 2011 (edited) Yeah, Honda did a very good job with the head and there's not much room for improvement there... only real options are supercharger & turbo. And realistically I would expect somewhere between 300 & 350 horsepower... though Kevin is up to 380hp I think. I was first looking at superchargers as it's cleaner & avoids heat issues (still may do it). But the turbo offers more options in how a driver might want the power to come on. My concern with the turbo is room/heat.... and the money to do it;) I think 300hp at the rear wheel will do me just fine. I'm really not into top speed; these cars get a bit sketchy up there. Edited July 17, 2011 by Mondo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted July 17, 2011 Share Posted July 17, 2011 My little Hayabusa dyno results. Puzzling that the graph stops at 9900rpm and I ran the engine to the revlimiter in 6th gear which SHOULD be 11,500rpm (normally 10,500rpm in 6th but I have the GIpro unit). I haven't been back since the shop owner purchased a new tach adapter for higher rpm engines. http://hanksmegabusa.com/images/111409/01.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss351 Posted July 18, 2011 Share Posted July 18, 2011 2.0 Duratec, Caterham intake, stage 2 cams, Ford Racing head. http://i276.photobucket.com/albums/kk27/adamgx50/Caterham/dyno_tq.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitcat Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) Today's fuzzy results. I left w/o the dyno sheet so this is the faxed version. Bottom line: 165 hp, 150 lbs torque-on a $1K junkyard motor w/no tuning. Looks like I am going to have to add the Birkin supercharger option to keep up w/all those East Coast Cosworth Duratecs and Rover engines (You guys know who you are!). 20120815161328169.pdf Edited August 16, 2012 by Kitcat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westy turbo Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) Here it is at max 1.05 to 1.1 bar with a hybrid gt2860 top paragraph. Low one is at 0.45 bar . http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o217/tigraturbo/DYNO.jpg Edited August 16, 2012 by westy turbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BessieTheSeven Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Looks like I am going to have to add the Birkin supercharger option to keep up w/all those East Coast Cosworth Duratecs and Rover engines (You guys know who you are!). Well hello there Mike sweetie! You mean little ol' me? :seeya: I am just waiting to come out and play with your Birkin. And I have always been fond of a Caterham with big rubber on its rear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitcat Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 Bessie: I am rarely speechless, but you got me here:). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now