TXDTR #8 Forum for the Texas chapter #8

TXDTR #8 Sept Meet

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 7, 2008 | 10:32 PM
  #181  
randyswelding's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
From: okc,ok
are yall having another dyno run in north texas south oklahoma anytime in october?im in okc and lookin for people to hang out with(all the diesel guys here are slugs and my friends dont get it they say when you snap a pinion while stallin up the turbo to stop playin).let me know guys
Reply
Old Sep 7, 2008 | 11:50 PM
  #182  
TexasCTD's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,680
Likes: 2
From: McKinney, TX
Originally Posted by XLR8R
...................

Way to go TEAM XLR8R !

Rowland got well into the 7's and Robert took home prize $ for Work Stock !!!


Actually, it was the "True Work Stock" (over 8000lb) class! I couldn't believe my truck had grown to 8490lbs. with tools etc.

2nd Place out of 7.........I was shocked! 255 ft pull.....I think 1st place was 260. And a sincere thanks to everybody for all of the cheers and support.

I just entered it for fun and really never expected to win any prize money. It wasn't much...but it payed for the trip and entry fees.

..
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 12:07 AM
  #183  
bigredBCS's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,529
Likes: 0
From: living in hotels like an underpaid rockstar!
Sounds like big blue could have made some power on this dyno. If not, he could blame it on his pump for the 1,000th time
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 08:45 AM
  #184  
AggieJustin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 16
From: Celina, TX
So did anyone get any pics from the dyno shop?

I was more worried about redeeming myself after my last run at that shop and never pulled the camera out. Plus I wanted to see if Charlie's claim that I had the highest "smoke to HP" ratio was accurate. LOL
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 09:05 AM
  #185  
RowJ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,234
Likes: 1
From: Texas/Oklahoma Border
Well using 'DuallyDogs' known baseline number from other dynos.... the correction figure appears to be 20%. That puts me at a more realistic number of 585 HP. Guess my boost leak (only pulled 55 psi) is hurting my numbers a bit. Did anyone notice if my smoke cleared up somewhere into the run?

Using 20% less...where does that put everyone?

Sorry guys, that the dyno was not more accurate! Last time we were there it was reading w/i 5% of previous Dynojet run. But, like said above, does give some of you bragging rights. I'd use my numbers too..... but nobody with any knowledge would believe them!
That being said....I might just keep the sheet to show a few uninformed friends. They are Powerstrokers and Duramaxers that like to trash talk my Dodge

RJ
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 09:06 AM
  #186  
XLR8R's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,785
Likes: 3
From: Pattonville, Texas
Yeah, that was Tyler's big shot at 4XX HP... oh well

p.s. I see he got banned again... man, he's like a cat with nine screen lives!
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 09:30 AM
  #187  
AggieJustin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 16
From: Celina, TX
Originally Posted by RowJ
Well using 'DuallyDogs' known baseline number from other dynos.... the correction figure appears to be 20%. That puts me at a more realistic number of 585 HP. Guess my boost leak (only pulled 55 psi) is hurting my numbers a bit. Did anyone notice if my smoke cleared up somewhere into the run?

Using 20% less...where does that put everyone?
Are you doing 20% off of the corrected value, or 20% off the uncorrected value? My CF was 5% on the graph.

So my Smarty/M6 only run that was 460 corrected, would be 438 uncorrected using the 5% CF from the graph. Using the 20% number it would fall to 383. I'd be more inclined to believe the 5% number as my previous numbers were 423 in my old configuration.

Smarty (65hp) + TST (120hp) + DD2 (90hp) = 275hp extra
Smarty (65hp) + Mach 6 (220hp) = 285hp extra

So I'd think that a Smarty/M6 run would compare to my Smarty/TST/DD2 run, which were close at 423 vs 438.

The other way I figured it was my old baseline run was always to do a Smarty/DD2 run which was consistently in the 344-350 range (corrected). This usually gave me a pretty good indication of where the dyno was reading.

In that case, I was running 155 extra hp and would net 348 (~13% loss). My Smarty run was with 285 extra hp and came up to 438 uncorrected (~18% loss) or 460 corrected (~13% loss).Of course the other variable is the SO pump.

As for my runs with the TST, I have no idea how accurate they are. I was working the skinny pedal with my right foot trying to keep boost under 45psi, so consistency on those runs could be questionable.
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 09:38 AM
  #188  
RowJ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,234
Likes: 1
From: Texas/Oklahoma Border
Originally Posted by AggieJustin
Are you doing 20% off of the corrected value, or 20% off the uncorrected value? My CF was 5% on the graph.

So my Smarty/M6 only run that was 460 corrected, would be 438 uncorrected using the 5% CF from the graph.
The 5% uncorrected would take your 460 up to like 485 hp, not down...... No?
Conditions were above STP, no below.

I was using 20% of uncorrected.

RJ
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 09:47 AM
  #189  
AggieJustin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 16
From: Celina, TX
Originally Posted by RowJ
The 5% uncorrected would take your 460 up to like 485 hp, not down...... No?
Conditions were above STP, no below.

I was using 20% of uncorrected.

RJ
My assumption was that the number listed on the graph was already the corrected number (because I only had one max number). So to go back to uncorrected, I had to remove the factor (in other words, divide by 1.05 to remove the 5%).

The number should have corrected up to account for the hot weather based on the assumption that STP is a more optimal temp than 90* (or whatever it was in the shop). Maybe I'm thinking of this bass-ackwards. But it makes sense to me. The only time I would expect a corrected lower than an uncorrected is when you are running cool air and optimal pressure.

EDIT: One other point I forgot earlier, all my runs were made in 5th (1:1). I didn't make any runs in 6th as I knew 6th would load up hard and shoot boost around past 50psi.
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 10:02 AM
  #190  
RowJ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,234
Likes: 1
From: Texas/Oklahoma Border
Yup! My mistake. Correction Factor is a multiplier.

But what has me confused is Bobby told me the Dyno said 731 hp on my best run. My Correction Factor was 1.00. Sheet should have read same as Dyno? But my sheet shows best run was 712 HP.
Maybe I mis heard him?? Anyone else remember what my numbers were on the dyno.... before they printed out the sheets?

RJ
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 12:00 PM
  #191  
RowJ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,234
Likes: 1
From: Texas/Oklahoma Border
RPM's on my print out were off. I did my runs from 1800 rpm to 3200 rpm. Graph shows from 1800 to 2800 rpm? Could the software comdensing the rpm spread account for over reading the power??
Wish I better understood Dynos. I spent an hr once on the web but could not find the real info on how an inertial dyno reads power. Drum acceleration I assume but not sure. Anyone?

RJ
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 12:55 PM
  #192  
AggieJustin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 16
From: Celina, TX
I'm lost on that one too. Not sure how that dyno can show engine RPM when it doesn't have a way to determine it. If we used the optical pickup, I can see that. But in order to calculate engine speed based on ground speed, they would have to know tire size, rear end ratio and transmission gearing.

That said, I've got one run that shows I made max power and torque at 4000. It was a bad run, but no idea how it ended up with that number. Most of the other runs are close to the range I was running (1600-3000)
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 01:15 PM
  #193  
RowJ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,234
Likes: 1
From: Texas/Oklahoma Border
Originally Posted by AggieJustin
... in order to calculate engine speed based on ground speed, they would have to know tire size,
Good point! My 35" tires would account for lower RPM's...assuming generic software.
Just have to stick with Dynojets...I guess.

RJ
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 02:51 PM
  #194  
AggieJustin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 16
From: Celina, TX
Originally Posted by RowJ
Good point! My 35" tires would account for lower RPM's...assuming generic software.
Just have to stick with Dynojets...I guess.

RJ
I was reading up on them this morning and Dynocoms have optical pick-ups for measuring engine speed. Not sure why they don't use one.

I did notice when I watched a few runs from the computer that engine speed didn't display until they started sampling. So it must be calculated based on sampled parameters. But I still don't get how it could vary so widely for a single vehicle.
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2008 | 04:56 PM
  #195  
Duallydog's Avatar
Chapter President
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
From: Big Spring (now Stephenville), Tx
My baseline dyno's for the 3 times I've measured it on the rollers are respectively 275 (Halthom City), 270 (Era), and 340 (Burleson). Remember I dynoed 440 corrected. All of those are just running a Quad intake, maybe the AFE dry filter added another 70hp.
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:14 AM.