|
Jarp - Actually hoping the work Vince does helps others get thru the process quicker: in talking to Matt, the tune is pretty close.
KM - I do plan on having another session after I get back to Texas but will try to closely match conditions so it may be later in the year before that happens.
So, my thought on the numbers -
My dyno run was with an Injen long tube and MRT v2.0 and pulled 254 whp which is 18.6% loss (254 / 312 = 81.4 or 18.5% loss). Tracy's dyno showed 256 whp which is 18% loss (256 / 312 = 82.05 OR 18% loss) with the TB, 3/8" iceolator, headers and tune.
However, there are several differences to note:
- air temp - 76* my run, high 80s* Tracy's run
- altitude - 612 feet Austin, 30 feet Palmetto
- Humidity - 75% Austin, high 80s% in Palmetto
My summation is there is approximately (I'm guessing) a 30whp difference between the two dynos. This is my thinking on measuring the results.
1) Cam Only Baseline established - 256whp
2) Cam only / tune final run - will yield the Cam only numbers (CO)
3) CO minus original baseline = cam only net gain (CON)
4) Heads / Intake / tune final run - will yield CAM / Head numbers (CH)
5) CH minus original baseline = cam / head net gain (CHN)
The measurement which has not / will not change is the drivetrain loss: averaged out it's 18.25% loss. Once the final numbers come from the dyno, add 18.25% and that should be a good estimate of crank horsepower.
Once I get back to Texas I can run on the original dyno will run 3 passes and average. From the numbers will be able to approximate what the bolt ons added and what the Cams / Heads added from the new totals and my original baseline.
As Can't_C said earlier - the RX crew may need a day of relaxation at the track with a certain yellow car! If the knock sensor comes into play, track numbers will show it by producing good 60ft and ET/MPH.
In the end, dyno numbers are a snapshot in time - the true test is how the car drives in the real world - and I plan to find out!
|