0 registered members (),
391
guests, and 2
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums69
Topics113,853
Posts1,343,285
Members1,655
|
Most Online731 Jan 14th, 2020
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#649275
21/07/2008 09:13
21/07/2008 09:13
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 554 Nottingham
Cyclone
Enjoying the ride
|
Enjoying the ride
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 554
Nottingham
|
I'm sure they'd talk you through what the setting means and what difference it could possibly make if you ask them. Maybe there isn't a 5, just 4, 6 and 8? After doing some searching for "dyno dynamics" it appears they dont have a 5 cylinder mode, been mentioned on here before. does 314 at the flywheel sound about right when it's 266 at the wheels? sounds about right to me. Hi Matt, That's a fair comment and may be correct. Jules
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: Cyclone]
#649340
21/07/2008 11:01
21/07/2008 11:01
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,391 Essex
Trappy
Forum is my life
|
Forum is my life
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,391
Essex
|
It should be run in 6 cylinder mode. Apparently neither is any more accurate, but it is the industry standard to do 5s in 6 mode for comparative purposeses. More importantly, as I recall (I can't view from work) your dyno graph redlines at 5,900rpm. It appears that they haven't set the dyno up correctly (if this is the case) and you BHP figures will be out. You'd be better of posting up the torque curve and getting one of us to put the BHP up properly.
I think it will actually give a higher figure...Sorry, I blame the work filter
Last edited by Trappy; 21/07/2008 12:47. Reason: Idiocy...
F****** b****** thing...
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: Trappy]
#649354
21/07/2008 11:11
21/07/2008 11:11
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
It should be run in 6 cylinder mode. Apparently neither is any more accurate, but it is the industry standard to do 5s in 6 mode for comparative purposeses.
More importantly, as I recall (I can't view from work) your dyno graph redlines at 5,900rpm. It appears that they haven't set the dyno up correctly (if this is the case) and you BHP figures will be out. You'd be better of posting up the torque curve and getting one of us to put the BHP up properly.
I think it will actually give a higher figure... You looking at my graph there? My graphs go to well over 6500rpm, if you take another look, and the torque curve is displayed
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: Trappy]
#649355
21/07/2008 11:11
21/07/2008 11:11
|
Vas
Unregistered
|
Vas
Unregistered
|
test was done in 3rd gear??? Should be 4th in 5gear boxes and 5th in 6gear boxes, no?
Good results, spot on fueling, so who really cares if its 310 or 320!
V.
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#649363
21/07/2008 11:16
21/07/2008 11:16
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
3rd gear was used, yes - most of the different coupe RR sessions that I've seen have been done in 3rd gear.
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#649366
21/07/2008 11:19
21/07/2008 11:19
|
Vas
Unregistered
|
Vas
Unregistered
|
v.odd!
as far as I know they try to test with as close to 1:1 ratio and that's definitely not 3rd gear! I'm sure someone is going to correct me if not, but most Italian and Greek RR graphs I've seen and all the RR sessions I've been to were in 4th or 5th for the 6gear guys.
V.
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650036
22/07/2008 11:45
22/07/2008 11:45
|
clay99
Unregistered
|
clay99
Unregistered
|
Done better that mine there mate your fueling is alot better than mine looking at your graphs.
Congratulations m8!! Will have to look at sorting out my fuel and clutch still on a standard one at the moment
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650091
22/07/2008 13:01
22/07/2008 13:01
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
Cheers, clay, I've replied in your thread
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650512
23/07/2008 00:50
23/07/2008 00:50
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
OK, what's going on? More than one person has told me that my results are just plain wrong, inaccurate, try it on another rolling road, etc etc. Nobody will tell me WHY they are wrong... (apart from jules saying they shouldnt have run it in 4F - but 4F was fine on everybody elses car) What else could bring anyone to that conclusion?
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650573
23/07/2008 09:16
23/07/2008 09:16
|
MABR
Unregistered
|
MABR
Unregistered
|
OK, what's going on? More than one person has told me that my results are just plain wrong, inaccurate, try it on another rolling road, etc etc. Nobody will tell me WHY they are wrong... (apart from jules saying they shouldnt have run it in 4F - but 4F was fine on everybody elses car) What else could bring anyone to that conclusion? Matt - give Steve a call at Dyno Demon. Explain what people on here are saying and ask him for his comments. I'm sure this can be brought to a successful conclusion.
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650591
23/07/2008 10:14
23/07/2008 10:14
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
I need a bit more than "I've been told theyre wrong" I need "I've been told theyre wrong BECAUSE......."
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650603
23/07/2008 10:27
23/07/2008 10:27
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,729 N.E Scotland
mattB
Club member 6
|
Club member 6
I AM a Coop
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,729
N.E Scotland
|
The things that I can see are wrong are that it’s been run in 3rd gear when 4th would be more ‘normal’ and that the torque seems remarkably high for the level of boost you are running.
Death-rattle-tastic
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: mattB]
#650610
23/07/2008 10:37
23/07/2008 10:37
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
Thanks mattb I can explain the torque. look at any other coupe running a GT28R. Can they hold 1.4 bar to 5000rpm? No, it drops off to 1.2 bar at 5000rpm. limitations of the turbo. My maximum torque is 300lb/ft at 5000rpm at 1.2 bar. SAME AS ALL THE OTHERS If I was running 1.4 bar I would get the same or similar peak torque at 5000rpm becauser it would have dropped to 1.2 by then, but it would beef up the midrange more below 5000rpm. Next time, I will ask them to run it in 4th gear.
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650680
23/07/2008 12:00
23/07/2008 12:00
|
suba
Unregistered
|
suba
Unregistered
|
No, it drops off to 1.2 bar at 5000rpm. limitations of the turbo.
What? You can almost hold that at the redline!??!?!?!?
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650703
23/07/2008 12:27
23/07/2008 12:27
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
No, it drops off to 1.2 bar at 5000rpm. limitations of the turbo.
What? You can almost hold that at the redline!??!?!?!? Nope, not even close! When I went in Ross' car just after he had upgraded from the GT28R to the RSR he was saying it was definitely holding more boost than the R, it was holding 1.2 bar past 6k rpm
Last edited by MattW; 23/07/2008 12:39.
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650714
23/07/2008 12:42
23/07/2008 12:42
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
1. High setting - Flywheel Power and Torque GRAPH 2. Low setting - Flywheel Power and Torque GRAPH 3. Both settings - Boost and Fuelling (top right shows power at the wheels on low setting - high was 266) GRAPH
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: Flea]
#650719
23/07/2008 12:45
23/07/2008 12:45
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,729 N.E Scotland
mattB
Club member 6
|
Club member 6
I AM a Coop
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,729
N.E Scotland
|
Why cant you get more than 1.2 bar at 5k rpm? I can hold more than that on my GTi-R.
Death-rattle-tastic
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: Flea]
#650720
23/07/2008 12:45
23/07/2008 12:45
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
oh right! OK
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: mattB]
#650722
23/07/2008 12:47
23/07/2008 12:47
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
Why cant you get more than 1.2 bar at 5k rpm? I can hold more than that on my GTi-R. I think I could hold a little bit more, perhaps, if it was set up properly to hold it. GT28R isnt bigger than GTiR is it?
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650730
23/07/2008 12:56
23/07/2008 12:56
|
suba
Unregistered
|
suba
Unregistered
|
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: mattB]
#650736
23/07/2008 13:10
23/07/2008 13:10
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,829 kidderminster
nick_d
My life on the forum
|
My life on the forum
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,829
kidderminster
|
So your boost goes over 1.5bar then tails off to 1.3?? Am i right in thinking 1 bar is 14psi??? Lot of boost isn't it??
Nick
Last edited by mattB; 23/07/2008 13:13. Reason: Sig pic too big
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: nick_d]
#650738
23/07/2008 13:14
23/07/2008 13:14
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,729 N.E Scotland
mattB
Club member 6
|
Club member 6
I AM a Coop
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,729
N.E Scotland
|
It is a lot, but the point I'm trying to make is that MattW's turbo is capable of making more boost than he is currently running.
Death-rattle-tastic
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: mattB]
#650741
23/07/2008 13:19
23/07/2008 13:19
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
MattW
Unregistered
|
It is a lot, but the point I'm trying to make is that MattW's turbo is capable of making more boost than he is currently running. I think youre right actually, if I ran more in the midrange then it would be able to sustain it for longer. it only drops by a few PSI, just like yours and everyone elses. It made 322bhp at 1.3 bar so that's what must have happened there. The most important thing for me... what I want to know is: 300lb/ft at just over 1.2 bar at 5000rpm - is that "too much torque to be correct" ??
Last edited by MattW; 23/07/2008 13:21. Reason: added a bit
|
|
|
Re: Congratulations MattW
[Re: ]
#650822
23/07/2008 14:39
23/07/2008 14:39
|
suba
Unregistered
|
suba
Unregistered
|
It's more than I would have thought - mine make just under that but peaks at 5,500 but on a flowed engine.
|
|
|
|