Back at the Dyno... again

[BOTTLEFED]

Well I got some interesting #s this time and I wanted to share them. I know I seem to post dyno results every month, but this was for a different reason.

Here was my last dyno thread. I hit 635hp and 642tq. Mods are my sig.
http://forums.viperclub.org/rt-10-gts-discussions/634120-new-dyno-s.html
Some were trying to say the #s were high because the dyno graph printed the rpms off. I don't really think it threw the #s off, just printed wrong. These dyno guys are usually very busy at the time and make mistakes in the graphs. In fact you'll see that this newest one has the wrong car entered in (it says 04 SRT, instead of 97 GTS).
I think this new dyno run proves the previous #s were pretty close. The dyno was a different brand, dynojet vs superflo. The weather was different, clear and sunny vs cool and cloudy. The elevations were very different, 2500ft vs 4700ft. So I think these differences show that I'm not just padding the #s at one dyno or in perfect conditions. I'd like to think my tuning is the key to the good, consistent #s.

So here is the reason for this new dyno session. I'm working with a new company to develop a high potency octane booster. We wanted to test it to see how much more power could be tuned in a motor if you add this booster, and safely tuned for optimal performance.
I turned off the water/**** system as to not skew the #s.

I retuned on the 6.5# pulley for a nice safe conservative tune. This netted 611hp and 622tq.

Then we added the octane booster to the tank and ran it for awhile to get it through the fuel system.

The tune was the same one as before, just with increased timing and optimal fuel enrichment (12AFR average). I played with the tune for good, safe performance for the street. It may even be a little conservative still, but remember, I'm on cast pistons.
So here was my final #s after retuning on the octane booster, no w/m.

You must be registered for see images attach

639hp and 655tq

I never had even a hint of detonation and my temps were good. I think with some w/m this could go up even more, safely. I won't go too crazy because I won't be using the octane booster all the time.
I'm not sure I have heard of many people getting these kinds of #s on the 6.5# pulley, much less with no water/**** injection.

Let me know what you think. I'd like to discuss the timing I used and get some opinions from some people that actually tune their cars (not just people that think they know what they are talking about).

 

[Camfab]

Take it to the track, that should yield some high tens if you can get that thing hooked up!

 

[Jack B]

A couple of observations:

1. The curves have way too much smoothing - you are loosing a lot of detail. In affect it is hiding any potential issues. They almost look fake.

2. There are no correction factors attached, this can mean 20-25 hp diff, depending on which correction factor was used.

3. The curves also are hard to diagnose without the a/f curve. Even when the a/f curve is shown, some dyno O2 monitors are worthless due to built-in smoothing. As an example, the Dynojet factory a/f logging has smoothing that you cannot get rid of. That averaging is bad because a dyno run is so short.

4. You are starting the pull too early - way too much stress on the drive train. Look at a log a a 1/4 run, you will never see 2000 rpm's during your run/

 

[RTTTTed]

Looks good. The heads obviously make a huge difference (100rwhp?). What higher numbers would you have expected with the water/mth inj?

Ted

 

[BOTTLEFED]

A couple of observations:

1. The curves have way too much smoothing - you are loosing a lot of detail. In affect it is hiding any potential issues.

2. There are no correction factors attached, this can mean 20-25 hp diff, depending on which correction factor was used.

3. The curves also are hard to diagnose without the a/f curve. Even when the a/f curve is shown, some dyno O2 monitors are worthless due to built-in smoothing. As an example, the Dynojet factory a/f logging has smoothing that you cannot get rid of. That averaging is bad because a dyno run is so short.

I'll have to disagree jack.

1. I don't think this is true at all. These guys tune for a living. I don't think they would impede their abilities by smoothing their graphs excessively. I know its not too smoothed out because my initial tune was pretty rough. Give me an example of what it should look like. This is the same as all the other dyno sheets I have ever seen.

2. The correction factor is correct for the dyno and conditions. The superflo rep just recalibrated it this winter. I don't think you could tell if the correction factor was right or not.

3. Their WBO2 was not used because I have my own and was logging it myself. He tried to get it to stay in the tailpipe but it just blew out. If you don't think they are correct, why did you even mention it?

Sorry, but I'm not sure how the items you listed could really make a huge difference. Any dyno is going to read different. I proved that I have similar #s across two totally different dynos on totally different days.

 

[BOTTLEFED]

Looks good. The heads obviously make a huge difference (100rwhp?). What higher numbers would you have expected with the water/mth inj?

Ted

Well, I'm still conservative, but I'm guessing the octane booster is giving me similar knock control as the w/m. But I'll get more fuel and more cooling with the w/m, so maybe another 5-10hp safely.

 

[EllowViper]

Crazy stuff. Putting a lot of the big boyz on notice!! Love to see the timing curve and fuel offsets. I'll PM you my email so you can send them to me..he.he. Also great that you did this without W/M...that can skew alot of factors regarding getting the basic tune right (but you already know that). You are still just using the BAP on the stock fuel system right?

 

[99 R/T 10]

Crazy stuff. Putting a lot of the big boyz on notice!! Love to see the timing curve and fuel offsets. I'll PM you my email so you can send them to me..he.he. Also great that you did this without W/M...that can skew alot of factors regarding getting the basic tune right (but you already know that). You are still just using the BAP on the stock fuel system right?

Me too, PM to ya Tim

 

[MarcRoth]

Who's boost are you working with? Mach1 seems the best unleaded to date that I have used. Real octain increase, not the advertised ****.That doesnt work.

 

[Russ M]

Take it to the track, that should yield some high tens if you can get that thing hooked up!

With that type of power nines should be a no brainier, and if not that at least 145mph traps.

 

[BOTTLEFED]

Crazy stuff. Putting a lot of the big boyz on notice!! Love to see the timing curve and fuel offsets. I'll PM you my email so you can send them to me..he.he. Also great that you did this without W/M...that can skew alot of factors regarding getting the basic tune right (but you already know that). You are still just using the BAP on the stock fuel system right?

Yep, stock fuel system + BAP and the Roe green top injectors.

I will be posting the screen shots of my tune on here because I want others to look at them and see what they think. Also, I started with one of Sean's tunes and I want to compare what I ended with and what I started with.

 

[BOTTLEFED]

Who's boost are you working with? Mach1 seems the best unleaded to date that I have used. Real octain increase, not the advertised ****.That doesnt work.

can't talk about it just yet

 

[Jack B]

I'll have to disagree jack.

1. I don't think this is true at all. These guys tune for a living. I don't think they would impede their abilities by smoothing their graphs excessively. I know its not too smoothed out because my initial tune was pretty rough. Give me an example of what it should look like. This is the same as all the other dyno sheets I have ever seen.

2. The correction factor is correct for the dyno and conditions. The superflo rep just recalibrated it this winter. I don't think you could tell if the correction factor was right or not.

3. Their WBO2 was not used because I have my own and was logging it myself. He tried to get it to stay in the tailpipe but it just blew out. If you don't think they are correct, why did you even mention it?

Sorry, but I'm not sure how the items you listed could really make a huge difference. Any dyno is going to read different. I proved that I have similar #s across two totally different dynos on totally different days.

Just trying to help:

1. You should ask what the correction factor is - it makes a difference in max hp and it helps you keep consistent. The dyno operator selects that when he prints. BTW, the correction factor is for altitude and temps. At elevated temps you can get 25 hp difference between SAE and Standard factors, that hurts tuning efforts if those were mixed without your knowledge.

2. No one is saying your tuner is not the best, my point is the graph does not tell us everything because it has too much smoothing. Those are nice numbers, but, the whole story is not there.

3. We may disagree here - a good dyno operator does not use a tail pipe sniffer (or try to use one) on a viper. It is way too easy to insert a sensor in the oem ****. I have done that on cars through year 2000 without throwing a code.

4. As far as the smoothing on the Dynojets, I was just alerting to the fact that the dynojet O2 algorithms are way off. You should not take offense, that was constructive input. That fact mislead me for quite sometime till we figured it out.

Knowledge is power, all my comments were meant to be constructive and positive. Good luck and I hope you continue to make great reliable power.

 

[BOTTLEFED]

Just trying to help:

1. You should ask what the correction factor is - it makes a difference in max hp and it helps you keep consistent. The dyno operator selects that when he prints. BTW, the correction factor is for altitude and temps. At elevated temps you can get 25 hp difference between SAE and Standard factors, that hurts tuning efforts if those were mixed without your knowledge.

2. No one is saying your tuner is not the best, my point is the graph does not tell us everything because it has too much smoothing. Those are nice numbers, but, the whole story is not there.

3. We may disagree here - a good dyno operator does not use a tail pipe sniffer (or try to use one) on a viper. It is way too easy to insert a sensor in the oem ****. I have done that on cars through year 2000 without throwing a code.

4. As far as the smoothing on the Dynojets, I was just alerting to the fact that the dynojet O2 algorithms are way off. You should not take offense, that was constructive input. That fact mislead me for quite sometime till we figured it out.

Knowledge is power, all my comments were meant to be constructive and positive. Good luck and I hope you continue to make great reliable power.

Well, thanks, but I'm not really seeing anything really important in your help.

1. The correction factor is a theoretical equation to allow dyno #s from different areas and weather conditions to be compared on an even playing field. The correction factor is determined by the dyno software. Unless you know exactly how to figure it out and exactly what my weather and elevation was, then I don't think if I reported it on here, that you would know if it was correct or not.
The graph says STP corrected. I think that is all the info necessary for this discussion.

2. I don't think the smoothing in this graph is going to skew the #s at all. How do you even know that its too smooth? I would like to take credit for a good tune, not over smoothing by the dyno software. I can post one of the earlier graphs and it doesn't look so smooth.

3. As I said, I really didn't need O2 readings because I have 2 WBO2 sensors in the car already and can log one with the VEC while watching the other. I don't think its relevant to my tuning to have another O2 reading.

4. Again, not really relevant to this thread. I was on a Superflow dyno, not a Dynojet, and no O2 readings were taken by the dyno.

Jack, I really, really respect your opinions on most things, but your statements haven't proved relevant to this discussion so far.

 

[Russ M]

Jack B is 100% correct in his comments, this dyno graph means nothing you might as well draw one with a crayon.

It is unfortunate that you seem to not want to listen or understand his points.

 

[BOTTLEFED]

Jack B is 100% correct in his comments, this dyno graph means nothing you might as well draw one with a crayon.

It is unfortunate that you seem to not want to listen or understand his points.

you're right, I did draw it with crayons, you caught me
I can't put one over on you guys, can I?

 

[plumcrazy]

get tom involved in this question on the octane booster. id like to see what he says

 

[BOTTLEFED]

get tom involved in this question on the octane booster. id like to see what he says

Phil, I have already asked Tom to be involved in some of this companies other products. Right now I can't really go into the details of the booster. I will give him some info on it if they let me, but not here.

 

[Russ M]

Torco(spelling?) supposedly makes a good octane booster, know a guy who actually bothered to mix it as instructed, then took a sample and sent it to a lab to get analyzed. It worked fairly well I would say cause he has been their best customer ever since. Don't quote me on this but I believe it raised octane like 4 or 5 points.

 

[EllowViper]

I have a can of TORCO sitting on the shelf. Its going in for my next tuning session. I think Ken H recommended using it. The biker crowd loves it since they can keep a bottle in their backpacks during their outings.

 

[AndyMac]

Torco(spelling?)Don't quote me on this but I believe it raised octane like 4 or 5 points.

Just want to make sure everyone knows that 4 or 5 octane points means going from 91 to 91.4 - 91.5 octane, NOT 95 to 96 octane. I find it to be a popular misconception around my area.

Awesome numbers BOTTLEFED!

 

[BOTTLEFED]

Andy is right, points are tenths in octanes. Torco usually gives you 4-5 octanes, or 40-50 points. Most octane boosters on the store shelves only raise the the octane less than a point. Our booster will raise the octane more than Torco

 

[AndyMac]

Wow, I didn't know there was an additive out there that actually gave you more than 5 or 6 points. 50 or 60 points would be awesome!

 

[BOTTLEFED]

Wow, I didn't know there was an additive out there that actually gave you more than 5 or 6 points. 50 or 60 points would be awesome!

there isn't.... yet

 

[plumcrazy]

downside to it ?

 

[BOTTLEFED]

None that I can see. We are still doing extensive testing on it. Probably won't be available until late summer, early fall.

 

[AndyMac]

downside to it ?

Having a case in your trunk at all times?

I'm curious to see what the cost will be versus race fuel. Obviously the additive will be more convenient than buying barrels of race gas, and allow for long trips without wondering how you are going to refuel.

On another note, I saw a setup I really liked on a mustang. It had a secondary set of injectors with a dedicated fuel system with race fuel in the dedicated cell. The injectors were only used under boost, so you got good octane under boost while being able to cruise on 91 octane.

 

[plumcrazy]

On another note, I saw a setup I really liked on a mustang. It had a secondary set of injectors with a dedicated fuel system with race fuel in the dedicated cell. The injectors were only used under boost, so you got good octane under boost while being able to cruise on 91 octane.

this sounds like a DLM paxton setup some have/had. Joseph Dell had this exact setup i believe. some nitrous guys do the same thing as well.

 

[Jack B]

Having a case in your trunk at all times?

I'm curious to see what the cost will be versus race fuel. Obviously the additive will be more convenient than buying barrels of race gas, and allow for long trips without wondering how you are going to refuel.

On another note, I saw a setup I really liked on a mustang. It had a secondary set of injectors with a dedicated fuel system with race fuel in the dedicated cell. The injectors were only used under boost, so you got good octane under boost while being able to cruise on 91 octane.

That was how Tom Welsh (BTR) ran his nitrous set-up. He also sold that system.

 

[KenH]

As EllowViper mentioned, I run Torco all the time. It works as advertized from my experience based on the difference I get in resistance to detonation. It contains MMT, so will leave deposits on the sparkplugs and exhaust, but I have never had a problem with them fouling.

Here is their blending chart to get different octanes. Definitely doesn't add just a few points like the stuff you find at the local car parts store.

You must be registered for see images

If other alternatives become available, I'll be interested in seeing how they do.