PDA

View Full Version : All Audi Dyno Day- June 22nd



hollywoodvr6
06-13-2013, 02:14 PM
Well, it is closer to the date, how is everyone feeling about the all Audi dyno day at Bluewater Performance?
Interested or pass?

Saturday, June 22nd 2013 10am-whenever

Let me know.
Hope everyone had a good day!


And tomorrow is FRIDAY!

AudiForeman
06-13-2013, 06:56 PM
If I'm home I would love to be there

AudiForeman
06-17-2013, 09:35 PM
Looks like ill be home, can we pay the day of?

jjvwg
06-17-2013, 10:05 PM
$65 right. I know my car isn't running 100% still and its only stage 1 but I kinda wanna get a baseline before throwing a bigger turbo in later this summer!

Taint Fair
06-17-2013, 11:03 PM
I may be up for this.

hollywoodvr6
06-18-2013, 09:38 AM
Yes, you can pay on the same day
it is $65 for 3 baseline pulls

I just need a general idea of how many are coming so I can plan

boostedAvant
06-18-2013, 09:52 AM
Looks like ill be home, can we pay the day of?

Holy shit Carter! You'll actually be here for something!


$65 right. I know my car isn't running 100% still and its only stage 1 but I kinda wanna get a baseline before throwing a bigger turbo in later this summer!

Same here, I just wanna do it for shits and giggles. We'll have an Atlas showdown.


Yes, you can pay on the same day
it is $65 for 3 baseline pulls

I just need a general idea of how many are coming so I can plan

I'll be there! [:d]

Firefox250
06-18-2013, 11:01 AM
Damn I really want to go, but it's my girlfriends birthday/might have to go out state for a family emergency. I look forward to the next dyno day!

jjvwg
06-18-2013, 11:21 AM
Same here, I just wanna do it for shits and giggles. We'll have an Atlas showdown.

Haha, hell yea man! Maybe I'll throw my injectors in and reflash, its runs a tad lean at WOT, but I feel like I need to make more power than you since your car looks better than mine!

AudiForeman
06-18-2013, 11:23 AM
Ill be there for sure! I can't believe I'm actually in town for something cool. After the dyno pulls there is a car show at hooters if anyone wants to go?

hollywoodvr6
06-18-2013, 11:36 AM
I am in... :) And awesome sounds like we will have a good turn out!

boostedAvant
06-18-2013, 11:39 AM
Haha, hell yea man! Maybe I'll throw my injectors in and reflash, its runs a tad lean at WOT, but I feel like I need to make more power than you since your car looks better than mine!

Given that you have a FMIC your numbers will probably be better. I'll heatsoak like a SOB.


Ill be there for sure! I can't believe I'm actually in town for something cool. After the dyno pulls there is a car show at hooters if anyone wants to go?

Yeeehaw!


I am in... :) And awesome sounds like we will have a good turn out!

This!

philthyphil
06-18-2013, 12:46 PM
I think I might be in for this too. At least to get a baseline.

aestivales
06-18-2013, 05:15 PM
I'll definitely try and get there for this, will work on clearing my schedule.

hollywoodvr6
06-19-2013, 10:20 AM
Glad to hear that so many will be able to make it :)

westco4k
06-19-2013, 10:40 AM
I hope you guys do another once my 10vt is in. . . it would be pointless and depressing to dyno the JT [=(]

boostedAvant
06-19-2013, 12:53 PM
Just drove my car to lunch and I'm only hitting 15PSI [:(] Need to get that shit fixed before I jump on a dyno... Boo!

UltraSchnell34
06-19-2013, 01:32 PM
lol Sounds like an Avant showdown... i think I'll join [:D]

What you guys thinking of going down?

boostedAvant
06-19-2013, 02:52 PM
I'll probably get there a little early to let my car cool down. There is no point in throwing it right on the dyno with my stock intercooler. I'll put down like 90awhp Hahah.

jjvwg
06-19-2013, 03:17 PM
Haha, yea I'm pretty sure I'll be really disappointed with the stage 1 numbers. Haven't tried a new DV yet, but something is causing my n75 duty cycle to flatline at 90-95% at wot. I'm pretty sure it's my wastegate/actuator, after having done some troubleshooting. Can't imagine its the DV as I got a brand new 710n back in January. The number will be interesting that's for sure!

UltraSchnell34
06-19-2013, 03:18 PM
I'll probably get there a little early to let my car cool down. There is no point in throwing it right on the dyno with my stock intercooler. I'll put down like 90awhp Hahah.

Haha dyno numbers are like golf number right? Lowest wins?

jjvwg
06-19-2013, 03:26 PM
Haha dyno numbers are like golf number right? Lowest wins?

Phrases like "anythings true as long as you believe it" and "whatever helps you sleep at night" come to mind!

UltraSchnell34
06-19-2013, 03:30 PM
Jeff are you challenging me to a Stage 1... SHOWDOWN?![evilsmile]

jjvwg
06-19-2013, 03:35 PM
Hmm, first annual Rocky Mountain avant showdown?

UltraSchnell34
06-19-2013, 03:37 PM
x2

hollywoodvr6
06-19-2013, 03:52 PM
Oh dear....
this is getting serious!

UltraSchnell34
06-19-2013, 03:55 PM
it will be funny if all 3 of us throw crap numbers and all work at performance shops. lol

boostedAvant
06-19-2013, 04:03 PM
LOL I can't wait, shit's going to be hilarious. I'm shooting for tripple digits! Highest number buys beer at Hooters.

jjvwg
06-19-2013, 04:14 PM
I don't work at a performance shop Tristan. I think a bunch of people on here get me confused with Jeff at berg performance! A while back Phil was hitting me up for some lift time haha.

UltraSchnell34
06-19-2013, 04:35 PM
Haha yup wrong Jeff I blame TJ he's the one that confused me

hollywoodvr6
06-20-2013, 12:29 PM
Well, sounds like this will be a fun dyno day :)

AND FYI-

We will be giving away a NewSouth Performance 0-30 PSI Boost Gauge to a random winner. Ya know the random names in a hat, pick one, and that is who wins etc. haha

UltraSchnell34
06-20-2013, 12:34 PM
My moms 2013 Allroad comes in tomorrow.... hmmmm lets chip and dyno it with only 12 miles on it lol jk

drumnjuny
06-20-2013, 12:55 PM
i wish those came in 3.0T so bad...

UltraSchnell34
06-20-2013, 01:02 PM
I wish they came in a 4.0T [evilsmile]

AudiForeman
06-20-2013, 02:20 PM
I will be pleased with anything over 450hp and tq. 500 would be sweet too

boostedAvant
06-20-2013, 02:40 PM
Hopefully tracking my boost leak down today after work...

UltraSchnell34
06-20-2013, 02:57 PM
Sounds like I have to be in Longmont by 12:30 so i guess I'll be there around 10 ish

boostedAvant
06-20-2013, 03:11 PM
Radical, see you then.

jjvwg
06-20-2013, 09:30 PM
I will be pleased with anything over 450hp and tq. 500 would be sweet too

GTFO carter [:D]

hollywoodvr6
06-21-2013, 11:27 AM
So, who is going to brave and run first tomorrow??
:) :)

boostedAvant
06-21-2013, 12:10 PM
I'll do it if I can fix my boost leak!

UltraSchnell34
06-21-2013, 12:11 PM
honestly I'll probably be there right at 10am to let my car cool so if I'm there and the car is ready I'll take #1

UltraSchnell34
06-21-2013, 12:12 PM
I'll do it if I can fix my boost leak!

Any idea where its coming from?

boostedAvant
06-21-2013, 12:47 PM
I'll find out tonight, after I get off work. I'd be willing to run at 10 but I need to let my car cool down as well. No point in putting it on the rollers if it's heatsoaked. Gotta love stock intercoolers!

AudiForeman
06-21-2013, 01:47 PM
Ill put mine up 2nd

jjvwg
06-21-2013, 02:19 PM
I can go first too if jace and Tristan aren't ready!

Greedo
06-21-2013, 03:22 PM
I may just have to come down since all you ladies will be there.

boostedAvant
06-21-2013, 03:58 PM
Who would want to miss the first annual rocky mountain K03 B6 avant dyno shoot out? Or the RMKBADSO as we call it.

jjvwg
06-21-2013, 09:27 PM
Starting to get really worried about this. I've heard a good estimate of crank hp is taking 80% of your max MAF reading. That would be 106 chp if that's true[headbang]

boostedAvant
06-21-2013, 09:34 PM
It's okay, I lose by default. I'm not going to run. Couldn't get my boost leak sorted out.

AudiForeman
06-21-2013, 11:57 PM
I wonder what the total head count will be? I haven checked vortex to see if those guy are coming.

hollywoodvr6
06-22-2013, 06:53 AM
I couldn't post in vortex... but feel free to invite.

Jace, get to the shop. I told you, we will look at it and see if we can find it. :)

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 2

Taint Fair
06-22-2013, 07:35 AM
I'll be there. May be a little after 10. Depends on the traffic from the Springs.

jjvwg
06-22-2013, 09:46 AM
Why am I the only b6 wagon here? I guess I win this years want showdown!

AudiForeman
06-22-2013, 03:29 PM
Well that was fun boys, glad to see everyone again. Sorry I spent most of my time trying to fix my issues ad not socializing. Managed to pit down 489 hp 523tq. I am very please with those numbers especially with my horrible misfires.

MDJ
06-22-2013, 04:19 PM
^Nice Carter!!

Get that 034 FSI coil conversion kit, buddy.

Operator
06-22-2013, 07:07 PM
Any other results?

jjvwg
06-22-2013, 07:27 PM
Any other results?

212whp 306wtq on stage 1 base file from maestro!

AudiForeman
06-22-2013, 07:30 PM
I was super stoked for Jeff and Tristen, they both put down good number and caught both of them by supprise I believe.

Aok303
06-22-2013, 07:59 PM
I really wanted to run but it didnt work out, Any 4.2 s4's make it

UltraSchnell34
06-22-2013, 08:40 PM
Yea it was a lot of fun to run against Jeff and to see everyone.

Dyno results: 218 whp and 295 tq

Operator
06-22-2013, 08:41 PM
212whp 306wtq on stage 1 base file from maestro!

WOW 306TQ!!!!!! Nice!

AudiForeman
06-23-2013, 06:17 AM
No 4.2s made it out yesterday. Hopefully taint fair gets his tune updated/ resolved, I want to see that thing run. I think I missed your name yesterday, sowwwy.

100Daily
06-23-2013, 07:54 AM
No 4.2s made it out yesterday. Hopefully taint fair gets his tune updated/ resolved, I want to see that thing run. I think I missed your name yesterday, sowwwy.

What was the problem with Taints tune? Sorry to hear that.

300+ lb-ft of torque at the wheels of a stage 1 A4? I use to have a stage 1 APR B7 A4. No way that thing put down 300lb-ft at the wheels. Or was that number adjusted for crank? We're there other mods that I missed?

That is 20% more torque than this shop (at sea level) after they dialed their Maestro tune in:
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showthread.php/496020-OTS-tune-vs-Maestro

When it was said that a few people were pleasantly surprised by the results, I wonder how aggressive the dyno correction factor was. 305lb-ft is much more torque than a bmw 335 puts down to the wheels, and I KNOW that car would stomp my old stage 1 A4. What am I missing here? This doesn't jive with my experience with that car.

jjvwg
06-23-2013, 10:01 AM
All of the numbers from yesterday had a 24% correction for altitude. These numbers are if we would be at sea level. Realistically, I made 170whp and 246wtq at altitude. My performance mods are maestro stage 1 base file, 034 HFC, and an FMIC. I feel most of my success comes from running maestro. Even the base file put down the same numbers as Tristan's GIAC stage 1+ injector file.

Tristan, let me know when you get that frankenturbo on, I want a ride to see how it is! Also, what wtq numbers did you say were the danger area for stock internals, 350wtq?

seal66
06-23-2013, 10:59 AM
Damn nice number jeff and trist. Makes my b7 look slow with my numbers.

AudiForeman
06-23-2013, 11:03 AM
Taint fair couldn't get a good 4th gear pull. With the dsg trans it kept wanting to downshift once the accelerator was applied. He's going to work with apr to get a correction for this and be able to do an actual pull.

Taint Fair
06-23-2013, 11:08 AM
I just need APR to release their DSG flash. Damn thing wouldn't hold a gear. Best I saw when he feathered it up was 376whp and 366TQ. That was right before the downshift and it was still climbing. Never knew the DSG wouldn't hold a gear in manual mode. I'm actually going to try to talk with APR about it and see how they Dyno a DSG since I know they do it.

It was great talking with everyone though!

UltraSchnell34
06-23-2013, 01:22 PM
All of the numbers from yesterday had a 24% correction for altitude. These numbers are if we would be at sea level. Realistically, I made 170whp and 246wtq at altitude. My performance mods are maestro stage 1 base file, 034 HFC, and an FMIC. I feel most of my success comes from running maestro. Even the base file put down the same numbers as Tristan's GIAC stage 1+ injector file.

Tristan, let me know when you get that frankenturbo on, I want a ride to see how it is! Also, what wtq numbers did you say were the danger area for stock internals, 350wtq?

Yea I have some good interest in the wheels so I'm hoping they are gone by the end of the week. From what I know which I will confirm later we have seen real problems around 350wtq but every car is different.

On a side note thank you for reminding me how bad I need a test pipe haha

drumnjuny
06-23-2013, 04:00 PM
yeah B7 would never hit 300awtq on a k03 hahaha.

Taint Fair
06-23-2013, 04:29 PM
My guess on the differences is the 24% correction. I don't believe a supercharger looses 24%. I had the same questions as you. I think if you take the APR numbers and my uncorrected numbers, 287whp and 279wtq, and adjust to the APR numbers, adding maybe a couple HP for the intake, and it would maybe give a good adjustment.

100Daily
06-23-2013, 04:35 PM
I just need APR to release their DSG flash. Damn thing wouldn't hold a gear. Best I saw when he feathered it up was 376whp and 366TQ. That was right before the downshift and it was still climbing. Never knew the DSG wouldn't hold a gear in manual mode. I'm actually going to try to talk with APR about it and see how they Dyno a DSG since I know they do it.

It was great talking with everyone though!

I am not trying to rain on anyones dyno wet dream parade, and its interesting to see the differences in cars on the same day on the same dyno, but these dyno numbers need to be taken with a huge grain of salt. On the b8 S4, APR Stage 1 is rated FROM APR at 353 awhp and 336awtq. Taint CRUSHED those numbers even short shifting with DSG issues?

Plus the APR Stage 2 (w/ pulley) is rated at 388 awhp and 377awtq, and Taint almost hit that with stage 1 and a DSG error, and that sounds normal to you all? I am sure if the DSG worked Taint would have crushed stage 2 numbers as well. That can't be accurate. C'mon.

Plus as I mentioned before, the A4's both are putting down ~300awtq and crushing other tuners with the same software by over 20%? Possible, but not my experience... If you guys want to believe in those numbers that is cool with me, but I just have to cast some doubt on all the exuberance. If it were me I would have prefered them to dial back on the correction factor to something more believable, or just refer to the pre-inflated values. But again, its cool to see all the results relative to each other on the same dyno and sounded like fun. Not trying to hate.

Taint Fair
06-23-2013, 04:53 PM
Sorry I deleted my post for editing and you posted before I could repost...

I do agree with you. If I would have gotten a good pull I would have liked the uncorrected numbers as well. What I took away from my partial runs is that it seems like stage I at altitude brings the B8/8.5s up to stock numbers at sea level. Kind of again proving your point that tunes are effective at altitude. To really prove this I would have to do some pulls with the stock file and then some with the 91 file. Maybe when I have some time on my hands, money, and can figure out how to dyno the DSG I can do this.

The DSG should be the easiest. I'm going to talk with Concours down here and APR to see if they have a solution.

UltraSchnell34
06-23-2013, 05:45 PM
I am not trying to rain on anyones dyno wet dream parade, and its interesting to see the differences in cars on the same day on the same dyno, but these dyno numbers need to be taken with a huge grain of salt. On the b8 S4, APR Stage 1 is rated FROM APR at 353 awhp and 336awtq. Taint CRUSHED those numbers even short shifting with DSG issues?

Plus the APR Stage 2 (w/ pulley) is rated at 388 awhp and 377awtq, and Taint almost hit that with stage 1 and a DSG error, and that sounds normal to you all? I am sure if the DSG worked Taint would have crushed stage 2 numbers as well. That can't be accurate. C'mon.

Plus as I mentioned before, the A4's both are putting down ~300awtq and crushing other tuners with the same software by over 20%? Possible, but not my experience... If you guys want to believe in those numbers that is cool with me, but I just have to cast some doubt on all the exuberance. If it were me I would have prefered them to dial back on the correction factor to something more believable, or just refer to the pre-inflated values. But again, its cool to see all the results relative to each other on the same dyno and sounded like fun. Not trying to hate.

Trust me neither Jeff or I thought we would be anywhere near what the dyno said we ran. I think we are both looking at the uncorrected numbers as more of the real numbers. Since last car I saw dyno'd at the shop was around 250whp and 330tq with corn juice and a K04.

I think most of us went to meet up with other members and to get an idea of what kind of numbers we might have.

jjvwg
06-23-2013, 06:17 PM
Yea, I don't think anyone is actually thinking they are hitting the inflated numbers. Taking the correction factor out of the equation my car is hitting 170whp which is typical for a stage 1 tuned car at sea level. Am I surprised to be hitting that at altitude, yes, but I believe the HFC and maestro tune are what is bringing me up to that. There's obviously no way to hit 300wtq on a ko3.

AudiForeman
06-23-2013, 07:15 PM
Yea, I don't think anyone is actually thinking they are hitting the inflated numbers. Taking the correction factor out of the equation my car is hitting 170whp which is typical for a stage 1 tuned car at sea level. Am I surprised to be hitting that at altitude, yes, but I believe the HFC and maestro tune are what is bringing me up to that. There's obviously no way to hit 300wtq on a ko3.

there is a way to hit 300tq on a k03 but it will only be for one pull before the ting lets go and is laying behind your car.

drumnjuny
06-23-2013, 08:45 PM
lulz to be had by all. my uncorrected (at 40ft of altitude anyway) stage 2 put down 180/260. i was kinda bummed haha

jjvwg
06-23-2013, 09:09 PM
lulz to be had by all. my uncorrected (at 40ft of altitude anyway) stage 2 put down 180/260. i was kinda bummed haha

Sounds like your car wasn't running right, has it ever haha jk! From what I've seen most stage 2+ 2.0t's hit 220whp, 40whp is quite the jump from just adding a new hpfp.

Numbers are just numbers in the end, but I'd say Tristan and mine's uncorrected numbers are pretty accurate as far as what is commonly seen amongst other 1.8t's. 034 motorsports claims 15whp with their HFC. If Tristan did one and was a legit "stage 2" car he'd be looking at approximately 190whp. It's said that a stage 2 1.8t is comparable to a stock b5 s4 which dynos around 190whp.

mec
06-23-2013, 09:27 PM
no sense in posting corrected numbers, then it's not comparable data, if different shops use different correction %'s then it all goes to a discussion on what the correct number should be, so best to stick to whp!

AudiForeman
06-23-2013, 10:05 PM
no sense in posting corrected numbers, then it's not comparable data, if different shops use different correction %'s then it all goes to a discussion on what the correct number should be, so best to stick to whp!

Bam! Slam! Yes!

drumnjuny
06-24-2013, 06:09 AM
haha yeah it was supposedly running right, maybe i had a boost leak or something. was also 110 and 99% humidity in the dyno room!! haha but you could throw a rock to the ocean from RAI so its always 99% humidity in their shop

i agree uncorrected numbers are the way to go. comparing different dynos on different days even at the same machine is irregular enough, plus RAI reads super low according to them. every mustang dyno can be calibrated to read as high or low as u want, by adjusting the load on the rollers if i'm not mistaken

hollywoodvr6
06-24-2013, 11:31 AM
I just need APR to release their DSG flash. Damn thing wouldn't hold a gear. Best I saw when he feathered it up was 376whp and 366TQ. That was right before the downshift and it was still climbing. Never knew the DSG wouldn't hold a gear in manual mode. I'm actually going to try to talk with APR about it and see how they Dyno a DSG since I know they do it.

It was great talking with everyone though!

Unfortunately with the shifting issues I wouldn't trust any of the numbers from the B8 S4 pull. None of them will be accurate because of the spikes during the shift. Raw data shows spikes all over the place but the smoothing factors on any dyno software attempt to correct that but what you get with your car shifting unexpectedly is an inaccurate number. That is why we just scrapped the pulls and did not want to charge you. Hopefully you get a DSG flash soon though.


My guess on the differences is the 24% correction. I don't believe a supercharger looses 24%. I had the same questions as you. I think if you take the APR numbers and my uncorrected numbers, 287whp and 279wtq, and adjust to the APR numbers, adding maybe a couple HP for the intake, and it would maybe give a good adjustment.

A forced induction car does not lose 24% at this altitude and unfortunately there is not a single dyno manufacturer that can adjust for the FI vs NA factor. For comparison one of our race cars dynos around 800hp at this altitude. This has been repeated over and over again. Our dynocom dyno read 804.6HP, a neighboring Super Flow dyno read 826.4HP and then lastly a Mustang dyno read 801.8HP. All different days and different times of the year but also all the same car and setup. The same car though at sea level out in California put down 698whp on a Dynapak dyno and 720.4 whp on a Mustang dyno. So what does that tell us? If we just compare the 2 mustang dynos We see that there was a difference of about 11% Not 23% or 24%. On average we see around 10% true correction for FI cars. So to keep things fair if we want to compare dyno numbers for local people only the only way to truly compare is to keep the natural correction factor. That way if X goes and does a dyno run on a Superflow dyno down at Carz performance he will have an accurate number to compare vs someone dynoing at our shop. However if you are looking to compare to cars at sea level then 10% would be a good place to start. I hope all of this makes sense. Basically none of the manufactures care about the like 2% of their customers which have to dyno at a crazy high altitude however we have a beta program with dynocom that should be able to make us the first company to be able to decipher between NA and FI at altitude.


I do agree with you. If I would have gotten a good pull I would have liked the uncorrected numbers as well. What I took away from my partial runs is that it seems like stage I at altitude brings the B8/8.5s up to stock numbers at sea level. Kind of again proving your point that tunes are effective at altitude. To really prove this I would have to do some pulls with the stock file and then some with the 91 file. Maybe when I have some time on my hands, money, and can figure out how to dyno the DSG I can do this.

The DSG should be the easiest. I'm going to talk with Concours down here and APR to see if they have a solution.

Just let us know and we can hook it up!


Trust me neither Jeff or I thought we would be anywhere near what the dyno said we ran. I think we are both looking at the uncorrected numbers as more of the real numbers. Since last car I saw dyno'd at the shop was around 250whp and 330tq with corn juice and a K04.

I think most of us went to meet up with other members and to get an idea of what kind of numbers we might have.

Not sure what car you are referring to but no cars that dynoed put down 250whp and 330tq and the only car to run with E85 from what I remember was a GTI at the end that has a GT2871R and is running E85. It put down 298.2WHP and 265ft. Lbs of torque.


no sense in posting corrected numbers, then it's not comparable data, if different shops use different correction %'s then it all goes to a discussion on what the correct number should be, so best to stick to whp!

Hopefully what I wrote above makes sense and can clear up things. [:)]

mec
06-24-2013, 11:39 AM
There is a varying degree of error between different dyno manufacturers, a significant difference. Now what I'm saying is why should you add in a correction factor, because its not a correction factor at all, what you are doing is inflating numbers to what you believe is accurate. On the street you're putting down power to the wheels, I don't want to know what you think my engine is making I want to know the amount of power at my wheels, and I understand that if I use different dynos I will get different results. But lets say I dyno at two places with the same dyno, each shop will use their own corrective figures and so my numbers don't mean anything, despite the same hardware, the numbers have been inflated and are incomparable.

I can understand that when people pay $70 they want to know they are making big power and reporting crank numbers is more impressive, but it's entirely inaccurate. You don't see scientists take one small beaker fill it with fluid and pour the fluid into a larger beaker and say "well based on the size correction factor this fluid is probably x% of the large beaker". No, they would pull the engine out if they are reporting crank numbers because crank numbers come from the crank, not estimations from the wheels.

Which brings me back to if you are measuring at the wheels why report crank numbers?

Not that I am targeting you specifically, everyone does it, APR, REVO, GIAC. However, recently more businesses report wheel figures, if you go onto APR's website they now added wheel figures to most of their crank figures.

UltraSchnell34
06-24-2013, 12:05 PM
Not sure what car you are referring to but no cars that dynoed put down 250whp and 330tq and the only car to run with E85 from what I remember was a GTI at the end that has a GT2871R and is running E85. It put down 298.2WHP and 265ft. Lbs of torque.

No worries I was referring a dyno we did down at our shop. Completely unrelated to Bluewater Performance. I was merely using it as a reference for Jeff and I

hollywoodvr6
06-24-2013, 12:07 PM
here is a varying degree of error between different dyno manufacturers, a significant difference. Now what I'm saying is why should you add in a correction factor, because its not a correction factor at all, what you are doing is inflating numbers to what you believe is accurate. On the street you're putting down power to the wheels, I don't want to know what you think my engine is making I want to know the amount of power at my wheels, and I understand that if I use different dynos I will get different results. But lets say I dyno at two places with the same dyno, each shop will use their own corrective figures and so my numbers don't mean anything, despite the same hardware, the numbers have been inflated and are incomparable.

I can understand that when people pay $70 they want to know they are making big power and reporting crank numbers is more impressive, but it's entirely inaccurate. You don't see scientists take one small beaker fill it with fluid and pour the fluid into a larger beaker and say "well based on the size correction factor this fluid is probably x% of the large beaker". No, they would pull the engine out if they are reporting crank numbers because crank numbers come from the crank, not estimations from the wheels.

Which brings me back to if you are measuring at the wheels why report crank numbers?

Not that I am targeting you specifically, everyone does it, APR, REVO, GIAC. However, recently more businesses report wheel figures, if you go onto APR's website they now added wheel figures to most of their crank figures.


We have no way of calculating crank HP. What we are doing is reporting corrected wheel HP. All dyno manufacturers have a built in correction factory. It is an easy way of establishing an industry standard. If all companies did was report raw data then nothing would ever match up. The missing factor in all of these dynos again though is altitude. and considering we have a typical density altitude in Denver of 8000+ ft. elevation it makes the correction again off for FI cars. The dynos are just what you think they are. They are a tool. Now what you want to use that tool for is up to each person. Again we can either report corrected numbers like 99% of the other dyno numbers you see out there are or we can report the raw numbers which is going to make everyone scratch their heads because at our altitude again it is way different then 90% of the rest of the country. We always like to explain to customers when they dyno their cars that we can give them raw numbers or industry standard corrected ones. We showed a few people just that on Sat. when they asked. Also I am trying to help people understand but if any of this is just getting confusing please let me know and you can even give me or Gabe a call at (303)800-7193 to discuss. I know a lot of this can be confusing but I am doing my best to explain.

hollywoodvr6
06-24-2013, 12:11 PM
Not that I am targeting you specifically, everyone does it, APR, REVO, GIAC. However, recently more businesses report wheel figures, if you go onto APR's website they now added wheel figures to most of their crank figures.

The only companies that report crank numbers that I know of and do it for a reason are APR and Integrated Engineering. The main reason they report these numbers are just like it sounds, because they have in house engine dynos and they can bolt up an engine without the vehicle and report changes in power. However for most of us we do not care about those numbers because of drive train loss and we just want to know what it will actually put down in our cars.

mec
06-24-2013, 12:23 PM
I haven't seen any dyno's from integrated but APR actually reports using the Dynapacks, so they don't pull the engine.

Corrected wheel horsepower numbers look very similar to engine hp figures. atleast at 24%, I mean that is not an adjustment for altitude, a 24% correction factor is a very aggressive wheel to engine correction factor. Like I said thought I'm not targeting you guys at all, its the industry standard that I don't understand.

hollywoodvr6
06-24-2013, 01:05 PM
Seriously, give Gabe a call to discuss and he would be more than happy to explain how everything works. He took some classes on the engineering side of the dynos and how they work and function as a tool.

100Daily
06-24-2013, 09:42 PM
We have no way of calculating crank HP. What we are doing is reporting corrected wheel HP. All dyno manufacturers have a built in correction factory. It is an easy way of establishing an industry standard. If all companies did was report raw data then nothing would ever match up. The missing factor in all of these dynos again though is altitude. and considering we have a typical density altitude in Denver of 8000+ ft. elevation it makes the correction again off for FI cars. The dynos are just what you think they are. They are a tool. Now what you want to use that tool for is up to each person. Again we can either report corrected numbers like 99% of the other dyno numbers you see out there are or we can report the raw numbers which is going to make everyone scratch their heads because at our altitude again it is way different then 90% of the rest of the country. We always like to explain to customers when they dyno their cars that we can give them raw numbers or industry standard corrected ones. We showed a few people just that on Sat. when they asked. Also I am trying to help people understand but if any of this is just getting confusing please let me know and you can even give me or Gabe a call at (303)800-7193 to discuss. I know a lot of this can be confusing but I am doing my best to explain.

It seems to me the industry standard is overly aggressive if that is the agreed on correction factor. If I were a car company, I would test here because the same car tested here will have much better looking numbers and would still be conforming to "industry standards". Why don't they?

Now if i understand this correctly, 90% of the rest of the country will look at our numbers in awe and scratch their heads on how we beat their numbers by 20%.

mec
06-24-2013, 09:46 PM
It seems to me the industry standard is overly aggressive if that is the agreed on correction factor. If I were a car company, I would test here because the same car tested here will have much better looking numbers and would still be conforming to "industry standards". Why don't they?

Now if i understand this correctly, 90% of the rest of the country will look at our numbers in awe and scratch their heads on how we beat their numbers by 20%.

agreed.

typical response "You made XXX hp at 5000ft elevation???? That's more than me and I'm at sea level!"
me "Blame it on the industry standard"

UltraSchnell34
06-25-2013, 01:37 AM
Speaking of the industry standard being off here's more info on that...

In 2005, the SAE introduced "SAE Certified Power" with SAE J2723.[20] This test is voluntary and is in itself not a separate engine test code but a certification of either J1349 or J1995 after which the manufacturer is allowed to advertise "Certified to SAE J1349" or "Certified to SAE J1995" depending on which test standard have been followed. To attain certification the test must follow the SAE standard in question, take place in an ISO9000/9002 certified facility and be witnessed by an SAE approved third party.

A few manufacturers such as Honda and Toyota switched to the new ratings immediately, with multi-directional results; the rated output of Cadillac's supercharged Northstar V8 jumped from 440 to 469 hp (330 to 350 kW) under the new tests, while the rating for Toyota's Camry 3.0 L 1MZ-FE V6 fell from 210 to 190 hp (160 to 140 kW). The company's Lexus ES 330 and Camry SE V6 were previously rated at 225 hp (168 kW) but the ES 330 dropped to 218 hp (163 kW) while the Camry declined to 210 hp (160 kW). The first engine certified under the new program was the 7.0 L LS7 used in the 2006 Chevrolet Corvette Z06. Certified power rose slightly from 500 to 505 hp (373 to 377 kW).

While Toyota and Honda are retesting their entire vehicle lineups, other automakers generally are retesting only those with updated powertrains. For example, the 2006 Ford Five Hundred is rated at 203 horsepower, the same as that of 2005 model. However, the 2006 rating does not reflect the new SAE testing procedure as Ford is not going to spend the extra expense of retesting its existing engines. Over time, most automakers are expected to comply with the new guidelines.

SAE tightened its horsepower rules to eliminate the opportunity for engine manufacturers to manipulate factors affecting performance such as how much oil was in the crankcase, engine control system calibration, and whether an engine was tested with premium fuel. In some cases, such can add up to a change in horsepower ratings. A road test editor at Edmunds.com, John Di Pietro, said decreases in horsepower ratings for some '06 models are not that dramatic. For vehicles like a midsize family sedan, it is likely that the reputation of the manufacturer will be more important.[21]

hollywoodvr6
06-25-2013, 08:16 AM
Just to add to the confusion we have the ability to give raw numbers, and the following standards from across the world

Din
Standard
SAEJ1349
EEC
JIS
ISO 1585
We typically give SAEJ1349 since that is the industry standard of manufacturers. However again nobody has come up with an accurate way to calculate for FI cars at crazy altitudes like ours. Or should I say with crazy density altitudes. However we are hoping to change that with the new software.

boostedAvant
06-25-2013, 08:37 AM
However again nobody has come up with an accurate way to calculate for FI cars at crazy altitudes like ours. Or should I say with crazy density altitudes. However we are hoping to change that with the new software.

[up] Awesome.

drumnjuny
06-25-2013, 11:49 AM
the problem is every FI application's ability to add pressure and make up for the altitude will be different. For example, in a stock b7 a4, wouldn't you dyno the same at altitude and at sea level? Because the car is able to keep up with a measly 7psi even at 6000ft of altitude. so theoretically you would make juuuust about the same power. efficiency of the turbo is what would go down if i'm not mistaken? AKA run at a higher RPM and affect heat etc. due to that difference. with a maxed out turbo, the boost might not be the same at sea level and altitude but who really maxes out a turbo nowdays anyway