PDA

View Full Version : Dyno Results Are In!!!



CaSp3r9
12-10-2005, 06:54 PM
Hey guys!
I finally got my car running good and took it out to Matrix Integrated today to get it dyno'd on their Mustang Dyno. I was actually pretty impressed with the numbers... Keep in mind my car is a 1998.5 1.8t with 108,000 miles on it. My car pulled 174 awhp @ 5500 rpm's and 188.5 awtq @ 4250 rpm's, which when converted (times by 1.25 with quattro) it comes out to be 217.5 hp and 235.6 ft. lbs. at the crank! ON THE SAME STOCK K03 THAT WAS ON THE CAR WHEN IT WAS NEW! My buddy mike has the same car as me but with a k04 and GIAC (exhaust, forge dv, etc...) and only pulled 6 more awhp than me! [:D] [up]. I'm pretty damn happy with my numbers, noone was expecting that much out of it.

(Mods done to my car: APR 1.0bar chip, Magnaflow cat back exhaust, Techtonics high flow cat, Forge DV, rebuild @ 89,000 miles)

Here's the printed test results and some other pics, unfortunately I wasn't able to get video becuase the battery in my camera was too low [:(]

http://x11.putfile.com/12/34320530197.jpg http://x11.putfile.com/12/34320494544.jpg http://x11.putfile.com/12/34320485866.jpg http://x11.putfile.com/12/34320505320.jpg

JeffM1587
12-10-2005, 07:11 PM
wow did u let ur car cool down after that ur turbo is a bit hot. nice numbers by the way

Poopie
12-10-2005, 07:13 PM
that is awesome! great pics too. I like the second one of the car. What octane fuel were you running?

joeya103
12-10-2005, 07:33 PM
wow, very not bad with a stock k03!

CaSp3r9
12-10-2005, 11:48 PM
Originally posted by JeffM1587
wow did u let ur car cool down after that ur turbo is a bit hot. nice numbers by the way

haha, yeah ofcourse, and thanks. I let it idle for a few minutes then drove home so it had PLENTY of time to properly cool down - I'm pretty anal about it so I always make sure to cool my turbo down before I shut the engine off. I have to do it the old fashioned way until I get an open weekend to install my GReddy turbo timer =)

CaSp3r9
12-10-2005, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by Poopie
that is awesome! great pics too. I like the second one of the car. What octane fuel were you running?

[:)] Thanks! I was running Shell's V-Power; as I always do. I'm pretty sure it's 92 octane.

Saturnine
12-10-2005, 11:54 PM
Sounds like your friend with the Ko4 might have some problems..

$teady$upreme
12-11-2005, 05:11 AM
i guess, it has to be. Plz tell me it has a problem. I am looking forward to K04 in the summer, and i want numbers better than that.

Congrats on your numbers, very impressive~ Now i wonder if i should get a high flow cat[:D]


Originally posted by Saturnine
Sounds like your friend with the Ko4 might have some problems..

tkarwin
12-11-2005, 11:53 AM
Hey Blair, It's Ted. once again your car was impressive. Good numbers man. take it easy

CaSp3r9
12-11-2005, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by $teady$upreme
i guess, it has to be. Plz tell me it has a problem. I am looking forward to K04 in the summer, and i want numbers better than that.

Congrats on your numbers, very impressive~ Now i wonder if i should get a high flow cat[:D]


No, his car doesn't have any problems, he works down at Matrix Integrated so it's always in tip-top shape and he knows how to care for it very well. However, it is a 1997 with 174,000 miles on it! [drive] Even then, the chipped k04 setup only claims 35 more HP than a chipped k03 setup, so there is definitely a noticable increase in power, but its not huge. Personally, if I had the money, I'd go straight to the APR Stage III+ kit with the Garrett gt28 turbo. 333 awhp!!! The 1.8t block is only good up to about 380 awhp, after that you're gonna have serious problems and need to bore it out to a 2.0 liter block, if not bigger. But thats ALOT of money with the custom setup and you're talkin serious hp gains!
I'm no professional, but I would HIGHLY recommend a highflow cat. I just got Techtonics Tuning's ceramic coated high flow cat for $295. It's a 400 cell count cat, so it doesn't throw CEL's and has pretty good flow rates... It makes my Magnaflow cat back exhaust system sound a little bit louder, deeper and spools up my turbo much faster vs. my old stock cat. You can also hear the turbo spool up much more, it's really cool! [up] I'm not sure if you have to pass emissions like some of us, but if you don't, you should look into getting a test pipe for maximum flow and power gains!
[:)]

offroader1006
12-11-2005, 10:50 PM
you cant compare the price on a K04 and APR stg III+

and what was his Tq #

do you have any graphs of the power curves?

CaSp3r9
12-11-2005, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by offroader1006
you cant compare the price on a K04 and APR stg III+

and what was his Tq #

do you have any graphs of the power curves?


haha yeah.... theres a good $4,000 difference there.
I'm not sure what his tq was at, but I remember him saying it wasn't too much higher than mine.
Are you asking if I have any graphs of my car? There should be one posted above... and I don't have any of his car. I'll ask him for his dyno results next time I see him though.

bitterchild
12-11-2005, 11:33 PM
Originally posted by CaSp3r9
Personally, if I had the money, I'd go straight to the APR Stage III+ kit with the Garrett gt28 turbo. 333 awhp!!! The 1.8t block is only good up to about 380 awhp, after that you're gonna have serious problems and need to bore it out to a 2.0 liter block, if not bigger. But thats ALOT of money with the custom setup and you're talkin serious hp gains!
[:)]

do you have any idea what you're talking about?

CaSp3r9
12-11-2005, 11:55 PM
uhhh... I'm pretty sure I do...? I don't wanna point fingers or anything but that's what I was told by Mike at Matrix Integrated. Why? Am I wrong?

BranCKY3
12-12-2005, 08:40 AM
Yes. The APR Stage 3+ uses a GT28RS turbo, the plain stage 3 uses a GT28R. Also, it's not 333awhp, its 333bhp.

offroader1006
12-12-2005, 09:40 AM
if the K04 with GIAC software only made a little more hp and tq, hes got a problem.

nizmosx
12-12-2005, 11:15 AM
Yea those are some of the lowest ko4 numbers i have seen or heard of especially if he says the cars running right. I bet somethings up with it

jeremy@matrix
12-12-2005, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by CaSp3r9
uhhh... I'm pretty sure I do...? I don't wanna point fingers or anything but that's what I was told by Mike at Matrix Integrated. Why? Am I wrong?

Hi Blair,

I think you're confusing WHP with BHP. WHP is hp at the wheels. BHP is hp on an engine dyno/brake. It's estimated that the Quattro drivetrain loses about 20-25% so WHP would be about 20-25% less than BHP. Does that make sense?

Mike wouldn't say that the said turbo kit or 1.8T block would net that much WHP. BHP, maybe, but not WHP.

jeremy@matrix
12-12-2005, 02:30 PM
Originally posted by nizmosx
Yea those are some of the lowest ko4 numbers i have seen or heard of especially if he says the cars running right. I bet somethings up with it

Aha! I found out the issue Blair as to why your A4 produced higher results than Mike's A4 K04. Both you and Ted on Saturday were on stock 15s, Mike (and other K04 cars like Dima's A4) are all on 18s or 19s.

That accounts for it.

tkarwin
12-12-2005, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by jeremy@matrix
Aha! I found out the issue Blair as to why your A4 produced higher results than Mike's A4 K04. Both you and Ted on Saturday were on stock 15s, Mike (and other K04 cars like Dima's A4) are all on 18s or 19s.

That accounts for it.

Is it the extra diameter or the extra weight from the larger wheel tire combos. I was on 16s with snow tires (no studs!) . Thanks again Jeremy!

CaSp3r9
12-12-2005, 10:41 PM
Hey Jeremy,
Yeah, haha I just got BHP and WHP mixed up when I was typing. I know the difference between the two. Also, I'm running stock 16's with 205/55/16 Proxes 4's, and Mike's OZ Superleggera's are 18's, but does that really make a big difference? My friend has a similar setup and the overall diameter of my setup is only 1/4"-1/2" less than my friends with 18's. I don't see how that would make that big of a difference in numbers on the dyno? Is it also the weight difference?
Also, I saw in your profile that you have an S4, which one is yours? I'm jealous![hail] [s4]

Thanks![:)]
-Blair

jeremy@matrix
12-13-2005, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by tkarwin
Is it the extra diameter or the extra weight from the larger wheel tire combos. I was on 16s with snow tires (no studs!) . Thanks again Jeremy!

Definitely the wheel weight over diameter.

jeremy@matrix
12-13-2005, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by CaSp3r9
Hey Jeremy,
Yeah, haha I just got BHP and WHP mixed up when I was typing. I know the difference between the two. Also, I'm running stock 16's with 205/55/16 Proxes 4's, and Mike's OZ Superleggera's are 18's, but does that really make a big difference? My friend has a similar setup and the overall diameter of my setup is only 1/4"-1/2" less than my friends with 18's. I don't see how that would make that big of a difference in numbers on the dyno? Is it also the weight difference?
Also, I saw in your profile that you have an S4, which one is yours? I'm jealous![hail] [s4]

Thanks![:)]
-Blair

Hi Blair,

No problem for the mix-up.

It's wheel weight.

S4; it's the black one with silver OZ Super's.

Best regards,
Jeremy

CuStOm
12-15-2005, 11:04 PM
MMmm....
Correct me if I am wrong but I think the diameter would contribute too, mathematically atleast. It all due to MOI (Moment of Inertia)

The weight is the larger contributor though, not only because of the weight of the rim but where the weight is at. The rotational weight is larger and the MOI is tremendously higher due to the weight being further from the axle and thus requiring more torque to rotate.

Its been a few years since my physics classes at the U but I think thats pretty on par.

jeremy@matrix
12-16-2005, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by CuStOm
MMmm....
Correct me if I am wrong but I think the diameter would contribute too, mathematically atleast. It all due to MOI (Moment of Inertia)

The weight is the larger contributor though, not only because of the weight of the rim but where the weight is at. The rotational weight is larger and the MOI is tremendously higher due to the weight being further from the axle and thus requiring more torque to rotate.

Its been a few years since my physics classes at the U but I think thats pretty on par.

Diameter, perhaps a smidge, but nothing like weight.

From a best friend of mine who's an ME;

"The dyno only ‘knows’ roller diameter (which transmits the tangential force from the vehicle’s tires) and roller rpm (based on the tangential velocity from the vehicle’s tires). Think of the chassis dyno as measuring what the road ‘sees’. The tires impose a ‘force’ on the rollers, which generates a torque curve (based on roller diameter) over an rpm range. Remember, hp is calculated directly from torque and rpm.


Larger wheels and tires (outside diameter increased):

For a given engine rpm, tires with a larger outside diameter will have a decreased tangential force on the roller, but an increased tangential velocity at the roller. This means the torque on the roller is decreased, but the rpm is increased proportionally. From this, hp should remain roughly unchanged."

HTH.

CuStOm
12-16-2005, 12:44 PM
I totally agree.

But on a larger wheel the mass is further from the axle and therefor will require more torque to accelerate than a smaller wheel. This is where the MOI comes into affect. From the Dyno's POV it has no idea this is happening, from your engines point of view it does. You loose energy due to this and thus the torque applied to the rollers is less.
Run that by your ME. On my way home tonight I'll stop the R&D lab and ask a couple PHD Physicist. ;) [:D]