Actual Dyno CHARTS.

[Guest TurboSedan]

Hmm... I think we need to create a 60 degree V6 list... Any 3100, 3400, or 3.4 DOHC from any GM car. Maybe a 1 or 1.5 gen w-body list.

 

tim

 

ooh we need more engines included than that....at least the 3.1 Turbo i hope to have a dyno chart from my car later this summer (see events section)

[timg]

Josh,

 

I agree. The 3.1 turbo should fairly compete with the 3.4 DOHC.

 

tim

[Aaron]

Yah they are very similiar in power outputs, I wish the DOHC was as cheap and easy to get fast though. I mean with a turbo it is, but I'm thinking N/A, it should still compete considering its displacement and headflow advantage. They could be compared for sure.

 

That list would be great, but good luck getting DynoPro to do it, they don't seem to answer emails.

[timg]

I think I'm going to start using Super Repair in Boulder and Autosport Werks in Broomfield for most of my dynos. Super Repair has a Dyno Dynamics dyno and Autosport Werks has a Dyna Pack dyno. I'm actually taking EFI101 in July. Hopefully after that, I'll rent a dyno for a half day to tune the Honda and then in a few months do the same for the Monte.

 

Tim

[Canada]

I've heard very gppd things about EFI101....how much is that again?

 

Aaron....do you have a copy of the raw data (exact power and rpm points)...I'd like to put your chart into my Excel file, but that requires tedious work of reading the chart and entering it into the file....at least one graphed against RPM....or did waste spark screw with the pickup.

 

I don't know if I have posted this chart in this thread before....but....

 

 

That's a 3.4L DOHC/5 speed swapped into the back end of a Fiero...stock verses some chip. I have been using this chart in the Excel file, but now I have something a bit better to work with.

 

178 hp / 200 hp = 89%......thats to good of an efficencey for that transmission, I think. Perhaps the K&N drop-in makes more than we think (it made 1.2 or whatever on the 3100 in the Beretta). Or it could flat out make more than GM rated it at.....they do that you know.

[Aaron]

*Bench Racing*

 

I honestly believe it is making more than GM thinks. First of all, it made more hp and tq than any stock, or lightly modded, 3.4 ever has. Remember, that dyno for the stock 3.4 in the Fiero probably has a custom chip, and most definately does not have power steering, which is said to be good for 5-10hp.

 

The red car feels strong, REALLY strong, for a 3.4. I have driven a lot of 3.4s, both modded and stock, and this one moves. So I think it just may be a factory freak, becuz that hp should have been at 170 even maximum.

 

I do not have the raw data, sorry. But using that graph you should be able to get good estimates, but not exact. But dynoes aren't exact in the first place, and there always is varying numbers, so you get my drift.

[Canada]

5-10 hp for no power steering??? Hmm.....maybe, but I think thats a bit optimistic.

 

Rex Weatherford (a Quad 4 Beretta GTZ guy) picked up 7 whp from removing the A/C and alternator belt on his Quad. (http://www.beretta.net/behind_the_wheel/dyno_results2.htm)

 

*I* think most of the gain came from not having to spin a belt at all. I just find a Briggs and Straton engine's worth of power gain hard to believe.

 

The dyno chart I posted is the factory X motor PCM against some guys chip. Why can't you use a power steering pump on a 3.4L DOHC Fiero?

 

 

 

What about a chart against RPM? Or perhaps you can just send me the file of the dyno (if its from a DynoJet).

[Aaron]

5-10 hp for no power steering??? Hmm.....maybe, but I think thats a bit optimistic.

 

The dyno chart I posted is the factory X motor PCM against some guys chip. Why can't you use a power steering pump on a 3.4L DOHC Fiero?

 

What about a chart against RPM? Or perhaps you can just send me the file of the dyno (if its from a DynoJet).

 

I wouldn't doubt 5-10whp with no PS, those accessories draw a lot of power to pump the hydraulic fluid. The Fiero doesn't have PS, no most guys just put an idler pulley there, or loop the pump. I am rerouting my enitre belt setup tho, as I do not need A/C or a water pump pulley.

 

The chart they printed was in RPM, I don't know why he didn't send me that one. I'll email him and ask him to, if not, then I will scan mine up for ya. It is from a DynoJet.

[Canada]

Got to playing with Aaron's chart today. I put it into my Excel file.....it looks like Aaron dynoed in third gear. So I plotted out rpm points every hundred against mph in that gear....that way I didn't have to convert MPH to rpm for every point. But, based of his chart I would shift it at....

 

1-2...6300

2-3...6400

3-4...6100

4-5...6400

 

Peak power is around 5100 rpm, so it makes sense to shift there.

 

Using that Fiero LQ1, I came up with the following shift points....

1-2...6500

2-3...6600

3-4...6300

4-5...6600

 

Apparently the Feiro IS modified a bit......because it is making a bit more high rpm power, so you shift higher. It also made peak power at 5300 rpm, and then again at 5900 rpm.

 

I have copies of my verison of Aaron's dyno chart and HP vs MPH...but my server is being mentally handicapped today.

[Aaron]

That's odd, I will have to look at my chart when I get back, I thought max power was at 5400rpm, but I could be wrong.

 

It was in 3rd, 4th and the car would hit the limiter. Those shift points are a lot earlier than I was expecting, but its good to know. Before I would hold first to 7, then shift at 6500 from there on out.

 

Thanks for the info Canada, I'll get you the RPM chart in a week or 2.

[Canada]

I should point out one thing...........

 

BIGBULS (my roomate) pointed out something I had overlooked when calculating Aarons numbers.................Aarons' Z34 probably has 225/60R16 tires under it, throwing off my rpm vs mph figures a little )I have been using the 245/50R16's under my GPSE......it's an optional tire for 91-92 GP's that Z34's never could get).

 

:oops: :oops: :oops:

 

Soooo..........once I get bored again, I will paste in the CORRECT stuff, and then do a direct head to head comparo of the Fiero and Aarons' car

 

Also.......*I* don't really think Aarons' car is that much of a freak..........for one, the 5 speed DOHC's are ALL rated at 210hp (crank), and GM HAS been known to play the ratings game before.

 

Also, my roomate mentioned that TwinDualCam.com's test car back in the day made 175whp STOCK (it was a 92 GTP 5 speed).

[Guest TurboSedan]

I have been using the 245/50R16's under my GPSE......it's an optional tire for 91-92 GP's that Z34's never could get).

 

really? i was always under the impression that the 245/50 was only available on the TGP.

[Aaron]

Also.......*I* don't really think Aarons' car is that much of a freak..........for one, the 5 speed DOHC's are ALL rated at 210hp (crank), and GM HAS been known to play the ratings game before.

 

Also, my roomate mentioned that TwinDualCam.com's test car back in the day made 175whp STOCK (it was a 92 GTP 5 speed).

 

Yes, I do have stock 225 tires on it

 

Yes, the 5-speeds were rated at 210hp. But the automatics were at 200. The reason the 5-speeds were higher was a result of the 9.5:1 compression (As opposed to the 9.25:1 of the auto cars). The motor in my red car is a 94-95 crate motor, which as we all know was automatic only, and at 9.25:1. Therefore, my motor is 200hp/200tq, not the 210/215 of the stock 5-speed. In fact, the 94-95 motors were rated at 210hp/215tq, but this was not due to compression, this gain was due to the SFI injection, and additional sensors allowing better air/fuel/ignition control.

[Canada]

So I went through and did it again with 225/60/16 tires and accounting for 3% rolling resistance.

 

1-2...6300, 36 mph

2-3...6400, 58 mph

3-4...6100, 96 mph

4-5...6400, 123 mph

 

A 0.81 (stock is 0.72) 5th would shortern the 4-5 shift to 6100 rpm.

 

So if you were to shift at 6400 everytime BUT 3-4, you'd be alright. Shifting 1-2 at 7k was a bad idea.......you have less than 130 whp at 6800 rpm alone. When banging through the gears using the points I came up with, you never drop below 150 whp.

 

Your last *good* data point is at 96 mph.....which converts to 6800 rpm.

 

You might notice that everything is the same.....well, thats because it should be.....yes, the speeds will be higher with the taller tires....but they'll effect every gear the same, so the shift SPEEDS will be higher, but the RPM will be the same. Even though using the spreadsheet I am finding the speed at which horsepower is the same in both gears and then converting speed to rpm....it works out in the end. Besides, its not like shorter tires make your gear set any closer.

 

Peak power appears to be 178 whp @ 5100 rpm and 196 w-ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm. *I* am not that excited over the fact that it made the power it did. TimG made 179 whp with his 1995 automatic, intake, and exhaust. He did have bolt-ons, and an engine that is rated another 10 hp higher....but he also had to send that power through a transaxle that is 4-5% less efficent. That means he was making about 13 more hp at the crank than you are.....which is what I would except to see for gains from an intake an exhaust.

 

Here are the charts I made....this is my verison of your dyno chart.....

 

This is horsepower graphed out in each gear against mph....simply shift when the lines cross.

 

BIGBULS is out driving a go-kart on a Neon course......or is it a Neon on a go-kart course, I forget which. Anyways, we'll see what he says when he gets back.

 

Aaron.....do you have a dyno chart of you modified LQ1?

[Aaron]

Interesting stuff, good job, I'll probly just go 6500 every gear but the 3-4, which I will do at 6. I rarely go that fast racing anyways.

 

I do have charts of my modded one, I will scan them up for you. I can't find the 218 run, but the 212 will work fine. I get back into town in 2 weeks, so I'll have them up then.

[Canada]

Cool.....I found a dyno chart for a stock C6.....I think its a Z51.

 

http://www.dynoperformance.com/search_details.php?ID=857&safeid=857

 

They also have a shit ton of dyno charts on their main page....

http://www.dynoperformance.com/

 

Anyways, if you happen to find yourself behind the wheel of a C6....shift at 6700 rpm everytime. Marked redline is at 6500....and apparently they can rev to 6750....this one dynoed to that anyways.

 

I like that website.....they list the dyno data out in raw numbers....this means I don't have to read the chart!

[BIGBULS]

Canada, I hate to be a shit, but you only did PART of what I told you too.............

 

You re-did everthing for the taller tires, but your original mph to rpm extrapolation of Aaron's chart still needs to be redone.

 

I GUARANTEE that his shiftpoints are higher than 6400ish rpm.

 

 

 

We might just have to do some minor editing to that very informative post you made above

 

 

 

Case in point:

 

Aaron's ACTUAL chart showed him making 186lb/ft to the wheels.............your original extraploation converting his mph chart into rpm was done with 245/50R16 tires in mind, yet he has the taller ones mentioned.

 

THIS is why YOU have 196lb/ft listed (and only have data points to 6800rpm).........

 

Once we redo THAT, I will bet that his 1-2, 2-3 and 4-5 shifts will all be in the 6500-6600rpm range, and that 3-4 will be at 6200ish.

 

Wanna bet me?

[Canada]

Aaron has worn out tires (or a SHORT 225/60/16).....it happens.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Because the whole entire speed thing is way off. He is at 7k at 96 mph. I said he was only at 6800 rpm because I was assuming his tires were new....and I really don't have a way to convert for worn tires.....other than to work with a chart graphed against rpm.

 

I simply plotted MPH verses HP.....and THEN converted to rpm based on tires and gearing. BIGBULS thinks I said 96 mph was 7k and then made some big magic number to convert. Well, I didn't.

 

So...based on NEW tires and the chart I was given, I am right.

 

 

 

 

To be absolutly correct on shift points, I need a chart graphed against rpm. BIGBULS, is right....they should be higher.

[88Regal Limited]

genuses...er..... 2 smart guys at work!

[Canada]

Aaron........get off your lazy ass!!!! I'm drunk and bored!

[Aaron]

I didn't know it was possible to be both drunk and bored. Normally you get drunk as a result of being bored, and you end up finding something to do (Swimming in apt pools after hours is fun!).

 

I will scan them soon....I swear....

[Aaron]

Canada, here you go.

 

Here is the red car's run, in a more typical graph, and with RPM, not MPH. Notice the power drop, which mirrors the rich A:F, after 6000rpm. This is what Ben's chip corrects, and why it makes it hold the power to 7 much better.

 

Here are 2 graphs from my white car. These are a 212 and a 208, I still havn't found my 218. The power is about equal to stock until about 3500rpm, where it climbs faster.

[Aaron]

Looking at the white car's second graph closely, we can see how the power mirrors the A:F. Take into account that the A:F results are delayed about 200-400rpm. This is becuz the computer takes the RPM from the plug wire, but by the time the exhaust gases get to the end of the tailpipe where the wideband O2 is, the motor is already 200-400rpm higher.

 

Notice the strong verticle climb from 3600-4000rpm, and how the A:F goes lean at this time. Not lean, but a lot leaner than the rest of the run, a leaner spike. Not dangerously, in fact it only peaks to 12.5 or so, where optimum is 13 across the board. Then the power climbs, but much slower, coincedently at the same time the A:F dives rich, almost below 11.5. Then at 4800 the A:F goes lean, and at the same time power climbs strong, to the max at 5600 or so. From here on out, power falls, and the A:F goes way rich again, especially after 6500rpm. IMHO, the power would have been much higher had it been at 13 the entire run, and hopefully Ben can tune it to do this. Have fun Canada!

[Aaron]

You bitch and bitch and bitch about dyno charts, and then don't do a damn thing with them.

 

Worthless.

 

 

hehehe just kidding!

[BIGBULS]

He's fat and lazy...............

 

I'll kick him in the ass tonight, and we'll see what we can come up with

 

 

He'll probably wait till Thursday though....it's the beginning of his "weekend".