OldSkoolGP Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 I've been wanting to do this since GPG, and finally I got my crap together and got it done. I just got done capturing the video, and here it is: http://www.netphetamine.com/joshherrell/dynorun.wmv Those numbers are good, but they're not what I wanted. However, how the engine makes the power it does makes me quite happy. Here's a chart of the best run: I made the runs using 90 octane gas and some fresh Schaeffer Oil, which I used for the first time on Friday and I'll never use anything else. My motr is actually quieter with it than Mobil 1, and it costs less and it's only a synthetic blend. Awesome stuff.
Prospeeder Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 dont u have a 4 door Grand Prix w/ a 3.4 dohc? i forgot, but those are still some impressive numbers even if u expected more
J Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 i've use schaffer for 5 years (get it for free) it is usually used in fleet cars and taxis. the cool thing is it is cheaper becasue they don't advertise. You can get at least 7k out of it. Schaffer gave us a pill bottle looking thing for a sample of oil and they test it and give you a report of what is in your oil, such as brass, and where it may come from such as valve guides. They will also tell you chemicals in you oil such as PPM of coolant and gas, awsome shit. Sorrya bout teh rant on oil. But let that oil work for a little bit and dyno it again, you'd be suprised. if i were you i'd also go with a schaffer tranny fluid. Numbers look pretty good nothing to be dissapointed about. later Jay
Canada Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 What exactly does your setup involve? (I just found it in your profile...might not hurt to list it though.) Your top end power really doesn't fall off as much as a stock unit. Typically dip at 3500 rpm. Do you happen to have a copy of rpm against power or torque already printed out from the dyno shop? Or do I have to read each line one by one? BTW.....you should post a copy of this chart in that one thread started by that one guy. What brand of dyno was that? It doesn't look like a DynoJet.
99RegalGS Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 Looks Good Josh. Didn't see the flame though..
Prospeeder Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 Looks Good Josh. Didn't see the flame though.. ya i didnt see it either
OldSkoolGP Posted October 17, 2005 Author Report Posted October 17, 2005 Yeah, the flames didn't show up on camera, which sucks, but trust me it was there. The popping from the tailpipes is a dead giveaway, can't expect too much of a flame in a car with no boost or nitrous. I did they dyno on a Superflow. I could have had it done on a Dynojet locally, but after hearing about how you can't recalibrate them, I thought against it. I didn't want t be BSed, I wanted to really know what was going. Plus the guys at this shop were awesome and genunienly interestred in my car.
OldSkoolGP Posted October 17, 2005 Author Report Posted October 17, 2005 Yes, I do have it broken down by HP and Tq vs. RPM, but it's 3 pages long and I don't want to take pictures of all 3, I'd rather just scan them. I can get them up I suppose.
Aaron Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 So what were the max numbers? I have some trash to talk Hehe just kiddin with you, its a lot prettier than my car's was, that's for sure.
mfewtrail Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 So what were the max numbers? I have some trash to talk Hehe just kiddin with you, its a lot prettier than my car's was, that's for sure. From the video, "212.6whp, 216.1 ft-lbs." Nice #'s Josh.
OldSkoolGP Posted October 17, 2005 Author Report Posted October 17, 2005 Yeah, and Kevwood's got me too, but I don't think I've ever seen such a flat torque curve. And the couple bumps that are in it are fueling and possible lifter issues we have to work out. We did find out I'm running pig rich at WOT, and I'm losing power because of it. I'll address it over the winter.
Aaron Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 Yeah, and Kevwood's got me too, but I don't think I've ever seen such a flat torque curve. And the couple bumps that are in it are fueling and possible lifter issues we have to work out. We did find out I'm running pig rich at WOT, and I'm losing power because of it. I'll address it over the winter. First of all, Kevwood is bullshit. Kevwood and I have gotten into it many times before. Basically, there is not 257whp to be had from head work and tuning. He made 198whp with a bone stock 3.4. Does this dyno sound accurate to you? To put that in perspective, there has NEVER been a 3.4 that we know of to break 180whp stock. In addition, most don't break 170. But the 5-speed will allow for about 10whp higher. My bone stock 1992 Z34 5-speed has a BRAND NEW crate engine, and it runs perfect, in fact I have never felt a 3.4 that runs better. It made 178whp, and is the highest stock dyno yet. He made almost 20whp MORE, with a used motor. So it had a number of miles on it. 20whp is A LOT. There is quite simply no way a stock 3.4 can make more than 180whp, I want to say its nearly impossible. Secondly, the heads already flow so much that porting the shit out of them isn't going to do anything. The heads aren't the restriction, the intakes, exhaust manis, and cams are. Porting the exhaust portion of the head will have benefits, but not that much. Now if he had a custom intake, headers, and cams, then head work is the next step. But for stock everything, the heads are as good as they need to be. They already flow 270/180. These are damn respectable numbers, but the exhaust could use some help. Third, his curve did not look like anything from a 3.4. It had gracious low end power, and it kept pulling until redline. Factory, power drops HARD after 5500rpm. I'm sorry, but P/P heads alone are not going to totally change the curve. In addition, he also had good low end torque, much more than it would have gotten factory. Now how you add a lot of low end, and high end, and totally change the curve for the motor with just heads is beyond me. Let's look at his 1/4mi times, and compare them to mine. He ran a 14.95 at 92.98, and a 14.88 @ 93.24. For having 257whp, this sucks. 257whp should be a mid 13 second car. Ironically, I beat him. My mods were intake, exhaust, chip, and UD pulley. I'm guessing it was at 180-190whp max. I ran a 14.78 @ 92.68. His 60' times were both better than mine, WAY better. His were 2.2 and 2.3. My best 60' that day was a 2.388, so basically a 2.4. Now tell me, how can I be down 70whp, get beat off the line by 2 tenths (A LOT), and still manage to beat him through the 1/4mi? The dyno they use has issues. It isn't a Dynojet, it is a Mustang. I have heard of A LOT of dyno shops exagerrating numbers before, it isn't at all uncommon, especially after someone like Kevwood dishes thousands into porting what already are near perfect cylinder heads. Traditionally these dynoes read lower, but in his case, it is reading MUCH higher. I don't care how bad you suck at driving, 257whp, with a 2.2 60', should be a 13.5, not a 14.95. There have been stock Z34s beat his 1/4mi time. And Oldskool, you have NO room to bitch about A:F lines, becuz I'm positive mine are worse, and my ignition timing isn't much to gawk at either (I knew I forgot something, oh yah, the IAT sensor...lol)
Aaron Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 As for the torque curve compared to mine, I'm guessing your's will be higher, but let's see:
Aaron Posted October 17, 2005 Report Posted October 17, 2005 RPM-You-Me-Difference 2500 180 165 15 higher 3000 195 180 15 higher 3500 190 180 10 higher 4000 205 205 0 same 4500 205 200 5 higher 5000 205 210 5 lower 5500 200 200 0 same 6000 180 175 5 higher 6500 165 155 10 higher 7000 140 100 40 higher Holy Damn your torque owns me. I guess that is what high RPM tuned headers and a massive throttle blade will do for you...lol Your torque curve is relly flat too. I'm sure if I had some ignition timing and some proper fuel tables it'd be much higher, hopefully we'll see soon enough though. Because I'm bored, how about with horsepower, taken from 3000 on. 3000 110 100 10 higher 3500 125 125 0 same 4000 160 160 0 same 4500 180 175 5 higher 5000 195 200 5 lower 5500 205 210 5 lower 6000 200 200 0 same 6500 200 190 10 higher 7000 180 135 45 higher Notice how bad my graph falls off after 6000. Looking at the WBO2 data, we can see why. At the same time this happens my A:F line DIVES rich. Ben used a DOHC that had cam timing done for my chip, and it costed me bigtime on the high end (Well actually it did throughout the run...). Not his fault, and at least it was still safe, but it was all over the place. I really would like to have us race side by side, by the dyno numbers you should win, but who knows, because by 1/4mi times, I should win.
Kevwood Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 First of all, Kevwood is bullshit... Kevwood and I have gotten into it many times before. Basically, there is not 257whp to be had from head work and tuning... He made 198whp with a bone stock 3.4... Aashole, I mean aaron, you are by far the smallest dicked member of this planet I have ever met. The amount of shit that pours out of your mouth is absolutely unreal. Your still pissin' and bitchin' about your god damn dyno number being blown out of the water. 1. 4 dyno sheets of my dyno runs 2. Videos of my dyno runs 3. If I had something to hide do you think I would post my 1/4 mile times? I can't drive, plain and simple. At least one of us can admit to a fault. And 198 from the stock engine??? Ahh, no again Aasshole, full exhaust, intake and dyno tune. Far from stock dip shit. And get over you bloody crying that there isn't more power to be found in the heads. Lightspeed proved that there is plenty in there. And the Mustang dyno has issues? Post this info you found my brain damaged little peon. The mustang dyno reads lower than other dyno's. Again Aasshole, go to your room, think about the things you said, and take your own life.
Aaron Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 1. 4 dyno sheets of my dyno runs 2. Videos of my dyno runs 3. If I had something to hide do you think I would post my 1/4 mile times? I can't drive, plain and simple. At least one of us can admit to a fault. And 198 from the stock engine??? Ahh, no again Aasshole, full exhaust, intake and dyno tune. Far from stock dip shit. And get over you bloody crying that there isn't more power to be found in the heads. Lightspeed proved that there is plenty in there. And the Mustang dyno has issues? Post this info you found my brain damaged little peon. The mustang dyno reads lower than other dyno's. Again Aasshole, go to your room, think about the things you said, and take your own life. Getting on to a technical discussion that you won't be able to read anyways... I never said anything about my dyno run, I don't know how that came up :? 1. 4 dyno sheets from the same inaccurate dyno...wow... 2. A video, even more evidence, of a messed up dyno. 3. Becuz you honestly believe that your car made that much power. Intake, exhaust, and tuning that doesn't need to be done isn't going to make more than 20whp over stock. In fact, a full exhaust does VERY little for a 3.4, I'd be shocked if it was more than 5 crank hp AT ANY RPM. That isn't far from stock, it's very close to stock. Lightspeed didn't prove anything, that is what I'm trying to say. It is very common for dyno shops to exagerrate numbers to please the customer. How about this, get it on a dynojet.
OldSkoolGP Posted October 18, 2005 Author Report Posted October 18, 2005 Why would you want to put it on a DynoJet? Those things get calibrated once from the factory, and then you can't calibrate them again. The place I went to used a SuperFlow, that you can recalibrate. In fact, it even comes with an extra program that can convert results from other dynos to corrected figures, and when it comes to Dynojet, it's almost always right on the money. I don't know anything about the Mustang, but I do know if I have the choice between a DynoJet and a SuperFlow, I'm taking the SuperFlow, I want to know what's really going on.
GP1138 Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 How about both of you shut up and apologize to OldSkoolGP for turning his thread into a flamewar.
Recommended Posts