Beams Dyno results registry.

[WFX]

Well Id say this is as good as I'm gunna get for awhile till I work out a few other issues so here are the new details anyway:

Car Owner: Wayne Siviour
Car Type: 1993 Toyota Celica ST184
Engine Type: 3SGE BEAMS Red Top
MAX HP @ RPM: 134.7HP @ 6700RPM
MAX Torque @ RPM: 111.2 HP @ 6000RPM
Modifications:
Blitz SUS Air Intake
Phoenix Exhaust Manifold
Full 2 1/2" Straight Through Exhaust System
JUN Lightweight Flywheel
TRD Clutch Cover & Disc
Apexi SAFC Neo
Walbro 255 Fuel Pump

Dyno Chart:

[speedyls91]

Edited - Will repost

[Roman]

Alright I took mine back to the dyno today. Will post my chart up soon. I should also update the first post in this thread with the results, haha.

Car: hardtop 1990 SW20, 1030kgs.
engine: redtop 3SGE from ST202 celica.
max power: 127kw @ wheels (170hp) Running quite rich, 12.5:1 AFR from about 4000 onwards.
max torque: not sure, I'll have to check later, haha.
relevant mods: cusco flywheel, exedy ceramic clutch, rebuilt gen 5 gearbox with cusco or TRD LSD, TOMS extractors/exhaust (2.5" through to muffler), cat converter replaced with straight pipe, standard muffler, alloy intake pipe, standard airbox/air filter from an ST215 GT caldina.

Now that I've got a good baseline result, I might see if a different muffler setup will make a difference, and might get a high flow panel filter for it. It's currently got an el cheapo paper one in there... An aftermarket ECU would definitely help a lot, but it's a lot of money for the sake of a few HP!

[Roman]

I've since fixed the low RPM leanspot, vaccuum leak in the throttle body!

[Lion_HUN]

Nice

[RST]

Car Owner: RST
Car Type: 1993 SW20 Rev 2 GT-i T-Bar with 1997 BEAMS transplant
Engine Type: 3SGE BEAMS Red Top
MAX HP @ RPM: 195.7Bhp @6,906rpm
MAX Torque @ RPM: 159.0lbf @ 5,978RPM
Modifications:
SARD induction kit
Blue Flame S/S exhaust
Blue Flame de-cat pipe
CAMCON (planned as of 4.10.2007)
VMAX torque brace (planned as of 4.10.2007)


...the gods must be smiling on me!

[SW20.dk]

Car owner: Bo Uhrskov
Car type: Toyota MR2 SW20
engine type: 3SGE VVTI Beams
max HP @ RPM: 195 Hk @ 6500, at flywheel
max torque @ RPM: 230 Nm @ 4600, at flywheel
relevant mods:
?? Exhaust Manifold - see picture
Remus exhaust

[Roman]

Ugh, why do some dynos insist on 'flywheel' horspower? It means less than nothing.


Aaaah, I should really update this registry with the new results. Will do so tonight.

[puretone]

Car owner puretone
Car type: ST184 Convertible
engine type: BEAMS RedTop!!!
max HP @ RPM: 198whp @ 6900
max torque @ RPM: 167ft/lbs @ 6000
relevant mods: intake air running thru skyline-size intercooler (air comes out cold as ice and the IC is there for future turbo project...) EGT, wideband O2, FAL fans on KOYO radiator with 1.5 bar TRD cap, Denso Iri's IK20, full 2.5 inch exhaust from flexpipe on to end can, 2.5 inch vibrantperformance resonator & muffler, swap out to titanium evo8 can from time to time, no catalytic converter
A picture of the dyno plot if possible: no havey scan here

[da_horse]

take a photo of the dyno sheet,
but 198HP at the wheels? considering you have 200HP at the crank stock, thats a 2hp loss through drivetrain.

[RageLtMan]

Nice curves, needs boost though. These things look like they'd be a blast @ autoX tracks or tight back road runs. Put your cars on a minor diet and you'll be more than competetive with the turbo guys.

[puretone]

Originally Posted by da_horse

take a photo of the dyno sheet,
but 198HP at the wheels? considering you have 200HP at the crank stock, thats a 2hp loss through drivetrain.

its adjusted for 20% loss thru drivetrain so it should be more like 170-160ish at the wheels, this dyno shop (the only one around...) doesn't show wheel-hp bc its lower so ppl think they got more power or something.....i do have some very light wheels on my rig which does help....

[RST]

max HP @ RPM: 195 Hk @ 6500

...what's Hk guys? Haven't seen that one before -are we comparing like for like figures here or what's the conversion into Bhp or KW? Also, I believe the red top is quoted at 200Ps, which equates to something like 197-198Hp unless I'm mistaken.

its adjusted for 20% loss thru drivetrain

..can I just ask if that was a calculated loss? Some of the r/r days that appear in mags. in the UK just knock-off 20% but it's surprising to see the variation in losses when it's measured.

Ugh, why do some dynos insist on 'flywheel' horspower? It means less than nothing.

...Actually I don't really give a stuff what mine's putting down at the rubber at the moment, that's a bit of a sweeping statement for me and not meaningless at all.

Not shooting any one down or picking holes, it's interesting to see what everyone's getting. Personally I've always wondered what difference an intercooler would make just out of interest. Any chance we can get a before and after figure?

[Roman]

...Actually I don't really give a stuff what mine's putting down at the rubber at the moment, that's a bit of a sweeping statement for me and not meaningless at all.

I dont get what you're saying here.

It sounds like you're saying that you DONT care about 'at the wheel' power (which is directly measured, and indisputable), but you DO care about supposed 'flywheel horsepower', which is the 'at the wheels' figure plus an imaginary percentage, plucked out of the air by the dyno operator.

Assuming you were concerned with a rough estimate of 'at the engine' power, 15% would be a more realistic percentage to add to the 'wheels' power figure.

And yes, power at the engine is well and truly irrelevant.

Lets say that you had two different engine/gearbox combos to choose from for a particular car.

One was a 200hp engine, mated to a gearbox which allowed it to have 180hp at the wheels.

the next engine is a 220hp engine, with a gearbox with marmelade and sand used as gearbox oil, which means it's still got 180hp ATW.

The 220hp engine aint gonna be any faster if it's only got the same HP ATW.

The reality is, that there's no way to measure flywheel horsepower with any degree of accuracy, apart from on an engine dyno. Anything else is mere speculation. And irrelevant anyway, it's the power that you can get to the wheels which is important.

P.S. I reccomend checking out some of the power/dyno articles down the page of pumaracing.co.uk

[RST]

Roman,

I agree with what you're saying and I agree that allot of club dyno runs seem to just add on 20% or 15% on an ad-hoc basis with no explanation. This is a "plucked" figure -no mistake and the most effective way for f/wheel power is on an engine dyno but that's allot of work and you can maybe accept an inacuracy measuring it another way. Perhaps my own mis-interpretation but I've extracted this from the Dastek web site page.

I understand that you use a coast down test to determine flywheel power. Why, when wheel power is what makes you go?



The problem with measuring wheel power only, is that many factors can affect the wheel power output - tyre design, temperature and pressure, wheel alignments, gear box oil, viscosity temperature and level, wheel speed, final drive ratios etc.



As an example; take two very similar cars with similar modifications, both are tested on a 'wheel horse power only' dyno, Car A has 12 Bhp more at the wheels than Car B. The owner of Car B and/or the dyno operator begin looking for problems with the turbo chargers, ECU calibrations, CAM timing etc. If the test had been carried out on the Dastek Dyno, the coast down test would have revealed the transmission loss would have appeared excessively high, thus taking the focus away from the engine fault and pointing us in the direction if the drive line problem. The fault was in fact a partially seized brake caliper, which was converting the power into heat.

Dastek Dynamometers - Frequently asked questions

...now if this is crap then fair enough but I have read the theory in better detail ages ago and seemed OK engineering wise at the time.

I'm just back from Cambridge and spoke to Patrick at Rogue yesterday afternoon about finding a competent dyno centre to do some proper work. I think there's a place in Tewkesbury which has a Mustang dyno which I think is highly rated. I'm thinking a 1,200 mile round trip there early next year is better than faffing about on others. I believe this can simulate a Dastek dyno also, so I can look at tuning some mods, then doing a final "Dastek" power run to see a comparison from my first run a few weeks ago.

...My comment still stands -and this is what I think we should be clear on is are we considering the same units, PS doesn't equal Bhp but I can't find a conversion figure yet (surely we shouldn't quote 200Bhp for the BEAMS -it's 200PS or about 197-198Bhp?) . And what on earth's an HK -I'm an engineer and never heard of that unit before, I can't find it searching the internet so far?

[SW20.dk]

Originally Posted by RST

And what on earth's an HK -I'm an engineer and never heard of that unit before, I can't find it searching the internet so far?

Sorry..

HK is danish for HP. HK=HP

[RST]

Ahh, brilliant -as simple as that, thanks for clarifying!

Richard


...learn something new every day

[WFX]

Try this little converter, I use it all the time and it works perfectly:

Unit Converter

[Roman]

I understand that you use a coast down test to determine flywheel power. Why, when wheel power is what makes you go?

The problem with measuring wheel power only, is that many factors can affect the wheel power output - tyre design, temperature and pressure, wheel alignments, gear box oil, viscosity temperature and level, wheel speed, final drive ratios etc.

Exactly, there's a lot more variables which lead to wheel horse power... Which is why knowing engine/flywheel HP is even more useless.

If you've got 10 more flywheel HP than someone else, but they've got 5 more HP at the wheels, what's the point, apart from bragging rights? If you lose 5whp because you stuck on some 19" chrome wheels, then that directly affects the performance of your car, so it's what's relevant.

As an example; take two very similar cars with similar modifications, both are tested on a 'wheel horse power only' dyno, Car A has 12 Bhp more at the wheels than Car B.
The owner of Car B and/or the dyno operator begin looking for problems with the turbo chargers, ECU calibrations, CAM timing etc. If the test had been carried out on the Dastek Dyno, the coast down test would have revealed the transmission loss would have appeared excessively high, thus taking the focus away from the engine fault and pointing us in the direction if the drive line problem. The fault was in fact a partially seized brake caliper, which was converting the power into heat.

So how exactly do they measure coast down losses?
If they've got the engine in gear, then they're effectively 'engine braking', as the vaccuum in the cylinders resists the turning motion of the drivetrain/wheels/etc. So the coastdown figure would change based on what type/displacement of engine that you've got, how heavy your flywheel is, etc etc... It's hardly indicative of drivetrain losses.

If they do this while the engine is out of gear, then... It's hardly representative of drivetrain losses either is it?

I'm not sure if you guys work on your own cars, but I'd know well before taking my car to the dyno that I had a jammed caliper, or a similar fault.

I can see the benefits of measuring coast down losses or whatever, but I dont see it as being at all relevant to the power figure while accellerating.

[WFX]

Car Owner: Wayne Siviour
Car Type: 1993 Toyota Celica ST184
Engine Type: 3SGE BEAMS Red Top
MAX HP @ RPM: 147.2HP @ 6800RPM
Modifications:
Blitz SUS Cold Air Intake
Phoenix Exhaust Manifold
Full 2 1/2" Straight Through Exhaust System
JUN Lightweight Flywheel
TRD Clutch Cover & Disc
Apexi SAFC Neo
Walbro 255 Fuel Pump



AFR needs to be leaned out a little in the higher rev ranges but other then that its an extra 18ish HP then last time so its definately getting there! Might play around with this exhuast setup before moving to QUADS!!