took my car to the dyno ***updated with a/f info***

Denver_whiteST185

Denver_whiteST185

New member
I finished a tune up on my car (new sparkplugs, air filter, royal purple 10w30 oil, rear differential fluid change) and took my car to mac autosports in parker, CO. heres the results on stock boost (i think 7PSI). I don't have any mods yet but i should have an aussie DP by the end of next week.

SAE corrected

dyno1.jpg


Uncorrected (remember I'm up at 5,500 FT.)

dyno2.jpg


BTW, my A/F ratios were so rich that they were off the charts. anyone else have this problem? I'm getting that fixed, so next time i should get another 10-15 hp once i lean them out to an appropriate level.
 
T

toayoztan

Moderator
It's nice to see a dyno chart of a stock motor to the wheels. I know it can vary due to age, but it's still to see and have as factual from a dyno. Yeah, and fixing that a/f will help. I'm still curious, what were your A/F's though?

Bryan
 
D

d1alltrac

Active member
those numbers arent bad at all...

with 158awhp (considering 200 flywheel hp) thats only 21% drivetrain loss, and with the torque at 176 (considering 200 flywheel tq) thats only 12% loss.

and the car being 16 years old (as we all know) means its probably making less than 200 crank hp, so that means its even less drivetrain loss...good news to me. :D

i think ill get a baseline dyno once my is in better shape.
 
T

turbo4wd

Moderator
Denver_whiteST185":3g8oyfb2 said:
They were seriously "off the chart", the dyno guy just laughed when he saw them :lol:
Click to expand...

The stock ecu is programed to be very rich with the fuel trim..

I'm curious to see your A/F's from 3000 to 4500..
 
S

SuperWhite92

New member
The overfueling is caused not only by the stock ECU, but also by the fact that we are at a very high altitude. Mine runs absurdly rich as well.

Also, don't believe the corrected numbers, they are for an N/A car. The Correction factor was 1.22, meaning they are assuming the car is losing 22% of its power here at altitude, which is a bit extreme. The car should only really be losing 10-12%.

With that said, still some good numbers for all stock.
 
R

Razzo

New member
well nice numbers, i'm currently looking at dynos where i live, i have done a couple things to my car but it still pulls really nice. I'm hopefully looking at figues around 210+ awhp with just boost intake and exhaust (3'') And also you should see about 20% in drivetrain loss since its 4wd, not 10-12% thats what fwd cars average.
 
Denver_whiteST185

Denver_whiteST185

New member
Razzo":3kcl77ob said:
well nice numbers, i'm currently looking at dynos where i live, i have done a couple things to my car but it still pulls really nice. I'm hopefully looking at figues around 210+ awhp with just boost intake and exhaust (3'') And also you should see about 20% in drivetrain loss since its 4wd, not 10-12% thats what fwd cars average.
Click to expand...

Shaun was talking about the correction factor (altitude, Barometric pressure, humidity, temperature, etc.), not driveline loss.
 
S

SuperWhite92

New member
Razzo":3tbziuci said:
well nice numbers, i'm currently looking at dynos where i live, i have done a couple things to my car but it still pulls really nice. I'm hopefully looking at figues around 210+ awhp with just boost intake and exhaust (3'') And also you should see about 20% in drivetrain loss since its 4wd, not 10-12% thats what fwd cars average.
Click to expand...

Not to the wheels. It will lose 10-12% before we even count drivetrain loss, just due to the thin air. And I think you'll find it'll be more like 25% due to drivetrain loss.
 
C

Conan

New member
Razzo":34wvkr0p said:
And also you should see about 20% in drivetrain loss since its 4wd, not 10-12% thats what fwd cars average.
Click to expand...
The loss should be (and actually is) closer to 30% on a full-time 4wd.
 
C

Conan

New member
Well, the uncorrected graph looks much more realistic to me ;)

P.S.
I just love to discuss dyno results :twisted:
 
S

SuperWhite92

New member
Conan":3vwuq1x1 said:
Well, the uncorrected graph looks much more realistic to me ;)

P.S.
I just love to discuss dyno results :twisted:
Click to expand...

Me too. I always feel really bad though, because lots of people think I'm insulting them. I'm not.

I like the torque on the uncorrected graph. That's plenty for being rated at 200 stock.
 
R

Razzo

New member
I didn't realize he was talking about correction factors. But about the drivetrain loss i would really only give it 20-25%. 30% is just to much :shock:
 
C

crazy_russian

New member
Why do you say that standard dyno correction factor for air density is invalid for turbocharged cars? I think the effects of thiner air are the same UNLESS boost controller operates in terms of absolute pressure and allows more boost at higher altitudes. My understanding is the stock wastegate does not do that. Would be nice if it did though, you would automatically get extra 2.5psi in Denver and extra 5.3psi in Rocky Mountains National park (12000ft).
 
S

SuperWhite92

New member
crazy_russian":347z0t9n said:
Why do you say that standard dyno correction factor for air density is invalid for turbocharged cars? I think the effects of thiner air are the same UNLESS boost controller operates in terms of absolute pressure and allows more boost at higher altitudes. My understanding is the stock wastegate does not do that. Would be nice if it did though, you would automatically get extra 2.5psi in Denver and extra 5.3psi in Rocky Mountains National park (12000ft).
Click to expand...

The correction factors used are not for turbo cars, they are for N/A cars, which are unable to help correct for less air density. A turbo compresses the air to what it's supposed to be, pressure wise, while an N/A or supercharger cannot. It takes a bit longer to hit the same boost level when compared to boosting at sea level.

Here's a thread from a local board comparing a sea level dyno, a denver dyno, and a corrected denver dyno. It shows how shops BUTCHER the SAE correction. Cool for bragging rights, I guess.

http://awdpirates.net/phpBB2/viewtopic. ... highlight=
 
R

Razzo

New member
Conan":3dcknj3a said:
Razzo":3dcknj3a said:
30% is just to much :shock:
Click to expand...
It's the reality.
Click to expand...

Really, thats new news, fwd cars average about 10-12% so your saving just because of a transfer case and another 2 wheels in the back you lose another 20% ekkk i went through a bunch of forums and dyno sheets to only see 3 awd and 4wd cars dyno more then 30% drivetrain lose. just what i see all over, figures he has here are like 20% so. I don't believe in that much drivetrain loss its just to much man. That means a stock sti makes 210whp....i dont see no drivetrain in the world that should lose 30% of the engines force in just the drivetrain. Just to much power being lost
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top