www.gt4dc.co.uk
http://gt4dc.co.uk/forum/

GT4OC RR Day at AmD Thurrock
http://gt4dc.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3324		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Muddy Water [ Sun Dec 06, 2009 8:25 pm ]
Post subject:  GT4OC RR Day at AmD Thurrock
Today Sun 6th Dec went to a RR day at AmD Thurrock.
Here's my write up:

Great Day out :D
It was a pity the RR had a problem but all credit to them for a free re-run for everyone when its fixed.

I was first to run so my figures are probably fairly accurate
...and VERY interesting they were too.

My setup is as follows:
Standard Engine;
C-ONE close ratio gear set (gears 1 to 4, oem 5th) Gearbox;
3" Exhaust system consisting of Aussie De-cat Pipe (double-lagged), Aussie Center section and HKS silent HiPower Rear section and Box;
HKS Reloaded Induction Kit;
Forge Dump Valve;
Turbo Technics S148 Hybrid Turbo;
Greddy Profec B Spec II Boost Controller.

What I knew before hand on the ECUs:
The Standard ECU has fuel cut, boost cut, a rev limit of 7200rpm and max. boost of 1.2 bar.
The SARD ECU has fuel cut removed, boost cut removed, the rev limit raised to 8000rpm and the boost raised to 1.3 bar. It's also ment to have a slightly more aggresive ignition map.

Here's the evidence:

Image

Runs 1 and 2 were with the standard ECU and standard boost (boost controller turned off).

Runs 3 and 4 were with the SARD ECU and standard boost (boost controller turned off).

Runs 5 and 6 were with the SARD ECU and boost controller on and set to 1.3 bar peak boost.

So inclusion I can confirm that the SARD ECU removes fuel cut, removes boost cut and raises the rev limit to 8000rpm.
Interestingly, it made virtually no difference at all over the standard ECU, infact, the figures were slightly down (However, the driving experience seems a lot smoother with the SARD ECU).
It appears that the slightly more aggresive ignition map in the SARD ECU is related to the boost. Here you can see an increase of 60bhp and 66 lbs/ft.

The next test will be to run the standard ECU with the boost controller on and set to 1.2 bar peak boost against the SARD ECU and boost controller on and set to 1.3 bar peak boost.
Author:  TrackToyFour [ Mon Dec 07, 2009 2:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
Some great numbers there Nigel :D you must be very pleased with that.

What was the problem with the RR on the day? .... did your monster power and torque break the rollers :?: ...ROFL :lol: :lol: :lol:
Author:  Muddy Water [ Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Some great numbers there Nigel... you must be very pleased with that.

To say that I was well chuffed was an understatement - I believe JP has a pic of me that probably sums it up.
HOWEVER, I have to take these figures with a pinch of salt as we have no way of knowing exactly when the dyno broke.
Apparently, they found that one of the rollers bearings had giving out.
(Just been informed that it was all fixed today so waiting for the re-arranged date).

I have 2 runs booked so want to do this:
Quote:
The next test will be to run the standard ECU with the boost controller on and set to 1.2 bar peak boost against the SARD ECU and boost controller on and set to 1.3 bar peak boost.

This will give a proper like for like comparison.
I strongly believe that the altered ignition map of the SARD ECU is specifically tailored for running the higher boost and rpm.
This would also tie up with the slight decrease in power and torque when tested like for like with the boost controller off.
Author:  two_OH_five [ Mon Dec 07, 2009 11:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
DId you get any wheel figures

These probably wouldn't be so effected by a broken bearing which would throw out the coastdown drag and hence flywheel power

Impressive looking results if they are correct though!. I imagine the picture involves a flip top head?? :lol:
Author:  Diceman [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 12:34 am ]
Post subject: 
flip top head... YES!
I wonder if the KW & CV at the bottom of the graph are wheel power figures.

I got there late and didn't get a chance to talk to the dyno operator. No AFR or Boost was measured and no det detection devices were used unfortunately. You get to stand about 10 ft behind the exhaust pipe when watching so after 2 runs you are deaf, suffering from carbon monoxide poisoning and covered in soot :-)
Author:  TrackToyFour [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 1:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
Sounds like a Health & Safety issue to me :lol: ..... Mike, where are you?
Author:  Sirius [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:12 pm ]
Post subject: 
Figures look very good. :)

Never seen a dyno day run that I'd be entirely happy with from a H&S point of view - but thats all part of the fun :D
Author:  Gary ST165 [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:44 pm ]
Post subject: 
Todays rolling road @ AMD. results are for my almost "stock" ST185 RC

cold air intake
2.5" exhaust
aussie downpipe
TVSV disable & bleed valve @ boost @ 9-10 psi / (0.68 bar)


Image


272.4 bhp @ 6502 rpm (203.1 KW)
252.2 lb/ft @ 4940 rpm (341.8 Nm)

Fuel: Waitrose Super Unleaded


* note the RC has a 7600 rpm rev limter :shock:
Author:  Diceman [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:23 am ]
Post subject: 
Hi Gary,
IIRC the way that dynos work means that if they have the wrong gearing ratio plugged in (and didn't hook up an RPM sensor) the rpms could well be slightly off. Should not however effect the readings for power. I believe that AMD use a inertia wheel type dyno "Dimtech" is the manufacturer. Do a google.

Nice figures from you two :-) To be fair I would expect the pair of you to get good figures as both cars are well cared for with some selective mods. Gary - any playing with cam timing when the engine was rebuilt?

How were everyone elses results on the re-run day?
Author:  Gidz [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
Some great number there Nigel 8) did they adjust your ratios to reflect the C-One gear set, or run it in 5th? I think stock 4th gear is normally used for power runs as it's closest to 1:1 so the adjsutment creates the least distortion??

I'm planing a few tweeks on mine over the winter & will hopefully be back to Surrey Rolling Road for a power run in the spring (OC often go there around that time). Better to stick with one Rolling Road as there can be a bit of variance between any two sets of rollers.

You planing to run the 205 in TSS next year? or will the project car be finished??
Author:  Gary ST165 [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
Diceman wrote:
Hi Gary,
IIRC the way that dynos work means that if they have the wrong gearing ratio plugged in (and didn't hook up an RPM sensor) the rpms could well be slightly off. Should not however effect the readings for power. I believe that AMD use a inertia wheel type dyno "Dimtech" is the manufacturer. Do a google.



The operator did make some similar comment ^^^ about RPM and gear ratios, however i'm sure he said they did hook up the RPM sensor and measured the actual engine RPM.


Diceman wrote:
Nice figures from you two :-) To be fair I would expect the pair of you to get good figures as both cars are well cared for with some selective mods. Gary - any playing with cam timing when the engine was rebuilt?


stock cam /valve timing. no exhaust retard etc


Diceman wrote:
How were everyone elses results on the re-run day?


Brendan's Carlos Sainz made 363.3 bhp on a SW20 rev1 MINE's ecu, stok fuel pump, 430cc injectors and S148 hybrid:

Brendan wrote:
Well Sunday the 6th December saw the CS at AmD for a RR day, she made 374.5BHP!!! with a couple of other dubious runs the roller were blamed to be inaccurate :( Long story short went back yesterday (8th December 2009) and had her put on again.

Sundays figure was produced with a clod CC, Tuesdays was with a warmish one, BUT the last run was done on Ash's car which was a known output and the RR gave the same result so it's accurate which is amazing when you consider the CS managed 363.6BHP!!!!

Considering that is WITH the AFM and the stock 440injectors, that just goes to show how capable the standard parts are, and given the strong smell of shells finest V-Power coming from the exhaust, I doubt it was running lean either.......

That was all at 1.1bar. I knew she felt quick, but damn I didn't for one second think that quick!!

Sundays RR print out:
374.5BHP
298.2bl/ft @ 5447rpm

Image

Today's RR print out:
363.6BHP
286.3lb/ft @ 6221

Image

Video of today's run:
Image
Author:  Diceman [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:57 pm ]
Post subject: 
363BHP from 440cc injectors!!
Sorry but that sounds very fishy! Not sure if they were actually measuring transmission loss on the run down or not? If they were I would suspect he has a dragging clutch. If not then they need to get someone to look at the rollers or learn how to use it!

At standard fuel pressure the 440cc injectors run out of juice at around 290bhp.
Author:  two_OH_five [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:27 pm ]
Post subject: 
Nigels result is within the bounds of believability

No disrespect to Brendan, never met him but I'm sure he's a nice guy and all that

His results are not believable however. They seem to be at odds with physics for a start

Gotta go, breakfast has just touched down at Bournemouth Internaional....
Image
Author:  Gary ST165 [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 7:35 pm ]
Post subject: 
gidz_master_flash wrote:
Some great number there Nigel 8) did they adjust your ratios to reflect the C-One gear set, or run it in 5th? I think stock 4th gear is normally used for power runs as it's closest to 1:1 so the adjsutment creates the least distortion??



Looking at the sub section Vehicle data > Ratio gear ....

each car had its own unique Ratio-Gear figure

I can only assume that gearing and tyre size / rolling radius was taken in to account as it features on the front & back of my print out.

Ratio-Gear Examples:

Muddy Waters = 2.65 -4 (ST205 c-one gear set)

Gary = 2.04 -4 (ST185RC E151F & 205/50/ 16" tyres)
Brendan = 1.98 -4 (ST185CS E151F & 17" rims)

Image


Brad =2.14 -4 (ST205 E154F & unknown rims)
Derren = 2.02 -4 (ST205 E154F & unknown rims)

Image






however all things considered and having witnessed the run on Brendans car immediately after mine, i still can't believe that stock 430cc injectors and 19 year old fuel pump will deliver 363 bhp worth of fuel.

Its also a right pain in the *bleep* that the AMD dyno doesn't do AFR / DET / BOOST pressure. I was informed they road map there cars, and do not use the dyno, only for "power" runs >>>> Hence i doubt i will ever go back there again, even for comparison purposes post Link ECU install. Plus its miles away from me, when Janspeed has a 4WD dyno at the end of my road :lol: or use the tried and tested facilities at Surrey Rolling Road
Author:  Diceman [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 8:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
jeeesus,
they have a dyno & road map? If they road map they must have a wideband and det cans & boost guage but I guess they can't get the dyno to log it.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC + 1 hour
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/