Went to the dyno with the GT42r today...

[gretchen/jason]

Man nice power wish when i did my stroker i got those numbers i did a f54 flat top pistons N47 head 3,000 rpm custom stall converter 3 speed auto 4.11 rear gears 4 barrle holley headers etc etc larger valves port polish and only got 230 to the crank made me want a turbo so bad but i opted for the V8 .

 

Very very nice job man lots of props to ya .

 

Jason

[speeder]

Tim, I'm following with interest your EGT numbers - I've tried everything I know to get mine below 1650F (20 psi on my 3.0l L, making at least 125 hp less than you make ) without success. Although I don't have a lot of time/miles on my junk, It has also held up well, but does freak me out.

 

In my experience, and backed up by conversations with Scottie, the Buick guys report lower EGTs (1500 and lower) due to the long distance ( a couple feet!) most have between the exhaust ports and the EGT probe. Your dyno guy may have been talking about aftermarket exhausts for the Buicks that get this distance smaller.

 

My manifold, an old BAE log style unit that has been extensively reworked and ported, has the probe mounted really close -about 6 inches away from the #5 exhaust valve. Looks as if your SFP unit has the turbo inlet fairly close, too.

[TimZ]

Tim, I'm following with interest your EGT numbers - I've tried everything I know to get mine below 1650F (20 psi on my 3.0l L, making at least 125 hp less than you make ) without success. Although I don't have a lot of time/miles on my junk, It has also held up well, but does freak me out.

 

In my experience, and backed up by conversations with Scottie, the Buick guys report lower EGTs (1500 and lower) due to the long distance ( a couple feet!) most have between the exhaust ports and the EGT probe. Your dyno guy may have been talking about aftermarket exhausts for the Buicks that get this distance smaller.

 

My manifold, an old BAE log style unit that has been extensively reworked and ported, has the probe mounted really close -about 6 inches away from the #5 exhaust valve. Looks as if your SFP unit has the turbo inlet fairly close, too.

 

 

I tried several different things to try to get the temps down - I advanced the timing as far as I dared, which had helped on my last setup, but I was now several degrees more advanced than before, and didn't feel like it was a good idea to go any further. I tried retarding the cam timing - no help. I ran the mixure down to 10.5:1, and that seemed to be the most effective, but I was still running at ~1650.

 

I thought I remembered the conversation with the dyno operator being about Grand Nationals, but I could be mistaken. The overall gist was that it wasn't as uncommon as I had thought for high effort turbo engines to run EGTs that high, and maybe even a little higher.

 

I think I had mentioned this before, but since this is a new EGT with its probe in a new location which is more directly in the flow path, it's entirely possible that my old setup was also running this hot and it just didn't show up on the old gauge.

[speeder]

I tried several different things to try to get the temps down

 

I tried all of the same, and even installed a different gauge, hoping the reading was wrong. It wasn't. I got the same results - The fat mixture helped the most but isn't the solution. Like you, I'm beginning to think that a "solution" isn't coming (or needed).

[Scottie-GNZ]

I used to tune for 1500-1550*. But Rick is correct in saying that the GNs with Stage II engines can and do run hotter.

[240Z Turbo]

Nice job Tim!

I rode in the car a few weeks back and it definitely packs a punch.

 

BTW, I still hold the torque record 509ft-lbs@wheels:)

[TimZ]

Nice job Tim!

I rode in the car a few weeks back and it definitely packs a punch.

 

BTW, I still hold the torque record 509ft-lbs@wheels:)

Thanks, James!

 

Yeah, mine always seems to make about the same ~480 lb-ft. I've just kept trying to move the peak higher and higher...

[Clifton]

Your torque curve is incredibly flat. Doesn't seem to drop much at all, must of done alot of head work. Lag doesn't seem too bad either for the size of the hotside, I thought it would come on about 500 rpm later. So when are you going to crank the boost up and see what that turbo can do ?

[speeder]

I don't go there very much, but check out what they're saying on the "other" board:

 

http://www.zcar.com/forums/read.php?f=4&i=334786&t=334786

 

Some people don't have a clue.

[TimZ]

I saw it - the implications that I was lying and the second guessing did get under my skin a bit, but I decided not to respond over there, as no good could come from it, and it would probably make me even more pissed.

 

I did see a few hybridZ'ers come to my defense - thanks guys.

[jgkurz]

I saw it - the implications that I was lying and the second guessing did get under my skin a bit, but I decided not to respond over there, as no good could come from it, and it would probably make me even more pissed.

 

I did see a few hybridZ'ers come to my defense - thanks guys.

 

I just read the zcar.com post. If people would spend a little time researching why Tim's car makes the power it does they might have a different response. It's more than an L28 with a GT42R... way more. It's my opinion that no matter what proof, data, video or pictures TimZ or even JeffP provide, some people will always be skeptical. Both TimZ's car and JeffP's car make tremendous power but with different approaches. At no point have I seen Tim or Jeff make this a competition or say one dyno is better than the other. It would be different if they did. We just get to see the individual results of their hard work. How cool is that! I think we are lucky they provide the information about their respective setup's. Unfortunately, if I was Tim, I'd question whether I wanted to be as outspoken in the future which would be a loss to everyone.

[RB26powered74zcar]

I just read the zcar.com post. If people would spend a little time researching why Tim's car makes the power it does they might have a different response. It's more than an L28 with a GT42R... way more. It's my opinion that no matter what proof, data, video or pictures TimZ or even JeffP provide, some people will always be skeptical. Both TimZ's car and JeffP's car make tremendous power but with different approaches. At no point have I seen Tim or Jeff make this a competition or say one dyno is better than the other. It would be different if they did. We just get to see the individual results of their hard work. How cool is that! I think we are lucky they provide the information about their respective setup's. Unfortunately, if I was Tim, I'd question whether I wanted to be as outspoken in the future which would be a loss to everyone.

 

 

Well said!!!

[v8dats]

i just read it and was also dissapointed!

thats why i never go there unless someone from here points something out with a link.

[Tony D]

I just read the zcar.com post. If people would spend a little time researching why Tim's car makes the power it does they might have a different response. It's more than an L28 with a GT42R... way more. It's my opinion that no matter what proof, data, video or pictures TimZ or even JeffP provide, some people will always be skeptical. Both TimZ's car and JeffP's car make tremendous power but with different approaches. At no point have I seen Tim or Jeff make this a competition or say one dyno is better than the other. It would be different if they did. We just get to see the individual results of their hard work. How cool is that! I think we are lucky they provide the information about their respective setup's. Unfortunately, if I was Tim, I'd question whether I wanted to be as outspoken in the future which would be a loss to everyone.

 

 

Absolutely, JGK! My comment there was apparently misconstrued as some sort of dig. I was simply trying to say that I wish we could get both Jeff's and Tims cars both on at least 'similar' dynos for a comparo of the performance characteristics. Unfortunately, the geographical separation makes this impossible. The closest resolution I could see was for Jeff to take his car over to where we do out dyno testing for the Bonneville Car (same place John C used for the Rusty Old Datsun) and then we would have as close as an 'apples to apples' comparo of the curve characteristics as possible.

 

I don't know about anyone else, but seeing the two curves on a similar graphing (X-Y Axis Scalars especially) really intrigues me. Taking a curve from a Mustang will produce a different curve, so any comparo of those two would be worthless.

 

Where the curves are on the graph really is irrelevant (on the Y axis, I guess is what I'm saying), the characteristic curve is more important. I know talking with Jeff personally, he is very interested in my thought to run it on a Dynojet just so we can compare stuff for our own purposes. There are decisions we have to make regarding our Bonneville engine, and this kind of run will give us some data to use for that decisionmaking process.

 

It has nothing to do with 'biggest numbers' either... most of the detractors will not make half than power, so what is the point (like Tim said) of even bothering with their commentary. I mean, if EITHER of them wanted to get on the 'A-Hole Horse' and be a lower body part about it, they could easily proclaim their engine makes more power at 2400rpm than XYZ.... Meh! What's the point. It's a learning curve, and we're all learning.

 

Part of learning is curosity, and my curiosity is piqued to really see what the difference is between the curve and numbers Jeff gets on the Mustang compared to the Dynojet. Actually, we have now discussed the possibility of doing the tuning on the Mustang in the AM, and then on the drive back to Jeff's house, making a detour to either Superior or DRS and doing a quick 'strapdown pull sequence' on one of their Dynojets so it's all in the same day with similar barometrics. Curiosity about the dynos as much as the cars power production, really...

 

I hope that clears up my part of that mess.

[Daeron]

Really, it is kind of saddening to me.. I broke my "forum cherry" on Zcar.com years ago, and it helped stimulate me to many different ideas with my car.. but after reading all of that thread, the only thing that will have me going back to the site will be the Z car of the month (or however often it gets updated )

 

It is amazing how much difference there can be through different moderators, and most of all simply antiquated forum software and less organization/classification to the sub-forums (or lack thereof) "over there." In the end, it is just a good argument in favor of the *ever-so-slightly* stronger moderation here. (that is to say, more effective moderation. it is a pat on your back guys, not a dig.)

 

My dad has said that he doesn't like hybridz so much because "they seem to be a bunch of jerks," but I try to explain to him that we get ALOT of "newbie" type posts here and yes, they get consigned to the dustbin. That is simply the price you have to pay to keep the bar higher. MAYBE if the "other place" would adopt Vbulletin software, it might improve... but that would be as much a result of the number of people who stop using it because they are afraid of the change

[jeffp]

I haven't been trying to start a fight on this stuff. I just want my car to run correctly on the Nissan box. I did finally get some good pulls, but hell the car was misfiring from 6K-7K on the dyno and I think it has really cost me some power.

Tony is correct, there are better systems out there, but I like the Nissan box for some reason, hell I don't know, but if I can get that box to work then I will be happy. Bernard the Nissan guru was also working on the box and tuning with me. He was scratching his head as well. I will say one thing though, we did get a good pull @ 15psi on the treet. I was on the rev limiter before I even realized it. We had a methanol injectoin system running on the car and I can tell you, the engine NEVER ran so smoothly period.

I have a driver circuit I have been working on, but it is not completed yet. So I will have my answer later this week as to if the system is going to work or not. Tony is right, the ECU is modified to work, but if these modifications are all that are required then no problem. I will say my power transistor(igniter) is so much better then the stock Nissan part. I really think more Z31 guys have this problem then realize.

So I have run into problems that others have not. For one thing, my engine is still making excellent power to 7K and guess what @ 5K is where all of my problems start, but if you look at the stock z31 power curve, I began to realize I am pushing the box higher then it has ever been pushed. The electronics, drivers specifically, for the injectors are not ideal, and the distributor/coil triggering is not ideal either. That is the problem LOL, all I got to do LOL.

So with all of the dyno time I have done I have found out a few things. My engine runs the best @ 12:1 AFR's 11:1 is to rich.

The 430.00 dollar Innovate wide band is not that good, it reads off somewhat, but it can be used to tune provided you figure out with the dyno graph, where the engine makes the most power.

My car runs very hot on the dyno, no question about it. I got the water temp to 110.0 degrees C one time, very hot. I got the turbo very hot with 11:1 AFR's. I put the pic on my web page under the turbo link.

So I basically ran the piss out of my car, and it does show some. I even turned the stroker to 7500 rpm a few times. so the engine has had a tough way to go again. The power is there no question. I have work to do on the waste gate as well. I tried a 5psi spring in the actuator and that has affected the total boost the turbo can get to. So I have to change that back.

But the big thing is the spark, if I can get that right, no problem. If I cant get it right, then to the EFI system from Lance and that will be the end of it. I can tell you one thing though, if I HAD gone with a stand alone system from the start like the EFI system from Lance this would have been a done deal long ago.

But I have learned some specific things that are very beneficial for me. Trouble spots and the like. But I have also made some significant progress with the Hp the total car can do and stay together.

I just may have to freshen the bottom end again, we will see. #4 is about 6 % down in compression from where it was. I don't like that to much, but I knew it was happening to the car I think, the tell tell signs of strong oil smell when it was hot for one. So who knows, but I know one thing for sure, I will have the management sorted before any further engine work is completed.

Anyway, nice pull, lean out the car and you will get your numbers.

REGARDS: jeffP

[Clifton]

I know this is getting off topic but Jeff, what plug gap are you running at the miss? Also a 5 psi wg spring is REALLY soft for any kind of boost even with a boost controller.

[TimZ]

I haven't been trying to start a fight on this stuff.

...and that is appreciated, Jeff. Exactly the reason I didn't post a response/defense on zcar - I had a strong suspicion that the "peanut gallery" over there was pusing in that direction, and that wasn't the reason for posting my results in the first place. I'm not going there.

 

So with all of the dyno time I have done I have found out a few things. My engine runs the best @ 12:1 AFR's 11:1 is to rich.

The 430.00 dollar Innovate wide band is not that good, it reads off somewhat, but it can be used to tune provided you figure out with the dyno graph, where the engine makes the most power.

 

I noticed Tony posting about this, too. I'm assuming you are using the LM-1? Are you using the analog out as a signal, or just using it standalone. I've found that it's an absolute necessity to buffer the LM-1's output with a differential amp - too much ground noise from the heater circuit without it. My LM-1 correlated very closely with the dyno's WB, and read down to 9.5 AFR with no issues.

 

Also, I appeared that mine was running the best at around 11.5:1 AFR. 12:1 netted essentially the same power, but with increased EGTs.

 

I think I at least alluded to this earlier, but my Manifold Air Temperature was running alot higher than what I have been seeing on the street for a similar pull. It appears that I'm simply not getting enough cooling air to the intercooler on the dyno. I know this was costing me significant power, but I'm not sure how to remedy it without being accused of cheating - my initial thought was to run a water mist on the IC during the pull, to acheive representative air temps.

 

Here's a MAT plot of my next to last dyno pull:

...and here's a comparable run on the street:

 

But the big thing is the spark, if I can get that right, no problem. If I cant get it right, then to the EFI system from Lance and that will be the end of it. I can tell you one thing though, if I HAD gone with a stand alone system from the start like the EFI system from Lance this would have been a done deal long ago.

 

LOL c'mon Jeff - it's NEVER a done deal...

[Tony D]

what plug gap are you running at the miss? Also a 5 psi wg spring is REALLY soft for any kind of boost even with a boost controller.

 

.020 or thereabouts from what I saw.

 

Define "any kind of boost"... the numbers Jeff is making is with boost in double digit numbers that all begin with '1'...

 

17 psi was about the limit on the last set of runs that were complete and clean.

 

You got flow, you don't need Boost. I think Tim's boost level will suprise a lot of people as well, given the numbers he's punching out!

 

Tim, What EFI System are you using, and are those screenshots off the Tuning Utility it comes with?

[TimZ]

.020 or thereabouts from what I saw.

 

Define "any kind of boost"... the numbers Jeff is making is with boost in double digit numbers that all begin with '1'...

 

17 psi was about the limit on the last set of runs that were complete and clean.

 

You got flow, you don't need Boost. I think Tim's boost level will suprise a lot of people as well, given the numbers he's punching out!

 

Tim, What EFI System are you using, and are those screenshots off the Tuning Utility it comes with?

 

It's a TEC3