ozconnection Posted June 10, 2009 Author Share Posted June 10, 2009 (sorry i've been out of contact, heaps busy and in exams atm:evil: catch up soon) No worries, look forward to it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 I dont want to be taken the wrong way - my point was that almost all HP data is qualitative - that is not a bad thing... sorry i probably jumped too much into the science aspect... This kind of data is VERY useful when comparing a known to an unknown (ie "stock" to "modified")... my point was that even dyno figures aren't reliable on the day but they do give you an idea in terms of percentage over how much power you've lost/gained per modification. I'm not bashing this type of aquisition, i spend at least 10 hours a week preparing microscopy slides for a research group which has absolutely not quantitative component at all- that does not mean it is not scientific... engineers love set numbers because they deal with known parameters, when dealing wiht the unknown, often qaulitative data is the best way to go (afterall... if i have a numerical figure by itself and no scale to compare against its pretty darn useless). +1, I was tempted to say something about your uses of qualitative and quantitative, but I couldn't find a way to do it that wasn't sounding dickish Basically, the words simply refer to two types of data: one (qualitative, quality) being experiential, what you see/hear/feel, sense data... Anything a human is naturally ideal to analyze; and the other (quantitative, quantity) is strictly numerical (like Der Kolonel said) Anything Metered or gauged, or ticked off by a machine and then printed out at the end, ripped off, and read by the analyzer. That LAST bit there, where the machine prints out its output, and the number is involved.. thats what made the dyno question so sticky. Honestly, until Klink said it, I would have said a dyno test was a quantitative measurement myself... but once I read what he said I got the feeling I used to get when the teached explained why an answer I SWORE was right, was in fact wrong. Oh, yeah.... that makes more sense. Oops. Regarding jmortensen's comments, and what tonyd had to say about the low end torque availability.. My honda is set up almost exactly like what is being discussed, and I must insist that the thing is a wild little beast to drive. The transmission and diff give it gearing like a fox body GT mustang, and really, the torque curve is almost identical!! A little lower on the chart, but then the weight of the car is so much less that in the end the vehicle speed difference is almost nil. I would LOVE to find someone with a stock 50 HO mustang local to me to run side by side with a bit just to make the comparison. For reiteration, I have an HF CRX which came with a tiny ported, 8V roller rocker head and manifold with runners and ports about the size of a quarter or smaller. (The runners are actually oval shaped; the quarter is an estimate of cross sectional area all told. Theyre smaller than that, but longer, really.) The longblock thats actually in the thing, though, is a 16V sohc solid rocker motor, with much more HP, a much higher redline, and less torque. (about 60hp/98 tq 5500 fuel cut, 5K redline for the 8V, 98 horse/90 tq 6500 redline with 7200 fuel cut for the 16v.) I have the stock EFI hardware and everything, so the tune is still for the HF motor, and the manifold is as well, so i have tiny intake runners dumping inot a large, easy-breathing motor. I obviously need to tune the thing in a bit to make it ideal, but the curve of the machine is still fairly apparent. Unfortunately, I have only my own experiences driving it and shifting gear to gear, over and over, for about 100 miles a night to really give me data on the car, so all I can say is potentially spurious.... but the car ceertainly has a great deal of lacking despite this grunt I enjoy so much. It is very very different from my brother's CRX, which has a high high revviing, ~115 horse VTEC motor in it and has dropped about 200 pounds of weight compared to mine. His is both stupid faster, and even better MPG than mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Fair Enough, this is definately a personal choice to make. For me, I'd turbo the car with a .48 A/R turbine (like I had on my 73!) Full 17psi available at 1700 rpms... Can't be much more torquier than that! But this is 'dark side technology', not mentioned thusfar... LOL 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozconnection Posted June 12, 2009 Author Share Posted June 12, 2009 Fair Enough, this is definately a personal choice to make. For me, I'd turbo the car with a .48 A/R turbine (like I had on my 73!) Full 17psi available at 1700 rpms... Can't be much more torquier than that! But this is 'dark side technology', not mentioned thusfar... LOL Oh yes, reminds me of the time I ran the L20A turbo on my L28...... A mate of mine is going to be running one of those smallish Toyota superchargers on his L26 soon....different method but a similar outcome. I'll let him chime in if he chooses.... That would be icing on the cake. Torque monster! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kolonelklink87 Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Oh yes, reminds me of the time I ran the L20A turbo on my L28...... A mate of mine is going to be running one of those smallish Toyota superchargers on his L26 soon....different method but a similar outcome. I'll let him chime in if he chooses.... That would be icing on the cake. Torque monster! thats me with the l26 lol *hides from scorn* it's still moving slowly due to uni commitments etc... It definately a poor-mans mod but i'm not chasing mega horses and can't afford all the hassle of mod-plating etc on and engine swap(study income sucks). I've got two more exams to go then i get some time off next month where i'm just doing a bit of lab-work. touch wood i can get started on decompressing and putting together the last mount for the SC. (could use some help on the decompression when that comes around:redface:) Actually i'm really looking for an l28 ATM to build for turbo during semester for a bit of fun (maybe put it i the jap ceddy if i ever finish) because i can't pull car apart in between uni and get it back together for work every week. i'll never finish all these damn degrees lol. Also, one last naughty comment on the qual v. quant cocepts... due to sleep deprivation i think i skipped through alot if nonsense but you're definately right about, in the strictest sense, a dyno figure is quantitative when compared to other figures from the same machine under the same conditions... this relates to the accuracy of the machine etc... if you want to take that data away from the context of that machine (ie compare to someone elses results on another machine on a different day) there's no control to let you know if the data is directly comparable, so i wouldn't unless talking about the ratios of power gained compared to control readings (ie compared to stock dyno runs). I guess what i'm trying to say here is when the accerometer spits out a certain readng at stock settings you cant then compare that to the factory dyno read unless you have a factory car that spun a known amount on a factory dyno and the accelerometer data for that car to scale results appropriately... There's too many factors at play here to use newtonian calculations (ie: "z" acceleration = "x"HP in an ideal universe) in my opinion. my own little addendum to the method of the accel. meter would be to log the information: repeat each reading a few times, note the temperature on each day- try to keep it the same (this might mean daytime in winter and night time in summer if it takes that long) do it on the same bit of road each time at operating temp etc. write everything down!!! I'm sure you figured that out already though. science FTW Edited June 13, 2009 by kolonelklink87 to make it better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 Oh yes, reminds me of the time I ran the L20A turbo on my L28...... That's what I did, initially! It got addictive. THEN came the compressor upgrades, injection of water....boost and more boost... Guys don't know what they're missing until they can pump 21psi into an engine at 1700 rpms and hook it up. Even if you DO have to 'short shift' because it's a stock L28 N/A cam...you're well above 100mph by the end of the standard onramp! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noddle Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 That's what I did, initially! It got addictive. THEN came the compressor upgrades, injection of water....boost and more boost... Tony, the next time you go "on the road" you should write up some of this wonderful knowledge you have, so the rest of us save it for later use. Nigel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozconnection Posted June 14, 2009 Author Share Posted June 14, 2009 Tony, the next time you go "on the road" you should write up some of this wonderful knowledge you have, so the rest of us save it for later use. Nigel Great idea.....Tony D and a few others should write down things like that, 'short story' style and it could be posted here on Hybridz as a kind of information archive or something? If anyone wanted to build a particular style of engine or parts combination it could be a good place to start ones research! I'd personally love to read about the evolution of a turbo gasoline L28 to 21 pounds of boost at 1700rpm!! Hell yeah!! Nice one Nigel. Tony? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 I thought that's what I just did... When I put it on the in-ground Clayton Dyno up in LaHabra the dyno operator saw 'turbo' on it, and figured 'lag beast' so he ran it up to 60mph in 3rd gear, and then loaded it. (3.36 Rear Gear, 265-50/14 Rear Tyres, 84 Skyline FS5C71B Tranny) Boost came HARD. Clutch went up in smoke. Dyno operator tried another loading, but it was gone...clutch that is. Guy was all apologetic 'I never saw a turbo that came on that hard before! Sorry about your clutch, get it fixed and you can come back well run it again for free.' At 50mph I would turn 2000 rpms, and being able to just lay on the throttle and scoot past traffic got addictive. When I lunched that last turbo and made the mistake of 'upgrading' to the statesize .63 A/R turbine, the feeling I had gotten used to was gone... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozconnection Posted June 14, 2009 Author Share Posted June 14, 2009 I ran the car with the G Tech again today on the freeway near my place. The days were almost identical, overcast, little to no wind and about 15 degrees celcius. I made 9 runs in total, with various changes to just the Holley and manifold spacer. The spacer is a phenolic unit, both being 1 inch tall, the difference is one is a 4 hole and the other is open. This effectively changes the manifold from a dual plane to a single plane, respectively. The carb received some tuning via my WB02 meter when the changeover was made between the spacers. The change alters the way the manifold pulses effect the airflow through the carby, hence the recalibrations. No other changes were made to my engine tune other than the above mentioned. The best times I got the other day were (with an extra 75kg person) open spacer full throttle; 0-100 km/h = 11.4 seconds 0-400 metres = 18.2 seconds at 126.7 km/h Today (Best overall run 4 hole spacer) full throttle; 0-100 km/h = 10.2 seconds 0-400 metres = 17.4 seconds at 132.0 km/h The best times with the open spacer were full throttle; 0-100km/h = 10.3 seconds 0-400 metres = 17.6 seconds at 132.5 km/h I tried the car running on detent, the best results were (open spacer) 0-100 km/h = 11.7 seconds 0-400 metres = 18.2 seconds at 129.1 km/h Allowing for the fact that on the first day I was carrying another person, there are performance improvements here. Detent was surprising, almost matching the full throttle and revs run. I should've tried holding the gears to 6000rpm just for fun to see the trend. Would I be quicker and/or faster? Maybe next weekend I might give that a go. The G-Tech was resonsible for measuring the results, better than a hand held stopwatch and some markers on the road to indicate 400 metres in my opinion. A great little tool and what a great way to spend a Sunday afternoon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 The perfect G-Tech Testing Location: Google Earth... 33 48.957'N 117 14.377'W Flat, roadway is at least 2M below grade on both sides so no wind messing with you. Behind a sound wall to the east, and a railroad grade to the west. No other openings to roadway except on either end as seen from the ariel view, both visible from the....well look closely and you will know where both ends are visible from! Using the ruler tool, you can figure the rest out. And you pass a gas station that has 100 octane at the pump getting there! WOO HOO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozconnection Posted June 15, 2009 Author Share Posted June 15, 2009 The perfect G-Tech Testing Location: Google Earth... 33 48.957'N 117 14.377'W Flat, roadway is at least 2M below grade on both sides so no wind messing with you. Behind a sound wall to the east, and a railroad grade to the west. No other openings to roadway except on either end as seen from the ariel view, both visible from the....well look closely and you will know where both ends are visible from! Using the ruler tool, you can figure the rest out. And you pass a gas station that has 100 octane at the pump getting there! WOO HOO! My Google doesn't resolve the 'rice fields' in the middle of China somewhere between Zhengzhou and Shanghai too well at all. Mate, come to Australia...and the copper that pulls you over can at least tell you you're going waaaaaay too fast....in English! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 Did I give the wrong Coordinates? Crap! Standby... 33 48.946N 117 14.351W The fields near Hong Kong and Macau I was in were at 22 42.388N x 113 38.987E METHINKS: Ye entered "E" when ye shoulda entered "W"... Which would, strangely enough, land you nearby the area you mentioned. I was staying at 31 12.274N x 121 23.899E (Grand Mercure Hongqiao) earlier last month! I've been out for close to 2 months, and if I could get finished here at 10 44.352N x 106 56.904E and head back to Muddy Murphy's in Singapore for a couple of days before one more week. Just one more week, and then it's homebound, and 16.5 hours on a plane to sleep sleep sleep! But use "W" not "E"... I'm still puzzled why I got two different numbers for the same spot, though... Look again. It's there. It's better than the rice fields! LOL It's obvious what goes on there, too! G-Tech Testing. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozconnection Posted June 17, 2009 Author Share Posted June 17, 2009 33.48.946N 117 14.351W still lands me in rice fields WTF! 22 42.388 113 38.987 gets me to what looks like an airstrip leading into the drink, I think I can make out a car near the entrance...IS that YOU Tony? 10 44.352 106 56.904 gives me some residential area near Long Thanh in Vietnam!? Lovely! Now check out 33 45'54.58S 150 55'34.05E, that's the Cedric in the driveway! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kolonelklink87 Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 sorry guys... couldnt resist.... 50.813680N, 2.474818W if i've given the right directions you should know fairly immediately:flamedevi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalium99 Posted July 30, 2009 Share Posted July 30, 2009 ozconnection, I have a late model E88 head which appears to have the same combustion chamber as your Y70 head. Hmm, I know it has smaller valves but didn't measure the intake ports to see if they are as small as the Y70. I wonder if they are? Also I imagine the 05L head would also be small in port size like the Y70 ? Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kolonelklink87 Posted July 31, 2009 Share Posted July 31, 2009 ozconnection, I have a late model E88 head which appears to have the same combustion chamber as your Y70 head. Hmm, I know it has smaller valves but didn't measure the intake ports to see if they are as small as the Y70. I wonder if they are? Also I imagine the 05L head would also be small in port size like the Y70 ? Cheers :eek:Pictures? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozconnection Posted July 31, 2009 Author Share Posted July 31, 2009 ozconnection, I have a late model E88 head which appears to have the same combustion chamber as your Y70 head. Hmm, I know it has smaller valves but didn't measure the intake ports to see if they are as small as the Y70. I wonder if they are? Also I imagine the 05L head would also be small in port size like the Y70 ? Cheers The late model Aussie E88 head was found on the R30 Skyline L24E engine. I had one of these on my L28 for a while. The chambers are very similar to the Y70 head but larger. The intakes are 42mm's and the exhausts are 35mm's. The intake ports measure 34mm's in diameter. The E88 head is very similar to the Aussie N47 L24E head. The N47 and Y70 heads have round exhaust ports with liners. The O5L head ( I have one of these too) has 28mm intake ports, smaller than the 30mm Y70 ones. The O5L has square exhaust ports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalium99 Posted July 31, 2009 Share Posted July 31, 2009 :eek:Pictures? I wish I had pics. I have seen some floating around before though. They seem to be a good head. I think 40cc combustion chamber IIRC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalium99 Posted July 31, 2009 Share Posted July 31, 2009 The late model Aussie E88 head was found on the R30 Skyline L24E engine. I had one of these on my L28 for a while. How come you took it off out of interest? I bought a complete motor and went to do up the head (N42) and found out that it was too badly corroded. Needed a head badly so just pulled the first one I saw. Was quite suprised that it turned out to be something like a small chambered P90 of sorts! The chambers are very similar to the Y70 head but larger. The intakes are 42mm's and the exhausts are 35mm's. The intake ports measure 34mm's in diameter. The E88 head is very similar to the Aussie N47 L24E head. The N47 and Y70 heads have round exhaust ports with liners. The O5L head ( I have one of these too) has 28mm intake ports, smaller than the 30mm Y70 ones. The O5L has square exhaust ports. Tiny intake ports on those then! If anyone wants to try out one of those bad boys my mate has an 05L for sale here in Australia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.