Yes, there's a Quaife for the G, though apparently Auto Tech may also be coming out with their own version soon. Have a read further up in this thread.

Haltech Platinum is definitely not a cheap option, but it is the closest thing to a full standalone for the G without going with something that requires full custom wiring like a MoTeC. What attracted me to the Haltech the most is the full cam timing control it offers, but also the high resolution control of the fuel and ignition maps. Even on an all-motor setup like mine, it's amazing how much power can be found with proper ECU tuning, so I'm really looking forward to seeing how much power we can find with the Haltech. Plus it gives me the option to grow into a forced induction setup, which is a good possibility over the winter. I was super impressed by the power Scott from Relentless got out of the JWT setup on the BC Racing G35 he and Pete from BC Racing brought out to the Modified Mag Tuner Shootout this year (check out the Sept issue of Modified for the full story). This beast made something like 600whp and 650whp and ran like a top all weekend, so I may look into a similar setup when I'm ready to go big

 

Very nice!

Keep us posted on the power before and after on tuning!

 

The Haltech Platinum is a full standalone as far as fuel, ignition and cam timing goes. I'm not sure if the Motec interfaces with the drive-by-wire, but most VQ EMS systems do not. Cost and liability issues are what I've heard.

I'll be interested to see what kind of improvements you make with a Haltech on your NA G. I have a Haltech on my NA G and the improvements were beyond what I was expecting.

For the record, Jeremy Tibbs at the Performance Factory actually tuned Pete's G.

It's a shame that Scott is permanently banned on Driver and most of the other G & Z sites. A lot of people wondered how he got Pete's car in for a magazine shoot out.

 

So how much doesthis unit cost? I might probably look into using it to get tuned.

 

im late in saying anything about this thread but this is a good write up. A tune will make the whole powerband stronger for sure. My G was night and day after being tuned with a utec. i have headers to put on just wondering if i'm going to be doing turbos soon. O yeah dynapacks do read lower than dynojets. Ask sgp racing in houston texas!

 

you mean the other way around...

 

I think a lot people are under the impression that Dynapacks read HIGHER than Dynojets or other types of dynos because the Church Automotive Dynapack is a widely used dyno in SoCal and it does produce some very generous #'s.

However, the U2Ndyno.com Dynapack we use up here in Toronto reads significantly LOWER than the Dynojets we've tested it against here in town.

Interestingly, the Dynapack at UMS Tuning in Mesa, AZ reads exactly the same as the Mustang dyno at Evolution MotorSports just down the road from UMS in Tempe, AZ. I know this because we tested Cobb Tuning's Mazdaspeed3 on both dynos on the same day and the numbers were identical (within less than 1 HP of each other). FYI, Mustang dynos always read LOWER than Dynojets, which would add further evidence to my thinking that Dynapacks read LOWER than Dynojets in most cases, the Church Dynapack being the exception rather than the rule.

 

^^^ granted, calibration will determine what a dyno’s numbers are… however, it’s inherent of the way a Dynapack works as appose to Dynojet – very simple physics principals dictate this, nothing else.

When you read from the hub you have no rational mass (wheels and tires) to account for – and you have no slip from rollers (yes, it happens – often).

Church’s dyno is not the only one that reads higher… I’ve dyno’s on five different machines – 2 different Dynojets, and three different Dynopacks… all 3 Dynopacks reading higher than the 2 Dynojets.

I’m not unique in this fact… it is a relatively wide occurrence.

If a particular machine is calibrated to read similar to another – then it’s moot. But the info in 2nd paragraph doesn’t vary.

And lets not lose sight of what a dyno is in general... it will never tell one car has more power over another on a different machine... no matter what the calibration is. It's nothing more than a tuning tool and a way to compare hp & trq with others same day, same machine.

 

Agreed that in principle, because the drive wheels are removed from the equation, that a Dynapack should -- all other variables being equal -- report higher power #'s since the power-robbing rotating mass of the wheel and tire aren't in play. However, as we both know, all other variables are not equal (due to the different ways dynos measure power and convert these measurements to an estimated output at the wheels/hubs), so whether or not the wheels are in play is really a moot point.

I also agree that dynos are really only a tool for tuning an engine and results shouldn't be compared from dyno to dyno. However, since we all love to compare things (my ___ is bigger than your ____ !!!), it's inevitable that people start these conversations about "why did your engine make so much more/less power than mine?", when we both know that's not a constructive conversation unless both cars were tested at the same facility.

Moral of the story: stick to testing your car on a single dyno so that you can accurately track it's performance as you add/subtract modifications and alter its state of tune, and don't waste your time comparing your #'s to somebody else's #'s from a different dyno facility.

 

Anyone wanting to understand losses should purchase the following paper from the SAE website:

2002-01-0887

It is a discussion of flywheel hp measurements, roller dyno measurements (on Superflow, Mustang and Dynojet) and then measuring component losses for the transmission, tires, differential, etc.

Key takeaways:

-Tested in inertia mode, all three roller dyno's read within +/-1% of each other.
-Approximately half the losses on roller dynos are wrapped up in the tire/roller interface - half. And the higher the speed the bigger the losses get.
-Variations in strap down tension can introduce additional losses of 5% or more.

There is lots more, but the gist of it is, a Dynapack should read substantially higher than any roller dyno. That some Dynapacks don't is a calibration issue. But hp is hp and physics dictate that a hub dyno should always read higher than a roller dyno.

Gotta love the Dynapack consistency though. We just did a car last night that made 920, 921 and 922 hp on three consecutive runs.

SC

 

Cool, thanks Sean, I'll pick up that SAE paper, for sure.

I do love how consistent the Dynapack is. With other types of dynos, we always make sure to reestablish a baseline when testing on a new day, and we've sometimes seen 5-10whp swings in the baseline #'s from the last time we tested, even though nothing on the car had changed. On the other hand, with the Dynapack we've been using a lot lately, we still re-baseline the car just to be cautious, but we've always come within 1-2 HP from the previous session, even when that was months ago.

 

lets see sum footage or atleast hear sum noise !! good stuff right here man i jus put in the stillen headers, nismo cat back, waitin on HFCs would love to hear this. Im definently into the nismo cams i might b goin that way soon.

 

hmmm... Shawn basically validates what I stated - you thank him and (try to) correct me

 

Dynapacks are known for reading more accuarate(on back to back runs), thats why they are so expensive, because of how good tuning devices they are. They can simulate real world conditions alot better, and that is why a dynojet is so damn cheap! LOL

Dynojets are hard to mess with to skew numbers, because of how little crap they have to mess with.

Dynapacks are the opposite, they are easy to mess with teh numbers, but that is why they are such great dynos, their versatility.

In other words, all dynapacks all read different, and is always good to get a dyno run on a dynojet for comparisons sake to know how those numbers fair. Dynojets are everywhere because of how cheap these dynos are.

 

Impossible to correlate two dyno runs with different brand tires, different inflated identical tires, or different tread wear identical tires. Rear alignment differences can add another 2-3% errors within the wide oem alignment specs.

For dynos to be valid the two runs must have identical tires operating at identical temperatures. You must test durometer hardness of identical tires to adjust for hardness [friction coefficient] differences.

Tires can represent 7-10% of total [15%] frictional losses.