Installed the Fujita!!
#31
07-17-2007, 12:13 AM
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#32
07-17-2007, 01:16 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (GTA), ON, Canada
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kmuniz78
http://www.f5air.com/images/dyno/sr2205.gif I wonder if this is really true. Who cares. Looks good, sounds good, just buy the damn thing. We all know it's not NoS.
#33
07-20-2007, 01:47 PM
Originally Posted by brown_fv
look at the temperature and condition changes. at the same temp im sure fujita makes less gains than it is advertising.
#35
07-20-2007, 02:20 PM
I don't know if this article will help. but take a look.
The Numbers Game
The numbers game in horsepower readings has been a constant source of irritation for competition engine builders for 30 years. The objective of dyno testing is to compare combination A to combination B. A company who cares about what they are doing will have an absolute barometer (usually mercury), and a valid method of recording air temperature and humidity. When a person says that "an engine dyno cell may lack adequate climate control" it is a reflection that they not understand the issues involved. The differences in the volume of air from one facility to another can result in different cooling and different changes of temperature the engine is consuming through the course of a run. For reference, it currently costs a NASCAR team over $250,000 to create the ability to "climate control" an engine dyno cell.
We know that different dyno's read differently, especially chassis dyno's. Some of the inertia wheel chassis dyno's have the air temp sensor located inside the computer sitting near the dyno which results in very inaccurate air temperatures. Some chassis dyno's are purely inertia type. This means they are dependent upon how quickly the vehicle can accelerate the drum from one speed to another. If the bearings the drum is mounted on change their friction factor, it will change the vehicles ability to accelerate it. The owner of the dyno has no ability to measure that. If the owner wants to create some high numbers all he has to do is tell the software the wheels weighs more than it does, and bingo... you've got higher numbers. Owners of chassis dyno's that use eddy current brakes do not have calibration devices to calibrate the torque the eddy current is absorbing in the range of torque being seen at the wheels. These owners are not provided with any method or explanation how to properly calibrate the dyno for the torque range they are using.
Because engines respond to inlet air temp, barometric pressure, and humidity it is necessary to record those values and with normally aspirated engines apply a correction factor in an attempt to create a level playing field. But the validity of using a horsepower correction factor with a positive pressure inlet engine (as in supercharged or turbo charged) is a debatable issue.
The most competitive form of motorsports in the world is NHRA Pro Stock. It drives the engine builders crazy that they get different power readings depending on the time of the year. And we really can't be concerned about comparing the actual numbers produced at differing facilities on different days because of all the variables that vary from car to car such as internal friction, state of tune, fuel, and on and on. In fact, seldom will an engine or car produce the same results in January, April, August, or November.
So readers please do not get caught up in the numbers game. Look at the repeatability of the data and ask the supplier of the data for the information that is important so you are able compare the differences between combination A and combination B. Because of all the issues that affect the final numbers we must only be concerned with the relative difference between combination A and combination B.
Variables:
Dyno: wheel slippage & condition of bearings on inertia dynos; load factor on fixed load dynos; calibration & correction factors
Car: how was it broken in? how many hours are on the engine? what are the leak-down & compression numbers? hardware and software modifications & rotational mass differences?
Fuel: octane and additives can vary from location to location, temperature
Atmospheric conditions: temperature, humidity, barometric pressure
Cooling for adequate heat exchange
Inlet air temperature
Water temperature
Oil temperature, viscosity, and capacity (same for the gearbox)
Wind resistance, ram air effect, and inside the bonnet cooling effect (heat soak); not possible on all but the most sophisticated dynos
__________________________________________________ ____________________________
Truth in Testing
Dynamometers and flow benches are great diagnostic and testing tools. In essence, they are scales for measuring performance. Just be sure there’s not a thumb on the scale.
By C.J. Baker
The term “dyno tested” is used a lot these days, and most people tend to accept dyno results as absolute truth. Unfortunately, dyno results are no better than the testing method used to get the results. In other words, unscrupulous operators can make the results come out to be almost anything they want. It all comes down to the testing method and the ethics of those doing the testing. Let’s look at a quick example. A vehicle can be placed on a chassis dyno and accelerated to speed. Let’s say this speed is 60 MPH. At this point the vehicle’s engine could be switched off and a dyno reading taken. It would show a power reading even though the engine is no longer running! Why? The inertia of the rollers and the spinning tires would provide a reading.
The above example might seem far-fetched, but in truth the inertia effect of any dyno, be it a chassis dyno or an engine dyno can contribute to a flash reading that is higher than what the test vehicle or test engine could sustain under an extended steady-state load. This is a very common method of “cheating” a dyno test. Of course, the results of such a test are meaningless, but the operator can say, “The dyno showed a reading of such-and-such.”
At Gale Banks Engineering, we’re sticklers for testing using proper scientific testing methods. That means testing under controlled and monitored conditions, elimination of outside variables, and sustainable results. Dedication to such testing begins with the test equipment. All Banks test fixtures have the capacity for sustained load operation. All test equipment is calibrated before testing begins, and every test is fully instrumented with the results correlated to standard conditions. It’s the only way to compare apples to apples – to get honest results to reveal if real progress is being made.
We have seen some dyno facilities that simply don’t replicate real world conditions. For example, an engine dyno cell may lack adequate climate control. In such cases, the cell gains temperature during testing, this in turn changes the intake air temperature. Worse still are dynos that don’t have adequate engine cooling water, and more importantly, adequate dyno water-cooling facilities. A water-brake engine dyno converts engine power into heat in the absorbing unit. If the water to the absorbing unit becomes progressively warmer, the water will not absorb as much heat as if it was cool. Hence, the dyno readings would change. At Banks, the dyno cells have high capacity environmental facilities and massive water tanks and heat exchangers for engine and dyno operation at a constant temperature. Similar heat problems occur on chassis dyno’s if the rollers and the vehicle tires get hot. It is essential to cool both with an adequate supply of cool air. It is also necessary to move air thru the vehicle’s radiator, and intercooler if so equipped, at a rate consistent with the roller speed to simulate actual road conditions. All of these things are done on Banks' chassis dyno. Assuring consistent testing conditions is the responsibility of the dyno operator. It can also be a manipulation factor for an unethical dyno tester.
As important as temperature is to the test facility, it is even more important to the engine or vehicle being tested. Simply checking oil temperature and water temperature isn’t nearly enough. An engine needs to heat soak to the same level before each test. For example, if an engine is initially warmed up and then tested, and then allowed to sit for ten minutes before the next test, the block may have gained 30º F. due to heat soak. That change in temperature will change the internal dimensions and clearances of the engine. The second test cannot then be compared to the first test. The same thing applies to the tires and rollers on a chassis dyno.
The same rigorous standards are applied to flowbench testing. The equipment is checked, temperature and relative humidity measured, and components are flowed under as realistic conditions as possible. What does that mean? Let’s consider flow testing a muffler. For realistic results, the muffler must be flowed with the appropriate exhaust pipe and tailpipe in place. Any comparison to other mufflers must be done with similar inlet and outlet pipes in place. Doing such tests any other way would be to "fudge" the results.
In conclusion, testing of any kind, be it on a dyno, a flowbench, or even a road test, the results are only as good as the testing method, and more importantly, the ethics of the tester. False or inflated claims, however, have a way a coming around to bite the ones who foster them on their unsuspecting customers. In the end, if the products don’t live up to claims that are made for them, the word gets around. At Banks, we’re proud of our reputation. We test more than anybody else in the industry to be sure our products are the best. That’s the way it’s always been. That’s the way it will always be.
(Editors note: In spite of all the money Banks has spent on dyno facilities, I doubt if they have the ability to "climate control" their dyno cells. I think Baker means to say the requirement to move an adequate volume of air through a cell so as to cool all the components to a reasonable value is the objective.)
http://www.dmhmotorsports.net/DynoRacing.html
The Numbers Game
The numbers game in horsepower readings has been a constant source of irritation for competition engine builders for 30 years. The objective of dyno testing is to compare combination A to combination B. A company who cares about what they are doing will have an absolute barometer (usually mercury), and a valid method of recording air temperature and humidity. When a person says that "an engine dyno cell may lack adequate climate control" it is a reflection that they not understand the issues involved. The differences in the volume of air from one facility to another can result in different cooling and different changes of temperature the engine is consuming through the course of a run. For reference, it currently costs a NASCAR team over $250,000 to create the ability to "climate control" an engine dyno cell.
We know that different dyno's read differently, especially chassis dyno's. Some of the inertia wheel chassis dyno's have the air temp sensor located inside the computer sitting near the dyno which results in very inaccurate air temperatures. Some chassis dyno's are purely inertia type. This means they are dependent upon how quickly the vehicle can accelerate the drum from one speed to another. If the bearings the drum is mounted on change their friction factor, it will change the vehicles ability to accelerate it. The owner of the dyno has no ability to measure that. If the owner wants to create some high numbers all he has to do is tell the software the wheels weighs more than it does, and bingo... you've got higher numbers. Owners of chassis dyno's that use eddy current brakes do not have calibration devices to calibrate the torque the eddy current is absorbing in the range of torque being seen at the wheels. These owners are not provided with any method or explanation how to properly calibrate the dyno for the torque range they are using.
Because engines respond to inlet air temp, barometric pressure, and humidity it is necessary to record those values and with normally aspirated engines apply a correction factor in an attempt to create a level playing field. But the validity of using a horsepower correction factor with a positive pressure inlet engine (as in supercharged or turbo charged) is a debatable issue.
The most competitive form of motorsports in the world is NHRA Pro Stock. It drives the engine builders crazy that they get different power readings depending on the time of the year. And we really can't be concerned about comparing the actual numbers produced at differing facilities on different days because of all the variables that vary from car to car such as internal friction, state of tune, fuel, and on and on. In fact, seldom will an engine or car produce the same results in January, April, August, or November.
So readers please do not get caught up in the numbers game. Look at the repeatability of the data and ask the supplier of the data for the information that is important so you are able compare the differences between combination A and combination B. Because of all the issues that affect the final numbers we must only be concerned with the relative difference between combination A and combination B.
Variables:
Dyno: wheel slippage & condition of bearings on inertia dynos; load factor on fixed load dynos; calibration & correction factors
Car: how was it broken in? how many hours are on the engine? what are the leak-down & compression numbers? hardware and software modifications & rotational mass differences?
Fuel: octane and additives can vary from location to location, temperature
Atmospheric conditions: temperature, humidity, barometric pressure
Cooling for adequate heat exchange
Inlet air temperature
Water temperature
Oil temperature, viscosity, and capacity (same for the gearbox)
Wind resistance, ram air effect, and inside the bonnet cooling effect (heat soak); not possible on all but the most sophisticated dynos
__________________________________________________ ____________________________
Truth in Testing
Dynamometers and flow benches are great diagnostic and testing tools. In essence, they are scales for measuring performance. Just be sure there’s not a thumb on the scale.
By C.J. Baker
The term “dyno tested” is used a lot these days, and most people tend to accept dyno results as absolute truth. Unfortunately, dyno results are no better than the testing method used to get the results. In other words, unscrupulous operators can make the results come out to be almost anything they want. It all comes down to the testing method and the ethics of those doing the testing. Let’s look at a quick example. A vehicle can be placed on a chassis dyno and accelerated to speed. Let’s say this speed is 60 MPH. At this point the vehicle’s engine could be switched off and a dyno reading taken. It would show a power reading even though the engine is no longer running! Why? The inertia of the rollers and the spinning tires would provide a reading.
The above example might seem far-fetched, but in truth the inertia effect of any dyno, be it a chassis dyno or an engine dyno can contribute to a flash reading that is higher than what the test vehicle or test engine could sustain under an extended steady-state load. This is a very common method of “cheating” a dyno test. Of course, the results of such a test are meaningless, but the operator can say, “The dyno showed a reading of such-and-such.”
At Gale Banks Engineering, we’re sticklers for testing using proper scientific testing methods. That means testing under controlled and monitored conditions, elimination of outside variables, and sustainable results. Dedication to such testing begins with the test equipment. All Banks test fixtures have the capacity for sustained load operation. All test equipment is calibrated before testing begins, and every test is fully instrumented with the results correlated to standard conditions. It’s the only way to compare apples to apples – to get honest results to reveal if real progress is being made.
We have seen some dyno facilities that simply don’t replicate real world conditions. For example, an engine dyno cell may lack adequate climate control. In such cases, the cell gains temperature during testing, this in turn changes the intake air temperature. Worse still are dynos that don’t have adequate engine cooling water, and more importantly, adequate dyno water-cooling facilities. A water-brake engine dyno converts engine power into heat in the absorbing unit. If the water to the absorbing unit becomes progressively warmer, the water will not absorb as much heat as if it was cool. Hence, the dyno readings would change. At Banks, the dyno cells have high capacity environmental facilities and massive water tanks and heat exchangers for engine and dyno operation at a constant temperature. Similar heat problems occur on chassis dyno’s if the rollers and the vehicle tires get hot. It is essential to cool both with an adequate supply of cool air. It is also necessary to move air thru the vehicle’s radiator, and intercooler if so equipped, at a rate consistent with the roller speed to simulate actual road conditions. All of these things are done on Banks' chassis dyno. Assuring consistent testing conditions is the responsibility of the dyno operator. It can also be a manipulation factor for an unethical dyno tester.
As important as temperature is to the test facility, it is even more important to the engine or vehicle being tested. Simply checking oil temperature and water temperature isn’t nearly enough. An engine needs to heat soak to the same level before each test. For example, if an engine is initially warmed up and then tested, and then allowed to sit for ten minutes before the next test, the block may have gained 30º F. due to heat soak. That change in temperature will change the internal dimensions and clearances of the engine. The second test cannot then be compared to the first test. The same thing applies to the tires and rollers on a chassis dyno.
The same rigorous standards are applied to flowbench testing. The equipment is checked, temperature and relative humidity measured, and components are flowed under as realistic conditions as possible. What does that mean? Let’s consider flow testing a muffler. For realistic results, the muffler must be flowed with the appropriate exhaust pipe and tailpipe in place. Any comparison to other mufflers must be done with similar inlet and outlet pipes in place. Doing such tests any other way would be to "fudge" the results.
In conclusion, testing of any kind, be it on a dyno, a flowbench, or even a road test, the results are only as good as the testing method, and more importantly, the ethics of the tester. False or inflated claims, however, have a way a coming around to bite the ones who foster them on their unsuspecting customers. In the end, if the products don’t live up to claims that are made for them, the word gets around. At Banks, we’re proud of our reputation. We test more than anybody else in the industry to be sure our products are the best. That’s the way it’s always been. That’s the way it will always be.
(Editors note: In spite of all the money Banks has spent on dyno facilities, I doubt if they have the ability to "climate control" their dyno cells. I think Baker means to say the requirement to move an adequate volume of air through a cell so as to cool all the components to a reasonable value is the objective.)
http://www.dmhmotorsports.net/DynoRacing.html
#36
07-20-2007, 03:38 PM
You know, now that I'm looking at the torque numbers, they seems to be a little low when compared to others without the intake: https://g35driver.com/forums/v36-general-tech-questions/166403-first-dyno-run-07-a.html Would it be possible to lose that much? I'm wondering if this is the 'o6, claiming the '07. Who kows. Will have to order, then dyno myself I suppose.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
