Mitsubishi 3000GT & Dodge Stealth Forum banner

Dyno Chart Collection Thread, Take Two

101K views 117 replies 29 participants last post by  StarWolfQTP 
#1 · (Edited)
First and foremost, please go to this thread and read at least the first post so you understand this thread that much more.

let's make a collection of Dyno charts from various turbo setups - 3000GT/Stealth International Message Center

As many know, that thread is a great resource for members of this forum, but it hasn’t been updated in some time. I’ve asked for permission, and been given by chris (aka mellon), to take over his project, update it and keep it going. I’m very happy for this to happen. I’ve used his thread numerous times, and I hope others continue to benefit from this project. I will not be changing how the info is presented, or anything like that. My goal is to simply continue from where the last thread was updated, and to keep this project going, using mellon’s original criteria.

I’ve spent many hours looking through the previous thread for all the info that was posted but not updated. I believe I have caught it all and updated it accordingly. All categories have new info in them, except for the 3000 to 6500 rpm acceleration comparison.

Finally, this project relies on you. Please contribute information to this project. It only helps to better the 3S community. The rules/criteria for each category are clearly presented in the first post of the previous thread. Please read them so your data can become a useful part of this project. But please be aware, not all dyno charts are posted to the project. The idea is to show the best that each setup (ie turbo) is capable of producing. Also, I do not have time to take every dyno chart that was ever was or ever will be posted on 3si, and compile it into the project here. Please post your dyno chart to this thread if you would like it included. This goes for the other categories as well. Please post it to this thread for it to be included. It may take me a few days to get it into the project and update everything, but it will be included. If it is not posted to this thread, there is no guarantee of that. So without further ado, the data:

DYNO CHARTS








SPOOL CHART




ACCELERATION CHART




ESTIMATED AWHP CHART



if the images aren't of the latest update, then press shift + your browser's refresh button to force the browser to get the new images instead of using the cached images from your earlier visit.
 
See less See more
6
#37 ·
ok, so this is something i've been meaning to do for a while with the 3sx car, but i haven't had the time to log on much lately. and with DR doing what he just did, it motivated me to do this.

so having just realized that the two fastest cars weren't on the "hp estimate" chart, i've decided to do a little something about it. it seems neither really has a 100% accurate weight for their car for the exact setup they ran, but each has a fairly close estimate. I won't add it to the chart, but i'll put the numbers here in this post.

3SX, 159.53, 3050 lbs (estimated in the original thread), the "estimated awhp" would be 913. i'm not sure if this is before or after their 995 awhp dyno. i tried to go back and look, but they were doing a lot of dyno's at the time with varying 9xx numbers, but the 995 is in Chris's sig. if someone wants to 100% clarify this info, i'll update this post.

DR, 166.79, 2920 lbs (maybe add a couple pounds, from original thread), the "estimated awhp" would be 1005. this was a couple weeks after his 955 awhp dyno.

so like i said, i won't add these to the chart on the front page because the weights are *somewhat* in question and it wouldn't be fair to those on the chart who did weigh them, but i felt that the numbers should be made known so that everyone can see how the cars compare when put to the same criteria, which is the point behind the chart in the first place.
 
#38 ·
11.65@135.76mph, 3780 race weight.

What does that come out to be for estimated hp?
 
#39 ·
is this a trap and weight that could be added to the chart? as in the car was weighed with the same setup that trap was run with? or is it an estimated weight or something else? is this your car? what setup?

at any rate, the number would be 701.
 
#42 ·
#44 ·
first page updated. niterydr's estimated hp added, lva3kgt chart added.

lva3kgt, being fwd it's a significantly different setup than the other dr500 chart on there, being awd. therefore, both charts go on, with the note of your's being fwd :)

thanks guys!
 
#45 ·
Very cool, thanks!
 
#46 ·
Copied from my E85 thread.

Ok, most would not call E85 "pump gas". While is is available at many gas stations at the pump and normal cars (flex fuel) use it it's really not "pump gas".
But makes for a funny thread title.

It was finally time for me to test out E85. Been wanting to for a long time, before I started building my DD. For those unfamiliar with it, it's about 105 octane but acts better than C16. It's burn characteristics are great and it cools the charge. Makes more power than race gas all for cheaper than 93 octane. Well, you do run about 30% more E85 then Gas, but when compared to race gas it's the hands down winner both in performance and cost.

I installed a dual pump dual feed system a few weeks ago. And today...I found it it does even more than expected.

I did base runs on the tune it was siting at at wastegate pressure/boost controller off, 14psi.

Then dumped the VP110 and put in the E85. NO timing changes were made at this point, All that was done was retuning the fuel map to hit the same AFR. You will see the AFR on the VP110 run matches the E85 run. The increae floored me.



Then I slowly turned up the boost until I hit the 24psi/625AWHP area that I hit a wall with on the VP110. Again TQ and HP were up. But funny thing, the HP wall disappeared. I kept upping the boost and unlike the VP110 that stopped at 625, It just kept going. 644AWHP, 660AWHP, 676AWHP.

Then I set it to 30psi. Held on. And Went.

707AWHP 620AWTQ. Out of Stock Heads and Cams.
the run was quiet but we are getting to that 30psi high HP area where heads start to lift so I ended he session there. I am happy with 707AWHP.

As known, E85 cools very well. With VP110 the coolant was getting to 207F at the end of 14psi runs. With E85 I could run 600+AWHP runs back to back and she never broke 193F, and next run would dip right back to 180F without a long cool down.

Car showed the extra power peak and the Gobs of extra power under the curve on the street. As many have mention in many articles, it seems to run smoother. The Pull under power is smoother. And it smells sweet while running.

Corn Kicks Ass.




-Chris
 
#47 · (Edited)
Might I suggest for the Graphs...and I know it's excessive, maintain separate classes for the modified cars, so the stock one (main one) would have stock heads, stock engine, supporting mods like fuel, injectors are allowed, that way we know what is doing what all turbo something like the below:

Class 1, Stock engine+stock intercoolers+pump gas required, exhaust+intake+piping+fuel systems modification allowed (and this would be the primary graph)

Class 2, Cams/heads modified+stock lower end required, as above supporting systems

Class 3, Modified lower end (list changes) then other mods listed inc 6g74 conversions etc

Class 4, Modified Intercoolers+stock engine required, other supporting mods allowed.

Open Class, Full modified class (includles alternate fuels)

I know it gets a little complicated, but it would allow you to see the effect of changes to various systems without getting over the top (imho).

as I see it CC of engine makes a huge diff to how turbo's can handle, Cams make a huge diff & Intercoolers...the rest of it is much of a muchness (and would create too many threads for mod exhaust etc etc).

the graph showing spool+RPM+powa would be needed, timing slips not so handy since that induces a huge amount of other variables...so no real point to calculating this, of course go ahead if you wish.
 
#48 ·
#49 ·
yeah, sorry, haven't been around as much lately. just got back from a deployment a week ago. so, chris, this last chart you're showing isn't t4, correct? the modlist on the title of the graph, is that the basics that could be added to the chart?

also, i have been trying to keep track of all the advancements made by the big power people as well, and if they have something new to add. but i don't have a ton of time to sift through it all. and i haven't been on here at all in a couple months, so i may have missed some. i try to ask guys if they mind me adding them to this thread, when they post them up, but sometimes i just never get a reply back. i tend to take that as a polite 'no'. but if anyone has any charts, that they think should be here, post 'em here and i'll see what i can do.

as for the graphs, the only thing i'll likely do is somehow split them up because they're getting crowded. something like a fwd and awd chart, something along those lines. similarly to how there is a seperate td04 and non-td04 chart. and, i almost hate saying this publicly because i'm afraid of the flood i might get, but if you want a custom look at the graphs, email me and i'll see what i can do. i have done it once for someone.
 
#50 ·
Correct, this is not T4, it's my personal daily driver, but that chart is now old. Here is the newest one.




Thanks
-Chris
 
#51 ·
updated. also updated post two with a few tidbits from this thread.
 
#52 ·
thanks for picking it up where I left off spfan, looking good
 
#54 ·
from the original thread, his post that made it into the chart:

http://www.3si.org/forum/f35/lets-m...-turbo-setups-294601/index69.html#post3557342

other than that, i don't know. my guess is he was probably knocking. and since it was just a "quick stab" as he said, it's not going to destroy the engine that quickly. but i'm just guessing, maybe you could pm him and see if he'd post the info? i'd be interested too :)
 
#56 ·
This was a long time ago fellas! Umm, yeah, I didnt do this for anything other than to test spool up. I dont think it knocked, but I backed out really early in the RPM range. The car would rarely knock this early on, even if I was pushing boost... mostly it would happen around 5500rpm IIRC. But I definitely wouldnt have made full passes at this boost level. From what I recall it was running really rich on TPS/MAP enrichment too, so Im sure I was dumping in tons of fuel... my Maft Pro tune wasnt the best. It was really just a lets do this and hope for the best type of thing, dont try it at home. lol.

Rob
 
#57 ·
 
#58 · (Edited)
hey, thanks man. i wasn't trying to be an ass in the other thread, just didn't want to clutter it up, since the topic really deals with this thread. anyway...

i think what mellon was trying to say, is that there's no set way to make it 100% accurate for every vehicle, since a lot of people have aftermarket wheels and tires, and even changing gearing around now. essentially, the math would have to be done individually for every person that submits a chart in mph. and my main concern with the tire circumference, is where do you take the measurement. just use the rim diameter and the tire width/aspect ratio and get it from there and trust it's 100% accurate, or require the person to actually measure the tire. and then, where do you measure it? to the side, or to the bottom since there is some deflection there and that's the point where it actually contacts the road. and if you don't have each individual person measuring it, how much do you take off for that deflection? it would depend on the tire sizes and how much it's inflated. and is it the same static as when it's moving? surely centrifugal force at 100+ mph would have some effect. anyway, you see what i'm getting at.

at any rate, did you put the rpms on that chart? i ask because i've seen it before but didn't notice the rpms, if they were on there. pretty nifty. but because of how the excel spreadsheet is setup, i would need the power numbers at 500 rpm increments, starting at 3000 rpm. or wherever the dyno pull starts. so the power at 3000, 3500, 4000, 4500, etc.

edit: i just measured my own tires on my car, and for a left/right i get a diameter of 25 inches. for up/down i get 24.25 inches. using the numbers on Stealth 316 - Gear Ratios that gives a difference of 200 rpm at 7000 rpm, depending on which number i used. just for reference.

edit2: and just doing the math on my 245/45/17 tires, they should be 25.68 inches in diameter. so maybe a 300 rpm difference between 25.68 and 24.25.
 
#59 ·
anyone else got something on this? i was actually hoping to have a little bit of a discussion. of course, anyone can go ahead and post any dyno chart they want to this thread, for archive-esk sake or whatever. i would like to incorporate mph-derived dynos somehow, but some kind of understanding/agreement/consensus should happen first.
 
#61 ·
Another thing to consider is that not all dynos have the same rpm pickup methods and some can be quite off if not calibrated correctly. Are you looking at converting the current rpm charts to mph? I guess I am not understanding the question.
 
#62 ·
very cool, thanks :)

Another thing to consider is that not all dynos have the same rpm pickup methods and some can be quite off if not calibrated correctly. Are you looking at converting the current rpm charts to mph? I guess I am not understanding the question.
that is true, that different measuring equipement may read slightly different, even the same manufacturer and such, as long as they're in tolerances and all. but that is just something that is fully out of our control here. i think that's just one of those things that must be taken on faith that it's done correctly, for the terms of this project anyway.

no, not looking to convert from rpm to mph, the opposite actually. i'm actually trying to encourage talk about adding the dyno charts that are plotted on mph instead of rpm on the x-axis. there are some very high hp cars that have been dyno'd, but the graph used mph instead of rpm on the x-axis, for whatever reason. the current "rule" on this project, as originated by mellon, is those charts as a whole cannot be put on the same graph as the rpm charts, because there are possibly too many variables to accurately compute it. now, if 3si as a whole wishes to change that rule, possibly adding stipulations to the rule, or something like that, i'm not opposed to converting them to rpm and putting them on there. or maybe, i just had an idea and thinking outloud, just make a seperate chart for them. one with mph on the x-axis instead, and just put those charts all together. just a thought.
 
#63 ·
Since overall tire size will change MPH in gear at rpm I don't think it can be taken for granted 100% that you can convert a MPH graph to RPM.

That said, how far off would it be?

-Chris
 
#64 ·
Radials have almost no growth. 26" slicks can grow 1-2 inches or possibly more. The narrower rim you have for your slick width, the more growth!

FWD cars can usually measure slick growth during Burnouts if they do a 4th gear burnout. Would be pretty hard to measure at the top end...or a real fancy camera.
 
#66 ·
right, this is once concern i have as well. the only way to accurately get it, is to have the person actually measure their tire with a tape measure or something. and then that raises the question, use distance to the side or up, or to the bottom of the tire, since it obviously squishes the tire at the bottom due to weight. and does it elongate at all during a pull? i kinda touched on this a couple posts ago using my own tires as a reference, and from my math, depending on where you measured from, it could be off by 200-300 rpm.
 
#67 ·
Is there any way I could get a graph of the lower ranges? Going down to 2000 RPM and say 100 HP? I know not all people start runs that low, but some do. I'm trying to work on the low end with my car and would like to get an idea of where others are at. I guess I would only need it for the TD04 cars, I'm not worried about the big turbo cars.

Or would it be possible to get the Excel file?
 
#69 ·
the excel file i have starts at 3000 rpm, no less. and 200 hp was chosen as a decent number to start the hp graphs at. so the only way to get that info would be to go back and find the original dyno charts, and see where they started at. and incidentally, if you do, please pm/email/post to me the charts, as it's something i'd like to be able to add to one of the posts right after the first one, a link to the original graphs that are on these charts.
 
#68 ·
We always start our pulls at 35mph.

-Chris
 
#70 · (Edited)
I don't think I'm going to go through the trouble of putting them in Excel. I tired with 1 or 2, but it's a TON of work, some graphs are quite poor. MAD props for you and Mellon for dealing with it.

I went through and found a number of graphs (some from this thread) for different turbo's. I'll just post up the numbers for reference. As you can see from the charts on page one, 5 of the 12 TD04 cars are ~200 WHP at 3000 RPM. Surprisingly enough, the 19T's aren't that far off! A healthy motor and a good setup can have it's effects I guess. Most graphs I've found start just under 2500 RPM, so that's as low as I'm going.

wsrtt's 9B car ~120@2500 200@3000
DR500 car ~130@2500 195 @3000
13G car ~110@2500 ~185@3000 (not a great graph, small and hard to read)
13T car ~120@2500 195@3000
DOCH NA ~80@2500 100@3000 (made 190HP, 186TQ, fairly typical for an NA)
Stock LS2 ~147 @ 2500, ~185 @ 3000
Trevor's 14B setup ~110 @ 2500, ~175 @3000 (started at 1900, that's going to help spool up)
oohnoo's 19T's 85@2500 (estimated, graph starts at ~2550) ~148@3000 (DR street cams)
Niterydr's 50 trims ~60@2500, 85@3000 ("272" cams! not down that bad compared to an NA!) :eek:
EVO8 with an FP green ~145 @ 3000 (start of graph)

Looking at all the similar turbo cars, it seems that most gains are going to be made by applying NA tuning theory. The difference in power between the 9B/13G/DR500/13T is negligible.
 
#71 ·
just to show you what i'm talking about, here's a screenshot of the excel file. data below 3000 rpm isn't even put into the file. if it's below 200 hp at 3000 (or more) rpm, it's inputted, but just to help give the graph an accurate shape, that point isn't going to appear on the chart, obviously.

also, if you could give me the links to those charts, that'd be cool. i'll add them to the first page, so others can reference them.

 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top