RICH WILD

For a Full list of cars that ran on the day and their figures, see the Northern section.

Out of interest, both myself and Harvey ran yesterday and I obtained exactly the same figures (power and torque) as I did 2 weeks ago there. My graphs for both days are identical. Harvey ran a month previous and again his figures and graphs are almost identical.

On Steve and Christian's boost, Steve's is actually mapped lower now than it was, to the 1.25 he got, I believe, and Christian's had a problem with an inlet pipe I heard, hence his lower boost.

I think, Steve (Sherwen), it MAY be that the rollers were a bit on the low side yesterday, but in a way that's good, at least your figures won't be bullsh1ttingly high. If we look at some other results as well, they seem bob on for what you'd expect, E.g. Scooberators car. Or also it could be a problem with specific cars, like Chris with his diff setting.

I'm sorry we couldn't get boost figures for people as that could have highlighted any problems. My brother for example got less than expected as he was only boosting to 0.7 bar. If he hadn't had his own boost gauge we wouldn't have known.

The full results are there anyway so we can draw better conclusions.

As John says though, we shouldb't take these figures as red as RRs vary so much. They are only good to gauge car against car, the figures themselves mean nothing on their own, really. It's all just a bit of fun.

Cheers Rich

Adam M

cant wait to see what christian gets with a sorted inlet pipe.


am sure the issue of it crushing itself was raised here!

R19KET

Paul,

I would expect to see some losses from the engine dyno figures, like you say, based on ancillaries, exhaust, etc'.

We ran the d/p but not the whole exhaust system. This is common for road engines.

However, I'm actually expecting to see pretty similar figures, since IMO, RR's read high anyway. We'll see.

From what I can tell, I'll use,

1) WL if I'm feeling inadequate.

2) PS if my insurance company needs a power printout.

3) PE if I want a base comparison to my previous figures (and to p*ss Trout, and Mo off

Mark.

Mellow Yellow !

iTrader: (1)

Too true Rich

Mark, you are probably right with regards to Steve S. figures/conservative mapping....

My point is only that when Scott had the car it made 344 bhp and 310 lbs torque at P.E. this was at 1.2 bar

Since then I now have the GEMS and has been mapped on the road at 1.5 bar reducing to 1.3 in top gear....

Now I'm no techie unlike you bods but from a laymans point of view I would then therefore expect it to run greater torque....that's all folks !

Having said all this I have spoken to several other rolling road peeps and they have all said they normally run an RA in full lock mode i.e; 50/50 split AND....wait for this.... in 5th gear !!!!

Now girls, please don't get this confused with my being upset with the figs....it seems in reality that the rolling road was operating correctly when you look at Messrs. Harvey and Rich's figs...

I was merely asking for ADVICE re; how should the car have been run on the rollers...diff...gearing...etc... that's all

As I said....the track is where it all counts....and I have no qualms there girls....

steve McCulloch

Mark

1.5 Bar was always maximum boost - that was actually a bit of overboost as their were evident problems with the BPM downpipe - this was sorted with the replacement of this to a Scoobysport downpipe

To be honest the car has never been mapped to hold more than 1.3 bar of boost in high revs - on previous days it has spiked at 1.4-1.5 bar but always held between 1.2 and 1.3 bar....

So the boost was not an issue at all - it did what it was supposed to. I don’t run silly boost –the operator was pleased that I was achieving the power with ignition advance and fuelling rather than boost – compare this to RichiW’s car were boost was at 1.6 bar dropping off to within 1.4-1.5 bar to get similar power

You are correct in stating that I got 346bhp (not 349bhp) and then ran 315bhp at PE)

However the prime reason for that was actually discovered to be a slipping clutch, (not slipping at Well Lane) subsequently replaced, along with the exhaust and a new up-pipe as this was damaged.

On a like for like if everything had been working for me I would have expected power to be about 10 bhp below David Taylors, as he was running 4 degrees more advance than me on the day

As for other results I was not surprised at what others got - Harveys was as expected with the Turbo, and Chris's was about what I expected - probably running a lot less timing and smaller turbo unit (MD191) and 550cc injectors, which would be too small for my car. (as they would be at their maximum flow rate on my car) Who knows if a cooler airfilter and headers did any difference and the exhaust is different

It would be interesting to see how Chris’s car would perform at PS?

Anyway I suspect that the figures at WL are over by about 15bhp - compared to PE and PS. I achieved 330bhp at PS, but have since done a lot off changes to the ECU settings!

It varies on the day – though the Well Lane ones are consistent for me – if I raise the advance then this shows on their rollers, or if the car feels faster on the road then this shows on their rollers

I'd love to run on the rollers in 5th - my car is set up to hold 1.4 bar in 5th but 1.25 bar in 4th.....

sammyh

iTrader: (1)

I have to agree with John rolling roads are best suited for problem finding.

R19KET

Chris,

Firstly, you can't compare on RR to another. Next, Harvey has had a remap since his last run, and was expecting even hgher figures, and Scott has had his car mapped with a different ecu, mapper, and turbo !!!!

Also, comparing "peak" power figures does NOT represent how a car drives on the road. I always compare the figures at 5252 (cross over point) this gives a far better idea of how a car drives.

As an example, the STi7 that got 333bhp (iirc) at PE's last RR day, had circa 250bhp/ftlbs @ 5252, whilst cars mapped with a Link, ect', would be getting 290~300 bhp/ftlbs at the same point, with a peak 330~340bhp !!!!

Mark.

steve McCulloch

And it was good to see RichiW's face when he still could'nt beat me on raising the boost up!

Its all a bit of cheap fun

steve McCulloch

Hmm wheres mi graph

at 5252 = 280bhp and 280lbs on the day approx

Andy.F

At 5250 Hmmm 343/343 Who needs a link Of course Scottish air must be worth 50 bhp I guess

Pavlo

Can I just say bmep?

For turbo's I would have thought that bmep/boost (gauge pressure in atmospheres) would give a more meaningfull idea of performance.

I seem to remember a race spec 2l engine, BDA or similar being good for about 212psi bmep.

I know the units here are messed up...

Paul

R19KET

Steve,

I'm a little confused over what boost you're "supposed" to be running, since it was Bob R, who called me yesterday, and told me you got low boost on the RR. Once the boost profile, and related controls have been set on the Link, the only reason you would get different boost levels, in different gears, is load related. If you can get 1.4bar in 5th, you should certainly be able to achieve it in 4th on a RR.

Injectors is another issue, but given the both Bob, and Trout get idc's of circa 65% on their 740cc injectors, and you have similar power to them, 550cc injectors would work fine on your car.

Anyway we digress. RR's should be treated as a bit of fun, nothing else.

Mark.

R19KET

Andy,

"At 5250 Hmmm 343/343 Who needs a link Of course Scottish air must be worth 50 bhp I guess"

Firstly, it's not the AIR, that's worth 50bhp, but more likely the local brew

I think you need to come on a track day, and show up some of the Linked cars.......... A 20min' session should be enough

Mark.

Andy.F

"A 20min' session should be enough"

What ? to lap them all

steve McCulloch

The cars never got more than 1.25 bar of boost held on their rollers! in 4th
But then it does'nt get this on the road either.... does in 5th on the road - or am I just going mad....

Must be a load issue

Your right re the injectors - just relooked - 68% = 503 - 91.5% utilised on 550's. No good then if I want to do a few other things... glad I got the 740's!

Mellow Yellow !

iTrader: (1)

Mark....I'm confused !

Are you saying that when Scott achieved 310lbs torque and 344 bhp he had a different turbo/map etc...than what I currently have on ?

If not...the point is ?

Adam M

chris,

you shouldnt worry about figures so much, a lot is dependent on so many factors that you are not considering like for like.

scotts car was dynoed some time back, and wasnt it on an entirely different rolling road?

to answer some of you points.

They normally run the type rs in 5th gear as this is supposed to be closer to 4th gear on other cars, your car has the same 4th as normal stis, ie. not the close ration gearbox so 5th is not necessary.

ambient temp was probably much higher, and humidity potentially lower. Engine power is not just determined by boost but by mass of air, so atmospheric conditions have a lot to say when measuring power.

also consider that regardless of boost, you dont know how conservative he timing was on the gems map, and if you ask pat nicely he will explain how muchgain there is to be had from advancing the ignition. The figures are staggering.

In essence, boost alone is not the big issue. You have the right ingrediants, your car should be amazing. Make sure you have a decent fuel pump though, have no idea if scott fitted one.

remember, you were happy before you went on the rollers, why should anything have changed? its teh same car, except now it has an arbitrary number attached to it.

My engine will be mapped on an engine dyno, may make my way onto some rolling roads to see what they think is teh power output of my car, and see for myself how inaccurate these things can really be!

carlos_hiraoka

Hi Mark, how were your engine dyno results ..... ?????

Carlos H.

Andy.F

Whilst an engine dyno is no doubt more convenient for tuning, such as optimising cam timing etc, I fail to see how it is deemed any more accurate than a regularly calibrated rolling road ?

A bench dyno set up does not fully replicate 'real life' for the engine. Different exhaust system, different air intake route and pressure, different fuel supply totally unaffected by pipe runs etc.

Both bench and chassis dyno's fail to simulate the effects of G force on the fuel and oil systems. Another factor is that no dyno's I've seen outside of F1 let the engine accelerate as it would in the car.

An ECU may control things optimally when taking 30 seconds to run from 2000 - 7000 rpm but what's it like at 2000 - 7000 in less than 2 seconds ?

I agree that it's what it 'feels' like in the car that really matters, that's why I can't understand why performance meters such as the AP22 are not more popular ? They, quite simply give a very accurate read/print out of that G force you are feeling.

IMHO it takes + or - 10bhp for your bum to feel the difference, some mods produce less difference than this, the meter will catch it. I personally have found it useful for disclosing which mods/fuels/octane boosters etc actually lost me BHP !!

Andy

Adam M

chris,

i hear from mutant matt,k that scotts old car ran 19.8mph/100rpm, meaning you have type r gearing in yours. Ie. you might have been better off in 5th like the type rs.

Personally I still dont thuink it makes much diff as you will be able to generate max load in fourth and that is what its all about.

Pavlo

Andy,

I agree your point about sensitivity of bench dynos to installation. I doubt whether or not accel has a major affect on fluids, but airflow into and around induction has a major effect.

I can't say for the dyno Mark used, but with modern eddy current and induction motor dynos, racetrack simulation is certainly possible from a load perspective.

But, as for any performance testing the stopwatch has the final say, and for the most part, the stopwatch doesn't lie (certain competitors always gain 2 tenths from a stopwatch!).

Paul

R19KET

Andy,

Interesting points. Generally, an engine dyno is used by people wanting to optomise the ignition (find MBT) and to map the fuelling to a point where it's close enough for the ecu/wide band lambda sensor to do the rest, in the car.

There are many things that you can adjust on an engine dyno, that you would be nigh on impossible, to practically do on the road.

Of course there will be some "tweaking" needed once the engine is back in the car, but it will be pretty damn close.

As for the accuracy of the figures, well you may well be right, but I'll stick with the ED. Maybe I need to come up to the Star RR to get some REAL power figures

You still running that 125 octane Iron Brew ?

Mark.

Andy.F

Sometimes I think some folk just like to disagree for the fun of it I know I do

Some time ago, when I suggested my car had over 330bhp I was told "No it can't have with only those little mods, you need to see what it will do on the 1/4 mile"

Done the 1/4 mile - " Ah but it's an RA, it's the short gearing that gave you good times, you need to see what it puts out on a rolling road"

Done a rolling road day - "Pah, rolling roads are innacurate, everyone knows that, you need to get a through the gears run alongside say..... an EVO7"

Done the EVO7 thing - "Er, EVO had gearbox problems, that's why it was so slow, you need to get out on a track day"

Track day coming up shortly - but wait a minute, is that not more down to driver, brakes and suspension

So what is the definition of performance then ???

Andy.F

I have tried many different 'brews' but the most sucessful by far is the 'cough, cough' with a touch of 'ahmmmmm'
As if 'I' need to tell 'you' !!!!!

R19KET

Andy,

I believe your figures..... and in fairies, and even Father Christmas

It's a well known fact that the Scottish 1/4 mile, is like the US BHP..........

That aside, who cares what other people think......

Mark.

carlos_hiraoka

..... BTW this vehicle's weight is around 1200 kg .....

Carlos H.

Andy.F

LOL @ Mark, and I believe your car is going to be on the road one day

GT3 ? are they 4wd ? if not then unfair comparison Beat a 550 bhp skyline to 120 though tanks that they are

steve McCulloch

Pretty heavy then....

Mellow Yellow !

iTrader: (1)

Lol @ Andy...well done for making it so lighthearted

Yet again I appreciate your thoughts and advice Adam....no truer words spoken than your statement re; I was happy before it went on the rollers

Donno on Sunday then and we're being joined by the 3 quickest EVO' I know of driven equally by the guys that can peddle well

Andy.F

Must be I guess ? Bit lag through the gears too