superflow engine dyno and dyno dynamics plots for comparison - GT-R Register - Nissan Skyline and GT-R Drivers Club forum

Want to buy a banner ad? Find out more here.

Go Back   GT-R Register - Nissan Skyline and GT-R Drivers Club forum > General > General Nissan R35 GT-R Chat
Register Garage FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Insurance


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 28th August 2014, 05:42 PM   #1 (permalink)
scoooby slayer is unaware they can edit their status
GTR.co.uk seasoned Member
 
scoooby slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,324
superflow engine dyno and dyno dynamics plots for comparison

ok so here is a high powered yb engine.
run on a superflow engine dynamometer on race fuel 109




and here is the same motor, same tune on 109 fuel flywheel projection figure on dyno dynamics



the wheel figure on the dyno dynamics was 690 rwhp.



the superflow engine dyno shows 29 more hp than the dyno dynamics flywheel projection, by the time all the ancillaries are added and a bit of exhaust restriction in the car id say that dyno dynamics flywheel figure was pretty bang on tbh
__________________

Last edited by scoooby slayer; 28th August 2014 at 05:47 PM..
scoooby slayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2014, 06:06 PM   #2 (permalink)
goldgtr35 is Running 1026 BHP and 850 Lbs torque
Registered
 
goldgtr35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: KENT UK
Posts: 1,423
Thats some serious HP from a Sierra lump.
What was it bored too.
Still like a Escort cosworth (Standard),, But it would feel slow with todays cars


Goldie
__________________
Executive GTR Owners Club
goldgtr35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2014, 07:06 PM   #3 (permalink)
Conrad is taking a break from cars...
Registered
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Singapore / Halifax, Yorkshire
Cars owned: AE86.... Sometime in the future
Posts: 1,316
Comparing a Superflow Engine Dyno with a Dyno Dynamics is like comparing an apple with a pineapple, they both "measure different parameters"
__________________
Conrad is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 28th August 2014, 07:48 PM   #4 (permalink)
scoooby slayer is unaware they can edit their status
GTR.co.uk seasoned Member
 
scoooby slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrad View Post
Comparing a Superflow Engine Dyno with a Dyno Dynamics is like comparing an apple with a pineapple, they both "measure different parameters"
Oh dear here we go again! They both give crank hp and within the same ballpark showing that a dyno dynamics flywheel guesstimate is very close to an engine dyno figure. It's not a comparison of different engines, it's the same motor on both dynos for showing how close the figures are.
__________________
scoooby slayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 07:08 AM   #5 (permalink)
Adamantium is apparently poisonous to Wolverine - who knew?
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London
Cars owned: Audi S5 3.0TFSi, Audi Q5 3.0TDi
Posts: 9,073
But all it shows is that the guess for drivetrain losses on THAT chassis might be acceptable.

Arguably, since it's a percentage and you know the engines figure you could fudge the percentage to make it bang on. It still wouldn't mean anything.

Conrad's point is that you are measuring power at the wheels and guessing power at the flywheel. Not the same thing at all.
__________________


Adamantium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 08:23 AM   #6 (permalink)
Stealth69 is touching himself furiously in a desperate bid to get warm
GTR.co.uk seasoned Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cambs
Posts: 3,180
jesus christ all that ever comes out of these discussions is that Dynos are a waste of time for gaining power figures...... you either get a "friendly" one that just aids you in the willy waving I'm bigger than you in the pub or an "unfriendly" one that ruins your day and makes you contemplate selling akidney to get more power.

Dyno's are a tuning/Diagnostic aid and for entertainment (i.e. rolling road meets) nothing more!
__________________
Stealth69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 09:15 AM   #7 (permalink)
OldBob is trying to sell the pork
Registered
 
OldBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Gerrards Cross
Cars owned: Currently:911.2 Turbo S, Cayman S, Cayman R, Mk7Golf R, Seat Ibiza FR
Posts: 1,561
Appreciate and understand the input SS and I'm not aiming this at your post.

Probably best to avoid this type of groundhog day discussion if we encourage people to quote and use whp where possible on this forum isn't it, or at least the poster only have to caveat any extrapolated bhp once ...
That way we can then only argue about the tyre slip, temperature, calibration etc for absolute figure purposes lol

Maybe make a sticky of a simple explanation/discussion of dyno figure folly/pitfalls and refer all threads getting out of hand to it.
Any knowledgeable pro want to post one?

I'm with Stealth on this and have imo only personally ever productively used a dyno with a tuner on my lads porker, same conditions, day, time as possible. Tweaks, rerun, remove tweaks confirm etc cycles to achieve relative power and torque gains (Similar to what GTR Nemesis is doing)....and it's fun on a dyno shootout day looking at the relative whp results..

So who knows and quotes their whp (as we should)? esp in the pub or other only to be told that someone's mate with a tuned Integra R makes more power as a result.
__________________
Gone to the pork darkside
OldBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 09:54 AM   #8 (permalink)
scoooby slayer is unaware they can edit their status
GTR.co.uk seasoned Member
 
scoooby slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,324
whatever way you want tro look at it it proves that a dyno dynamics flywheel prediction is mighty close to the engine dyno figure.

I don't care how we got to that figure we got to it no matter what parameters are measured, we got to that figure from a fixed percentage so repeatable correction, with both machines finishing displaying crank power.


if you want to get down to exact accuracy amb temp probe location can and will affect the figure by ive seen 50 hp gained from a test ! theres loads of variables that can effect a dyno plot, im pointing out that a correctly operated dyno dynamics dyno will give similar results to an engine dyno.

im not saying they all will some of it is in the hands of the dyno operator.
__________________
scoooby slayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 10:50 AM   #9 (permalink)
Adamantium is apparently poisonous to Wolverine - who knew?
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London
Cars owned: Audi S5 3.0TFSi, Audi Q5 3.0TDi
Posts: 9,073
it's about 4% off which is pretty poor and as I tried to say above, it proves that THIS rolling road plot was only 4% out.

the drivetrain loss thing on DD rollers is a guess that will work in some cases and not in other, it's probably the mean average of lots of testing, and more crucially it isn't a clever variable that's proportional to engine power so it's accuracy will vary between lots of the same car at different power levels.

All you've shown is that on one occasion one rolling road graph happened to be within 4% of the engine dyno power. You can't draw any more conclusions than that and certainly can't suggest that the conversion % is correct or even close as a result.

If you could do this over a massive sample of varying cars at varying powers, then you might be able to draw some conclusions.

It's important to point out that there are some very advanced rolling roads that can much more effectively measure coast down losses on each individual car and give a repeatable very accurate calculation of engine power, this just isn't one of them.
__________________


Adamantium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 11:07 AM   #10 (permalink)
thistle is aware they can edit their status
GTR.co.uk seasoned Member
 
thistle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Cars owned: GTR, D4 S8, MkV GTI, E46 325ti, E46 M3
Posts: 1,216
At 5250 RPM, there is an error by a factor of about 245%. 650 vs 265 HP.

One looks to be a gutless motor that would be a pain in a road car and on some tracks with 2nd gear corners. The other looks like a nice motor. One reaches about 90% of peak torque something like 1500 RPM before the other. I'd love to see what happens in real life in 2nd gear at 4500 RPM when you mash the pedal into the Wilton carpet or steel floor.
__________________
thistle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 12:11 PM   #11 (permalink)
scoooby slayer is unaware they can edit their status
GTR.co.uk seasoned Member
 
scoooby slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,324
the engine is more comparable to the dyno dynamics plot I think with regard to where it comes on boost in the real world on the road, the engine dyno must put more load on the motor than the rollers making it come on boost sooner.

that motor is a 4 pot iirc 2.1 litre on 109 fuel 2.8 bar of boost


as for 4% difference, well there will be a difference on the engine dyno there are no ancillaries and it has a free flowing exhaust which taking that into account means the rollers are very close with regard to the peak figures.

im not talking about an exact science comparison what im trying to point out which seems to be missed is that the peak figure is very close.
now going back to the other thread which is what started all this stock turbos have already made 644 crank hp on srr which will be very close to what that engine would engine dyno im sure.
__________________
scoooby slayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 01:13 PM   #12 (permalink)
Adamantium is apparently poisonous to Wolverine - who knew?
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London
Cars owned: Audi S5 3.0TFSi, Audi Q5 3.0TDi
Posts: 9,073
the peak figure is completely arbitrary, it just happens to be the highest. It's just as arbitrary as saying, how does the 45.679% of peak dyno figure compare or the 4963.5 rpm figure compare?

As I said twice before, this just shows that on these two set ups, the readings coincidentally weren't a million miles apart.

The most you can say about your test is "wow, what a coincidence, the peak power readngs were 4% apart!", nothing more (and that's despite them being 700rpm apart!
__________________


Adamantium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 01:25 PM   #13 (permalink)
w8pmc is loving his new M5
GTROC Member
 
w8pmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lancashire
Cars owned: Previous, RS6, E60 M5, B7 RS4, Storm White 2010 R35, Audi A8 Exec. Now Monte Carlo Blue (DMS Stage 2) 2015 F10 M5
Posts: 1,365
I'm surprised (pleasantly) that those plots are so close.

My car will be pre & post remap dyno'd next week & as i expect the operator to apply the exact same loss margin to both runs, all i'll get with any real accuracy is what power & torque i've gained.
__________________
MY15 LCi F10 M5 (DMS Stage 2 Tuned) in Monte Carlo Blue With Extended Sakhir Orange Interior. Options: Bootlid Operation Powered, Loudspeaker System Harman Kardon, Reversing Assist Camera, Surround View, Universal Remote Control, Internet & Sun Protection Glass
w8pmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 01:34 PM   #14 (permalink)
Adamantium is apparently poisonous to Wolverine - who knew?
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London
Cars owned: Audi S5 3.0TFSi, Audi Q5 3.0TDi
Posts: 9,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by w8pmc View Post
I'm surprised (pleasantly) that those plots are so close.

My car will be pre & post remap dyno'd next week & as i expect the operator to apply the exact same loss margin to both runs, all i'll get with any real accuracy is what power & torque i've gained.
They aren't close - have you read any of the above!

Look at thistle's comments alone!
__________________


Adamantium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 01:37 PM   #15 (permalink)
w8pmc is loving his new M5
GTROC Member
 
w8pmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lancashire
Cars owned: Previous, RS6, E60 M5, B7 RS4, Storm White 2010 R35, Audi A8 Exec. Now Monte Carlo Blue (DMS Stage 2) 2015 F10 M5
Posts: 1,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adamantium View Post
They aren't close - have you read any of the above!

Look at thistle's comments alone!
Good point, i only looked at the peak figures & saw they were closer than i'd have expected between to the 2 dyno methods.

Big disparity in the plots further down the rev range.
__________________
MY15 LCi F10 M5 (DMS Stage 2 Tuned) in Monte Carlo Blue With Extended Sakhir Orange Interior. Options: Bootlid Operation Powered, Loudspeaker System Harman Kardon, Reversing Assist Camera, Surround View, Universal Remote Control, Internet & Sun Protection Glass
w8pmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 04:00 PM   #16 (permalink)
scoooby slayer is unaware they can edit their status
GTR.co.uk seasoned Member
 
scoooby slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adamantium View Post
the peak figure is completely arbitrary, it just happens to be the highest. It's just as arbitrary as saying, how does the 45.679% of peak dyno figure compare or the 4963.5 rpm figure compare?

As I said twice before, this just shows that on these two set ups, the readings coincidentally weren't a million miles apart.

The most you can say about your test is "wow, what a coincidence, the peak power readngs were 4% apart!", nothing more (and that's despite them being 700rpm apart!

lol I don't know what plots your looking at !

at 6500 rpm to 8000 rpm each plot is 20 - 30 hp apart, earlier than that and the extra load on the engine dyno will be spooling the turbo sooner hence power coming in sooner as ive already said once.

the peak figure is totally relevant as its accurate, infact if you want to get picky about it as you are the dyno dynamics is reading lower not higher, as it should due to less parasytic losses and restrictions.
__________________

Last edited by scoooby slayer; 29th August 2014 at 04:03 PM..
scoooby slayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 05:34 PM   #17 (permalink)
Adamantium is apparently poisonous to Wolverine - who knew?
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London
Cars owned: Audi S5 3.0TFSi, Audi Q5 3.0TDi
Posts: 9,073
How many times, the dyno dynamics is not reading anything it's just multiplying what it can measure by a fixed number.

Think of it like this. Take the measured engine power and divided it by 1.22 for any 4wd car and see if that compares to power at the wheels.

Why would you bother.

In this case it HAPPENS to be fairly close at some points on the graph, fantastic. It's akin to saying a stopped watch happens to be right twice a day.
__________________


Adamantium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2014, 06:10 PM   #18 (permalink)
scoooby slayer is unaware they can edit their status
GTR.co.uk seasoned Member
 
scoooby slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adamantium View Post
How many times, the dyno dynamics is not reading anything it's just multiplying what it can measure by a fixed number.

Think of it like this. Take the measured engine power and divided it by 1.22 for any 4wd car and see if that compares to power at the wheels.

Why would you bother.

In this case it HAPPENS to be fairly close at some points on the graph, fantastic. It's akin to saying a stopped watch happens to be right twice a day.

dear lord I know exactly what it does its very simple. that's partly the point this is a big power motor ! il explain a little more
even at 690 rwhp with the 17.5% correction added for rwd the figure still comes up LOWER than it did on the engine dyno, with a lower powered car the corrections will be even less as its 17.5% of a smaller number.

and the numbers will be lower in the lower end of the plot on the rollers as theres less load applied from the dyno, have you driven a car and noticed the difference in boost made from 1st gear in comparison to 5th gear ? it will make a lot more boost a lot sooner due to more load on the motor making more exhaust gas which in turn turns the turbine faster making more boost sooner
don't forget this is a gt42 turbo capable of 1000hp bolted to a 2 litre 4 pot motor, with such a huge turbo on such a small motor it will be very susceptible to load variations altering where/when it makes boost

I build engines and turbos as part of my job on my equipment, and ive tested flat out revs and torque stall revs on a cat and the boost doubles once full torque load is applied

whatever anyone says ive done plenty of research into dyno corrections and the figures can be very close imo this is just to illustrate although not gospel they can still be a good guide.
__________________

Last edited by scoooby slayer; 29th August 2014 at 06:28 PM..
scoooby slayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th August 2014, 07:00 AM   #19 (permalink)
Adamantium is apparently poisonous to Wolverine - who knew?
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London
Cars owned: Audi S5 3.0TFSi, Audi Q5 3.0TDi
Posts: 9,073
I understand everything you've said, I know entirely about load, I also work in the cutting bleeding edge of car and engine development, in fact everything development.

I don't care about the load variations between the road and the engine dyno, my only point, which I've said more than once so I'm going to stop after this one, is that you have shown ONE example where the calculated power at the flywheel is vaguely similar to the measured power from an engine dyno.

All I'm saying is that this evidence of nothing and that no conclusion about engine dynso versus road fynbos can be drawn from from this.

Do 1000 of these comparisons and then you can maybe start making some valid comparisons. 10000 would be better still.
__________________


Adamantium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th August 2014, 09:13 AM   #20 (permalink)
scoooby slayer is unaware they can edit their status
GTR.co.uk seasoned Member
 
scoooby slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adamantium View Post
I understand everything you've said, I know entirely about load, I also work in the cutting bleeding edge of car and engine development, in fact everything development.

I don't care about the load variations between the road and the engine dyno, my only point, which I've said more than once so I'm going to stop after this one, is that you have shown ONE example where the calculated power at the flywheel is vaguely similar to the measured power from an engine dyno.

All I'm saying is that this evidence of nothing and that no conclusion about engine dynso versus road fynbos can be drawn from from this.

Do 1000 of these comparisons and then you can maybe start making some valid comparisons. 10000 would be better still.

and as ive said a few times the figures will only be similar not identical as theres less drag on the engine dyno than the chassis dyno.

no doubt even an engine dyno has ways and means of being fudged to give elevated figures.
for a 100% reliable measurement of power 1/4 mile trap speed simply cannot lie no matter what is done, its just gaugeing exact hp from that is impossible.
as a good guide I use the weight and mph plot that rob added a while ago



im not disagreeing its only this instance that the figures are comparable ONCE FULL LOAD IS REACHED, but it does show in the right circumstances with a well operated dyno its possible a very close figure can be achieved.

a dyno plot backed up with a 1/4 mile trap speed is a good guide. done it myself made about 580 hp in an r32 gtr and trapped consistent 122 mph which is about right from rips guide plot.

well breakfast is now over I must go and test a poorly cat 3306 motor that's reaching 112d water temp for some reason....
__________________

Last edited by scoooby slayer; 30th August 2014 at 09:16 AM..
scoooby slayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
http://www.Tyreforums.com

tyreforums

 

Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.