Bullet Performance supercharger by Mercury Performance

[Unleashed]

I feel like these dyno conversations should be posted else where. It seems like all these FI threads become dyno arguements, while educational and civilized, they take up way more time/space having to scroll through and find actual updates.

[Coheed]

Originally Posted by Unleashed

I feel like these dyno conversations should be posted else where. It seems like all these FI threads become dyno arguements, while educational and civilized, they take up way more time/space having to scroll through and find actual updates.

Originally Posted by Unleashed

It seems like all these FI threads become dyno arguements, while educational and civilized, they take up way more time/space having to scroll through and find actual updates.

Originally Posted by Unleashed

while educational and civilized, they take up way more time/space having to scroll through and find actual updates.

Originally Posted by Unleashed

scroll through and find actual updates.

Originally Posted by Unleashed

find actual updates.

Originally Posted by Unleashed

updates.

Yes, I too would like actual updates. :happy0180:

[mines13]

Originally Posted by Coheed

I've run thousands of dyno runs on the same dynojet without any "calibration" other than when added ballast weight was added to the roller. And yes, there IS a steady load in comparison to an eddy dyno. You either know what I am saying, or you are oblivious. Of course, all words are open to interpretation, you're just wrong, that's all. Just keep believing inertial dynomometers don't generate load.

Have you ever used a water brake dyno? Well, if you had you would realize what I meant by "they suck". Regardless of who uses them, they are notorious for being complicated and unreliable and inconsistent. But you haven't used one, that much is obvious. in comparison to what is available, a water brake dyno is the LAST one I'd consider.

And furthermore, like I've said numerous times. On hp numbers I don't care about aerodynamic drag, tread squirm, vehicle weight etc. I don't need to simulate the road. That's all great for tuning, but spitting out arbitrary numbers to represent whp is a fail.

Now, a eddy dynojet and inertia dynojet are calibrated to read within 1% of each other. I trust their numbers. Here's some good reading material for you.
http://imageftp.dynojet.com/CMD/Trut...Runs_Final.pdf

All bias aside, a yard stick is a yard stick. Just don't be mad at me if yours comes up a bit short.

Yes, actually I have used a water brake engine dyno, in fact we had a Superflow 902 water brake engine dyno. As well as a dual Mustang IMP dual PAU 42" roller setup, I ran it and tuned on it for 5 years of my life... Your experience? Speaking of oblivious... I will leave it right there. Do not feed me Dynojet propaganda. I have used their intertial products, they are not to be confused with their eddy current brake products... Oh yes, and it does matter.

[mines13]

Originally Posted by E92M3Guy

I'm very familiar with water brake dyno's and have known them to be very simple, very reliable, and extremely repeatable results. I have experience both with engine dyno's and Dynapack hub-attached dyno's.

I'd like to know more about your experience and other less reliable water brake dyno's than the types I mentioned. Can you give examples of which dyno, and what happened to you?



A buddy of mine is in the market to buy a Dynojet. I'm advising him on the purchase. The Dynojet sales guy told us that the eddy current model is mostly for tuning, and the eddy current must be turned off when trying to capture a whp run. This was only two months ago. Maybe he was wrong, or maybe I remembered the conversation incorrectly. Are your experiences different? How is the eddy current used to capture a full whp run?

EDIT: I just finished reading the white paper. It looks like the DJ can run in eddy current mode; but it also looks like it's pretty finicky. At this point, I'm guessing the sales guy was just talking for ease of use (not absolute requirements), one should turn off the eddy current when testing a whp run.

Now, here's my $0.02 on this debate -- having collected and assimilated 500+ dyno runs in the BMW Dyno Database (www.s65dynos.com). My preferred dyno is the Dynapack. I believe it to be the most accurate non-engine dyno I've ever used. However, I also recognize that the Dynojet is the most widely used Dyno here in the US. I think of it as the defacto standard, regardless of the results and how they are obtained.

Dynapack builds and excellent brake dyno. No issues with tires slip, etc.

[Chewie4299]

I despise getting pointed to a Facebook page when looking for information. Facebook is one of the worst trends to ever plague our society. If I'm reading a thread about X it's because I want to find information about X in that thread and not in the middle of some massive electronic popularity contest/like-fest.....


Waiting for more information to be posted.

If I'm handed a Facebook link I'll throw it in the trash and abandon this thread for one where the developer knows how to communicate properly.

Edit: well shit...I just realized this thread wasn't created by the developer and instead was just started by a Facebook find.

WTB proper R&D thread a la Accelerated Performance!

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[Coheed]

Originally Posted by mines13

I have used their intertial products, they are not to be confused with their eddy current brake products... Oh yes, and it does matter.

So you agree they read differently, and that one has benefits over the other. Ok cool.

[mines13]

Originally Posted by Coheed

So you agree they read differently, and that one has benefits over the other. Ok cool.

Yes, I do. The eddy current Dynojet models sort of work.

[Coheed]

Originally Posted by mines13

Yes, I do. The eddy current Dynojet models sort of work.

hahaha. This actually did make me laugh. I haven't used a eddy current version yet, only dynomite and mustang. They were inconsistent in readings between runs. Sometimes with variances of 30whp. Perhaps it has soured my experiences.

I thought about a eddy-current update to my 248c many years ago, but it missed the cutoff, and wasn't able to be retrofitted. Instead, got the "h" upgrade for higher power readings. After recalibration it could hold 1500whp no problem, but even then the 48" rollers couldn't hold traction at that level.

I suppose if I was in the market for a dyno, I'd need to play around with each to see which one I like best. But I've never had a bad tune come off the dynojet. AFR readings were always exactly where they should have been on the street as well as the dyno.

In your experience, which dyno has the most consistent results, month to month, year to year? Because most of these dynos have to be set up each time to maintain accurate results. The dynojet just goes. Weather station keeps it simple and has good results.

[speed3]

Originally Posted by Coheed

words

Originally Posted by E92M3Guy

words

Originally Posted by Coheed

words

Originally Posted by mines13

words

Originally Posted by mines13

words

Originally Posted by Coheed

words

[Tradewind]

Originally Posted by Visconti

AUD is about the same a USA.

I guess the big question is, what do you get for 5500?

What do you get

A complete intercooled, Screw type supercharger system with 5psi +



You will need to add tuning to the cost

Bullet indicated they would like to do a drive in drive out deal for Australian customers that got the entire job done for less than AUD$ 10k

Overseas customers would see it about 10% cheaper as the local tax would be knocked off the price

I dont have a dyno chart to share, asked for one, not showed up yet

[Panman]

Originally Posted by Tradewind

What do you get

A complete intercooled, Screw type supercharger system with 5psi +



You will need to add tuning to the cost

Bullet indicated they would like to do a drive in drive out deal for Australian customers that got the entire job done for less than AUD$ 10k

Overseas customers would see it about 10% cheaper as the local tax would be knocked off the price

I dont have a dyno chart to share, asked for one, not showed up yet

Not to Hijack this thread, but how's your development going? Any updates?

[E92M3Guy]

Originally Posted by Coheed

As long as the results are consistent, that's great. All I'm asking for is an actual reliable representation of what the hp is. Imagine going to 10 drag strips and seeing full-second variations in time. Its just frustrating that after 10 years I've seen no progress in companies rectifying this issue.

I'm really just ranting about how everyone's dynos read wildly different.

You'll have a better time correlating SAE corrected dyno results than you will drag results vs. dyno results. The whole purpose of SAE correction is to "normalize" the results to a standard set of weather conditions. On your dynojet, I'm sure you've dyno'd the same car without any changes, but in vastly different weather conditions. I'm sure you've noticed the uncorrected results are vastly different. But when you map the results to SAE corrected, they should correlate much better.

Well, the drag strip represents your uncorrected results on the dyno. That's what your car did on that day and under those weather conditions. Dragtimes.com has a drag strip correction calculator that makes very similar corrections to SAE on the dyno. If you want to compare cars at drag races, then I suggest using the dragtimes calculator to do so.
http://www.dragtimes.com/da-density-...calculator.php

Originally Posted by Coheed

I suppose if I was in the market for a dyno, I'd need to play around with each to see which one I like best. But I've never had a bad tune come off the dynojet. AFR readings were always exactly where they should have been on the street as well as the dyno.

That's nice, but I hope you realize that you're at the mercy of the wide band O2 sensor on the dyno when you do this. We have a local dynojet whose wide band always flat-lines in the 10's, even when the car's wide band is reading in the 13's. Just goes to show that you must always check and verify the wide band on the dyno as well.

In your experience, which dyno has the most consistent results, month to month, year to year? Because most of these dynos have to be set up each time to maintain accurate results. The dynojet just goes. Weather station keeps it simple and has good results.

Dynapack claims calibration isn't necessary. And since they are measuring hydraulic pressure and that's a known quantity, I kind of believe them. They claim they are accurate to 0.1 ft/lb torque measurement. Best of all, it works exactly like an engine dyno; can do steady-state for tuning, or ramp for plotting. I've used six different Dynapack's and five of them read exactly the same. The sixth had some custom software in it, so it read a little different and I'd say it can't be counted as a standard Dynapack for comparative purposes.

[mines13]

Originally Posted by Coheed

hahaha. This actually did make me laugh. I haven't used a eddy current version yet, only dynomite and mustang. They were inconsistent in readings between runs. Sometimes with variances of 30whp. Perhaps it has soured my experiences.

I thought about a eddy-current update to my 248c many years ago, but it missed the cutoff, and wasn't able to be retrofitted. Instead, got the "h" upgrade for higher power readings. After recalibration it could hold 1500whp no problem, but even then the 48" rollers couldn't hold traction at that level.

I suppose if I was in the market for a dyno, I'd need to play around with each to see which one I like best. But I've never had a bad tune come off the dynojet. AFR readings were always exactly where they should have been on the street as well as the dyno.

In your experience, which dyno has the most consistent results, month to month, year to year? Because most of these dynos have to be set up each time to maintain accurate results. The dynojet just goes. Weather station keeps it simple and has good results.

Supplemented with road tuning, to make up for the fact that you have no brake. It could work. Calibration is a normal part of maintaining a piece of hardware, the IMP model I ran is the same unit that Ford, Chrysler and several other OEM's use for whole vehicle testing. If you wish to tune completely on the dyno, and not do your load tuning on the road, (as is necessary with an inertial dyno) you need that brake. In real life, you do not drive you car around from idle to WOT 99.99% of the time. Without the ability to hit all of your load sites, you can not effectively tune anything, except WOT. I've had plenty of cars come in that have either not had the map touched anywhere that the car is actually driven most of the time or, at best, smoothing. I am partial to Mustang, their products are top notch. However, you can have the best tools in the world, if you do not know how to use them or take care of them, you will not get results.

[mines13]

Originally Posted by E92M3Guy

That's nice, but I hope you realize that you're at the mercy of the wide band O2 sensor on the dyno when you do this. We have a local dynojet whose wide band always flat-lines in the 10's, even when the car's wide band is reading in the 13's. Just goes to show that you must always check and verify the wide band on the dyno as well.

Oh, it can get even worse. If it is the vacuum pump wide band Dynojet offered for years, even if the sensor is remotely accurate, you are seeing A/F information that may have occurred 1000rpm earlier. Effectively rendering any A/F information unreliable. The only proper way to monitor A/F is to mount the sensor directly in the exhaust stream and bypass the horrible pump.