Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB

Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/index.php)
-   Engine, Exhaust, Transmission (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   The Ultimate FA20 ITB thread. (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125122)

StraightOuttaCanadaEh 10-18-2018 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG (Post 3145636)
As much as I want to believe that I am pretty skeptical of those numbers. From what I read the baseline and the ITB dyno where not done on the same machine, though I could be mistaken.

He's got a Nameless catless header as well. As for the dyno, they did the baseline on the old one but this tune on the new one. Same shop, different dyno, and the shop said the new one reads lower than the last one. So combined with the header it's an increase of at least 60 whp apparently.

Tokay444 10-18-2018 11:48 AM

Sounds like shitty dyno operation/calibration is a factor here.

PulsarBeeerz 10-18-2018 03:55 PM

He seems to have won his time attack class again so the shitty dyno calibration wasn't too much of a factor.lol

Tokay444 10-18-2018 04:55 PM

It certainly seems he is making more power. How much more is anyone's guess at this point, knowing what we know.

Lantanafrs2 10-18-2018 09:58 PM

I've never heard anybody admit to using an optimistic dyno

CSG Mike 10-19-2018 02:59 AM

Believe me, I want these to make serious gains more than anyone, but without apples to apples data like what I'm (slowly) getting done with a lot of help, it's like comparing two different dynos from two different cars and facilities, and I think the gains shown on the other car are a bit too much.

If I'm wrong with that assumption, then hey, that means more power for everyone who decides to go the ITB route! Win-win; that's actually the best case result!

NoHaveMSG 10-19-2018 12:27 PM

I have the nameless setup as well and even if it was responsible for 2/3 of those gains that is BS. His final dyno number seems a little high but it's the baseline that is suspiciously low to me. That is by far the lowest whp figure I have seen.
Quote:

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh (Post 3145661)
He's got a Nameless catless header as well. As for the dyno, they did the baseline on the old one but this tune on the new one. Same shop, different dyno, and the shop said the new one reads lower than the last one. So combined with the header it's an increase of at least 60 whp apparently.

Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using Tapatalk

NoHaveMSG 10-19-2018 12:29 PM

Correlating Dyno numbers with lapping results is like saying because I have a lap I am good at petting cats.
Quote:

Originally Posted by PulsarBeeerz (Post 3145847)
He seems to have won his time attack class again so the shitty dyno calibration wasn't too much of a factor.lol

Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using Tapatalk

Dr. BRZ 10-19-2018 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG (Post 3146147)
I have the nameless setup as well and even if it was responsible for 2/3 of those gains that is BS. His final dyno number seems a little high but it's the baseline that is suspiciously low to me. That is by far the lowest whp figure I have seen.

Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using Tapatalk

It depends if his car is auto or stick. The manual dynos at 165whp and the auto dynos around 145whp so could it be, his twin is an auto?

PulsarBeeerz 10-19-2018 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG (Post 3146149)
Correlating Dyno numbers with lapping results is like saying because I have a lap I am good at petting cats.

Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using Tapatalk

That's cool.

Tristor 10-19-2018 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. BRZ (Post 3146162)
It depends if his car is auto or stick. The manual dynos at 165whp and the auto dynos around 145whp so could it be, his twin is an auto?


Where have you seen that? All the data I've seen indicates that the only performance differential between the manual and the auto is due to final drive gearing. This would affect the torque output shown on a chassis dyno, so I suppose it could show a different in horsepower based on that, but it shouldn't really create a significant affect. The transmission itself accounts for only a small portion of drivetrain loss.

Jaden 10-19-2018 09:46 PM

No he's full of shit...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tristor (Post 3146182)
Where have you seen that? All the data I've seen indicates that the only performance differential between the manual and the auto is due to final drive gearing. This would affect the torque output shown on a chassis dyno, so I suppose it could show a different in horsepower based on that, but it shouldn't really create a significant affect. The transmission itself accounts for only a small portion of drivetrain loss.

The difference in dyno results is mainly between a mustang dyno (heartbreak) and a dynojet.

Mustang's typically show about 145-150 and dynojets between 165-170 for a baseline.

Dynojets are more likely a more accurate representation based on what driveline losses SHOULD be from BHP ratings, but for some reason people like mustang dynos for gain comparisons and think that for showing gains, they're more accurate.

Go figure...

If he got 206 whp from a mustang dyno, that's pretty significant for 91 octane (especially canadian 91) and could be showing good gains for ITBs.


Jaden

StraightOuttaCanadaEh 10-19-2018 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaden (Post 3146437)
The difference in dyno results is mainly between a mustang dyno (heartbreak) and a dynojet.

Mustang's typically show about 145-150 and dynojets between 165-170 for a baseline.

Dynojets are more likely a more accurate representation based on what driveline losses SHOULD be from BHP ratings, but for some reason people like mustang dynos for gain comparisons and think that for showing gains, they're more accurate.

Go figure...

If he got 206 whp from a mustang dyno, that's pretty significant for 91 octane (especially canadian 91) and could be showing good gains for ITBs.


Jaden

this is significant. One tuner mentioned the knock correction on canadian 94 was higher than on US 91

chaoskaze 10-20-2018 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh (Post 3146455)
this is significant. One tuner mentioned the knock correction on canadian 94 was higher than on US 91

That's true but i also thought that's cause ..... nobody puts 94 in their car lol.... so they are usually sitting there for a long time


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.