In for the long haul Ultimate NA build thread.

[FRS Justin]

Here is another article that should make everyone happy on the light weight subject please read. so we can get back on topic.


http://www.uucmotorwerks.com/flywhee...heel_works.htm












How does a lightweight flywheel work? Amongst the majority, there are two schools of thought concerning light flywheels. The first is that they do not contribute to power output. The second is that they do. Which thought is correct? In fact both, in a way, are correct.

[solidONE]

I recall seeing a peak 1~2whp gain from just changing the stock wheel and tires with a lighter RPF1/RS3 tires, all else equal.

[Summerwolf]

A 1-2 hp "gain" is well within acceptable differences between runs. 1-2 hp on a dyno is literally not worth noting.

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by Summerwolf

A 1-2 hp "gain" is well within acceptable differences between runs. 1-2 hp on a dyno is literally not worth noting.

This is true, I was skeptical of the gain I was seeing but it was consistent under multiple pulls. I even remounted the factory wheels to confirm what I was seeing, and it was consistent.

[KoolBRZ]

Originally Posted by churchx

celek: only losses in friction of gears/bearings and tire-road affect whp readings. And those are mostly same with or without lightened rotational components. Change of rotational mass affect only time at which certain speed is reached, not how much energy is needed once it gets up at said speed. In your example if you move it to dyno, then it's not the wheel of 200lb or 50lb weight, but rather that dyno brakes car wheels at four time the force, which is not the case. With same dyno "braking" readings should be same for both 200lb & 50lb wheels, with exception of how long heavier one was spun up/accelerated to max speed.

They would show in the graph as a quicker ramp up to max HP. The low and mid-range HP would show improvements. There would be no difference to the final number however the drive-ability would be greatly improved.

[churchx]

KoolBRZ: was there in any dyno chart also time shown? In all were just whp/wtq at rpms. So how can it be shown in graph? Yes, acceleration would be quicker, yes one would notice that in driving .. but how would you see it in dyno graph?

[KoolBRZ]

Originally Posted by churchx

KoolBRZ: was there in any dyno chart also time shown? In all were just whp/wtq at rpms. So how can it be shown in graph? Yes, acceleration would be quicker, yes one would notice that in driving .. but how would you see it in dyno graph?

The low and mid-range parts of the dyno graph aren't tested static. They are tested on-the-rise. In other words, acceleration is shown in the graph UP TO the peak. It alters the shape of the visible ramp. Low acceleration shows as a gradual incline with a steep part at the end, while high acceleration shows as a steep angle right at the start, leveling off to a gradual incline at the end.

[churchx]

Tim: problem being .. i doubt statement of problem being in stock intake, as yet to seen any aftermarket intake to be THAT much better then stock + aftermarket drop in filter, to consider stock being problem/bottleneck. Yes, some bring +5whp on top of stock+AM filter (in most cases those that "bring more gains" are just via manipulating MAF sensor readings resulting running much leaner on stock tune, and once MAF calibration is done, so are most of those "gains"). Those just 5whp .. do not make stock looking in my eyes as THAT of a limiting factor due some supposed "major flaws".

[celek]

Originally Posted by churchx

Tim: problem being .. i doubt statement of problem being in stock intake, as yet to seen any aftermarket intake to be THAT much better then stock + aftermarket drop in filter, to consider stock being problem/bottleneck. Yes, some bring +5whp on top of stock+AM filter (in most cases those that "bring more gains" are just via manipulating MAF sensor readings resulting running much leaner on stock tune, and once MAF calibration is done, so are most of those "gains"). Those just 5whp .. do not make stock looking in my eyes as THAT of a limiting factor due some supposed "major flaws".

I think Tim and myself are looking after the throttle body not before though

[Spartarus]

Originally Posted by FRS Justin

Here is another article that should make everyone happy on the light weight subject please read. so we can get back on topic.


http://www.uucmotorwerks.com/flywhee...heel_works.htm

Thank you for posting that. The presentation is a bit pedestrian but it is good material.

It's physics guys. Basic. F*cking. Physics. And basic, basic math.

It isn't magic.

And @celek was right about the WHP gain on any inertia-based chassis dyno, of which there are many.

Originally Posted by churchx

celek: only losses in friction of gears/bearings and tire-road affect whp readings.

In a brake dyno? Or any other dyno that can evaluate steady-state operation? Yes. On an inertial dyno? No. 1/4 ET? Oh, it'll make a difference.

[Lonewolf]

Celek- Have you seen this yet?

http://www.enginelabs.com/…/pri-2015-king-engine-bearing-s…/

[DocWalt]

King makes some fantastic bearings. At this point they're all I'll use in my GTI since I seem to just chew up everything else...

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by Tim Radley

Problem is there are two major design flaws in the intake system that really hold it back in N/A form. I've seen it in the datalogging from both road and dyno. Might print a new intake manifold over Christmas to test out as I want to leave the car in N/A form whilst i set the Holinger up.

What kind of material do you plan on using? Will it withstand the heat? I'd love to see the end result of a printed manifold.

[wizzo]

Will you be able to tell us which of the piper cams will work with OEM pistons, and if they do not, how much additional clearance are we after?

Also, i wonder if we will need to use some sort of phaser limiter like the mustang 5.0 guys etc.