Vivid Racing - Agency Power Dyno Runs Part III

[EZWood]

Originally Posted by sw20kosh

Good results.

My only question is to the torque curve. Most torque curves I see take a dive at 6.5k-6.8k rpms. This one really doesn't have much dip. I like it! How did you doit even stock?

It could have to do with the driver when the Dyno runs are done.

[sw20kosh]

Originally Posted by EZWood

It could have to do with the driver when the Dyno runs are done.

Your car's torque curve is excelent and produces high HP numbers.

I hope mine is similar now that it is broken in at 1500+

[bakerr6]

I'll have mine dyno'd in a couple months. We are goign to try and keep the car mildly modded, but want to see normal temp dyno runs around here, since this car performs better in hotter weather

[os86]

@vividracing waiting for all the data to be added on the first page. thanks

[vividracing]

I just spent the last two hours adding more Dyno info. I'm going to bed now I have to be at work in 3 hours.

[subatoy]

THIS IS AWESOME! great job guys!
I have a question. how much would the cost of ALL the parts used be?

Agency Power Header $600
Agency Power Cross-Pipe $400 (this is a place holder I couldn't find price)
Agency Power Catback $850
Agency Power Pulley $130
Total: $2,000 (estimate)
not including labor.

Taking into consideration that a turbo Kit running 4psi will cost $5k and basically give
you the same results, this is not that bad, plus you retain NA drivability.

[Jidonsu]

Ooh. Interesting data. Is it just me or is the header not doing much?

[CBR600RR]

PM for the price on the cat-back and the pully please.

Also - quick question:

all these dyno pulls are showing the results of just bolt-ons with no tuning of the AFR right? What affect are the bolt-ons having on the AFR? hopefully its not leaning out the engine too much?

Props to all this hard work BTW!!!!

[brichard0625]

^ im wondering same thing...i love this setup, and the gains i see across the chart! i would love to run a turbo but i dont plan on racing but i do want a little kick in power . will there be a package offered with everything?.. or at least a full exhaust package?

[slrml617]

so lets see

Stock 174whp
Header +4
cross pipe +11
CBE +12
Pulley +12

Combos
Header+Cross pipe +5
Cross pipe+CBE +15
Header+Cross pipe+CBE+pulley +26

The gain from the pulley and cross pipe are amazingly high
On the other head, I would assume the gain from the header would be higher.

individually the header +4whp and the CP +11whp but plus together they only +5whp?

Is there anyway to explain this?

[vividracing]

Restrictive Muffler and cross pipe. The numbers are what they are. Each run has a list. No ECU tuning.

The AFR's are listed on the bottom black line. All was running very rich. Found nothing lean. A tune can lean out the fuel and and adjust other tables and make more power.

The torque will also come up on the header back as well after a tune.

[vividracing]

Originally Posted by subatoy

THIS IS AWESOME! great job guys!
I have a question. how much would the cost of ALL the parts used be?

Agency Power Header $600
Agency Power Cross-Pipe $400 (this is a place holder I couldn't find price)
Agency Power Catback $850
Agency Power Pulley $130
Total: $2,000 (estimate)
not including labor.

Taking into consideration that a turbo Kit running 4psi will cost $5k and basically give
you the same results, this is not that bad, plus you retain NA drivability.

Those are retail prices. They sell for less.

[kwood9000]

Originally Posted by subatoy

THIS IS AWESOME! great job guys!
I have a question. how much would the cost of ALL the parts used be?

Agency Power Header $600
Agency Power Cross-Pipe $400 (this is a place holder I couldn't find price)
Agency Power Catback $850
Agency Power Pulley $130
Total: $2,000 (estimate)
not including labor.

Taking into consideration that a turbo Kit running 4psi will cost $5k and basically give
you the same results, this is not that bad, plus you retain NA drivability.

The AP setup provides an additional 26Whp and 17Wtq from the baseline. The turbo provides an additional 42 Whp and 24 Wtq from a baseline.

I'm curious to see what the total gains are without the AP Pulley, which appears to have a very high gain of +12Whp and +8Wtq by itself.

[E92M3Guy]

Originally Posted by industrial

3rd gear vs. 5th gear? People are dynoing these cars pretty much at random gear wise. They should be done in 5th since it's 1:1. Since our cars are low powered, it's probably just fine to do it in 3rd.

This might ruffle a few feathers and go against a common belief. But I believe the dyno in 1:1 ratio theory is just a myth, and here's why. And once you think about it, might realize that it's true.

The theory goes like this: 1:1 gear has little or no drive train loss, and is therefore the best (most efficient) gear. Just because it's 1:1 doesn't mean anything, and most people forget the final drive plays a role in the outcome as well. At first I had a very hard time explaining why my BMW on a Dynapack dyno'd the worst in 5th gear -- if it was the most efficient. A Dynapack is a hub-attached dyno, wheels are removed, and operates on the same principle as an engine dyno. Wheel inertia is not involved. The results are only influenced by the motor and drive train loss. So I wondered why my Dynapack results were worse in 5th gear if it was supposedly the most efficient?

I spoke to a physics buddy of mine many times. He's a mechanical engineer whose specialty was gears and hydraulics. After a half dozen discussion pondering why my 5th gear results were worse than any other gear, he finally asked if I could get the teeth count of the gears, and he would cruch the numbers and tell me the mechanical efficiency of each gear.

The mechanical efficiency of a gear is determined by: 1) How many teeth on the primary gear; 2) How many teeth on the secondary gear; 3) Type of gear cut (helical, spherical, straight, etc.); and 4) Type of coupling (wet, dry, etc.).

After he crunched the numbers, we found that my 1:1 gear was the second least efficient gear in the transmission, and 3rd gear was the most efficient; with 4th gear somewhere in between. Viola! The mechanical efficiency calculations perfectly matched my dyno results, and that's when I realized the 1:1 gear ratio theory is just a myth (and a pretty bad one at that).

But those results were on a hub-attached Dynapack. Inertial dyno's didn't match these results. On the inertial dyno's, my 4th gear always dyno'd the highest. But I didn't care because inertial dyno's basically guess power anyways based on mass*acceleration.