How many bhp for this boost is normal? UPDATE with graphics!
17-08-2009, 09:36 AM
#1
How many bhp for this boost is normal? UPDATE with graphics!
Done a rolling road session last friday. Turned out to have only 278bhp at 5300 (20psi of boost). I find this very low for the setup.
My cossie 4x4 runs a stage 2, so MSD closed loop chip, -34 actuator, greens, 3 bar mapsensor, standard T03 turbo and 3 inch stainless steel Mongoose. Peaks at 26 psi, held 20psi at 5500rpm. Fuelling is at the rich side at lambda 0.7
In a previous session 3 years ago it had 320bhp with 2,5 inch exhaust (non closed loop msd chip). But than it had a very, very lean mixture.
My cossie 4x4 runs a stage 2, so MSD closed loop chip, -34 actuator, greens, 3 bar mapsensor, standard T03 turbo and 3 inch stainless steel Mongoose. Peaks at 26 psi, held 20psi at 5500rpm. Fuelling is at the rich side at lambda 0.7
In a previous session 3 years ago it had 320bhp with 2,5 inch exhaust (non closed loop msd chip). But than it had a very, very lean mixture.
Last edited by YBJ; 20-08-2009 at 07:36 AM.
Trending Topics
18-08-2009, 08:10 PM
#8
Mate of mine with exactly the same setup and boost had also only 280bhp, slightly better torque figure but that was maybe cause he had a afr of 0.8. But in a previous rr sesion at the same place he got 325bhp..
Only thing we can think of is that we both had a MSD chip non closed loop and now both have a MSD closed loop. No other changes have been made at both of our cars, just another chip in it and now we both lost about 45 bhp..
18-08-2009, 08:31 PM
#9
Yes, we used the same Rolling road. Actuator is brand new, boost was not fluctuating at all, nice and steady. But as it is a standard T3 it will only hold 20 psi high up the revs which I think is good.
Mate of mine with exactly the same setup and boost had also only 280bhp, slightly better torque figure but that was maybe cause he had a afr of 0.8. But in a previous rr sesion at the same place he got 325bhp..
Only thing we can think of is that we both had a MSD chip non closed loop and now both have a MSD closed loop. No other changes have been made at both of our cars, just another chip in it and now we both lost about 45 bhp..
Mate of mine with exactly the same setup and boost had also only 280bhp, slightly better torque figure but that was maybe cause he had a afr of 0.8. But in a previous rr sesion at the same place he got 325bhp..
Only thing we can think of is that we both had a MSD chip non closed loop and now both have a MSD closed loop. No other changes have been made at both of our cars, just another chip in it and now we both lost about 45 bhp..
maybe the rollers need calibrating?!
19-08-2009, 07:56 AM
#10
Both cars feel like the same with the old and new chip when driven. New closed loop chip is a lot smoother but feels as strong as the old one. 45 Bhp less should be noticed I quess..
Talked to the operator but he ensured the rr was calibrated and only had a max. of +/- 0.5 kW deviation.
Its strange to me that 2 cars with similar setup have a lower value than normal. Both had a previous output of 325 bhp and now only 280 bhp. Cant imagine its the new chip because the cars are both still very fast!!
Talked to the operator but he ensured the rr was calibrated and only had a max. of +/- 0.5 kW deviation.
Its strange to me that 2 cars with similar setup have a lower value than normal. Both had a previous output of 325 bhp and now only 280 bhp. Cant imagine its the new chip because the cars are both still very fast!!
19-08-2009, 09:41 AM
#12
No not problems, car drives ok. But not that many bhp like that I was hoping for. And done a new RR with a friend of mine like described and he also had very low bhp...
Again at Rica like we did with the club in the past.
19-08-2009, 10:29 AM
#14
I've found that life I needed.. It's HERE!!
Turbo-charged cars on a Rolling Road always get hot. Especially the intake air temperature may rise to levels where the power decreases.
Where the conditions about the same? i.e. same room temperature?
Did both operators have the same cooling capacity?
Was the intake temperature measured?
Where the conditions about the same? i.e. same room temperature?
Did both operators have the same cooling capacity?
Was the intake temperature measured?
19-08-2009, 11:50 AM
#16
Turbo-charged cars on a Rolling Road always get hot. Especially the intake air temperature may rise to levels where the power decreases.
Where the conditions about the same? i.e. same room temperature?
Did both operators have the same cooling capacity?
Was the intake temperature measured?
Where the conditions about the same? i.e. same room temperature?
Did both operators have the same cooling capacity?
Was the intake temperature measured?
20-08-2009, 07:34 AM
#19
How many bhp for this boost is normal? UPDATE with graphics!
Here are the 2 graphics of my rolling road sessions, one for low boost and one for high boost (switchable amalvalve).
What I notice is that in high boost mode the wheel power goes up with 38 PS (bhp) but the flywheel power goes up with only 13,6 PS (bhp). Now that's very strange in my opinion!?
Low boost:
And high boost:
What I notice is that in high boost mode the wheel power goes up with 38 PS (bhp) but the flywheel power goes up with only 13,6 PS (bhp). Now that's very strange in my opinion!?
Low boost:
And high boost:
20-08-2009, 04:36 PM
#20
I've found that life I needed.. It's HERE!!
The difference is in the parameter "trekvermogen" which is the green line.
This is supposed to measure transmission losses and the number is added to the measured power on the wheels. With high boost that is considerably lower.
Which run did you do first? Low boost or high boost?
I would like to point out the value of the Lambda (Oxygen sensor) signal above 5900rpm. It is going VERY VERY VERY lean, even peaking at 1.3. If I were you I wouldn't try top speed in Germany, that may lead to melted pistons. Your chip needs some work done.
My personal opinion is that the operator should have aborted the run once the lambda goes above 0.9 (never mind 1.3) to prevent engine damage.
I know I would have aborted it.
This is supposed to measure transmission losses and the number is added to the measured power on the wheels. With high boost that is considerably lower.
Which run did you do first? Low boost or high boost?
I would like to point out the value of the Lambda (Oxygen sensor) signal above 5900rpm. It is going VERY VERY VERY lean, even peaking at 1.3. If I were you I wouldn't try top speed in Germany, that may lead to melted pistons. Your chip needs some work done.
My personal opinion is that the operator should have aborted the run once the lambda goes above 0.9 (never mind 1.3) to prevent engine damage.
I know I would have aborted it.
Last edited by oldford; 20-08-2009 at 06:11 PM.
21-08-2009, 07:01 AM
#21
I have noticed that some numbers aren't correct. So I think the whole rr session wasnt done good. For instance the wheelpower has gone up with 4 bhp in relation to the session done 3 years ago, but the enginepower has gone down with 45 bhp! That's impossible in my opinion..
Second is there wasnt a good rpm measurement. The operator looked at my rev counter to calibrate his machine. The km/h per 1000 rpm was set at 30 km/h per 1000 rpm in fourth gear and in previous sessions it was 36,5 km/h per 1000 rpm in fourth gear.
So all the mathematics that are done are not at the right values.
Second is there wasnt a good rpm measurement. The operator looked at my rev counter to calibrate his machine. The km/h per 1000 rpm was set at 30 km/h per 1000 rpm in fourth gear and in previous sessions it was 36,5 km/h per 1000 rpm in fourth gear.
So all the mathematics that are done are not at the right values.
21-08-2009, 10:19 AM
#22
I've found that life I needed.. It's HERE!!
Rolling roads are good for measuring wheel horsepower, not engine horsepower.
Look at your 2 graphs, in the first the losses are 104bhp, and in the second 80bhp.
In your previous run the losses were something between 125 and 130bhp, which I believe to be too much. I'll go along with 80 -90 bhp loss.
30 km/h per 1000 revs in 4th gear is about right.
36.5 km/h per 1000 revs is about the value for fifth gear.
Still you have got a huge problem. Lambda is going dangerously lean when revving above 6000 rpm. Could be a chip problem or your fuel pump doesn't supply enough.
Look at your 2 graphs, in the first the losses are 104bhp, and in the second 80bhp.
In your previous run the losses were something between 125 and 130bhp, which I believe to be too much. I'll go along with 80 -90 bhp loss.
30 km/h per 1000 revs in 4th gear is about right.
36.5 km/h per 1000 revs is about the value for fifth gear.
Still you have got a huge problem. Lambda is going dangerously lean when revving above 6000 rpm. Could be a chip problem or your fuel pump doesn't supply enough.
21-08-2009, 06:11 PM
#24
I've found that life I needed.. It's HERE!!
4bhp difference between 2 runs is for a 200bhp Turbo-charged engine very acceptable.
No 2 runs will be the same and on a turbo the inlet temperature plays a big role.
I have measured cars on the road and found 10% difference between a cold (freezing) day and a hot summers day. Your difference is only 2 percent.
On the other difference you have a valid point. Rolling roads produce very different bhp figures for the transmission losses. If you want some big numbers on the printout just hit the brake when the losses are calculated.
Even with the 2 runs on the same rolling road you have a difference of 20bhp. Let alone when you compare the losses measured on 2 rolling roads. Once again 130bhp loss is very, very exaggerated. I believe the printout you placed here comes very close to what you really have.
For the specs you have this is not a lot. With a standard 4x4 engine and a stage 1 chip I can get 270bhp, which is only 8 less than you have.
This chip cannot match your torque, that's seems to be somewhat in order for the specs you have.
No 2 runs will be the same and on a turbo the inlet temperature plays a big role.
I have measured cars on the road and found 10% difference between a cold (freezing) day and a hot summers day. Your difference is only 2 percent.
On the other difference you have a valid point. Rolling roads produce very different bhp figures for the transmission losses. If you want some big numbers on the printout just hit the brake when the losses are calculated.
Even with the 2 runs on the same rolling road you have a difference of 20bhp. Let alone when you compare the losses measured on 2 rolling roads. Once again 130bhp loss is very, very exaggerated. I believe the printout you placed here comes very close to what you really have.
For the specs you have this is not a lot. With a standard 4x4 engine and a stage 1 chip I can get 270bhp, which is only 8 less than you have.
This chip cannot match your torque, that's seems to be somewhat in order for the specs you have.
Last edited by oldford; 21-08-2009 at 06:36 PM.
22-08-2009, 09:06 AM
#25
Thanks again. I understand fully what you are saying. Chip is an off the shelf one for this setup from MSD.
I think its the wheelpower figure that is most important. And when seeing this figure and the one a few years ago they are about the same, both in the 190bhp region, so that makes me happy.
Unfortannely the operators at Rica never want to give some good solid information when you ask them for the differences or other figures from their rr sessions. Every car that hasnt been tuned by them is no good it seems. Maybe in the future I will visit another place to get a reference.
I think its the wheelpower figure that is most important. And when seeing this figure and the one a few years ago they are about the same, both in the 190bhp region, so that makes me happy.
Unfortannely the operators at Rica never want to give some good solid information when you ask them for the differences or other figures from their rr sessions. Every car that hasnt been tuned by them is no good it seems. Maybe in the future I will visit another place to get a reference.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JK12
Pictures, video & Photoshop Forum
33
26-04-2021 12:09 PM
TPM961
Restorations, Rebuilds & Projects.
19
15-01-2018 10:50 AM
Russ Payne
Ford Sierra/Sapphire/RS500 Cosworth
1
25-09-2015 08:29 PM