Yums Dyno Day Today **Result's page 2 & 3**
20-04-2009, 06:51 PM
#122
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Mark
20-04-2009, 06:54 PM
#123
To answer a couple of the questions.
The head gasket went with a tiny bit more ignition in it than Rod's ended up running last time, so even though it made 16lbft less of torque, the cylinder pressures were slightly high probably, the reason for this is that Dave is on a MUCH smaller turbo than Rod is, only a GT40 not a GT42, so essentially the engine is working harder to do the same numbers as its got greater pumping losses.
Dave's primary interest with the car was what it does on pump fuel, he wants an engine that performs well on the track and on the road, and basically the bottom line is that for those sort of things he simply cant afford to run the car on 5 quid a litre fuel anyway realistically, as trackdays are dear enough already without the fuel bill increasing fivefold.
So the race fuel run would only have been "out of interest" really, so no big deal to Dave particuarly that he didnt get that figure.
He went there hoping it would make 700 on pump, as that is what Rod has told him he needs to stand a fighting chance of doing something that no one else has ever done, and run a cossie at over 200mph on pump fuel.
If it can manage that, I personally think its an awesome achievement, to be able to drive your car there, run it and drive it home, without even changing the fuel, so a true 200mph road car.
Obviously only time will tell if that can actually happen or not, as with "only" 711bhp its not going to be a walk in the park, but its certainly something to aim for.
With regards to why it makes peak power at 6500rpm, its simply that after that the turbo cant really flow any more air than it does at that point, and with the cams and port sizes etc that it has, the engine is particuarly efficient at those revs.
Rod's carried on to make more power further up simply cause the turbo was able to keep cramming in more and more air to make it do so, daves "little" turbo cant achieve the same feat so the boost drops a little at high rpm.
He's got within a hairs width of 700bhp for a whopping 2000rpm window though, all the way from 6000rpm to 8000rpm, so IMHO its going to be monstrously fast for that whole chunk of the rev range by most people's standards.
Peak torque in the car will be a bit lower than the engine actually made, as they have to preserve the gearbox and 623lbft (the highest I saw on pump, although that wasnt on a recorded run so isnt in the figures published here) isnt going to do that, so I believe mark is going to limit the boost in the midrange to just under 2bar where it makes 530lbft of torque. (think it did that on 1.99 bar IIRC)
The head gasket went with a tiny bit more ignition in it than Rod's ended up running last time, so even though it made 16lbft less of torque, the cylinder pressures were slightly high probably, the reason for this is that Dave is on a MUCH smaller turbo than Rod is, only a GT40 not a GT42, so essentially the engine is working harder to do the same numbers as its got greater pumping losses.
Dave's primary interest with the car was what it does on pump fuel, he wants an engine that performs well on the track and on the road, and basically the bottom line is that for those sort of things he simply cant afford to run the car on 5 quid a litre fuel anyway realistically, as trackdays are dear enough already without the fuel bill increasing fivefold.
So the race fuel run would only have been "out of interest" really, so no big deal to Dave particuarly that he didnt get that figure.
He went there hoping it would make 700 on pump, as that is what Rod has told him he needs to stand a fighting chance of doing something that no one else has ever done, and run a cossie at over 200mph on pump fuel.
If it can manage that, I personally think its an awesome achievement, to be able to drive your car there, run it and drive it home, without even changing the fuel, so a true 200mph road car.
Obviously only time will tell if that can actually happen or not, as with "only" 711bhp its not going to be a walk in the park, but its certainly something to aim for.
With regards to why it makes peak power at 6500rpm, its simply that after that the turbo cant really flow any more air than it does at that point, and with the cams and port sizes etc that it has, the engine is particuarly efficient at those revs.
Rod's carried on to make more power further up simply cause the turbo was able to keep cramming in more and more air to make it do so, daves "little" turbo cant achieve the same feat so the boost drops a little at high rpm.
He's got within a hairs width of 700bhp for a whopping 2000rpm window though, all the way from 6000rpm to 8000rpm, so IMHO its going to be monstrously fast for that whole chunk of the rev range by most people's standards.
Peak torque in the car will be a bit lower than the engine actually made, as they have to preserve the gearbox and 623lbft (the highest I saw on pump, although that wasnt on a recorded run so isnt in the figures published here) isnt going to do that, so I believe mark is going to limit the boost in the midrange to just under 2bar where it makes 530lbft of torque. (think it did that on 1.99 bar IIRC)
Last edited by Chip; 20-04-2009 at 06:56 PM.
20-04-2009, 06:57 PM
#124
PassionFord Post Whore!!
It looks like a gasket problem, Checking the crank pully it apears the offset keyway that was cut in to it over 5 years ago apears to have been cut around 5dgs out,
This would explain why we had slightly less igition in it than we should have, Then slightly more ignition was added than Rods on race fuel this was still safe with the type of race fuel we run,
But this was above what we had found safe in Rods hance the gasket problem but not the same type as Rods as that popped the gasket out and Daves has not.
Mark
This would explain why we had slightly less igition in it than we should have, Then slightly more ignition was added than Rods on race fuel this was still safe with the type of race fuel we run,
But this was above what we had found safe in Rods hance the gasket problem but not the same type as Rods as that popped the gasket out and Daves has not.
Mark
20-04-2009, 07:04 PM
#127
It looks like a gasket problem, Checking the crank pully it apears the offset keyway that was cut in to it over 5 years ago apears to have been cut around 5dgs out,
This would explain why we had slightly less igition in it than we should have, Then slightly more ignition was added than Rods on race fuel this was still safe with the type of race fuel we run,
But this was above what we had found safe in Rods hance the gasket problem but not the same type as Rods as that popped the gasket out and Daves has not.
Mark
This would explain why we had slightly less igition in it than we should have, Then slightly more ignition was added than Rods on race fuel this was still safe with the type of race fuel we run,
But this was above what we had found safe in Rods hance the gasket problem but not the same type as Rods as that popped the gasket out and Daves has not.
Mark
This might seem a daft question but when you built the engine surely you would have marked the pulley for TDC and then put a light on it before dynoing it to check the figures you were seeing on the screen were what you were actually getting?
Good power though.
Last edited by Martin-Hadland; 20-04-2009 at 07:08 PM.
20-04-2009, 07:08 PM
#129
Advanced PassionFord User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bristol
Posts: 1,660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Superb figures Mark and Dave, amazing graph, holds on to the power right to the end.
Can't wait to see how Yum goes with this latest power plant!!!
Can't wait to see how Yum goes with this latest power plant!!!
20-04-2009, 07:08 PM
#130
The actual positioning of it isnt all that important, as when you map it if its out you adjust the numbers accordingly, so the car was still mapped with the right amount of ignition for what it required, mark was just saying that the numbers in the table looked lower than rod's but were higher than rods on the engine, if that makes sense mate?
20-04-2009, 10:31 PM
#132
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sutton
Posts: 2,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a long day
A couple of thanks to, Mark, Rod, Chip, Helen and the guys from Norris Designs
Very happy with the figures, more than we was looking for
Big thank for all the comments
A couple of thanks to, Mark, Rod, Chip, Helen and the guys from Norris Designs
Very happy with the figures, more than we was looking for
Big thank for all the comments
20-04-2009, 10:47 PM
#137
I've found that life I needed.. It's HERE!!
Join Date: May 2007
Location: ballymoney co"antrim northern ireland
Posts: 1,092
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
hi
all you need is a gear box thats not a toy so the car can be used the way it should be out on track
thanks steven..
thanks steven..
20-04-2009, 11:32 PM
#141
21-04-2009, 07:23 AM
#144
The actual positioning of it isnt all that important, as when you map it if its out you adjust the numbers accordingly, so the car was still mapped with the right amount of ignition for what it required, mark was just saying that the numbers in the table looked lower than rod's but were higher than rods on the engine, if that makes sense mate?
21-04-2009, 03:15 PM
#151
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sutton
Posts: 2,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the picture of head gasket
SO head need a clean up and will be back on Thursday
Sump is being done and will be back this week, then ,ark can put it back together again so can be installed back in car on Sunday!!
SO head need a clean up and will be back on Thursday
Sump is being done and will be back this week, then ,ark can put it back together again so can be installed back in car on Sunday!!
21-04-2009, 03:43 PM
#155
No power run was done, the only value we got was 650lbft at 5500rpm, as thats the only pull done before mark spotted the problem.
That 650lbft reading was probably less than it should have been though as it was recorded with the failed gasket (or during the failure) as that is from literally the last time the engine ran before the plugs were inspected, so it must have gone at that point or before that point.
21-04-2009, 03:45 PM
#156
Agreed!
over 620lbft is far too much to ask of daves transmisison!
It wont need capping at the top end though where it makes peak power as the torque is naturally less by then anyway of course.
Should be a really interesting car to be in with a totally relentless pull of 500lbft of torque from 4K right through to 8K with utterly no let up!
over 620lbft is far too much to ask of daves transmisison!
It wont need capping at the top end though where it makes peak power as the torque is naturally less by then anyway of course.
Should be a really interesting car to be in with a totally relentless pull of 500lbft of torque from 4K right through to 8K with utterly no let up!
21-04-2009, 04:08 PM
#159
10K+ Poster!!
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: birmingham west mids
Posts: 11,919
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
9 Posts
Nice 
....
It is not so much the peak figures that are so impressive (although they are in their own right), but just the area under the graphs, mightily impressive spead of both power and torque, should be an animal on the road
.. How much is an engine like that to drop in ready to run? 
....It is not so much the peak figures that are so impressive (although they are in their own right), but just the area under the graphs, mightily impressive spead of both power and torque, should be an animal on the road
.. How much is an engine like that to drop in ready to run?
