Latest MAD engine dyno graphs and figures!
02-02-2006, 10:51 AM
#81
DEYTUKURJERBS
I dont why everyones worrys about surge anyhow, just buy some more boost here...
http://kalecoauto.com/index.php?main...products_id=39
http://kalecoauto.com/index.php?main...products_id=39
02-02-2006, 10:52 AM
#82
Originally Posted by fiesta cossie
i know, but it read like it.
Daft thing is, knowing how well marks engines are reputed normally to work, if it had the extra figures it would probably seem MORE impressive anyway!
02-02-2006, 11:03 AM
#83
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it ISN'T impressive, it's just by posting up the accelerated runs, it makes it IMPOSSIBLE to compare to other dyno figures that aren't obtained in this way.
Why is it always me that can read graphs & not you Mike.
Please read the figures sheet & you will see its a Manual run graph & not an acclerated one, come on Mike stop clutching at straws.
Rod
02-02-2006, 11:05 AM
#84
Originally Posted by MADRod
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it ISN'T impressive, it's just by posting up the accelerated runs, it makes it IMPOSSIBLE to compare to other dyno figures that aren't obtained in this way.
Why is it always me that can read graphs & not you Mike.
Please read the figures sheet & you will see its a Manual run graph & not an acclerated one, come on Mike stop clutching at straws.
Rod
That doesnt change the fact that no environmental information is given though Rod, so its useless to compare against anything, you should know that, you were the one commenting on the NMS graph and how it wasnt meaningful unless put into context.
02-02-2006, 11:22 AM
#86
Originally Posted by space hoppers
got to be bloody good made more torque than rods old 500 engine with less boost 
and i no wot boost levels there were. you guys need to get over it 
and i no wot boost levels there were. you guys need to get over it Is anyone slagging the engine off?
Is anyone slagging mark off?
Is anyone not interested in knowing more about it?
Fuck me talk about paranoid, people dont want to know more so they can use it against mark to slag him off, most of us asking have nothing but respect for mark, and are purely interested in the other figures just to put into perspective how good the engine is!
02-02-2006, 11:28 AM
#87
Originally Posted by jock
I know it was GT something or other
would extra information give away the compression ration as i got the feeling that it was or a higher compression then normal ??
Mike
would extra information give away the compression ration as i got the feeling that it was or a higher compression then normal ??
Mike
02-02-2006, 11:34 AM
#88
Originally Posted by MADRod
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it ISN'T impressive, it's just by posting up the accelerated runs, it makes it IMPOSSIBLE to compare to other dyno figures that aren't obtained in this way.
Why is it always me that can read graphs & not you Mike.
Please read the figures sheet & you will see its a Manual run graph & not an acclerated one, come on Mike stop clutching at straws.
Rod
.Also doesn't explain the missing information that you get when you do a full load point run at the relevent increments
.Here is a full load run:
This is what you get when mapped at Mountune, SCS, Tommy Field's etc (same Superflow dyno), but for some reason (I'm sure Mark will clarify), not when Mark does his
.
02-02-2006, 11:39 AM
#89
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 7,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
If that IS the case, Mark must be exceptionally quick at mapping engines, that he can do a full manual run AND swap the fuel over / remap the engine to suit, all in the space of 20 minutes
a. 16.47 (pump fuel run)
b. 16.58 (race fuel run)
Thats 11 minutes between runs
02-02-2006, 11:43 AM
#90
Originally Posted by Doug Stirling
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
If that IS the case, Mark must be exceptionally quick at mapping engines, that he can do a full manual run AND swap the fuel over / remap the engine to suit, all in the space of 20 minutes
a. 16.47
b. 16.58
Thats 11 minutes between runs
. Rod?
02-02-2006, 11:50 AM
#91
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
[
If that IS the case, Mark must be exceptionally quick at mapping engines, that he can do a full manual run AND swap the fuel over / remap the engine to suit, all in the space of 20 minutes .
Also doesn't explain the missing information that you get when you do a full load point run at the relevent increments.
.
If that IS the case, Mark must be exceptionally quick at mapping engines, that he can do a full manual run AND swap the fuel over / remap the engine to suit, all in the space of 20 minutes
.Also doesn't explain the missing information that you get when you do a full load point run at the relevent increments
..
Im looking at my graph Mike its got exactly the same info nothing has been removed. Think the other information is on another sheet if i remember correctly i did not print it off, not sure if Nick did. Can you please ring Simon ( i will tell him to expect your call) to check that this is fact & not Mark becoming a photo-shop expert. After the NMS guys being caught there aint no way Mark is going to pull the wool over the 'barrack Room' lawyers on here. I note who are complaining all members of the 'Torqueless Wonders' brigade, just except Mark is capable of this, there may be suicides after Ranjs figures are posted.
Rod
02-02-2006, 11:53 AM
#92
Originally Posted by MADRod
I note who are complaining all members of the 'Torqueless Wonders' brigade, just except Mark is capable of this
not sure that comment is fair, personally, ive got bottles and bottles of torque lieing around, and im 101% prepared to except mark builds fantastic engines, in fact its because ive got so much respect for mark that im interested in seeing more details, im sure the same is true of MikeR etc too!
02-02-2006, 11:59 AM
#93
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Doug Stirling
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
If that IS the case, Mark must be exceptionally quick at mapping engines, that he can do a full manual run AND swap the fuel over / remap the engine to suit, all in the space of 20 minutes
a. 16.47
b. 16.58
Thats 11 minutes between runs
. Rod? Why dont you think before you dig the Hole deeper. The Graphs were printed at the end of the sessions look at the time, why would they print
during ?. They are stored on what they call a computer Mike which has that facility
.Just spoken to Mark he has the other figures which can be added.
Cheers Rod
02-02-2006, 12:00 PM
#94
Advanced PassionFord User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: hants
Posts: 1,588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chip-3door
Originally Posted by MADRod
I note who are complaining all members of the 'Torqueless Wonders' brigade, just except Mark is capable of this
not sure that comment is fair, personally, ive got bottles and bottles of torque lieing around, and im 101% prepared to except mark builds fantastic engines, in fact its because ive got so much respect for mark that im interested in seeing more details, im sure the same is true of MikeR etc too!
02-02-2006, 12:03 PM
#95
Originally Posted by space hoppers
Originally Posted by chip-3door
Originally Posted by MADRod
I note who are complaining all members of the 'Torqueless Wonders' brigade, just except Mark is capable of this
not sure that comment is fair, personally, ive got bottles and bottles of torque lieing around, and im 101% prepared to except mark builds fantastic engines, in fact its because ive got so much respect for mark that im interested in seeing more details, im sure the same is true of MikeR etc too!
Mark has utterly no reason to bullshit or hide anything, im just interested to know what boost it was running etc i cause i find engines interesting.
I find birds interesting too, so rather than just be told a birds height i would like to know her cup size too and wether or not she has a liking for oral or whatever, doesnt mean i dont believe she is 5'7 just means i am interested and want to know more.
Im asking for EXACTLY the opposite reasons to what you re implying, if i thought it was all bullshit i would be interested!
02-02-2006, 12:30 PM
#97
Rod,
Okay, I accept the with dignity, but I would still be REALLY interested in seeing the 500rpm increments and other columns listed, purely as this allows me to see how another engine mapped on any other Superflow compares 
.
Was not intended in any way a diss, I just always find it odd that Mark doesn't post these figures up from the start.
As to the "torqueless wonders", boost = torque, 38psi = LOADS of torque.
Okay, I accept the
with dignity, but I would still be REALLY interested in seeing the 500rpm increments and other columns listed, purely as this allows me to see how another engine mapped on any other Superflow compares .Was not intended in any way a diss, I just always find it odd that Mark doesn't post these figures up from the start
.As to the "torqueless wonders", boost = torque, 38psi = LOADS of torque
.
02-02-2006, 02:12 PM
#100
Originally Posted by RANJ
ill commit suicide if mine gets on the dyno
Shitbox is coming up to the anniversary of dropping his engine off there IIRC, still they do say good things come to those who wait
02-02-2006, 06:36 PM
#103
matt-sab - this is Nik Anwyl's Capri as featured in an old copy of PF (the same issue as the three Cossie powered RS200's too). Been hearing about this build for some time now, can't wait to see it out as I've always loved the car...
Cheers,
Ben
PS - it's 2wd mate!
Cheers,
Ben
PS - it's 2wd mate!
02-02-2006, 07:39 PM
#104
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Originally Posted by cosworthcapri
It must be Nick Anwyls capri then, B16 NYK? which was running 12.7 second quarters at 115mph with 320bhp,looked standard aswell.
Mark
02-02-2006, 07:47 PM
#105
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Martin,
You don't get those figures with a "stab test" (accelerated dyno run). Mark knows this and also has reasons for showing the above runs, instead of the full load mapping points
.
The accelerated dyno run "massages" the figures somewhat, as the dyno overshoots and never stabileses or "brakes" the power like on the mapping run
.
Perhaps Mark could post up the mapping run instead - or perhaps not ?
Please note this is not a diss, you just can't compare accelerated dyno run figures with the full load figures that most other people use - it's like comparing chalk and cheese. Obviously those that don't understand this, will be impressed though .
You don't get those figures with a "stab test" (accelerated dyno run). Mark knows this and also has reasons for showing the above runs, instead of the full load mapping points
.The accelerated dyno run "massages" the figures somewhat, as the dyno overshoots and never stabileses or "brakes" the power like on the mapping run
.Perhaps Mark could post up the mapping run instead - or perhaps not
?Please note this is not a diss, you just can't compare accelerated dyno run figures with the full load figures that most other people use - it's like comparing chalk and cheese
. Obviously those that don't understand this, will be impressed though . you missed Manual power run,We did multiple mapping points roughly every 250rpm
and with no real time in between to cool the engine.I was hoping to have the rest of the readings tonight but the emails gone awall so will have to wait till tomorrow night,
Boost does= power so why arnt people doing the same
I also run the same boost in the car
.Mark
02-02-2006, 07:56 PM
#106
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Jock,
It is the GT35s that some people find difficult to prevent surging. However, anyone who has an engine dyno to play with knows how to get rid of by speccing the correct cams / head work. Also, it is only an issue with incorrectly specced 2.0 litre cars, the larger capacity ones (such as Rod's) are easy, because the engine is inherently more capable of processing more air due to it's larger capacity, so has an immediate advantage over a 2 litre car .
It is the GT35s that some people find difficult to prevent surging. However, anyone who has an engine dyno to play with knows how to get rid of by speccing the correct cams / head work
. Also, it is only an issue with incorrectly specced 2.0 litre cars, the larger capacity ones (such as Rod's) are easy, because the engine is inherently more capable of processing more air due to it's larger capacity, so has an immediate advantage over a 2 litre car .So far I have not used any engine dyno for development work ask anyone who has been with me watching the engine is not touched no cams or timing changes or anyother mods
all I do is map.Mark
02-02-2006, 07:59 PM
#107
Originally Posted by madevelopments
Originally Posted by cosworthcapri
It must be Nick Anwyls capri then, B16 NYK? which was running 12.7 second quarters at 115mph with 320bhp,looked standard aswell.
Mark
Rod
02-02-2006, 08:03 PM
#108
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by MADRod
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it ISN'T impressive, it's just by posting up the accelerated runs, it makes it IMPOSSIBLE to compare to other dyno figures that aren't obtained in this way.
Why is it always me that can read graphs & not you Mike.
Please read the figures sheet & you will see its a Manual run graph & not an acclerated one, come on Mike stop clutching at straws.
Rod
.Also doesn't explain the missing information that you get when you do a full load point run at the relevent increments
.Here is a full load run:
This is what you get when mapped at Mountune, SCS, Tommy Field's etc (same Superflow dyno), but for some reason (I'm sure Mark will clarify), not when Mark does his
.Until you have used/mapped with Autronic to the extent I have
it is very very easy to map,the race fuel map is +4dg Ign and tweak the fuel which again is the easy part.
Mark
02-02-2006, 08:05 PM
#109
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Originally Posted by PF Ben
matt-sab - this is Nik Anwyl's Capri as featured in an old copy of PF (the same issue as the three Cossie powered RS200's too). Been hearing about this build for some time now, can't wait to see it out as I've always loved the car...
Cheers,
Ben
PS - it's 2wd mate!
Cheers,
Ben
PS - it's 2wd mate!
1/4 mile he knows he going to have fun with 500ftlb on pump but he can always turn it down
Never Mark
02-02-2006, 08:07 PM
#110
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 7,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by madevelopments
..........Until you have used/mapped with Autronic to the extent I have it is very very easy to map,
the race fuel map is +4dg Ign and tweak the fuel which again is the easy part. Mark
it is very very easy to map,the race fuel map is +4dg Ign and tweak the fuel which again is the easy part. Mark
You are NOT allowed to advertise on here!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
02-02-2006, 08:12 PM
#111
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Rod,
Okay, I accept the with dignity, but I would still be REALLY interested in seeing the 500rpm increments and other columns listed, purely as this allows me to see how another engine mapped on any other Superflow compares .
Was not intended in any way a diss, I just always find it odd that Mark doesn't post these figures up from the start.
As to the "torqueless wonders", boost = torque, 38psi = LOADS of torque.
Okay, I accept the
with dignity, but I would still be REALLY interested in seeing the 500rpm increments and other columns listed, purely as this allows me to see how another engine mapped on any other Superflow compares .Was not intended in any way a diss, I just always find it odd that Mark doesn't post these figures up from the start
.As to the "torqueless wonders", boost = torque, 38psi = LOADS of torque
.
.Rod
02-02-2006, 08:25 PM
#112
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: South Wales
Posts: 949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always good fun to read a thread like this!!
Well done Mark - another top engine! & good to see Rod back on PF - (you have probably been back a while but i did'nt notice. )
Well done Mark - another top engine! & good to see Rod back on PF - (you have probably been back a while but i did'nt notice.
)
02-02-2006, 09:46 PM
#114
Advanced PassionFord User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bristol
Posts: 1,660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wait till we dyno my engine next month; GT35, EEE IV throtle body, internal waste gate, I wounder what reaction this will create as we're going to be hoping to see 600 brake on pump 500+tq, and 640 brake and 550+tq on 102. All this with once again no trace of surge
Ade.
Ade.
02-02-2006, 11:05 PM
#117
PassionFord Regular
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MADRod
...but you were blazin with both barrels so i resulted to a punch below the belt. .
Rod
.Rod
Hard for him to get above the belt IMHO!
