Andy.F

Those fans are first class though by the time he has done the warm up run the temps are way back down. I was datalogging my runs and I only seen 2 degrees above my 'on road' charge temps. Water temps were exactly as they are on the road, oil was even cooler.

Yes, I still have the ap22 had it with me today in fact !

Andy

Spooks

Amazingly consistant rollers as Andy says but they are about 10% lower than star consistantly too so you takes yer choice as to what one ya think is right.
Anyways bad result for me
227 BHP and 207 torque ....... so doon a fair bit fae Star. Figures aint the be all and end all so Cest la vie. Having said I cant say that I trust em as there is no way in hell that all the PPP Sti's were 20 bhp doon, Coulty , Johnny, Dave and myself were down from what was expected as well.
And then I gotta say a big ta to all the guys for the banter, Dastek ( good guys) and Bats for the gettin this done
Oh and one other thing Andy yer car is a MONSTER Geez.............
Spooks

sti-04!!

what did the 350Z make ?

kart_man

My figures were a bit lower than expected, but as John said, it was detting a bit during the runs. Was fine on the way there and way back though !!
Boost was lower than I expected too. The peak logged on my guage showed only 1.06 bar which is a good bit lower than normal. I'm sure the P1 usually peaks at 1.2 then holds 1.1 Air temps and atmos pressure perhaps ?!? At the end of the day, this is just my starting point. The car is standard, so I've now got something to compare to if I start mod'ing. Just need to go back to Dastek to get an accurate comparison as every set of rollers are different.

Only criticism of the day was the lack of extra info on the dyno printouts. No boost shown on the graph which is handy to see, and no temps either. Other than that, a good well organised day, albeit slightly slow running.

Big thanks to everyone involved though - The Dastek guys worked hard and I'm sure it was a long day for them too !

kart_man

p.s. Left just before the 'Z' ran, but the sti04 ppp's were running around 280 (and are quoted as 305).

Bats-Wrx

iTrader: (1)

The 350z ran 279bhp iirc.

Hope yous enjoyed your day.

GrantyBoy

I got 261 bhp with 226.9 torque.

My torque graph is strange though. Peaks to 226.9 at 4500rpm then drops off quickly. I thought peak torque would be produced higher up in the range and have more of a gradual tail-off.

Does this sound right??

Russs

Boost plotting will appear on the graphs very soon.
If Gerry could've done it today, he would've.
Also I'm sure if you asked for a ambient temperature figure you could've had it.

There are always going to be differences between rollers, but as Andy said, you won't get a more consistent set-up.

The "hot room" never got that hot imho. I was there from 0830 and I doubt it even came up more than a couple of degrees before I left at 1300.
Very nicely thought out dyno cell.
Also think they show alot more mechanical sympathy at Dastek than at any other rollers I've seen. Good warm up and cool downs.

Nice numbers Andy

sti-04!!

IIRC - torque peaks a lot earlier & does exaclty what you have just said

See my graphs for an indication

ylee coyote

376 actually....

ylee coyote

I was a little disappointed with the results hoping for over 400

however it ws nice too meet all you guys (and gals)

Btw ..later on that day goosed the gearbox...still drivable but only just

famous weak point on these cars
unburstable engines but the gearbox has a 50p circlip in the gear selector mechanism
which breaks very easily...
gearbox out and stripdown...600 squid at least !!

(R-6)

Sorry to hear about the box Geo, I'm sure you and the son will fix it up.
#
Nice to see you again.

Chris (the blind man)

wrxmania

[QUOTE=sg72]

Did you have youre car mapped for new filter /exhaust Bri?

QUOTE]

Hi Steve,

The car is not mapped for the filter and exhaust - it still has both the cats in place and the 3" straight pipework from the cat back, ready for the cats to be dispelled before it gets mapped.

Giving it a bit of time under warranty before I blow it all for a few horses. Like to look after my cars too so it is not booted every minute of the day.

Happy enough with my result - if it is lower than Star and is REALISTICALLY making 235 under Dasteks sort-of road like conditions then I am still 15 BHP up on the manufacturers claim for just an exhaust and filter - I do very much wish there was a standard new style WRX on the rollers today to see what that does. Judging by the average 20 BHP down on expectations/claims I would say it would only have made 200 BHP so happy that mine MAY have made as much as + 30 odds over a standard car - all conjecture of course.

The curves for both Torque and BHP and nice and smooth, no dips of blips, and a smooth tail-off at the top of the rev band, so happy wit that too.

Nice to see it running well - the Dastek guys did say that the WRX's seemed to hold their boost better than the STI's, so one plus point.

Pity you could not make it Steve - your car is now a MONSTER!!!!!!

Brian

Mr Blob-eye

Wish I could have got Noel Edmonds beard on the rollers!!

sti-04!!

Brian - he said it was the PPP ones that werent holding the boost

wrxmania

Did he not say it was the blue and gold ones?

Mr Blob-eye

Sounds about right to me too.

sti-04!!

nope

the noiser the better

Mr Blob-eye

What is the fascination with noisy cars - a sore head and draws attention of all the kids at the side of the road. I prefer to be inconspicuous.

Pink works every time for me

sti-04!!

Mr Blob-eye

What immature behaviour - just what I would expect from a boy racer!!

RS Grant

I was very happy with my 174.5bhp that I got from my wee Civic...

Was a good day, apart from finding out that the tracking needs sorting on the car and that my tyre had a golf ball sized bulge on it!!!

Cheers,
Grant

Johnny50

Grant,

Was well impressed with the Civic matey.
Very nice, and top results too.

hugo

Here's my numbers, if you're interested (MY03 STi PPP, only mod TSL Group N backbox and centre section). Peak power 283bhp (7000rpm), peak torque 280 (4000rpm), on second run. The 350Z did exactly what it says on the tin, which makes me a bit miffed at the observed vs expected PPP figures (as you know all the STi PPP's were pretty much the same). Do you think that ducting the cool air through the scoop with a closed bonnet after a few skooshes of water spray would make a difference? By the way my ears are still ringing and my liver still resonating after standing next to your car on the rollers Stephen! And after a night on the pi$h my liver is not happy . Thanks again to Bats and the Dastek fellows, I really enjoyed the afternoon and got to put some faces to names.

sti-04!!

Hi hugh - thanks for that its loud eh ??

Looking at your graph & mines you can really see that mines dips at 3500rpm then rises again good to see that & i will be trying to reflect on this in the future

I have to say that after seeing the 350z & the M3 results i think (flame suit on) that dasteks rollers on near to being spot on

All the best

Stephen

Andy.F

Certainly all the 2wd cars were bang on, is it just us 4wd dudes that have high expectations

Frazer

Grant what mods does it have? What torque did it make?

trancer

My trusty ol' M3


Had a good time at the day and it was great to meet you all!! I regognise a few of the sign in names!

Steven

Gerry Gaffney

Hi Guys,

Andy F emailed me with a few queries, so I replied in length to him, & it would make sense if I stuck the reply up here as well, maybe explain a few things.

I spent a few hours on Saturday night (much to the wife's amusement) looking at all the raw data, & I spotted the problem.

Here goes the long winded tech explanation As you probably noticed we control the roller RPM per second per second rate on both roller sets, this we feel gives the car a more realistic load & extremely repeatable results (& hence the boost & torque curves usually match how the car performs on road) Because we have a constant acceleration of the rollers we know how much torque is required just to accelerate the rollers at this rate ( torque = polar moment of inertia * rpm per second / 9.5) thus we use a look up table depending on the ramp rate we are using & add it to the torque seen by the loadcell on the brake (which is controlling the ramp rate) this way the engine is always under load (unlike other systems that apply more load the faster the rollers go - so low boost & torque at low engine speeds, then a spike of boost & torque as the brake comes on, then a killer load at the top end) Anyway, in my eagerness to impress the Scoobynet fraternity, I worked very late on Friday night trying to finish the 16 channel data logger with the new software that provides the ramp rate, correction factor, temp, atmo pressure, peak figures, losses, etc etc, just like most people are used to, however I couldn't get it finished in time, so I swapped the software back to the old version, but I forgot to replace the 4WD look up table, so when we ran the 2WD cars, they were spot on, but when I ran the 4WD cars, they were looking at the wrong torque multiplier (the software basically thought it was to add the torque in for only accelerating one chassis only) so the power at the wheels for the 4WD cars would be down somewhere in the region of 20 - 40 bhp depending on roller speed. However at the time I didn't believe it could be wrong as I had dynoed & mapped quite a few 4WD cars during the week & they were all producing what I would expect (this was before I fecked about with the software of course) so a big bit of humble pie for lunch today

The above however, wouldn't affect the transmission losses, as we use another calculation for this. John Banks made an interesting observation in that, at circa 50 bhp, the M3 had almost identical losses to the 4wd cars. What he witnessed was that the M3 was run in 4th gear & the gearing is quite long on these cars, & as the transmission losses are related to roller speed (windage of rollers & retarders, parasitic drag on the bearings, deformation of tyres etc) the drag is higher with greater speed. What you probably would have seen (with the correct look up table installed) would be higher at the wheels figures (remember we run the 4WD 5 speed cars in 3rd) & much lower transmission losses, this is not just because of the roller speed being lower in 3rd gear, but also because our rollers are closer together (so the wheel doesn't get 'pinched' by the two rollers & thus the tyres deform less) & also because the finish on the rollers means we don't have the same slippage problems as other dyno's (providing we get the wheel base correct - but this is easy picked up on the run if it's not) we therefore don't need to pull the cars down hard onto the rollers (further deforming the tyres & reducing the power at the wheels & increasing the drag)

So apologies to all the 4wd cars for the wrong results, so my proposal would be either to get back all the 4WD cars & do them again (preferably when I've got the new software 100%) or refund the money to all affected.

Let me know what you think.

Cheers,

Gerry

sti-04!!

Gerry - thanks for your reply !!

It makes sense now

I wouldnt mind coming back up for another FOC go (off next week)

I was the standardish though very loud sti that got 261bhp