Went to PE today having fitted the dawes this morning ;)

MY99 on standard ECU with Dawes MBC, ITG panel and full straight through Magnex exhaust (no resonator, twin dump DP) and got:

266bhp and 257lb/ft :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

It was on the select monitor at the same time and was running nice and rich (about 9-10% CO2) with no sign of knock/det whatsoever. The Dawes was set reading about 1-1.1 bar on my gauge and was told that it was running at just over 15Psi on the rollers so I could probably up the boost a bit more????

Also running with a 1.5mm drilled out bleed hole in the Dawes as John said........

Happy chappy anyway :D Thought you might like to know the results ;)

[Edited by ScoobyJawa - 1/19/2002 6:54:32 PM]

I second what Neil says about the Dawes, as the two of us had them fitted this morning (I think Luke made a comment about us in another thread ;)). Thanks also goes to Steve L for fitting it, along with a couple of things! ;):D

My results for a MY00, Dawes, K&N 57i, full S/S system were 268 bhp, and 251 lbs/ft. :D:D I was holding just over 1 bar, and as I never really had an opportunity to fine tune the Dawes (due to running @ PE), I'm extremely happy with the results. :D Hopefully tomorrow I will be able to set it to 1.1 bar.

As Neil also mentioned about the fueling on his car, mine was also running spot on according to the engineer.

I will post my dyno graph up as soon as I can find a new FTP software, as my current version has passed it's trial date! :D

[Edited by Scott W - 1/19/2002 6:26:57 PM]

Oops ;) yeah second that Scott, cheers to Steve L for fitting it :D

I need to play about some more too - had a little more time than Scott but we both had to shoot off so hopefully those figures will rise a bit ;)

Scott - how you getting the graph done? You got a scanner? Can I borrow it? ;) :D

As mentioned earlier:-

http://www.swallace.demon.co.uk/PE%2...Jan%202002.jpg

Neil, yes and yes :D

Good results guys. Mine is going on tomorrow at Star, but I don't think I will get results as good as yours as Star reads much lower than PE. My car is very similar to both of yours except a PPP ECU, which I don't think will make that much difference except in the midrange since I can run 18PSI. At the top end it is flow limited.

Here's my dyno result too, but scott chopped the bottom off ;) Its 266bhp at 6600 or so rpm.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/neil.am...9thJan2002.jpg

[Edited by ScoobyJawa - 1/20/2002 4:55:17 PM]

Guys

Maybe you can help ?

What facility do PE have for cooling top mount intercoolers ?

We had a group run at star today and a number of cars fell short of expectations.
There is a view that it may be due to lack of charge cooling.

Andy

[Edited by Cosie Convert - 1/20/2002 6:18:10 PM]

PE run on the rollers with the usual fan blowing air at the front of the car. But when running an Impreza, run it up with the bonnet down so the Scoop does it's job.

The Star fan is quite low down - ideal for a FMIC and quoted as 80mph. The TMIC fan is quoted as 40mph but when it was pointed at me it felt more like 10mph - certainly it was a lot windier outside today!

When they did the run the bonnet was closed with the fan in front and aimed slightly up the bonnet.

This could explain why Stars power readings are lower that PE on Scoobys ?

thanks guys

Andy

Power Station have the lowest results of all and they have a dedicated fan, which blows down onto the i/c with the bonnet up, as well as a front fan. I can't see that it makes that much difference. PS also use a mister spray!

F

Which is it guys ?

Bonnet up / Bonnet down ?
Front fan / Top fan ?

Mister ? Water vapour spray ?

cc

Scott W/ScoobyJawa,

can you remember your power at wheels figures?,you both have similar figures above and would just like to compare PAW's.

PE PAW figures are still way higher than Star/PS though?

I only want to compare these two cars with each other.not with our results.one thing I cannot understand from our r/r day was my m8's Dawes car got great flywheel and torque but crap PAW's.just thought it may be the MY00 ECU.

You are analysing data which is quite error-ridden though for hidden meanings ;) ? You would make a good religious leader... ;) No offence to religious folk, just call it a few interesting experiences and a few close shaves with a bunch of nutcases for rather too long...

me a religious leader,lol.
I have less belief in that than these Green MY00 ECU's-they're both full of sh1te :p .

Sometimes it's really a shame search is down ...

We had a *big* discussion about RR/PAW figures a few months back, with input from all the big shots, including Merv etc...

The conclusion was that PAW figures were even more unreliable than flywheel figures.

Damn if I can find the thread. :(

I have always found PAW to be consistent with my cars but lets face it r/r's are only a very rough guide.

I think it is good that search is off as opinions change.okay some threads get repeated but it is something else to read.

>>I think it is good that search is off as opinions change

Damn. A good point actually :D

It's just that I forgot the arguments... but basically, the software compensation (DIN, temp) makes up to a certain extent for the different roller loads/conditions/guestimate figures of the PAW figures.

Best still - and it amazes me that it doesn't catch on - is to do a few tests from 0-120 mph (or 128 mph/200 km/h). Even with the fault tolerance on a AP22/G-Tech of 1 second or so, it does make interesting reading.

(and I mean real 120 MPH, not speedo)

I'm hoping Neil can remember is as from what I remember and I'm not 100% confident but I think my PaW was around the 175 mark.

FYI my ECU is the green AE802.

Also, do any of you guys now how I could potentially increase this, as it seems a lot of cars with similar bhp figures to mine are close to/if not above the 200bhp PaW? :confused:

Theo,

Is this the thread you are looking for? :D :D :D

http://www.scoobynet.co.uk/bbs/threa...threadid=12124

Cheers,

Wrexy.

LOL Wrexy, I think that's the one :D

Using my own weapons against me now eh, you git ;)

:D :D :D

I think both Scott and I were around the 170 mark, not exactly sure. (Thats a sh1t load of transmission loss :eek: )

OMG xmission loss [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img] I lost 103.5bhp @ the last RR.

Pete

in my experience power engineerings rollers read way higher than anybody elses- so it looks like theyve done a REALLY good job when u give em cash to mod ur car!

A couple of points....

intercooling on a RR makes a huge difference - the difference between a clean run and a bag bit for a car tuned to its limit.

At one rolling road where there was no airflow over the intercooler (my waterspray was coming out of the scoop!!!!) the difference betweent the first (cold i/c) and last run was 30bhp at 6,000rpm.

There are cars that have been to Star and then had much lower figures at PE.

PE will run higher spec cars with two fans - bonnet down and will set it up with flow on the topmount. Twice recently my best run at PE has typically been the last of four or five consecutive runs indicating the top mount is getting plenty of airflow.

Finally this is why FMICs seem to give SO MUCH power - the performance on the RR is better than a top mount as you can't get enough flow into the bonnet scoop.

Trout