Dyno Result w/ full bolt-ons plus V-AFC tuning - Honda Accord Forum : V6 Performance Accord Forums
Ribbon Banner

Go Back   Honda Accord Forum : V6 Performance Accord Forums > GENERAL DISCUSSION > GENERAL AUTO DISCUSSION > RACING and TUNING > DYNO
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read Insurance
V6Performance.net is the premier Honda Accord Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 19th, 2004, 12:21 AM   #1
J32A2 + SC + Meth AV6
 
BlackV62K2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 3,407
Send a message via ICQ to BlackV62K2 Send a message via AIM to BlackV62K2 Send a message via MSN to BlackV62K2
Dyno Result w/ full bolt-ons plus V-AFC tuning

I was reading the dyno day review thread from another forum that I went to and it turns out that the numbers everyone got wasn't multiplied by 1.17 (correction factor). The dyno sheet shows that I got 167.2whp but when multipied by 1.17, I get 195.3whp. That's more in the range I was expecting considering the mods I have and what others have gotten with similar mods. Stock SRT-4 ran that day also and he only got 202whp. I checked out SRTforums to see what other stock SRT-4s are running and they usually get 230-240whp. So that's about right if you multiply what he got by 1.17. Same thing with 5th Preludes with full bolt-ons + tuning, highest one got 160whp only. I was shocked to see what I got but I didnt realize that they didnt factor that in. So that means I'm pulling 195.6whp and 181.3 tq. I think Platinum got 196whp with almost the same setup as my car except he has the Unichip.

Those who havent seen my dyno sheet, the link is in my sig.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Old J30 Dyno result: 262.4whp & 244 wtq
New J30 Dyno result: 277.6whp & 254 wtq
BlackV62K2 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old October 19th, 2004, 01:04 AM   #2
Tofu Delivery Boy
 
The_Tofu_Shop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: So Cal (626)
Posts: 5,706
Send a message via AIM to The_Tofu_Shop
nice dyno. i wish i had those numbers
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Andy 2
SoCal Pride

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
G-Spec Points: 40
The_Tofu_Shop is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old October 19th, 2004, 01:31 AM   #3
New Member
 
aznfunkyflip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northridge, CA
Posts: 4,767
Send a message via Yahoo to aznfunkyflip
so why do we have to multiply the number by 1.17?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

aznfunkyflip is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old October 19th, 2004, 02:57 PM   #4
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 402
Try to run on Dynojet next time which is defacto industry standard and make sure SAE corrections (just tell them). Check the locations near you - HERE . You would've made more accurate results.
alt04 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old October 19th, 2004, 03:02 PM   #5
Registered User
 
nycsam786's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,329
Send a message via AIM to nycsam786
nice #'s
nycsam786 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old October 19th, 2004, 04:40 PM   #6
J32A2 + SC + Meth AV6
 
BlackV62K2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 3,407
Send a message via ICQ to BlackV62K2 Send a message via AIM to BlackV62K2 Send a message via MSN to BlackV62K2
Quote:
Originally Posted by aznfunkyflip
so why do we have to multiply the number by 1.17?
Because the correction factor wasn't taken into account for my dyno run. Therefore my results weren't SAE corrected.
BlackV62K2 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 6th, 2004, 12:11 AM   #7
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,097
^boosted and NA cars have different correction factors. I would be willing to say you really had more power than you think. 1.17 is good for FI cars, but generally, its 1.25 for NA cars. Its ok to tell your SAE corrected ones, as long as you konw that it isnt really what your car did. Those corrections are used to try to equalize the playing field for everyone to "pretend" that conditions were exactly the same. Most go for thier SAE because they are higher and it sounds better. Just FYI.

Thats funny about that SRT, because thats what I put down myself. 202whp/230wtq UNCORRECTED.
r.j-lo is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 6th, 2004, 10:24 AM   #8
V Go SoCal Drivers V
 
bustedryde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 949
Posts: 1,941
Send a message via AIM to bustedryde
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackV62K2
I was reading the dyno day review thread from another forum that I went to and it turns out that the numbers everyone got wasn't multiplied by 1.17 (correction factor). The dyno sheet shows that I got 167.2whp but when multipied by 1.17, I get 195.3whp. That's more in the range I was expecting considering the mods I have and what others have gotten with similar mods. Stock SRT-4 ran that day also and he only got 202whp. I checked out SRTforums to see what other stock SRT-4s are running and they usually get 230-240whp. So that's about right if you multiply what he got by 1.17. Same thing with 5th Preludes with full bolt-ons + tuning, highest one got 160whp only. I was shocked to see what I got but I didnt realize that they didnt factor that in. So that means I'm pulling 195.6whp and 181.3 tq. I think Platinum got 196whp with almost the same setup as my car except he has the Unichip.

Those who havent seen my dyno sheet, the link is in my sig.
What gear did you use? Also, I noticed in another thread you got yourself an SC Do you plan on dynoing with the SC installed anytime soon? We have almost the same mods and I've been wavering with the SC....
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bustedryde is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 6th, 2004, 03:50 PM   #9
J32A2 + SC + Meth AV6
 
BlackV62K2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 3,407
Send a message via ICQ to BlackV62K2 Send a message via AIM to BlackV62K2 Send a message via MSN to BlackV62K2
Dyno was done on D3. So r.j-lo, you think I'm pulling more HP? That's good news to me .

Yup, got myself a S/C....polished too!!! I'll be dyno tuning it once I get everything installed but I'm not sure how I'm going to hookup my V-AFC with the ESM. I'll have to ask around, I think some of our members have done.

I'll be run the CL-S high boost pulley. But I'm glad that someone has looked over my dyno sheet and told me I'm actually making more power. So if NA cars are suppose to use 1.25 correction factor, that puts me @ 209whp and 201.25tq....interesting, I think that's too high but I'm just comparing to other people with similar mods.
BlackV62K2 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 6th, 2004, 04:49 PM   #10
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,097
yes, I do think those corrected numbers are too low. I was able to pull 190whp/175wtq with all the mods you have except for the spacer and the cams. The cams haver been dynod and net you more than 5hp/5tq.
r.j-lo is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 6th, 2004, 06:03 PM   #11
Who are you!?
 
gme2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Jose, Ca
Posts: 2,328
Send a message via AIM to gme2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackV62K2
Dyno was done on D3. So r.j-lo, you think I'm pulling more HP? That's good news to me .

Yup, got myself a S/C....polished too!!! I'll be dyno tuning it once I get everything installed but I'm not sure how I'm going to hookup my V-AFC with the ESM. I'll have to ask around, I think some of our members have done.

I'll be run the CL-S high boost pulley. But I'm glad that someone has looked over my dyno sheet and told me I'm actually making more power. So if NA cars are suppose to use 1.25 correction factor, that puts me @ 209whp and 201.25tq....interesting, I think that's too high but I'm just comparing to other people with similar mods.
The ESM will plug into the Frog Harness you have.
gme2001 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 6th, 2004, 07:16 PM   #12
J32A2 + SC + Meth AV6
 
BlackV62K2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 3,407
Send a message via ICQ to BlackV62K2 Send a message via AIM to BlackV62K2 Send a message via MSN to BlackV62K2
Thought I read something about the ESM has plugged in before or after the V-AFC. Can't remember which order it was.
BlackV62K2 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 12:27 AM   #13
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
where the heck are you guys getting these crazy 1.17 and 1.25 dyno "correction" factors?

That almost certainly isn't SAE correction for conditions and pressure. You dynoed on a dyno dynamics. You're not trying to convert from one type of dyno to another (like a dynojet), are you? If it's really for conditions, what in God's name were the conditions that gave you a 1.17 or even a 1.25 CF? With any SAE cf beyond 0.95 or 1.05, you lose accuracy very quickly. By 1.17 or 1.25, the conditions would have to be so extreme that the "corrected" numbers would purely be a shot in the dark.
__________________
Steve | Senior Moderator | "Enginerd" | Nazi Mod | Devil's Advocate | Sarcastic Bastid | AHOLE BMW DRIVER SINCE 2011
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2018 GMC Yukon XL Denali (soon) | 2011 BMW 335i convertible (current) | 2007 Toyota RAV4 V6 Sport 4WD (sold to folks) | 1999 Nissan Maxima SE 5MT (sold) | 2001 Accord EX V6 (RIP 2002)



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 04:45 PM   #14
J32A2 + SC + Meth AV6
 
BlackV62K2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 3,407
Send a message via ICQ to BlackV62K2 Send a message via AIM to BlackV62K2 Send a message via MSN to BlackV62K2
Had a feeling SteVTEC will post in this thread sooner or later LOL. Is there no way to convert my numbers to dynojet numbers?
BlackV62K2 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 08:45 PM   #15
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,097
A dyno is only good for tracking results of your own ride. Comparing it others is kinda pointless unless they are using the same dyno with the same conditions.

1.25 is a pretty common correction factor for NA cars. My bad though, I didnt catch that you were on a different dyno.
r.j-lo is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 08:52 PM   #16
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
you "can", but it's not good practice, it's misleading, confuses people, and really just looks silly and completely ridiculous when you quote it in your sig like that. "1.17 correction factor" isn't even a "correction" factor either (implies SAE correction). What you're using is some whack "conversion" factor to convert dyno dynamics to dynojet with some random number you found on the internet for not even the same type of dyno (awd vs 2wd). (I googled and found the EVO thread)

Unless you guys can provide some really convincing technical argument or a whole helluva lot of raw data for the actual 2wd dynos that shows that a 1.17 "conversion" factor would be accurate, I'd take whatever you claim like a grain of salt

The easiest way to get your true dynojet numbers is to just dyno on a dynojet. If that's really what you want anyways, then why even bother wasting money with anything else?
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 08:55 PM   #17
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by r.j-lo
A dyno is only good for tracking results of your own ride. Comparing it others is kinda pointless unless they are using the same dyno with the same conditions.

1.25 is a pretty common correction factor for NA cars. My bad though, I didnt catch that you were on a different dyno.
yeah but you're at some crazy altitude aren't you. "Common" SAE correction factors for NA cars at most altitudes near sea level are 0.95-1.05. I thought I read that SAE correction tends to over correct on turbo cars at altitude though. There's a different correction formula for boosted cars at altitude which you can google to find too.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 09:02 PM   #18
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,097
Guy, everything is subjective. Honestly, there is not way you can compare your dyno/timeslip to anyone elses but your own. I realized I skipped over the dyno type thing, but correction factors are widely used even among the pros. It doenst matter if you use your corrected numbers or your uncorrect to do your comparing as long as you resume the same on your following runs.

next post...

Altitude is one of the reasones why the correction factors even exist! Of course there will be different factors for diferent elevations...if they were the same, whats the point of correcting? Ill admit that they might always be right on the money, but it levels out the playing field. FI and NA cars DO have different corrections, hence the 1.25 for NA and the 1.17 for FI. Using the wrong correction leads to construed numbers. First dyno I had showed 250hp/270tq at the wheels on a stock car. Thats a little high and come to find out, they had the wrong correction put in (the NA one). Once it was fixed, we came to the 230/250 mark where every other car is hovering around.
r.j-lo is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 09:53 PM   #19
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
okay listen, this is really simple. Yeah, I know all about the purpose of correction factors - no need to explain that to me. Here's the problem, though.

If I go to dyno my car right now in my location with my conditions (41F, 79% RH, 29.87 in.Hg, 780ft), then my SAE correction factor for my NA car is going to be 0.975 and NOT 1.25.

Yet you're telling people in this thread that 1.25 is what they "generally" should be using for NA cars.


Houston, we have a problem.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 10:00 PM   #20
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 330
whats your altitude blackv62k2? i think hes giving an approximate correction factor for your altitude (roughly). The numbers seem about right with the cf, i know what he means...
BasicAV6 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 10:04 PM   #21
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
unichip tuning is good for about 10 whp, so I think his numbers are still high. not many people break past 190 whp without tuning.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 10:17 PM   #22
J32A2 + SC + Meth AV6
 
BlackV62K2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 3,407
Send a message via ICQ to BlackV62K2 Send a message via AIM to BlackV62K2 Send a message via MSN to BlackV62K2
Here's data sheet (A/F ratios, HP, TQ, and correction):



The X: 1.170 is supposely the correction factor used. We had a huge discuss on the dyno day thread (Vancouver Prelude Club, the club I went with) and they came to the conclusion that the 1.17 wasn't taken into account.
BlackV62K2 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 10:30 PM   #23
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
Isn't Vancouver at like sea level?
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 7th, 2004, 10:45 PM   #24
J32A2 + SC + Meth AV6
 
BlackV62K2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 3,407
Send a message via ICQ to BlackV62K2 Send a message via AIM to BlackV62K2 Send a message via MSN to BlackV62K2
Pretty close to sea level. Here's the thread for our dyno day review if you want to read it: http://www.vancouverpreludeclub.com/...5&pagenumber=1
BlackV62K2 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 8th, 2004, 07:25 AM   #25
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
The conditions at sea level for an SAE cf of 1.17 would be absurd. We're talking 100F, 90% humidity, and pressure so low you would darn near need an oxygen mask. I doubt that x=1.17 is the correction factor. Wishful thinking and groupthink maybe? I bet the A=1.01 is the cf. And if a dyno dynamics characteristically reads say 10% lower than a dynojet 248c does, then nobody is going to be getting the numbers they expect anyways solely due to that fact. And even if the 1.17 is in fact the correction factor, the software would have already corrected the numbers on the display. I've never seen a dyno where they show the SAE correction factor, yet don't correct the plot. That makes no sense.

So I'm just going to have to call bs on your 1.17 correction.

Do you remember approximately what the conditions were the day you did the dyno?
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 8th, 2004, 04:28 PM   #26
J32A2 + SC + Meth AV6
 
BlackV62K2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 3,407
Send a message via ICQ to BlackV62K2 Send a message via AIM to BlackV62K2 Send a message via MSN to BlackV62K2
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteVTEC
Do you remember approximately what the conditions were the day you did the dyno?
I forgot, but it was pretty hot in the dyno booth. Around 30C. Hmm 167whp is pretty low though considering all the mods I have. Unless there's a huge difference between that dyno and dynojet numbers, then I can see why. Either that or there's something wrong with my car.

I remember asking the dyno operator what I would run if I ran on a dynojet and he same it would be the same because he made the numbers look like dynojet numbers. But I know that can't be right seeing how others have ran around 190-195whp on a dynojet with similar mods as me.
BlackV62K2 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 16th, 2004, 06:28 PM   #27
Something Something Darkside
 
Doom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Miami
Posts: 4,498
Send a message via AIM to Doom
Just for arguments sake take it to a Dynojet. It won't solve this argument as factors continually change but at least you'll have an idea.

Moved to Dyno.
Doom is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 16th, 2004, 06:42 PM   #28
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackV62K2
I forgot, but it was pretty hot in the dyno booth. Around 30C. Hmm 167whp is pretty low though considering all the mods I have. Unless there's a huge difference between that dyno and dynojet numbers, then I can see why. Either that or there's something wrong with my car.

I remember asking the dyno operator what I would run if I ran on a dynojet and he same it would be the same because he made the numbers look like dynojet numbers. But I know that can't be right seeing how others have ran around 190-195whp on a dynojet with similar mods as me.
err, forgot to reply to this before.

So basically the dyno operator admitted that he "rigged" the dyno in some way to show something that it shouldn't be. But he obviously didn't do a very good job, or he was lying altogether. Even at 30C, you would still need flat out insane humidity and air pressure to get a 1.17 correction at sea level. No way in hell. People may have groupthinked their way into believeing that, but I say bs.

In other words, your dyno is meaningless, other than for the purpose of comparing to what others dynoed at on that same day in that group. Yeah, just dyno on a dynojet.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 16th, 2004, 07:42 PM   #29
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,097
Ill agree. I made a big stink about it, but once I realized the dyno used...my engine kinda lost steam. Dont get the idea that your dyno was meaningless though. A dyno is only good for comparing your own car to your own mods. Its hard enough comparing the same dyno types over a worldwide forum but when you throw a curve ball like a different machine.....everyone is ballparking. A track time and ET are what will hold true.
r.j-lo is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 16th, 2004, 10:45 PM   #30
Something Something Darkside
 
Doom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Miami
Posts: 4,498
Send a message via AIM to Doom
Quote:
Originally Posted by r.j-lo
A track time and ET are what will hold true.
True. Easier to convert to compare to other cars versus 50 million types of dynoes. But then again driver's skill is another non-comparative factor.
Doom is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Honda Accord Forum : V6 Performance Accord Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Chapter
Choose your AV6 Chapter Location
Ride
What do you drive?
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On