Dyno Leaderboard Version III

[funkytown]

what is STP correction?

[scottspeed]

 funkytown said:

what is STP correction?

· SAE -- The SAE standard applied is a modified version of the SAE J1349 standard of June 1990. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.23 InHg (99 kPa) of dry air and 77 F (25°C). This SAE standard requires a correction for friction torque. Friction torque can be determined by measurements on special motoring dynamometers (which is only practical in research environments) or can be estimated. When estimates must be used, the SAE standard uses a default Mechanical Efficiency (ME) value of 85%. This is approximately correct at peak torque but not at other engine operating speeds. Some dynamometer systems use the SAE correction factor for atmospheric conditions but do not take mechanical efficiency into consideration at all (i.e. they assume a ME of 100%).

· STP -- The STP (also called STD) standard is another power correction standard determined by the SAE. This standard has been stable for a long time and is widely used in the performance industry. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.92 InHg (103.3 kPa) of dry air and 60 F (15.5°C). Because the reference conditions include higher pressure and cooler air than the SAE standard, these corrected power numbers will always be about 4 % higher than the SAE power numbers.

· ECE -- The ECE standard is based on the European Directives. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 99 kPa (29.23 InHg) of dry air and 25°C (77 F). Friction torque is not taken into consideration at all.

·

DIN -- The DIN standard is determined by the German automotive industry. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 101.3 kPa (29.33 InHg) of dry air and 20°C (68 F). With the advent of European legislation and standards, national standards such as the DIN (formerly widely used) are now less significant.

[funkytown]

interesting thanks.

potentially worth pointing out some testing here in wellies showed back to back at about 300wkw Din read about 7% lower than an SAE corrected plot.

(not my testing or car, i just got a copy of the result)

[scottspeed]

 sultan']

Yeah the lower rpm high power kinda gives the 2.5 displacement away

And yes its on a modified Garrett 3540R

Id be sad if a EZ30 only made this! (have one kicking around the shop that should leave the shop with 1000hp)

This thing runs just like a stock car, slightly laggier but makes 500+ wheel HP! And it does alot of miles between rebuilds.

[quote name='PhatRS said:

stab in the dark 2.5lt with a 35r?

/quote]

im thinking forged ez30r maby to

what do you mean laggier? surely not as in power threshold. that car makes the same as my 2.5 setup, 180kw at 4000rpm, which is extremely early, a lot better than any stock car. in fact dyno plots are few and far between to find more power than that at 4k. you must be meaning 3500 and under which i suppose is a little down, but gee, pretty responsive for 340kw, even with a 2.5. i'd love to know what was done as far as headwork, and details of the turbo setup but it looks like you don't want to share that info. well done

Sorry I Get used to dealing with more response rally/ tarmac cars which start making good power from 3000rpm, hence this is alot laggier than them but takes over over 5000rpm Might try and dig out a dyno sheet later to show you what I mean.

[sultan]

 scottspeed']

Yeah the lower rpm high power kinda gives the 2.5 displacement away

And yes its on a modified Garrett 3540R

Id be sad if a EZ30 only made this! (have one kicking around the shop that should leave the shop with 1000hp)

This thing runs just like a stock car, slightly laggier but makes 500+ wheel HP! And it does alot of miles between rebuilds.

[quote name='PhatRS said:

stab in the dark 2.5lt with a 35r?

/quote]

im thinking forged ez30r maby to

what do you mean laggier? surely not as in power threshold. that car makes the same as my 2.5 setup, 180kw at 4000rpm, which is extremely early, a lot better than any stock car. in fact dyno plots are few and far between to find more power than that at 4k. you must be meaning 3500 and under which i suppose is a little down, but gee, pretty responsive for 340kw, even with a 2.5. i'd love to know what was done as far as headwork, and details of the turbo setup but it looks like you don't want to share that info. well done

Sorry I Get used to dealing with more response rally/ tarmac cars which start making good power from 3000rpm, hence this is alot laggier than them but takes over over 5000rpm Might try and dig out a dyno sheet later to show you what I mean.

yeah that would be awesome, that's the sort of thing i like to drive. Mine makes 120kw at 3k - what's the most you've seen at around that rpm?

[MercuryFree]

http://stmtune.wordpress.com/2012/06/13/how-to-gain-49-kw-for-free/ Re: DIN vs SAE

 

Why STM use DIN correction

Big power numbers are great for bragging to your mates, but they don’t mean too much in the real world. Over years of testing and tuning engines in all sorts of atmospheric conditions, we simply don’t feel that the SAE results are realistic. DIN provides a more stable result, which is not so dramatically affected by high intake air temperature. This is more realistic in our opinion.

*NOTE: The way a dyno manufacturer chooses to apply power correction does vary from dyno to dyno. These results from this test are ONLY relevant to the Dynapack chassis dyno.

[funkytown]

 MercuryFree said:

http://stmtune.wordpress.com/2012/06/13/how-to-gain-49-kw-for-free/ Re: DIN vs SAE

 

Why STM use DIN correction

Big power numbers are great for bragging to your mates, but they don’t mean too much in the real world. Over years of testing and tuning engines in all sorts of atmospheric conditions, we simply don’t feel that the SAE results are realistic. DIN provides a more stable result, which is not so dramatically affected by high intake air temperature. This is more realistic in our opinion.

*NOTE: The way a dyno manufacturer chooses to apply power correction does vary from dyno to dyno. These results from this test are ONLY relevant to the Dynapack chassis dyno.

this release was as a result of the testing i was privy too

[MercuryFree]

 funkytown']

[quote name='MercuryFree said:

url]http://stmtune.wordpress.com/2012/06/13/how-to-gain-49-kw-for-free/[/url] Re: DIN vs SAE

 

Why STM use DIN correction

Big power numbers are great for bragging to your mates, but they don’t mean too much in the real world. Over years of testing and tuning engines in all sorts of atmospheric conditions, we simply don’t feel that the SAE results are realistic. DIN provides a more stable result, which is not so dramatically affected by high intake air temperature. This is more realistic in our opinion.

*NOTE: The way a dyno manufacturer chooses to apply power correction does vary from dyno to dyno. These results from this test are ONLY relevant to the Dynapack chassis dyno.

this release was as a result of the testing i was privy too

I did wonder

[scottspeed]

 sultan']

[quote name='sultan said:

/quote]

Sorry I Get used to dealing with more response rally/ tarmac cars which start making good power from 3000rpm, hence this is alot laggier than them but takes over over 5000rpm Might try and dig out a dyno sheet later to show you what I mean.

yeah that would be awesome, that's the sort of thing i like to drive. Mine makes 120kw at 3k - what's the most you've seen at around that rpm?

Ok here are some examples of different MY01 onwards rally restrictor engines.

For those that dont know, Group N (1st graph)is the stock engine no modifications allowed and previously 32mm now 33mm diameter turbo air restrictor, and Group A (2nd graph) or open class is 34mm or 36mm and Engine mods allowed.

Always makes me laugh when people go for a ride in a rally car and think they have 500HP+!! a good 300hp engine will beat many "400Hp street cars" when the right combo of bits is used.

[sultan]

That's awesome torque on the first one. Its a shame it doesn't hold though. But i guess that's by design

[scottspeed]

 sultan said:

That's awesome torque on the first one. Its a shame it doesn't hold though. But i guess that's by design

Yeah unfortunately in motorsport thats the joy of having to breath through a small turbo air intake restrictor. General rule, smaller restrictor makes more low rpm torque but limits top end power. If you average a straight line down the the right hand side of the graph that basically is the choked airflow limit

[sultan]

Wonder if a high speed electronically controlled variable restrictor would work.

[funkytown]

 sultan said:

Wonder if a high speed electronically controlled variable restrictor would work.

variable vain technology in the exhaust housing? already exists.

(i geddit you mean on the compressor side) but cost > benefits imo

[speedfreak]

 sultan said:

Wonder if a high speed electronically controlled variable restrictor would work.

yep works great, toyota had variable restrictors, lots of horsepower, also thrown out of WRC for a year.

motorsport rules are restrictor is 1 piece and complied at any temperature. the different sizes are differnt class's, eg my car falls in open 4wd(pre 92) so is a 36mm, group N is 33mm now i think, WRC is 32mm i think (if anyone can confirm or if im wrong feel free to correct)

good to see you can still get a decent chunk of power out of restricter motors still, mine should make a bit more with more boost via a G4 etc. What do you find is the best turbo for the restrictors? im running a 36mm

Cheers

[Koom]

 sultan said:

Wonder if a high speed electronically controlled variable restrictor would work.

One way to cheat.....not electronic but as speedfreak said, got them kicked out of WRC

[speedfreak]

 Koom']

[quote name='sultan said:

Wonder if a high speed electronically controlled variable restrictor would work.

/quote]

One way to cheat.....not electronic but as speedfreak said, got them kicked out of WRC

moved under boost i believe, so when they checked with the motor off it complied, but then the boost came on and move so air moved around it and moved the hole further away so they got more air.

[Stoffa]

maybe someone can split this thread, its way off topic now

[Eight_dollar]

 funkytown']

[quote name='MercuryFree said:

url]http://stmtune.wordpress.com/2012/06/13/how-to-gain-49-kw-for-free/[/url] Re: DIN vs SAE

 

Why STM use DIN correction

Big power numbers are great for bragging to your mates, but they don’t mean too much in the real world. Over years of testing and tuning engines in all sorts of atmospheric conditions, we simply don’t feel that the SAE results are realistic. DIN provides a more stable result, which is not so dramatically affected by high intake air temperature. This is more realistic in our opinion.

*NOTE: The way a dyno manufacturer chooses to apply power correction does vary from dyno to dyno. These results from this test are ONLY relevant to the Dynapack chassis dyno.

this release was as a result of the testing i was privy too

lol - na man - you saw Rick's coupe plot with DIN vs SAE (285kw vs 307kw ish ) that wasnt STM's blog basis

[funkytown]

i realise there is no note of ricks plots on the STM blog, you're joining the wrong bits together

[Eight_dollar]

ohh -my bad

soz bro

what were you privy to at STM? - your not one of their customers - your a Shred man

[Cloud]

STM posted that blog up after they had run my shred reflash tune on there dyno and made way less power than it did at shread. It made 201kw at shred then only 178kw at stm Andre changed it to Sae correction and it went closer to 190kw or so. Needless to say I got him to load his tune and went to 198kw DIN corected on the same boost @ 19psi and 221 on 21psi. Was a happy guy that day haha. May of had something to do with the blog as Rick posted on STMs facebook when my car was featured about the diffrence in correction methods and results

[Stoffa]

195kw at 0.9bar and 242kw at 1.4bar dyno plot to follow ;D

[caspros]

 Stoffa said:

242kw at 1.4bar dyno plot to follow ;D

Goddamn it. Move me down a place.

[sultan]

speaking of places, funky's needs to be removed, 1) it no longer has a motor, 2) no proof it's actually been on a dyno ;-D

[funkytown]

mm true. add sl8r and gregs at 296.6 and 310wkw respectively...?

nice results stoffa. will be great to see the shape of the curves