Calder 30/7/2004

[TBO240]

  ROCKET said:

Wow, that's quite amazing. Maybe someone could offer suggestions on what could cause these differences. Is it possible that the cars are tuned differently. Maybe one has a slightly different tune to protect the driveline early or is it possibly due to different factory specs before the cars were modded.

Geea.

greetings Craig

I think you hit the nail on the head, my guess is the difference in power output before the mods begun

for those that are interested I also ran my Ute on the A.P.S. dyno yesterday & was more than happy with the result with a 268.2 Rwkw, not bad for a V8

regards

rod

hi rod

my car started with 186kw which isnt great but its also not that bad.

[Buf-Phoon]

  geea said:

  TBO240 said:

  geea said:

Great times Mick and Steve. If you guys both have APS phase II, how come Steve has  a much better 60' but slower ET and mph.  What different driving styles do you guys use. Steve has the launch down and Mick has the rest pretty well sown up.

Geea.

hi craig

micks car pulled a 270 rwkws at the aps dyno day on saturday and my car is only 258rwkws so I think it may be in the tune with my 60ft time I should be killing it the only other xr6t on this forumn with a 1.91 60ft time that I know of was 100% and his car was a stage3 with slicks.....my car seems to be falling away right through the range as my 660ft mph is way behind micks car as well.

Wow, that's quite amazing. Maybe someone could offer suggestions on what could cause these differences. Is it possible that the cars are tuned differently. Maybe one has a slightly different tune to protect the driveline early or is it possibly due to different factory specs before the cars were modded.

Geea.

Craig I am no expert far from it , but peak power does not necessarily relate to quick 60ft times or terminal speed , more to the way the cars are tuned.

ie bringing increased boost in down low will produce a better 60ft time rather than later in the rev range which may produce a better terminal speed.

For example max boost for me comes in fairly low ~ 3500 rpm at a fairly miserely 10.5 psi giving me a 2.01 60ft time this then tapers slightly to give a fairly sedate 111mph at the end of the strip.

This is confirmed by others running similar 60ft times but greater terminal speed and better times with less rwkw

Good questions , I look forward to learning some more from subsequent posts

[TBO240]

  geea said:

  TBO240 said:

  geea said:

Great times Mick and Steve. If you guys both have APS phase II, how come Steve has  a much better 60' but slower ET and mph.  What different driving styles do you guys use. Steve has the launch down and Mick has the rest pretty well sown up.

Geea.

hi craig

micks car pulled a 270 rwkws at the aps dyno day on saturday and my car is only 258rwkws so I think it may be in the tune with my 60ft time I should be killing it the only other xr6t on this forumn with a 1.91 60ft time that I know of was 100% and his car was a stage3 with slicks.....my car seems to be falling away right through the range as my 660ft mph is way behind micks car as well.

Wow, that's quite amazing. Maybe someone could offer suggestions on what could cause these differences. Is it possible that the cars are tuned differently. Maybe one has a slightly different tune to protect the driveline early or is it possibly due to different factory specs before the cars were modded.

Geea.

just did a interesting exercise using the formula kw x 9549 divided by rpm =nm and using my dyno chart and big mick original dyno chart even though my peak power was 258rwkw and micks 266.7rwkws a difference of only 8.7 kws it does not seem like much until you work out the torque through the rev range.

at 30000rpm mick has 35nm more at the wheels

at 3500rpm 39nm

at 4000rpm 23nm

at 4500rpm 23nm

at 5000rpm 13nm

at 5800rpm I have 7nm more than mick.

so going by the formula mick car comes on alot stronger early in the rev range....I could be total of the planet with my thinking correct me if im wrong.

[ktford]

I'd say there might be the factor of convertor slip in the lower terminal speed.

Scotty

[TBO240]

  ktford said:

I'd say there might be the factor of convertor slip in the lower terminal speed.

Scotty

tranny and convertor have been rebuild less than 2000 km ago and is working great as my 60 ft time shows so I dont think that is the problem

[macka'sxr6t]

Hi TBO240,

Interesting reading your nm calcs. Did some calcs from my own dyno sheet and would like to know how they compare to yours.

110 kw x 9549 / 1500 rpm =700nm

130 kw x " " / 2000 rpm = 620nm

155 kw x " " / 3000 rpm = 493nm

203 kw x " " / 4000 rpm = 485nm

238 kw x "" / 4800 rpm = 473nm

These were the max power levels at current tune. There's still more in it but I have to tune on 95 Ron as that's all that's available in my area at the moment.

I know it's a little of topic but I would like to know, how much and what rpm range the APS kits produce their torque as a comparison to what I've already done to my "T"

If you don't want to post figures can you PM

macka

[TBO240]

  macka said:

Hi TBO240,

Interesting reading your nm calcs. Did some calcs from my own dyno sheet and would like to know how they compare to yours.

110 kw x 9549 / 1500 rpm =700nm

130 kw x " " / 2000 rpm = 620nm

155 kw x " " / 3000 rpm = 493nm

203 kw x " " / 4000 rpm = 485nm

238 kw x "" / 4800 rpm = 473nm

These were the max power levels at current tune. There's still more in it but I have to tune on 95 Ron as that's all that's available in my area at the moment.

I know it's a little of topic but I would like to know, how much and what rpm range the APS kits produce their torque as a comparison to what I've already done to my "T"

If you don't want to post figures can you PM

macka

this topic is getting a bit of topic I think I might start another post on it in the aps posts later on got to go now...