Sydney Pirelli (K04) GTI dyno comparison day

[johnc]

Read my post again.

2 different runs

we switched programs from normal tune to a high torque one.

so if you look at dyno sheet there are 2 plots on it.

Lol. Yeah. I read it. I do realise there are 2 runs with 2 different programs. I'm a simple man, but not quite that simple.

Here's an overlay to help illustrate what I'm on about. Shifted the colours from my 2 runs in the overlay. Green is my 98, Purple is the 104. Yours are as they were.



Your Hi-torque setting looks good. Nice and linear. Would be much better on the track than the other run normal tune which only starts to match up once @ 150kph (based on my 98 fuel)

Also worth noting that I'm still running my stock engine cover. I'll be trialling a few intakes in the coming months now that I'm running the new beta remap.

[QuickA4]

Yeah no probs.

But i would look at getting your fueling fixed, you are a bit lean and max boost.

and you a bit lean on upper end.

what injectors are you running, as they are probably maxed out.

and how come your torque does a bit of a yoyo effect.


Let me know next time you have a dyno day, that was we will run some race fuel too for some extra power.
But get your tune fixed up before that.

[tinto]

What were the temps for the morning runs?
Aside from same dyno, same day (the usual thing that gets bitched about), how much impact do the increased(assumed) temps have on the final output?

The A3 is a weapon regardless!

But bringing a built motor with a custom tune to a dyno day where no one else's engine has been opened is like taking a machine gun paint balling.
There's nothing on the list to compare it to... First place is a given.
Is the turbo the thing holding it back?

Kudos for making the journey, but I wish the top ranked cars were there at the same time (happy to be schooled on that ... Especially if the A3 was on with the main bunch... But it was mentioned that a lot of the melb crew left early). If not - and temps do have a large impact - it makes this feel like another opportunity for apples with apples comparisons p'd into the wind.

Hopefully I don't put anyone's nose out of joint with this post... Not intended to offend. But some clarity on time and temps would be great.
I'll be first to admit im wrong

can we get a full power mod list for the cars? I think it will be great reading.

[Tim]

the temperatures are listed on the dyno plots.
Doesnt the dyno apply a correction factor that takes into account different ambient temperatures/altitudes anyways?

[johnc]

The normal 98 is there on the chart, so i'm not solely comparing my 104 with your 98. I over layed both my 2 runs (with different programs and fuelling, along with your 2 different programs and simply matched up the grids.

The 104 is there too because it came included in the price, so I thought I'd test it. Had the fuel since the last dyno day back in October 09, but didn't get to run it.

I didn't know you guys were even coming up. Glad you made it though. Seriously. It's great to have the 2 charts to compare.

Yeah, the yoyo isn't great. Hence the compliment on your hi torque tune which pulled lower dyno numbers, but does a better job, and that's my point. It's not about the highest kwatw numbers. It's about how and when it's delivered.

This is currently a beta map for testing. I've only been running it since the 18th of December. The previous 98 run with my k04 was more linear. Other than the remap, the car was the same. (see dyno below)

[johnc]

the temperatures are listed on the dyno plots.
Doesnt the dyno apply a correction factor that takes into account different ambient temperatures/altitudes anyways?

From what I understand, yes it does. The math behind it is a mystery to me.

My intake temps for the 98 run were between 46-48 degrees and the 104 run were 50-52. There doesn't seem to be any accounting for the intake temps though.

I know this is lame, but there's some interesting commentary on Atmospheric Correction below:
http://www.mainlineauto.com.au/produ...OWACCURATE.PDF

Something else I thought was interesting here:

Several atmospheric correction factor standards exist, but most vary primarily by what they use as reference points. For example: “Standard” SAE J607 factors are popular with hot-rodders (and snowmobilers) because they are based on “engine friendly” conditions of 60 degrees Fahrenheit air temperature (cool), 29.92 Inches of Mercury barometric pressure (sea level), and 0% relative humidity (dry air). Like all correction factors, SAE J607 tries to predict how Mother Nature is influencing the power of your test engine. But, like all estimations, the bigger the guess — the more room for error.

Consider an engine run on a hot muggy day in 5000’ elevation Denver, Colorado gains 25% applying the Standard factors! Unfortunately, verification tests prove that such large corrections (estimations) are unreliable for quoting absolute power. Even the newer SAE J1349 factors (based on 29.38” and 77 degrees), still return a shaky 20% adjustment! Ethical high altitude shops only use large factors for relative comparisons between engines tested at the same altitude.

If you require certifiable power data, even when Mother Nature will not supply you with near “standard” conditions, you must modify the test cell’s atmosphere. For our high altitude example, that requires a dyno room pressurized by large (expensive) blowers and drawing air from either a pre-conditioned warehouse or very high capacity air conditioners. Smaller shops just wait for the weather to change!

Source: http://www.land-and-sea.com/dyno-mit...inter-2003.htm

[tinto]

Good to hear there's some sort of compensation for temps - thanks for the clarification guys.

I just don't want there to be any significant excuses in the summary results or we'll never hear the end of it
It is a big achievement to get same dyno/same day in the first place. Nice work fellas.

[Timbo]

For those interested, below is Mainline's explanation of inlet temperature measurement, and the weather correction applied by Mainline in determining output results:

Intake temps... the issue is addressed in the Mainline product booklet, p19 as follows:

AIR INTAKE TEMPERATURE - Naturally we also provide a sensor to monitor and log Air Intake Temperature. It is important to note that the Mainline/DynoLog dyno does NOT use the Air Intake Temperature as a variable for Atmospheric Compensation. Mainline/DynoLog uses ambient (Inlet) air temperature measured by the Automatic Weather Station Module for Atmospheric Correction. Some dyno systems use the Air Intake Temperature for Atmospheric Correction, which allows cheating by the improper placement of that sensor. Mainline/DynoLog strongly opposes fudging/cheating of dyno results and does not build into its dynos any functions through which results can be operator-influenced.

The Atmospheric Correction applied by a Mainline dyno is explained in their "How Accurate" brochure, as follows:

ATMOSPHERIC CORRECTION
Modern dynos also have the ability to correct power on the basis of changes to weather conditions. A short explanation is needed here to fully understand atmospheric correction. Atmospheric correction is applied to compensate for changes to the combustive properties of the ambient air (the quantity of oxygen per unit volume) in an attempt to provide a level playing field between dyno runs. Atmospheric Correction Standards are defined by organisations such as SAE, ISO, DIN, ECE etc and each uses a slightly different way of measuring change. Using the widely accepted SAE J607 standard, on an ideal day when the temperature is 15 degrees Celsius, and there is 0% humidity, and the Barometric Pressure is 1015mbar, zero power correction is applied. Variations in any of these three atmospheric factors will either cause positive or negative power correction to be applied. If the temperature changed to say 19 degrees Celsius, the humidity to 34% and the Barometric Pressure to 989mbar, the conditions are not as ideal and the vehicle will not make as much power. By applying the SAE J607 atmospheric correction (in this case +3.89%), the power readings are corrected to what the vehicle could be expected to make on an "ideal" day.

The amount of power correction applied to a vehicle always needs to be an accurate reflection of how much power is actually lost by or gained by the vehicle as a result of unfavourable weather conditions. The SAE J607 standard specifies a maximum ceiling of 10% power correction, on the basis that any power correction in excess of 10% will produce a power figure that cannot necessarily be reproduced by the vehicle under optimum conditions.

So, a dyno that can accurately correct vehicle power according to changed weather conditions should produce more consistent and accurate results from run to run. A dyno that cannot correct vehicle power according to weather conditions or where weather conditions have not been regularly updated can produce results that vary considerably from run to run. A 5oC inaccuracy in air temperature can lead to a 0.9% change in power figures. A 3 mBar (normal range 900 to 1050 mBar) inaccuracy in barometric pressure give a 1% change in power.

"Heat Soak" is a further issue.

My understanding (and I'm happy for any clarification) is that there is a distinction when dynoing between the impact of general ambient temperatures -- which a Mainline dyno corrects for -- and the impact of "heat soak", which is where the car's ECU reacts to rising temp sensor readings (inlet, block and exhaust) and alters the tune to protect, for example, the cat. Usually, on FI cars, you see this in subsequent runs through a richer AFR plot, as the ECU adds more fuel to the mix to cool and protect the exhaust/turbo/cat.

So heat has two effects when dynoing:

1. On a Mainline dyno, the integrated weather station will correct the output reading for temperature, so it doesn't really matter what the conditions are when you run; but
2. At any time, the more runs a car does, the greater the effect of 'heat soak', which is where the car's own ECU reacts to rising temps, and (among other reactions) increase the fuel mix. This will tend to reduce power output on subsequent runs.

It is important to bear these two, quite distinct, temperature issues in mind when discussing dyno results.

[johnc]

I posted this up on golfmkv.com, but I thought I'd share it here too.

This is both my normal 98 RON run along with the normal GIAC run which got the 200.4kw peak power spec. Original dyno sheets in which this data came from (was re-aligned and traced actually) are within this thread.

[Tim]

I asked over at golfmkv.com but I get the impression that sites gonna be broken for a while.

How come your runs only go to 5500rpm?

[johnc]

Yeah. I noticed that too. Sounds serious over there.

Not sure why it only went up to 5500rpm. Todd could probably explain why. I'll ask him next time we're down there.

I said on golfmkv that my earlier read out went up further (11.5 secs). There's not much more after that point. My peak kw was at it's highest later in the rev range though (as you can see below).



I don't want to mash the 2 together as that would be an estimate and false. I'm working with what I have. Good question though. I'll ask Derek when I speak with him next. He may shed some light on it.

[Timbo]

Lucas, what was the lean spot at c.3200rpm about?

We had 2 different runs with tony's car, one with a hi torque program both are on the dyno sheet attached.

[QuickA4]

err switching programs for no time given to adapt.

Todd does to rev cars beyond where they make power, once the power line starts to drop there is not point reving the car any more, it is not going to make any more power. ie power is all over.

John, i dont know why you are trying to pick at anything you can.

It was a dyno day, the cars made the numbers that they did on normal 98RON pump fuel with programs that are available to any customer and thats what you get with those setups.
They are not Beta or some special test program running some exotic fuel.

Fact tony's car got 200.4KW on 98Ron fuel
and went on dyno after a 9 hours drive from melbourne,
and we should have gotten about 205KW, so he may have gotten some no so fresh fuel.
Its only got a 2.75" exhaust system.

Fact Jims car got 196.1KW at all 4's

Fact tonys car has ran at drag strip and trapped at 109MPH which is only 1mph off some other much bigger turbo's golf.

Tony and jim were both there and gave some people a ride in their cars that were interested in their setup and can verify how the car drives to what is shown on dyno.

But if you have any doubts or want to pick any issues, take you car to a drag strip and lets see what it traps at,
or maybe another dyno day, you nominate what fuel you want to run
so tony has the same in his car with a tune to match and go head to head.

Tendy went for a drive in tony's car. he has another tune in his car, ask him what tony's car went like.

Just leave it at that man and try again next time.

All in all was fun, we are all really tired from a last minute trip from melbourne,
next time we will be better prepared.

[johnc]

John, i dont know why you are trying to pick at anything you can.

Didn't relise I was Lucas. Thought I was being objective, and even complimentary is some instances. You're clearly with unhappy with my comments.

But if you have any doubts or want to pick any issues, take you car to a drag strip and lets see what it traps at, or maybe another dyno day, you nominate what fuel you want to run so tony has the same in his car with a tune to match and go head to head.

It's a fine offer, and if it happens, its happens. but I'm not into 1/4 mile times. I plan on tracking the car and having it as a daily driver. It's pretty normal for anyone to compare their K04 with another that pulled the best numbers. That's human nature, not an attack.

Tendy went for a drive in tony's car. he has another tune in his car, ask him what tony's car went like..

Yes, Tendy shared his thoughts with me on his drive later that day.

Just leave it at that man and try again next time.
All in all was fun, we are all really tired from a last minute trip from melbourne, next time we will be better prepared.

In all honesty, it was great you guys went to that effort. Love the 'try again next time' remark. It good to see that the biggest numbers aren't necessarily the best at delivering their power in a daily driver and track sensibility. Nice Dyno and 1/4 mile runner though.

All the best,

J

[Big Yellow]

It good to see that the biggest numbers aren't necessarily the best at delivering their power in a daily driver and track sensibility. Nice Dyno and 1/4 mile runner though.

thats exactly right. peak power on dyno runs mean **** for the sake of having the most power.

if you see Tony's 192kw run, you can see that he has heaps more torque down low and that is Tony's daily driving setting. 390nm is pretty damn impressive from just a k04.

all cars performed very well considering the heat! the stage 3 s3 was awesome!

from my perspective, the day was well run and had a blast meeting all you sydney peepz and had a great chat with you guys!