View Poll Results: You win absolutely nothing for your participation.
Voters: 186. You may not vote on this poll
Predict JD's high CR beater's dyno power
08-27-2008, 10:53 PM
#42
3.0 BAR
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,935
Re: Predict JD's high CR beater's dyno power
I predict that the car doesn't actually exist nor does the engine described, yet JD will have some report of a 900hp k series he just tuned and finlly confesses his secret gay love of the k Series platform, all the while we forget about some mismatched no power making Never existed high CR d series
08-28-2008, 01:00 AM
#48
0.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 0
Re: Predict JD's high CR beater's dyno power
I started out tuning on 87, and adding timing in two degree increments. The baseline run V-Tech was set at 3500, after seeing the huge dip I raised it to 4000 then 3900. Here's baseline, +2, and +4:
Notice everything looks like ragged ***? At 6 degrees advance the graph started to smooth out, here's baseline vs +6:
At this point I was giggling a little bit. I ended up at ten degrees advance from baseline ignition before I hit near-peak power, and started losing power in some areas. Here's +6 vs +10, notice where power pinches off at ~3400:
I played around with cam timing a bit but it either caused a significant power loss across the powerband, or dramatically shifted the powerband downward. So, fully massaged 87 octane tune:
At this point it was time to play with octane. I had ~2 gallons in the tank and dumped in 5.6 gallons of 93. I guess the resulting blend was in the ~91 octane range, I could care less about doing the math. Here's back to back 87 vs "93" octane pulls, the only thing changed between the runs was the addition of the 93 octane gasoline:
Joey is soooo not impressed.
I added 2 and 4 degrees timing for some 2 whp and 1.2 wtq gains. The +4 pull made the best power of the day, despite audible pingies throughout the entire powerband. Go figure.
Here's what +6 timing did to the "93" octane tune, notice how the output isn't smooth at all. It did make noticeably more power below 2500, even though it was pinging there too:
I never expected a stock cam D16 to make that sort of power, but to be perfectly honest I think the only other person I've heard of who builds D16 with quench is Mike Belben. I think the piston-head combo is where the voodoo comes from.
Notice everything looks like ragged ***? At 6 degrees advance the graph started to smooth out, here's baseline vs +6:
At this point I was giggling a little bit. I ended up at ten degrees advance from baseline ignition before I hit near-peak power, and started losing power in some areas. Here's +6 vs +10, notice where power pinches off at ~3400:
I played around with cam timing a bit but it either caused a significant power loss across the powerband, or dramatically shifted the powerband downward. So, fully massaged 87 octane tune:
At this point it was time to play with octane. I had ~2 gallons in the tank and dumped in 5.6 gallons of 93. I guess the resulting blend was in the ~91 octane range, I could care less about doing the math. Here's back to back 87 vs "93" octane pulls, the only thing changed between the runs was the addition of the 93 octane gasoline:
Joey is soooo not impressed.
I added 2 and 4 degrees timing for some 2 whp and 1.2 wtq gains. The +4 pull made the best power of the day, despite audible pingies throughout the entire powerband. Go figure.
Here's what +6 timing did to the "93" octane tune, notice how the output isn't smooth at all. It did make noticeably more power below 2500, even though it was pinging there too:
I never expected a stock cam D16 to make that sort of power, but to be perfectly honest I think the only other person I've heard of who builds D16 with quench is Mike Belben. I think the piston-head combo is where the voodoo comes from.
