Dyno Day pics

[ttweed]

Must be something in the water down there....

John,
I think I would attribute it to a different cross-section of P-cars being measured on this day than those you usually measure in the GT classes in POC, but there could be some variance in the machines as well, I suppose. If DQ hadn't cheaped-out and passed on this session, we would have been able to compare his results directly.

It would be interesting to do this again on a DynoJet and see what the differences are, too.

TT

[Mike]

Must be something in the water down there....

dynos are different.
After they get rebuilt they dont read the same.
It's more about who is tuning it and improving #s.
tuff to compare shop to shop.

[jrgordonsenior]

Must be something in the water down there....

John,
I think I would attribute it to a different cross-section of P-cars being measured on this day than those you usually measure in the GT classes in POC, but there could be some variance in the machines as well, I suppose. If DQ hadn't cheaped-out and passed on this session, we would have been able to compare his results directly.

It would be interesting to do this again on a DynoJet and see what the differences are, too.

TT

Well I've got PY's results from a Dynojet a year ago. Difficult to compare the different machines but it appears he's lost some 20whp and 8lbs. of torque since then. FWIW, NASA adds 10% to the results from any Dyno Dynamics or Mustang Dyno so his 180 + 10% = 198, right up there with the Dynojet result....

[lowyder993s]

WTF gordon...do you google "Porsche and dyno" then go tinkle on everyone's numbers??? If you ever ran down here w/ us, you might learn something Congrats on the POC class win. Just dropped $800 w/ your buddy Alan Greene...comissioned work on Mike's streeter and a print of a yellow F-430.

[jrgordonsenior]

WTF gordon...do you google "Porsche and dyno" then go tinkle on everyone's numbers??? If you ever ran down here w/ us, you might learn something Congrats on the POC class win. Just dropped $800 w/ your buddy Alan Greene...comissioned work on Mike's streeter and a print of a yellow F-430.

WTF copp are you talking about? Re-read my previous posts, this was about the reported TQ numbers. If you're panties are in a wad about my referencing PY's dyno results w/POC then get a grip. All POC dyno results are available to anyone who asks....

[ttweed]

Well I've got PY's results from a Dynojet a year ago.

Was it "Butch" ('78SC) that was measured a year ago or "Snickers" (his '79SC)? He has so many cars I can't keep track of them all, and they always seem to be evolving....

FWIW, NASA adds 10% to the results from any Dyno Dynamics or Mustang Dyno

Does POC do this too? On the Appendix D form for GT classification on the POC website it says "If HP was measured using a Mustang Dyno, multiply Measured HP by 1.1, else by 1.0." No mention of the Dyno Dynamics results being corrected. http://www.porscheclub.com/pdf/2012/2012GCRsAppendixD_r1.pdf

I have seen various reports on the web about relative HP results from DynoJet vs. Dyno Dynamics machines, and they are all over the place. Some say the Dyno Dynamics is the "heartbreaker" dyno (that it reads low compared to DynoJet) and other reports that say the opposite, and then some that say they are relatively close. Since our current Z8 rules allow for running cars in the same class that use published factory HP values OR dyno-measured power values, I think we should be using the most conservative dyno results possible to match the relatively conservative figures Porsche publishes. If a stock 3.0SC engine makes 180 RWHP on the dyno and Porsche publishes 180HP at the flywheel, I don't think we want to make the guy who measures his power use a figure that is another 10% higher, besides dinging him 16% for drivetrain loss.

TT

[gocart]

If you look at part of my print-out you will notice that the peak torque (circled) does not fit. Like a hiccup at that RPM.

BTW that scan is 600x800. Looks to fill the whole frame on my computer.

[ttweed]

All POC dyno results are available to anyone who asks....

Are they published on the web somewhere? I'd like to look at them, just for my own information.
Thx,
TT

[jrgordonsenior]

Well I've got PY's results from a Dynojet a year ago.

Was it "Butch" ('78SC) that was measured a year ago or "Snickers" (his '79SC)? He has so many cars I can't keep track of them all, and they always seem to be evolving....

FWIW, NASA adds 10% to the results from any Dyno Dynamics or Mustang Dyno

Does POC do this too? On the Appendix D form for GT classification on the POC website it says "If HP was measured using a Mustang Dyno, multiply Measured HP by 1.1, else by 1.0." No mention of the Dyno Dynamics results being corrected. http://www.porscheclub.com/pdf/2012/2012GCRsAppendixD_r1.pdf

I have seen various reports on the web about relative HP results from DynoJet vs. Dyno Dynamics machines, and they are all over the place. Some say the Dyno Dynamics is the "heartbreaker" dyno (that it reads low compared to DynoJet) and other reports that say the opposite, and then some that say they are relatively close. Since our current Z8 rules allow for running cars in the same class that use published factory HP values OR dyno-measured power values, I think we should be using the most conservative dyno results possible to match the relatively conservative figures Porsche publishes. If a stock 3.0SC engine makes 180 RWHP on the dyno and Porsche publishes 180HP at the flywheel, I don't think we want to make the guy who measures his power use a figure that is another 10% higher, besides dinging him 16% for drivetrain loss.

TT

PY's car was listed as a 79' SC # 17. VIN ends with 999 if that helps...

NASA's inclusion of the Dyno Dynamics unit is new for 2012 and we don't feel it's accurate or necessary. We really just want everone running with us to dyno at on the same dyno, the same day. We've contracted Canyon Racer's Motorsports' for their portable Dyno Dynamics 4500 unit for our first event of the year at WSIR Feb 11th. This will be their 3rd year providing dyno service for us and we're very happy with the results.
For those running our GT classes who can't make that weekend, I'm going to setup a Saturday dyno-day at their shop before our 2nd event at Spring Mountain.....

[jrgordonsenior]

All POC dyno results are available to anyone who asks....

Are they published on the web somewhere? I'd like to look at them, just for my own information.
Thx,
TT

Tom I should have correctly stated they're available trackside to any POC GT racer at the track. That being said, I'd be happy to give you make, model, and results, just not names....

[gocart]

Just curious if anyone else had an unexpected "bump" in their torque curve like I did.

See my previous post.

[ttweed]

If you look at part of my print-out you will notice that the peak torque (circled) does not fit. Like a hiccup at that RPM.

I think that's an outlier, Gordon, some spurious peak recorded due to quirks in the instrumentation and/or software. I wouldn't have recorded that as your peak TQ if I was looking at the data. The dyno operator showed me several peaks like that from different cars, and said it had something to do with what happens when he first jumps on the gas during a run. He told me to ignore that piece of data--that it probably wasn't correct. I would have recorded 159 as the peak for your car. This may explain a lot of the high torque numbers in the pic. They are at best a transient value, and possibly a quirk of the equipment is causing them.

He circled two values on my printout--one just like yours (6th value recorded) and then another one 9 datapoints later at 4350RPM. The first is an outlier like yours--a 192 reading @ 3697 RPM, and the second was what I would consider the actual peak of 189 @ 4350RPM. What's weird is that the chalkboard reports my peak as 192 @ 4350RPM, while the 192 value occurred at 3697RPM, so the data in the image may be wrong in some instances for peak torque figures, as well as peak torque RPM.

TT

[ttweed]

Tom I should have correctly stated they're available trackside to any POC GT racer at the track. That being said, I'd be happy to give you make, model, and results, just not names....

Is that for privacy/security/insurance reasons? I don't care about names, but does the data include displacement and boost levels (if not NA)? Without that, they wouldn't be of much use to me.

I guess we are being less than circumspect by putting all our Zone 8 info up on the web.

Thx,
TT

[Greg Phillips]

Just curious if anyone else had an unexpected "bump" in their torque curve like I did.

See my previous post.

Yes my peak torque was an anomalous number on the run that I was given.

Greg

[jrgordonsenior]

Tom I should have correctly stated they're available trackside to any POC GT racer at the track. That being said, I'd be happy to give you make, model, and results, just not names....

Is that for privacy/security/insurance reasons? I don't care about names, but does the data include displacement and boost levels (if not NA)? Without that, they wouldn't be of much use to me.

I guess we are being less than circumspect by putting all our Zone 8 info up on the web.

Thx,
TT

Sorry I don't have displacement, make, and model info, just the dyno results. NASA writes their competitor's class, minimum weight, and WHP on a sticker on the roof and I think we (POC) will probably come up with something similar.I don't believe there's anything wrong with publishing dyno information to your fellow competitors. FWIW I'm a 99' 996 with a OEM 3.4, GIAC street flash, 3.8 manifolds to open pipes and I dyno anywhere from 267 (Dyno Dynamics)to 272 on a Dynojet....