Post 669284 by JUDGENINJA on 2013-12-14 09:40:19
I'm here:
So is MRP:
Post 669294 by JUDGENINJA on 2013-12-14 10:31:14
At present we are fighting with AFR reading on mine
I'm here:
So is MRP:
Hopefully you'll update the thread with the all important figures.
Yeah dont keep us waiting all day
At present we are fighting with AFR reading on mine
Dalhousie... 278.5bhp oblark... 310.5bhp
[QUOTE=M-R-P;669308]Dalhousie... 278.5bhp oblark... 310.5bhp[/QUOTE] Wow, great result Rob, good for Steve too, was it the P1 R ?
[QUOTE=M-R-P;669308]Dalhousie... 278.5bhp oblark... 310.5bhp[/QUOTE] Good score there 311! Mr. Oblark sir, do you have the blue injectors in your car, if so have you upped the fuel pressure any?
JudgeNinja... 259.0bhp car wouldn't go over 4600RPM.
Dalhousie... 278.5bhp
oblark... 310.5bhp
So there is potential for more...
Wow, what have you had done to your t4 then jn?
Charlie r 263bhp
All good so far guys.....any of you 'done a Frankie' and lobbed the operator £20 ?
[QUOTE=S70T5Chris;669313]Wow, what have you had done to your t4 then jn?[/QUOTE] Not much... 18t hybrid turbo VXR injectors T5 manifold MBC Decat Exhaust Funny the car wouldn't go over 4600RPM in fourth gear, as it could have been much more by the steepness of the graph.. Potential there for 270-300 maybe...??? May need to run it up to Guildford jap-tuners to see if it happens again. As When I ran it Home I was advised to try to simulate the effect of the rollers on the road by running in fourth from 30MPH. I had a couple of goes from about 40MPH in Fourth to the redline with no problems..... Anyone any ideas on Volvo electronic trickery??
The Oracle has spoken..... I hit boost cut on the rollers!! Thanks Smithy....
My second run I got 263.7 from 4600rpm and stays flat from there. Chuffed to bits! Will get some videos up soon
[QUOTE=charlie-r;669365]My second run I got 263.7 from 4600rpm and stays flat from there. Chuffed to bits! Will get some videos up soon[/QUOTE] Nice to meet you today Charlie, that's a nice Swede you have there :)
Weldone everyone
What did yours make Martin? Comparable to HLM's RNM?
[QUOTE=M-R-P;669368]Nice to meet you today Charlie, that's a nice Swede you have there :)[/QUOTE] Cheers bud, it'll hopefully be a bit nicer over the coming weeks I'll start a thread soon :)
Ok... I'm about to start doing the video but in the meantime, here's something to think about... My car made 236whp which was nice but I decided something wasn't right so I took the chavvy Blitz air filter off... 252.3 whp! Bloody thing was strangling my engine :( this would most likely explain the low numbers on HLMs dyno last month.
[QUOTE=M-R-P;669378]Ok... I'm about to start doing the video but in the meantime, here's something to think about... My car made 236whp which was nice but I decided something wasn't right so I took the chavvy Blitz air filter off... 252.3 whp! Bloody thing was strangling my engine :( this would most likely explain the low numbers on HLMs dyno last month.[/QUOTE] What was it at the fly? You can't compare whp dyno to dyno, as they all measure different.
Just a thought and I hope someone corrects me if I'm wrong but.... I've never done a dyno day before, and I noticed the guy corrected all our figures off ambient air pressure which went into the air filter, but I thought in a turbocharged car you wouldn't be able to correct it because that ambient temp is then heated up during compression in the turbo to x degrees and then cooled via the intercooler to another temp. Just done a quick bit of reading and apparently you can't sae correct turbo engines? So we should be gloating about our non corrected numbers instead?
In an na car the temp/pressure of the air in controlled by your conditions, but in a turbo the pressure is controlled by your wastegate? I'm sure I've got something wrong but it's something to mull over
[QUOTE=charlie-r;669387]In an na car the temp/pressure of the air in controlled by your conditions, but in a turbo the pressure is controlled by your wastegate? I'm sure I've got something wrong but it's something to mull over[/QUOTE] A bit of light reading on that here...... http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=873912
Yeeeaahhh 283.7bhp bragging rights!
Very happy with this :)
[QUOTE=S70T5Chris;669382]What was it at the fly? You can't compare whp dyno to dyno, as they all measure different.[/QUOTE] I'm not going argue but you cannot compare crank bhp because the drag loss on different rollers is not comparable .the is a article about rollers some where .saying that whp is the most accurate reading .
Very nice...
[QUOTE=smithy;669409]I'm not going argue but you cannot compare crank bhp because the drag loss on different rollers is not comparable .the is a article about rollers some where .saying that whp is the most accurate reading .[/QUOTE] You are going to argue, you always argue your point! Even though it's invalid. :dgrin:
Well done Rob, Glad to see all those mods paying off :) And also well done to MRP wicked whp mate ;)
[QUOTE=S70T5Chris;669418]You are going to argue, you always argue your point! Even though it's invalid. :dgrin:[/QUOTE] Me I never argue but have a good debat lol
[QUOTE=smithy;669409]I'm not going argue but you cannot compare crank bhp because the drag loss on different rollers is not comparable .the is a article about rollers some where .saying that whp is the most accurate reading .[/QUOTE] People just ignore that article smithy. The fact is if a dyno can't get reliable whp figures then it has f*ck all chance of getting the crank figure correct. A dyno is connected to the car by the wheels, so it measures power at the wheels, how the numbers are then corrected is down to many things. Most dynos I've been to (and I used to go to a lot) would show similar whp AND bhp for the same car (on different dynos), only varying by a few %, which could be down to many things. Theres only been one exception to this rule, where the whp has been way off, but the bhp still seemed to be reasonably accurate for the cars.
[QUOTE=LiamT4;669533]People just ignore that article smithy. The fact is if a dyno can't get reliable whp figures then it has f*ck all chance of getting the crank figure correct. A dyno is connected to the car by the wheels, so it measures power at the wheels, how the numbers are then corrected is down to many things. Most dynos I've been to (and I used to go to a lot) would show similar whp AND bhp for the same car (on different dynos), only varying by a few %, which could be down to many things. Theres only been one exception to this rule, where the whp has been way off, but the bhp still seemed to be reasonably accurate for the cars.[/QUOTE] I haven't been on many different manufacturer dyno's. But the best examples I can think of, from my own car - was my T4 ran on a maha, and was 'x'whp (I can't remember the exact figures), and was 222bhp at the fly. 2 weeks later I ran on a Mustang dyno, the flywheel horse power was 221bhp, but the whp was much higher than the maha whp. If you lined up the same car on ten different manufacturer dynos, I bet the BHP result would be more consistent than the WHP results. You can't compare whp results dyno to dyno, they vary so much. Already rolling, a 300bhp Scooby will be as fast as a 300bhp V70 all day long, there'll be nothing in it. But your fwd V70 will be (for arguments sake) 270whp, and the 4wd Scooby will be 230whp. You reckon the Scooby will be slower? NO! WHP is something that Americans (and Smithy) are obsessed with! And it's wrong to think that it tells the true picture of a cars performance. Just look at these results from today. Rob's car is 310bhp at the fly, and 300whp?? Come on. And Judge's T4 is 260whp(????), yet 259 at the fly!! I fully believe the flywheel results from today, they seem very sensible, and what you'd expect, but the whp is a perfect example that defunks the argument that whp is the most accurate reading in the real world. The whp results are only valid for the dyno that it is run on, and nothing else.
[QUOTE=S70T5Chris;669541]I haven't been on many different manufacturer dyno's. But the best examples I can think of, from my own car - was my T4 ran on a maha, and was 'x'whp (I can't remember the exact figures), and was 222bhp at the fly. 2 weeks later I ran on a Mustang dyno, the flywheel horse power was 221bhp, but the whp was much higher than the maha whp. If you lined up the same car on ten different manufacturer dynos, I bet the BHP result would be more consistent than the WHP results. You can't compare whp results dyno to dyno, they vary so much. Already rolling, a 300bhp Scooby will be as fast as a 300bhp V70 all day long, there'll be nothing in it. But your fwd V70 will be (for arguments sake) 270whp, and the 4wd Scooby will be 230whp. You reckon the Scooby will be slower? NO! WHP is something that Americans (and Smithy) are obsessed with! And it's wrong to think that it tells the true picture of a cars performance. Just look at these results from today. Rob's car is 310bhp at the fly, and 300whp?? Come on. And Judge's T4 is 260whp(????), yet 259 at the fly!! I fully believe the flywheel results from today, they seem very sensible, and what you'd expect, but the whp is a perfect example that defunks the argument that whp is the most accurate reading in the real world. The whp results are only valid for the dyno that it is run on, and nothing else.[/QUOTE] Judge t4 didnot get 260whp it was at the crank thankyou and goodnight lol
[QUOTE=smithy;669547]Judge t4 didnot get 260whp it was at the crank thankyou and goodnight lol[/QUOTE] Look again - Wheel power (measured) - 260.5hp I tell you now, the only reason that company installed that dyno, is because it gives the highest whp readings known to man!
what is this corrected power thing?
i agree with chris something not quite right with those figures
[QUOTE=T5frankie;669553]what is this corrected power thing?[/QUOTE] A few dynos I've seen give a measured and correct flywheel hp, the Maha does. It's the corrected hp result that counts. Sometimes it works the other way, and the corrected is higher than the measured IIRC.
[QUOTE=T5frankie;669555]i agree with chris something not quite right with those figures[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=S70T5Chris;669557]A few dynos I've seen give a measured and correct flywheel hp, the Maha does. It's the corrected hp result that counts. Sometimes it works the other way, and the corrected is higher than the measured IIRC.[/QUOTE] so is robs 324bhp or 310bhp? as he has put on the rolling road table 324bhp
[QUOTE=T5frankie;669561]so is robs 324bhp or 310bhp? as he has put on the rolling road table 324bhp[/QUOTE] 310bhp
[QUOTE=S70T5Chris;669541]I haven't been on many different manufacturer dyno's. But the best examples I can think of, from my own car - was my T4 ran on a maha, and was 'x'whp (I can't remember the exact figures), and was 222bhp at the fly. 2 weeks later I ran on a Mustang dyno, the flywheel horse power was 221bhp, but the whp was much higher than the maha whp. If you lined up the same car on ten different manufacturer dynos, I bet the BHP result would be more consistent than the WHP results. You can't compare whp results dyno to dyno, they vary so much. Already rolling, a 300bhp Scooby will be as fast as a 300bhp V70 all day long, there'll be nothing in it. But your fwd V70 will be (for arguments sake) 270whp, and the 4wd Scooby will be 230whp. You reckon the Scooby will be slower? NO! WHP is something that Americans (and Smithy) are obsessed with! And it's wrong to think that it tells the true picture of a cars performance. Just look at these results from today. Rob's car is 310bhp at the fly, and 300whp?? Come on. And Judge's T4 is 260whp(????), yet 259 at the fly!! I fully believe the flywheel results from today, they seem very sensible, and what you'd expect, but the whp is a perfect example that defunks the argument that whp is the most accurate reading in the real world. The whp results are only valid for the dyno that it is run on, and nothing else.[/QUOTE] Its hard to go on the Scooby example because, as there are many variables (weight, gear ratios, aero ,etc) its hard to compare so look at it this way, If car A and car B are the same weight, have the same gearing and the exact same engine running at the same engine power, but car A is 4wd and car B is 2wd then, when on the move, car B Will be quicker because it loses less energy from the engine to the wheels and it is at the point where the energy is transferred from the car to the road that is actually moving the car forward, this is simple physics. (same goes for why a manual will be quicker than an auto counterpart). The more drive shafts, diffs, tyres, etc, the energy has to/through be transferred to, the more energy will be lost. On the question of the numbers today, having now looked myself, then yes I also have questions, just look at the measured and corrected figures and I don't understand whats going on with the numbers, without actually being there I don't know what and why its being corrected, so yes I would agree its that it is odd. On the maha thing, that dyno is the only one I have seen that gives wildly different whp to the others, but that doesn't mean I disagree with its bhp numbers (frankies car at the time did go like a 310bhp car). That dyno make obviously measures things differently, or uses its software in a different way. Although I do question why sometimes they will measure a car in a completely different gear than other dynos do, but that's not a dyno issue but an operator issue. I'm sure you'd agree though, that if a dyno has some form of issue measuring the actual power a car is producing, then because the ONLY way it can measure the power is at the wheels, then not only will the whp be wrong, but so will the bhp.
[QUOTE=LiamT4;669563]Its hard to go on the Scooby example because, as there are many variables (weight, gear ratios, aero ,etc) its hard to compare so look at it this way, If car A and car B are the same weight, have the same gearing and the exact same engine running at the same engine power, but car A is 4wd and car B is 2wd then, when on the move, car B Will be quicker because it loses less energy from the engine to the wheels and it is at the point where the energy is transferred from the car to the road that is actually moving the car forward, this is simple physics. (same goes for why a manual will be quicker than an auto counterpart). The more drive shafts, diffs, tyres, etc, the energy has to be transferred to, the more energy will be lost. On the question of the numbers today, having now looked myself, then yes I also have questions, just look at the measured and corrected figures and I don't understand whats going on with the numbers, without actually being there I don't know what and why its being corrected, so yes I would agree its that it is odd. On the maha thing, that dyno is the only one I have seen that gives wildly different whp to the others, but that doesn't mean I disagree with its bhp numbers (frankies car at the time did go like a 310bhp car). That dyno make obviously measures things differently, or uses its software in a different way. Although I do question why sometimes they will measure a car in a completely different gear than other dynos do, but that's not a dyno issue but an operator issue. I'm sure you'd agree though, that if a dyno has some form of issue measuring the actual power a car is producing, then because the ONLY way it can measure the power is at the wheels, then not only will the whp be wrong, but so will the bhp.[/QUOTE] that maha dyno i got 298bhp and 199whp lol, at 18psi on an 18t
[QUOTE=S70T5Chris;669557]A few dynos I've seen give a measured and correct flywheel hp, the Maha does. It's the corrected hp result that counts. Sometimes it works the other way, and the corrected is higher than the measured IIRC.[/QUOTE] But "corrected" results are also the easiest to manipulate.
[QUOTE=T5frankie;669565]that maha dyno i got 298bhp and 199whp lol, at 18psi on an 18t[/QUOTE] I simply don't understand the way those dynos go about there calculations in measuring and calculating the numbers, but I don't disagree with your bhp results as, considering your 1/4mile times at the time, 300bhp seemed about right.
The point of most dynos is to obtain as accurate flywheel figure as possible. The power is measured at the wheels, but as each dyno is different on how it obtains that figure, it vary's from dyno to dyno. Whilst the flywheel hp generally stays consistent within reason, once the magic has happened. Surely the fact that you admit the bhp figures on a maha are accurate enough, but the whp figures are wildly different, proves that whp figures in general are bogus. You can't possibly think the whp figures from today's runs are accurate?!
[QUOTE=LiamT4;669566]But "corrected" results are also the easiest to manipulate.[/QUOTE] The fairies in the computer do that, not the monkey behind the wheel. I think it was Greg who went to a dyno operator and specifically asked him to manipulate the dyno run to give the highest possible reading as a test. It didn't actually make that much difference iirc. But I can't remember the specifics.
[QUOTE=S70T5Chris;669569]The point of most dynos is to obtain as accurate flywheel figure as possible. The power is measured at the wheels, but as each dyno is different on how it obtains that figure, it vary's from dyno to dyno. Whilst the flywheel hp generally stays consistent within reason, once the magic has happened. Surely the fact that you admit the bhp figures on a maha are accurate enough, but the whp figures are wildly different, proves that whp figures in general are bogus.[/QUOTE] I've only noticed that on the maha dynos though. You understand the point I was making about the power losses with 4wd and 2wd though? Also people should stop thinking about it in bhp, whp, etc and think about it in a purely physics term, i.e energy, and as the dyno measures the energy at the wheels, and as this is the only contact point for the dyno, then a mistake there will cause mistakes in the bhp.
[QUOTE=S70T5Chris;669571]The fairies in the computer do that, not the monkey behind the wheel. I think it was Greg who went to a dyno operator and specifically asked him to manipulate the dyno run to give the highest possible reading as a test. It didn't actually make that much difference iirc. But I can't remember the specifics.[/QUOTE] But the point there is, its very easy to "correct" ;-)
bhp figures have always been consistent for me, whp figures are all over the place
[QUOTE=T5frankie;669575]bhp figures have always been consistent for me, whp figures are all over the place[/QUOTE] And when I used to go to vag, Datsun and the odd bmw event, all the figures where pretty consistent. But we can only go on our own experiences.
To be honest I don't give a fig because it's what it does on the road that counts period .as I will prove 140bhp can be pretty quick even a 140whp can be quick too lol.
Wonder if you can get your old slips out where you expect the data to be the same and see if there is a reading for barametric pressure and temperature? MRP and I had a Dyno lesson 101 yesterday regarding the concern over different Dyno calibrations and it was conveyed that in fact there is nothing to calibrate on a Dyno rollers. The reason for similar WHP vs Fly yesterday is purely down to the environmental conditions.... I'm not an arm chair Dyno expert to be able to comment on this, but looks like you lot are. I still haven't figure out who's right on this..
[QUOTE=JUDGENINJA;669586]Wonder if you can get your old slips out where you expect the data to be the same and see if there is a reading for barametric pressure and temperature? MRP and I had a Dyno lesson 101 yesterday regarding the concern over different Dyno calibrations and it was conveyed that in fact there is nothing to calibrate on a Dyno rollers. The reason for similar WHP vs Fly yesterday is purely down to the environmental conditions.... I'm not an arm chair Dyno expert to be able to comment on this, but looks like you lot are. I still haven't figure out who's right on this..[/QUOTE] I'm not ether but I just luv to wind things up lol.the reason why I look at whp as being the geniune figuires is because it's the wheels that are in the dyno not the engine .i just look at basics always been the same lol.and that the crank figuire works on drag loss on the run down witch seem to be anything from 20bhp to 100bhp witch seems werid .also that hub dynos don't have drag loss and they only give figuires out in whp .i could be wrong on all of this but hey ho lol
Good day by the look of it, some good results What have you done to yours Martin (other than taken the chavvy air filter off!)
The measured WHP should vary the most due to barometric conditions?? A cold wet day at sea level should be the best time to measure a cars HP? Hot, dry and up a mountain should give the lowest?!
[QUOTE=JUDGENINJA;669593]The measured WHP should vary the most due to barometric conditions?? A cold wet day at sea level should be the best time to measure a cars HP? Hot, dry and up a mountain should give the lowest?![/QUOTE] But wouldn't the crank do that too but it looks like I'm thick then and isn't that what correction is for .as said before I go on the same rollers every time to check afrs and boost etc .I'm only interested in going as fast as possible from 0 to 150 mph done .
Right basically what happens, the guy measured our BHP and WHP, but then corrected the figures using what's called and SAE conversion which would essentially give a result if the car was running in SAE conditions, I don't know what they are but for example 20degrees at sea level. What that dyno sheet says is because it was cold (between 8-11 degrees) our cars pulled more power that day, but it calculated at SAE standard we'd have pulled less. Problem is SAE standard doesn't apply to turbocharged cars as the wastegate negates the affect if pressure change in the atmosphere too significantly. So really what was measured on the rollers before correction (283bhp 260whp for me) is the much more accurate result.
[QUOTE=smithy;669596]I'm only interested in going as fast as possible from 0 to 150 mph done .[/QUOTE] Gets my vote! edit: the whp will vary depending on atmospheric conditions....but only in the same way it would on the road or track. The point of the correction is to account for this, and come with a 'standard' figure to use for comparison. Problem is, it can be manipulated. Mine is an auto so I couldn't give a fudge either (I don't want to see those 20-odd % losses :()
[QUOTE=JUDGENINJA;669586]Wonder if you can get your old slips out where you expect the data to be the same and see if there is a reading for barametric pressure and temperature? MRP and I had a Dyno lesson 101 yesterday regarding the concern over different Dyno calibrations and it was conveyed that in fact there is nothing to calibrate on a Dyno rollers. The reason for similar WHP vs Fly yesterday is purely down to the environmental conditions.... I'm not an arm chair Dyno expert to be able to comment on this, but looks like you lot are. I still haven't figure out who's right on this..[/QUOTE] Wayne, think of energy transference, the whp CANNOT be the same as the bhp because energy will be lost going from the engine to the wheels, whatever is true regarding whp and bhp, that is a simple fact of physics. These debates are good because eventually, one day, one of us will come up with a definitive answer and we'll know for definite............hopefully.
If someone can find a standard conversion factor for turbo engines then we can have definite figures but I can't find one :(. Atmospheric pressure will just shift the turbo efficiency on the compressor map So it will make a difference but only minimal compared to the SAE conversion on our dyno printouts :( problem is different dyno shops will use different conversion, and some won't use any at all because they'll know not to on turbo cars. Every dyno SHOULD read the same BHP but WHP will vary slightly due to the dyno itself. The two shouldn't vary because of atmospheric conditions they should stay relative to each other, but they will change if your oil/water temps increase/decrease.
[QUOTE=LiamT4;669645]Wayne, think of energy transference, the whp CANNOT be the same as the bhp because energy will be lost going from the engine to the wheels, whatever is true regarding whp and bhp, that is a simple fact of physics. These debates are good because eventually, one day, one of us will come up with a definitive answer and we'll know for definite............hopefully.[/QUOTE] When my car is ready for going on a dyno im going to go to different dyno days and different dyno models too see what the results are and by the end of 2014 I will have about 5 or 6 graphs to compare .then we will see what the conclusion is .and this will include a dynojet /maha/mustang etc etc.i think it will make interesting reading and I will not touch the car at all
As the title of this thread is "Southern Softies - Southways Automotive 14 Dec 2013 PICS" so to get it back on track here are some photo`s I took,
Video will along shortly.:)
I arrived a bit late and didn`t get any photo`s of Waynes V40 T4 on the dyno.
[QUOTE=smithy;669650]When my car is ready for going on a dyno.....[/QUOTE] .....will any of us live that long ?
[QUOTE=charlie-r;669598]Problem is SAE standard doesn't apply to turbocharged cars as the wastegate negates the affect if pressure change in the atmosphere too significantly. So really what was measured on the rollers before correction (283bhp 260whp for me) is the much more accurate result.[/QUOTE] How does the waste gate adjust for air density? Cooler day you will get higher density at a lower pressure?
[QUOTE=oblark;669651]As the title of this thread is "Southern Softies - Southways Automotive 14 Dec 2013 PICS" so to get it back on track here are some photo`s I took,
Video will along shortly.:)
I arrived a bit late and didn`t get any photo`s of Waynes V40 T4 on the dyno.
[/QUOTE]
Nice pics sorry about the hyjacking of the thread
Here`s the video :) My first go at making a video......... [video=youtube_share;Rnm5vQFMqJI]http://youtu.be/Rnm5vQFMqJI[/video]
Nice vid mate
First video [video=youtube;a-74czWGSmM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-74czWGSmM&feature=youtu.be[/video]
Oblark's run [video=youtube;UxyUQIMRysI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxyUQIMRysI&feature=youtu.be[/video]
[QUOTE=charlie-r;669701]First video [video=youtube;a-74czWGSmM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-74czWGSmM&feature=youtu.be[/video][/QUOTE] It says it unavailable
Works now buddy! My run; [video=youtube;e6SWH_bqVgA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6SWH_bqVgA&feature=youtu.be[/video]
Last but not least [video=youtube;KecJAF0tfY8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KecJAF0tfY8&feature=youtu.be[/video] didn't get any of judgeninja's V40 :(
Nice vids weldone
Yup, nice video's.....had to turn the speakers down with Rob's though :P
Looks like some very good results guys, well done!!
Nice vids and pics :)
nice, lol at oblarks status, i have yet to dyno mine mate so watch out lol
Rob, I must admit your car does look rather evil and sounds awesome. Great vids too
nice to see martin's motor getting the power he deserves at last
[QUOTE=T5frankie;669743]nice to see martin's motor getting the power he deserves at last[/QUOTE] Thanks Frankie - I couldn't believe how much the chav air filter was strangling the power, I've fitted a standard twin cone jobbie until my new one arrives. Much better. Here's a vid of Wayne's car to finish the collection. I'm doing a vid for the day but I doubt it'll be much better than Robs. Will post it here when I get it done. [video=youtube;IQ56I6Gbh5M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ56I6Gbh5M[/video]
Welcome to boost limit judge
[QUOTE=M-R-P;670067]Thanks Frankie - I couldn't believe how much the chav air filter was strangling the power, I've fitted a standard twin cone jobbie until my new one arrives. Much better. Here's a vid of Wayne's car to finish the collection. I'm doing a vid for the day but I doubt it'll be much better than Robs. Will post it here when I get it done. [video=youtube;IQ56I6Gbh5M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ56I6Gbh5M[/video][/QUOTE] Hold up you were singing the filters praises when you were at the Ace meet ;)
[QUOTE=AndysR;670389]Hold up you were singing the filters praises when you were at the Ace meet ;)[/QUOTE] I know. you can imagine just how surprised I was when removing it scored another 18whp.
[QUOTE=M-R-P;670401]I know. you can imagine just how surprised I was when removing it scored another 18whp.[/QUOTE] Not saying it isn't because of the filter but just remember different dynos do give different figures did you feel any difference as 18whp is a fair bit about a gain of 21bhp
Some good numbers there guys. Well done
[QUOTE=t5 pete;670403]Not saying it isn't because of the filter but just remember different dynos do give different figures did you feel any difference as 18whp is a fair bit about a gain of 21bhp[/QUOTE] same rollers on the same day mate. 2 runs, took the filter off, instant extra 18whp. spooled up a lot faster too. (watch Charlie's video)
[QUOTE=M-R-P;670412]same rollers on the same day mate. 2 runs, took the filter off, instant extra 18whp. spooled up a lot faster too. (watch Charlie's video)[/QUOTE] So being a chav actually costs you BHP. :P Having seen the filter in question, I'm not surprised.
[QUOTE=M-R-P;670412]same rollers on the same day mate. 2 runs, took the filter off, instant extra 18whp. spooled up a lot faster too. (watch Charlie's video)[/QUOTE] Well that certainly proves it