324.6 bhp and a thumbs up for Austec

[edhorne]

Hello everyone

Just had my tappets done and cam timing checked at Austec.

Took the opportunity to have a power run done aswell.

The result was 324.6 bhp on my 1996 4.2

I still have cats and a very noisy un-branded rear silencer which may be costing me a few ponies. It tailed off at about 6250rpm. Anyone have any thoughts?

They couldn't print off the graph otherwise I would have posted it here. As soon as I get a copy I will put it on.

In the real world the car is much nicer to drive having had the timing chain tightened and the tappets adjusted.

My thanks to the team at Austec for looking after me all day and for softening the blow when it all cost a bit more than I was expecting

Cheers

Ed

[Chimjunkie]

Had a dyno setup at Austec ages ago and they couldnt print it out. Thought they would have got their system working properly by now...

[esso]

Isnt it weird how Cerbs allways seem to cost a bit more than you expect!!!Mine does!!!

[HarryW]

Chimjunkie said:

Had a dyno setup at Austec ages ago and they couldnt print it out. Thought they would have got their system working properly by now...

How long ago was that , twas working last week, perhaps they were just out of paper

[trackcar]

Cerbs do seem very picky on cam timing .. I had a 4.5 in the other day which went from 303 hp std to 381 with cam timing/valves done and a remap. Geting them right brings them bang up to proper hp again sad thing is this car had just supposedly had a service and valves done .. Pleased you had a good result

[edhorne]

It may have been a lot less before. We didn't do a before and after the valve work.

I now know its all there or thereabouts so I'm happy until I find some linked decat pipes under the Christmas tree (hint, hint) and then I'll need a remap and so the list goes on......

Cheers

Ed

[Keithyboy]

edhorne said:

. . . They couldn't print off the graph otherwise I would have posted it here. As soon as I get a copy I will put it on.

Strange as it was certainly working on Saturday when I watched a very pleased modded Griff owner being given his graph with 397 ft.lbs. torque (yep 397!) Must be a temporary glitch - with the printer, not the Griff

[Seasider]

Keithyboy said:

Strange as it was certainly working on Saturday when I watched a very pleased modded Griff owner being given his graph with 397 ft.lbs. torque (yep 397!) Must be a temporary glitch - with the printer, not the Griff

Griff Torque

[buzz01]

trackcar said:

Cerbs do seem very picky on cam timing .. I had a 4.5 in the other day which went from 303 hp std to 381 with cam timing/valves done and a remap. Geting them right brings them bang up to proper hp again sad thing is this car had just supposedly had a service and valves done .. Pleased you had a good result

and a fine job you did too ,shame crap driver didnt get the best out of car at fighting torque.must practice those launches.

[jbvipercerb]

On the subject of 4.2 power figures, I've only seen 4.5 figures here, I had my 4.2 checked on the dyno at Rockingham. The chap said he hadn't done many Cerbs so didn't know what the power/torque should be.
When he did the run, he only reved it to 5500 revs, when torque started to drop off, and the grand total was 303hp and 320lbs/ft at 5500rpm.
The question is, how much more power is made after 5500 revs, and the run was done in third gear, what difference does this make?
He also gave me a fuel mixture graph from the run, which was all over the place, I don't see how he could get accurate figures when it was a quick blast up the revs, maybe someone here can enlighten me?

[touching cloth]

Always happy to dig out my 4.2 graph, although no doubt longbow will come and post his up and pip me anyway with his home built cobbled together special .



Judging by my graph mine there is a useful amount more to be had from 5500 depite the torque drop, they really should keep rising upto around the 7k mark asfaik. Probably count on another 25-35 minimum I would guess, just the rate of increase tails of following the torque.

[jbvipercerb]

Thanks very much for that, very interesting, your power curve is higher than mine all over but my torque curve is much flatter, its 300 to 320lbs/ft from 2400rpm all the way to 5200rpm, can any of the experts say why?

[Byker28i]

This was mine recently:


They only ran it up until 6200ish

Edited by Byker28i on Tuesday 14th August 19:55

[jbvipercerb]

This is mine, a much flatter torque curve but not as much power? Hmm.
Oh and a bit out of focus! Sorry.

[BCA]

Cerbs should be revved beyond 7200rpm on the Dyno, most of them wont make peak power till very high numbers - at 5500rpm the fun has just started in most Cerbs, they usually scream well beyond that with a reasonable amount of bhp still to give...

[goon1001]

Any reason why they used third gear? I ran my Tuscan and noticed it was in third when reading print out too?? This wont give direct drive from engine like 4th iirc and thus not the right power of engine?

[southendpier]

brrrrrm, brrrrrrrm!

Edited by southendpier on Tuesday 14th August 23:08

[touching cloth]

goon1001 said:

Any reason why they used third gear? I ran my Tuscan and noticed it was in third when reading print out too?? This wont give direct drive from engine like 4th iirc and thus not the right power of engine?

This has been the cause for much discussion in the past, basically I think it has to do with having to run needing to be within certain top speed parameters, in 4th it exceeds the upper limit. As I understand it, as long as the machine knows you are running it in 3rd (for the Dyno Dynamics machines at least) then it will be an accurate result.