Lambda correction

[ultra violent]

Does anyone know of a rough BHP correction for running rich. i.e. if I make 500bhp at 0.7 lambda approx. what would I make at 0.82.

Just looking for approximation, I appreciate all the factors involved.

[Brink]

smoke?

[stevesingo]

Impossible to tell, it all depends on what an individual engine requires.

What is the engine?

Steve

[ultra violent]

Yeah, as I said an approx. A guy once showed me how to do it and it was quite accurate.

Engine is single turbo porsche 3.4ltr twin pulg.

[trackcar]

If you're really making 500hp from 3.4 litres would you really want to run it any weaker?

[ultra violent]

lambda was off the scale i.e. less than 0.7 Car makes much more than 500bhp normally...

[stevieturbo]

trackcar said:

If you're really making 500hp from 3.4 litres would you really want to run it any weaker?

Why dump fuel in there for no reason ?

If you could run it cleaner, leaner and use less boost to make the same power....wouldnt that be better ?

Or of course more power

[trackcar]

I don't know what this engine wants, i don't map turbo cars .. but I hire my dyno out to a lot of people who do map turbos and they always seem to map well into the lambda sevens at full throtle, in fact if they're running short of fuelling and up into the lambda eights on high boost engines they send the owners away for bigger injectors/fuel pump/whatever it needs. I would say better be safe than sorry .. richer than lambda .7 is overkill though but likewise lambda .82 must be getting borderline for this specific output? I'm sometimes running that rich on normally aspirated cars if feel it's warranted. Like I say i don't map turbos so don't really know about this engine, just going on what I see on my dyno when other tuners are mapping here ..

[stevieturbo]

I'd be quite happy in most cases with Lambda bang on 0.8.

Although you could stretch that to 0.81-0.82 at a push.

Some would go leaner than that, I personally wouldnt. Any possible power gains, arent worth the risk.