Fitted an Intercooler, made a difference...............
Discussion
Paul-C said:
Will make a huge difference but no way can it be measured on a Rolling Rip Off. If you dont have a water spray system to squirt water on it to cool it down after traffic jams etc (like Mitsubishi EVOs) it is the next step. Use 50% screen wash in it to stop under-bonnet corrosion.
I do not see why it cannot be measured, if NAH had a run on the LSV dyno when the installation of the SC was done and then has one done after the intercooler fitment the measurement criteria will be similar and should show the difference, yes appreciate it does not relate to actual driving on the road but some of us will be interested to see the difference regardless.
Don't understand why you call measuring on a dyno as a rip off, the £150,000 investment in the dyno or the bill for running on it?
V8HSV said:
Paul-C said:
Will make a huge difference but no way can it be measured on a Rolling Rip Off. If you dont have a water spray system to squirt water on it to cool it down after traffic jams etc (like Mitsubishi EVOs) it is the next step. Use 50% screen wash in it to stop under-bonnet corrosion.
I do not see why it cannot be measured, if NAH had a run on the LSV dyno when the installation of the SC was done and then has one done after the intercooler fitment the measurement criteria will be similar and should show the difference, yes appreciate it does not relate to actual driving on the road but some of us will be interested to see the difference regardless.
Don't understand why you call measuring on a dyno as a rip off, the £150,000 investment in the dyno or the bill for running on it?
Having spent a number of years tuning and racing many cars I have discovered just how inaccurate rolling roads and hub dynos are compared to Engine Dynos. The figures are just not worth quoting from them period and differ wildly from from each rolling road I used. Try reducing and increasing tyre pressures 10psi for a good indication on a rolling road. Even when set up on a proper dyno the only way to fine tune is on the road / track.
Paul-C said:
V8HSV said:
Paul-C said:
Will make a huge difference but no way can it be measured on a Rolling Rip Off. If you dont have a water spray system to squirt water on it to cool it down after traffic jams etc (like Mitsubishi EVOs) it is the next step. Use 50% screen wash in it to stop under-bonnet corrosion.
I do not see why it cannot be measured, if NAH had a run on the LSV dyno when the installation of the SC was done and then has one done after the intercooler fitment the measurement criteria will be similar and should show the difference, yes appreciate it does not relate to actual driving on the road but some of us will be interested to see the difference regardless.
Don't understand why you call measuring on a dyno as a rip off, the £150,000 investment in the dyno or the bill for running on it?
Having spent a number of years tuning and racing many cars I have discovered just how inaccurate rolling roads and hub dynos are compared to Engine Dynos. The figures are just not worth quoting from them period and differ wildly from from each rolling road I used. Try reducing and increasing tyre pressures 10psi for a good indication on a rolling road. Even when set up on a proper dyno the only way to fine tune is on the road / track.
I do appreciate your racing pedigree and bow to your experience but it is the same car on the same dyno with the same operator and I will assume NAH checks his tyres
Edited by V8HSV on Friday 24th November 16:10
In actual fact....
If he is doing a before and after, with appropriate tuning to suit the new upgarde, this is exactly where the RR is at its best !!!!
Do a coupld of pwoer runs before the upgrade, fit the new parts, re-tune, then do another few pulls.
Using the RR as a tool, to show increases in power, rather than outright numbers, is what RR's are made for.
If you arent re-tuning/re-mapping to suit the intercooler fitment, you are wasting your time fitting it in the first place.
If he is doing a before and after, with appropriate tuning to suit the new upgarde, this is exactly where the RR is at its best !!!!
Do a coupld of pwoer runs before the upgrade, fit the new parts, re-tune, then do another few pulls.
Using the RR as a tool, to show increases in power, rather than outright numbers, is what RR's are made for.
If you arent re-tuning/re-mapping to suit the intercooler fitment, you are wasting your time fitting it in the first place.
stevieturbo said:
In actual fact....
If he is doing a before and after, with appropriate tuning to suit the new upgarde, this is exactly where the RR is at its best !!!!
Do a coupld of pwoer runs before the upgrade, fit the new parts, re-tune, then do another few pulls.
Using the RR as a tool, to show increases in power, rather than outright numbers, is what RR's are made for.
If you arent re-tuning/re-mapping to suit the intercooler fitment, you are wasting your time fitting it in the first place.
If he is doing a before and after, with appropriate tuning to suit the new upgarde, this is exactly where the RR is at its best !!!!
Do a coupld of pwoer runs before the upgrade, fit the new parts, re-tune, then do another few pulls.
Using the RR as a tool, to show increases in power, rather than outright numbers, is what RR's are made for.
If you arent re-tuning/re-mapping to suit the intercooler fitment, you are wasting your time fitting it in the first place.
I was referring to power figures obtained from rolling roads Stevie.
OK, for those interested, I have put the results of the dyno runs on the following page:
[url]www.eneily.net/index_files/page0004.htm[/url]
I already know that there are many experts out there who may or may not feel obliged to point out the plethora of reasons why all/any of these results are/are not valid/true/rubbish etc., etc. All I know is that the dyno runs showed an imporvement in the power over the previous run & the car now feels 'liberated'
My conclusion? The inlet temperature of engines with boost are too high without an intercooler.
My advice? Fit one.
Stands to attention & takes it like a man!
PS. The graphs in column 'C' were from the 'proper' dyno run with the temp sensor in the correct place.
[url]www.eneily.net/index_files/page0004.htm[/url]
I already know that there are many experts out there who may or may not feel obliged to point out the plethora of reasons why all/any of these results are/are not valid/true/rubbish etc., etc. All I know is that the dyno runs showed an imporvement in the power over the previous run & the car now feels 'liberated'
My conclusion? The inlet temperature of engines with boost are too high without an intercooler.
My advice? Fit one.
Stands to attention & takes it like a man!
PS. The graphs in column 'C' were from the 'proper' dyno run with the temp sensor in the correct place.
NAH said:
All I know is that the dyno runs showed an imporvement in the power over the previous run & the car now feels 'liberated'
PS. The graphs in column 'C' were from the 'proper' dyno run with the temp sensor in the correct place.
PS. The graphs in column 'C' were from the 'proper' dyno run with the temp sensor in the correct place.
Thats what the dyno is for....to show whether there are gains or not, so good result.
What do you mean, the temp sensor was in various places ???? Why would thye move it about ?
Charge temps should be measured after the intercooler. Thats it, nowhere else. All other air temp measurements in my opinion, are rather pointless, as they arent measuring the air temp thats going into the engine.
Did you measure charge temps ? or were they mucking about measuring ambient temps around the room ?
eliot said:
[quote=stevieturboWhat do you mean, the temp sensor was in various places ???? Why would thye move it about ?
Charge temps should be measured after the intercooler. Thats it, nowhere else.
Charge temps should be measured after the intercooler. Thats it, nowhere else.
Indeed.
[/quote]
Well if one reads the posts on an earlier thread about the effect of an incorrect IT figure producing a higher HP figure, I had the sensor moved around to see the effect.
Out of interest, without an intercooler, where do you think the temp sensor should be fitted?
Of course, what is unclear is exactly where in the dyno software algorithm the IT figure is used & what effect it has. Whole different matter.
ringram said:
Thats a massive difference from the intercooler! Huge!
Nice one.
Are you running a 2bar map sensor now and custom OS? I know we discussed it at one point.
Nice one.
Are you running a 2bar map sensor now and custom OS? I know we discussed it at one point.
Yes, it makes so much difference. Of course the weather is nice & cool right now (if not a little wet!) so will be interesting to see what it IT reaches in the summer. On the trip back from LSV to home last week, the IT reached no higher than 30ºC (according to the logged data).
I am still running the standard OS & MAP sensor.
Edited by NAH on Monday 27th November 11:47
NAH said:
Of course, what is unclear is exactly where in the dyno software algorithm the IT figure is used & what effect it has. Whole different matter.
Right i understand now. We find 36BHP between graph A and D due to the difference in intake temp positions.
Do you have a before and after graph (with the temp probe in the same place) for the intercooler addition?
Edited by eliot on Monday 27th November 12:45
eliot said:
NAH said:
Of course, what is unclear is exactly where in the dyno software algorithm the IT figure is used & what effect it has. Whole different matter.
Right i understand now. We find 36BHP between graph A and D due to the difference in intake temp positions.
Do you have a before and after graph (with the temp probe in the same place) for the intercooler addition?
Edited by eliot on Monday 27th November 12:45
Not for this run. I do have a graph for the previous run after the fittingt of the S/C [url] www.eneily.net/index_files/Dyno%201.jpg [/url]
Very similar to graph A, but the IT was 75ºC. This was after the S/C (the equivalent location if an I/C not fitted?) and was generally lambasted as being the incorrect location. What is odd is that the highest IT of the four runs was not the highest HP.
Still, I think that the dyno software has a lot to answer for, as does the method of calucation & the correction factor.
One thing I don't understand. The correction factor is supposed to correct for atmospheric conditions, so surely the ambient temp should be used in the calculation & should be vehicle independant.
Gassing Station | HSV & Monaro | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff