Rolling Road Result - ACT Carbon Fibre Plenum
Discussion
Evening Gents,
Following my writeup about the ACT twin throttle carbon fibre plenum I have been up to TVR Power and the car has been mapped by 14CUX guru Mark Adams.
Original plenum thread here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
The last dyno result I had for the Griff was at the Growl in 2013 on North London Dyno rolling road. This was without the plenum and you can see the car was over fuelling.
2013 Griff Growl
Peak BHP - 226.6BHP Wheels (281.8 Flywheel)
Peak Torque - 342ft/lb
BHP & AFR
Torque & AFR
The twin throttle plenum and K&N flat panel filter were added in 2014 everything else on the car has remained the same since the dyno run in 2013. Mark Adams booked up a session at TVR Power yesterday to get the car mapped correctly with new plenum. I am always impressed with Mark's work, peak power figures are all well and good when on full throttle but most importantly to me is how the car actually drives and this is where Mark excels, not only does he map the car for maximum power he also knows how to iron out all those annoyances such as shunting, hesitations, lumpy idles etc which become very tiresome around town and when stuck in traffic.
I have met Dom a few times but it was my first time up at Power and I was very impressed by the hospitality. Mark was mapping the car and Jason was operating the Dyno on the day so I had two TVR legends working on the car. After setting the car up Mark and Jason thoroughly checked the car over analysing the ignition and fuelling to make sure everything was working as it should. I asked Mark to perform a before and after run so I could compare.
2014 TVR Power
Peak BHP - 254.65BHP Wheels (309.95 Flywheel)
Peak Torque - 285.20ft/lb Wheels (347.15 Flywheel)
First Run (before mapping)
The first run showed that the additional air flow from the plenum had resolved the over fuelling issue in 2013 but the car was now running very lean but already a significant increase in power over last year.
Final Run (after mapping)
After Mark had worked his magic and got the fuelling spot on the final run showed a further increase in BHP and torque.
Conclusion
It is very difficult to accurately compare the pre plenum figures to post plenum as the readings are from different dynos on different days. The only way to accurately compare is to test back to back on the same dyno on the same day. Furthermore the fuelling was out in 2013 so the car would have certainly made more back then if this was sorted. TVR Power’s dyno figures where measured at the wheels whereas the Growl dyno measures at the wheels and then converts to a flywheel figure. The Growl Dyno Dynamics dyno last year read 226.6BHP at the wheels and converted this to a figure of 281.8BHP at the fly, as a percentage this works out as 21.7152%. I have applied the percentage to the TVR Power wheel BHP figures to compare flywheel figures:
Before plenum - Peak BHP - 226.6BHP Wheels (281.8 Flywheel)
After plenum - Peak BHP - 254.65BHP Wheels (309.95 Flywheel)
Having upgraded the AFM, injectors, fuel reg, plenum, trumpets and manifolds I am now in a position where there is no more power to be had from the original engine. Any further uplift in power will require an upgraded engine. Figures aside I am very pleased with the complete package, the car drives and performs well and I have the piece of mind that the fuelling is spot on so I can safely exercise the car on track.
So what is next..... I intend to enjoy the car now and spend my upgrade budget on fuel up until the point it needs a new cam. The car is still on its original cam and has 50k on the clock so based on others experiences this will probably need doing in the next 20k or so.
Following my writeup about the ACT twin throttle carbon fibre plenum I have been up to TVR Power and the car has been mapped by 14CUX guru Mark Adams.
Original plenum thread here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
The last dyno result I had for the Griff was at the Growl in 2013 on North London Dyno rolling road. This was without the plenum and you can see the car was over fuelling.
2013 Griff Growl
Peak BHP - 226.6BHP Wheels (281.8 Flywheel)
Peak Torque - 342ft/lb
BHP & AFR
Torque & AFR
The twin throttle plenum and K&N flat panel filter were added in 2014 everything else on the car has remained the same since the dyno run in 2013. Mark Adams booked up a session at TVR Power yesterday to get the car mapped correctly with new plenum. I am always impressed with Mark's work, peak power figures are all well and good when on full throttle but most importantly to me is how the car actually drives and this is where Mark excels, not only does he map the car for maximum power he also knows how to iron out all those annoyances such as shunting, hesitations, lumpy idles etc which become very tiresome around town and when stuck in traffic.
I have met Dom a few times but it was my first time up at Power and I was very impressed by the hospitality. Mark was mapping the car and Jason was operating the Dyno on the day so I had two TVR legends working on the car. After setting the car up Mark and Jason thoroughly checked the car over analysing the ignition and fuelling to make sure everything was working as it should. I asked Mark to perform a before and after run so I could compare.
2014 TVR Power
Peak BHP - 254.65BHP Wheels (309.95 Flywheel)
Peak Torque - 285.20ft/lb Wheels (347.15 Flywheel)
First Run (before mapping)
The first run showed that the additional air flow from the plenum had resolved the over fuelling issue in 2013 but the car was now running very lean but already a significant increase in power over last year.
Final Run (after mapping)
After Mark had worked his magic and got the fuelling spot on the final run showed a further increase in BHP and torque.
Conclusion
It is very difficult to accurately compare the pre plenum figures to post plenum as the readings are from different dynos on different days. The only way to accurately compare is to test back to back on the same dyno on the same day. Furthermore the fuelling was out in 2013 so the car would have certainly made more back then if this was sorted. TVR Power’s dyno figures where measured at the wheels whereas the Growl dyno measures at the wheels and then converts to a flywheel figure. The Growl Dyno Dynamics dyno last year read 226.6BHP at the wheels and converted this to a figure of 281.8BHP at the fly, as a percentage this works out as 21.7152%. I have applied the percentage to the TVR Power wheel BHP figures to compare flywheel figures:
Before plenum - Peak BHP - 226.6BHP Wheels (281.8 Flywheel)
After plenum - Peak BHP - 254.65BHP Wheels (309.95 Flywheel)
Having upgraded the AFM, injectors, fuel reg, plenum, trumpets and manifolds I am now in a position where there is no more power to be had from the original engine. Any further uplift in power will require an upgraded engine. Figures aside I am very pleased with the complete package, the car drives and performs well and I have the piece of mind that the fuelling is spot on so I can safely exercise the car on track.
So what is next..... I intend to enjoy the car now and spend my upgrade budget on fuel up until the point it needs a new cam. The car is still on its original cam and has 50k on the clock so based on others experiences this will probably need doing in the next 20k or so.
Edited by MPoxon on Monday 7th July 16:41
must resist must resistIt will be interesting to see what your 430 and my 500 do back to back at the Growl this year FFG. Hopefully I may finally have the upper hand with my latest upgrades 
Your new engine earth strap added 30ft/lb didn't it? All joking aside though the engine in yours is phenomenal for a 430 and they do drive much nicer than the 500s IMO, you really cannot beat the revvy nature of the 4.3 and with a 4.3BV you get almost as much power as a 500 so win win.
I suspect yours being the original press car a lot of work went into that engine at the factory
Your new engine earth strap added 30ft/lb didn't it? All joking aside though the engine in yours is phenomenal for a 430 and they do drive much nicer than the 500s IMO, you really cannot beat the revvy nature of the 4.3 and with a 4.3BV you get almost as much power as a 500 so win win.
I suspect yours being the original press car a lot of work went into that engine at the factory
Edited by MPoxon on Wednesday 25th June 23:13
MPoxon said:
It will be interesting to see what your 430 and my 500 do back to back at the Growl this year FFG. Hopefully I may finally have the upper hand with my latest upgrades
Your new engine earth strap added 30ft/lb didn't it? All joking aside though the engine in yours is phenomenal for a 430 and they do drive much nicer than the 500s IMO, you really cannot beat the revvy nature of the 4.3 and with a 4.3BV you get almost as much power as a 500 so win win.
I suspect yours being the original press car a lot of work went into that engine at the factory
Its the original engine on 250k miles though, but was rebuilt in 2003 by Power.Your new engine earth strap added 30ft/lb didn't it? All joking aside though the engine in yours is phenomenal for a 430 and they do drive much nicer than the 500s IMO, you really cannot beat the revvy nature of the 4.3 and with a 4.3BV you get almost as much power as a 500 so win win.
I suspect yours being the original press car a lot of work went into that engine at the factory
Edited by MPoxon on Wednesday 25th June 23:13
Didnt think you were at the Growl? I'll take you out for a spin if you're about.
FFG
Hi Peter, yes I think any additional power will be expensive to achieve from this point on. I do like the idea of heads and a hotter cam but to be honest I think I would probably save up my pennies and go for a rebuild package such as the TVR Power Taraka or that JE engine Ian Rose has in his Griff. To be honest I am really happy with the car now and it now has far more power than I have talent so I will be spending my money on some more track days.
Hi FFG, I have had a bit of a result with the Growl. I am at a Wedding on the Saturday in Birmingham but as it turns out it is a reception so I am planning to go the Growl during the day and go to the reception in the evening.
Hi FFG, I have had a bit of a result with the Growl. I am at a Wedding on the Saturday in Birmingham but as it turns out it is a reception so I am planning to go the Growl during the day and go to the reception in the evening.
Two great results their Matthew!
Look forward to seeing you at the Growl (get my car back in a few hours, not that I'm counting...).
Getting my car RR'd mapped (upto 4k rpm) on Saturday (http://www.mekmotorsport.co.uk/engine%20tunning.htm) and hopefully get 500m on it next week and full map before GG !
Look forward to seeing you at the Growl (get my car back in a few hours, not that I'm counting...).
Getting my car RR'd mapped (upto 4k rpm) on Saturday (http://www.mekmotorsport.co.uk/engine%20tunning.htm) and hopefully get 500m on it next week and full map before GG !
MPoxon said:
Nice one Paul, I bet you cannot wait to get her back on the road.
I had my Griff mapped at the shop next door to there Mech Repairs. Look forward to seeing you at the Growl.
Was that by Dave Young?(whose doing mine) - I know he's done loads of Griffs in the 9 years he's been there.I had my Griff mapped at the shop next door to there Mech Repairs. Look forward to seeing you at the Growl.
I thought the twin plenum was a waste of time on a 5l ! I would of junked the lot and fitted the Emerald K6 or any other good after market ECU .
Gone for coil packs ,new loom ,new injectors ,the whole lot and it would of been more cost effective than the twin plenum and keeping the old 14cux .
It does look nice
Gone for coil packs ,new loom ,new injectors ,the whole lot and it would of been more cost effective than the twin plenum and keeping the old 14cux .
It does look nice
SILICONEKID345HP said:
I thought the twin plenum was a waste of time on a 5l ! I would of junked the lot and fitted the Emerald K6 or any other good after market ECU .
Gone for coil packs ,new loom ,new injectors ,the whole lot and it would of been more cost effective than the twin plenum and keeping the old 14cux .
It does look nice
Nought wrong with the old 14CUX at controlling fuel especially when MA works his magic...I'd have it every day of the week over emerald or mega squirt...mine is piggy backed with an omex to control the spark. Gone for coil packs ,new loom ,new injectors ,the whole lot and it would of been more cost effective than the twin plenum and keeping the old 14cux .
It does look nice
SILICONEKID345HP said:
I thought the twin plenum was a waste of time on a 5l ! I would of junked the lot and fitted the Emerald K6 or any other good after market ECU .
Gone for coil packs ,new loom ,new injectors ,the whole lot and it would of been more cost effective than the twin plenum and keeping the old 14cux .
It does look nice
Hi Daz, Gone for coil packs ,new loom ,new injectors ,the whole lot and it would of been more cost effective than the twin plenum and keeping the old 14cux .
It does look nice
I had a conversation with Tim regarding the differences between twin and triple throttle plenums in terms of performance and he recommended the twin throttle over the triple in my case as it would be more than sufficient fitted to a TVR 5.0 Rover V8. The benefits of the triple throttle version would only really be noticeable over the twin on high output custom-built engines, for example the V8 Developments 5.5 and some of the higher capacity John Eales racing engines.
With regards to ECU the car would not gain any additional peak power with an aftermarket ECU over the 14CUX, the car has a 3 bar fuel reg, higher flow rate fuel injectors and a larger AFM which overcome the limitations of the original setup on the 5.0 cars. As you can see from the graphs the fuelling is now spot on since Mark mapped it. The car also runs very nicely on a 14CUX as it is a very reliable and sophisticated ECU when it comes to fuelling and has had the benefit of a large R&D budget from a mainstream manufacturer.
The most cost effective option for me was to not junk the 14CUX and with the money I saved buy the plenum and get Mark to map the existing ECU and keep the change
MPoxon said:
Hi Daz,
I had a conversation with Tim regarding the differences between twin and triple throttle plenums in terms of performance and he recommended the twin throttle over the triple in my case as it would be more than sufficient fitted to a TVR 5.0 Rover V8. The benefits of the triple throttle version would only really be noticeable over the twin on high output custom-built engines, for example the V8 Developments 5.5 and some of the higher capacity John Eales racing engines.
With regards to ECU the car would not gain any additional peak power with an aftermarket ECU over the 14CUX, the car has a 3 bar fuel reg, higher flow rate fuel injectors and a larger AFM which overcome the limitations of the original setup on the 5.0 cars. As you can see from the graphs the fuelling is now spot on since Mark mapped it. The car also runs very nicely on a 14CUX as it is a very reliable and sophisticated ECU when it comes to fuelling and has had the benefit of a large R&D budget from a mainstream manufacturer.
What are the gains of a 3 bar regulator ? Does it have a better spray pattern ?
The most cost effective option for me was to not junk the 14CUX and with the money I saved buy the plenum and get Mark to map the existing ECU and keep the change
I had a conversation with Tim regarding the differences between twin and triple throttle plenums in terms of performance and he recommended the twin throttle over the triple in my case as it would be more than sufficient fitted to a TVR 5.0 Rover V8. The benefits of the triple throttle version would only really be noticeable over the twin on high output custom-built engines, for example the V8 Developments 5.5 and some of the higher capacity John Eales racing engines.
With regards to ECU the car would not gain any additional peak power with an aftermarket ECU over the 14CUX, the car has a 3 bar fuel reg, higher flow rate fuel injectors and a larger AFM which overcome the limitations of the original setup on the 5.0 cars. As you can see from the graphs the fuelling is now spot on since Mark mapped it. The car also runs very nicely on a 14CUX as it is a very reliable and sophisticated ECU when it comes to fuelling and has had the benefit of a large R&D budget from a mainstream manufacturer.
What are the gains of a 3 bar regulator ? Does it have a better spray pattern ?
The most cost effective option for me was to not junk the 14CUX and with the money I saved buy the plenum and get Mark to map the existing ECU and keep the change
SILICONEKID345HP said:
What are the gains of a 3 bar regulator ? Does it have a better spray pattern ?
The 5 litre cars need more fuel at the top end than the original injectors can supply. The 3 bar fuel regulator will flow more fuel for the larger injectors. The Bosch injectors flow additional fuel and are also spray pattern, atomising the fuel better than the original Lucas injectors. The smaller the fuel droplets the quicker they burn, which is more efficient and releases energy quicker.I am sure you have seen it before but here is a comparison of spray pattern between Lucas and Bosch red tops:
Gassing Station | Griffith | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff