Mark Adams & Jason at TVR Power – amazing guys

[davetherave1970]

Matt Poxon mentioned he wanted to have some adjustments made to his map after the Twin Plenum was fitted & as my Griff has been running poorly for some time I ask if I could join him on the day, Matt taking the morning & I the afternoon.
Not only did this happen yesterday but Matt also provided me with lunch too, thank you Matt

Matt’s was done and dusted by 1pm & then it was my Griff’s turn. 500hc 94 Pre-serp.
Issue 1: The car cut out while connections were being made, turned out to be loose faulty relays (ECU & fuel pump) & intermittent cable connections (it had done this once the day before & a few times on car limits days at North Weald).
Jason was excellent & repaired the cabling & replaced the relays there & then.
Issue 2: First run result found it was running very lean (dangerously so) & the run was stopped for safety at 4.7k revs. 218HP / 285 Ft-Ibs. I had been short shifting for a long time so had been protecting the engine without knowing.
A temporary map was installed on a chip emulator & another run was done. This time it was just to max the injectors so they could pull the spark plugs & visibly inspect for “washing”.
It messed about again giving different results each run.
Issue 3: Turns out the AFM wasn’t playing ball. Another AFM fitted & they began again.
The next run concluded that the injectors were maxing out at the top end but were still ok to proceed with mapping. The injectors had been cleaned & flow matched last year!
The fuel regulator was adjusted to allow 45 PSI (up from 38 PSI) & a Tornado chip remap was completed. It now keeps pulling to 6k but starts to run lean again higher than that.
Results at the wheels:
255HP / 291 Ft-Ibs.
The car is de-catted, has a 885 cam, smooth bore intake and K&N filter but no other modifications.
It’s like a new car & I can’t thank Mark & Jason enough for their perseverance.
Matt & I didn’t leave TVR Power until 7pm.

It was suggested that a larger AFM and large injectors could see an extra 20 HP and 20 Torque and allow the revs to go higher too.
At the moment I’m happy as it is but it’s good to know there is scope

Mark/Jason you guys pulled out all the stops to get my Griff back running safely and smoothly. I’m sorry it was a longer day than you expected.

Here are the before and after graph’s.

[TVR Beaver]

£ so long as its going okay now

[FlipFlopGriff]

Knew Matt wouldn't one to go short on the food front.
Never met Mark Adams but Jason is a good bloke. If I knew Jason would be working on the car I'd use Power more often.
FFG

[gmw9666]

Ooooh I actually wanted to get in touch with Mark Adams as needing to get my 420SE tickled over once the old girls been serviced given he's a bit of a guru on the early flapper units

[V8 GRF]

FlipFlopGriff said:

Never met Mark Adams but Jason is a good bloke. If I knew Jason would be working on the car I'd use Power more often.
FFG

Mark has been to a couple of Growls, I had a long chat with him a couple of years ago..... He's lovely guy and what he doesn't know about the Lucas isn't worth knowing, always willing to advise as well and he's not expensive considering the experience you're buying.

[FlipFlopGriff]

V8 GRF said:

Mark has been to a couple of Growls, I had a long chat with him a couple of years ago..... He's lovely guy and what he doesn't know about the Lucas isn't worth knowing, always willing to advise as well and he's not expensive considering the experience you're buying.

Still never met him then, unless I'd had a few too many and don't recall.
FFG

[MPoxon]

Very impressive figures there, especially when you consider the car is pretty standard. The difference in the graphs is chalk and cheese, you always had good torque but was pretty useless after 4k where the car was running so lean. You can see the power band increase now past 4k and it starts to lean off around 5.5k where the injectors have reached full cycle and cannot put enough fuel in. I would love to see that engine can do with a bigger AFM and larger injectors.

Whenever my car has been on a Dyno Dynamics rolling road I get the Wheel BHP and predicted flywheel BHP, their formula puts the difference in wheel to fly on my Griff as 21.72%.

Based on that formula your fly figures are as follows:

Before - 266.09BHP and 347.56 ft/lb.

After - 311.12BHP and 354.87 ft/lb.

[Grey Ghost]

Excellent, two more commissions Dom owes me

Glad you two had a good day at my favourite shop and both came back with the right result

[TVR Beaver]

MPoxon said:

.....wheel to fly on my Griff as 21.72%.

Based on that formula your fly figures are as follows:

Before - 266.09BHP and 347.56 ft/lb.

After - 311.12BHP and 354.87 ft/lb.

Mat.. can you add 21.72% to the torque figures also?... I'm not sure it works the same way....
I also think 21.72% is a MA top side number .. If I did that on my results it showed 332 BHP or so.. where as at the Growl I think it was more like 316 BHP... I think the lower of the two is closer to the mark?..

[MPoxon]

I have no idea to be honest John that was just my guestimate based on calculating the percentage difference between the wheel and fly figures on dyno dynamics dyno at the Growl and applying to the TVR Power dyno. Mark Adams seems to think about 21% is about right for the Power dyno but it is all subjective anyway.

The results from mine are posted here... I will get mine on the Growl Dyno next month and that will be a good comparison as I get mine done every year there.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[Bluebottle]

V8 GRF said:

Mark has been to a couple of Growls, I had a long chat with him a couple of years ago..... He's lovely guy and what he doesn't know about the Lucas isn't worth knowing, always willing to advise as well and he's not expensive considering the experience you're buying.

What many people forget or don't know, he is not just a guru on ALL Lucas ecu's, he has works on many and varied ecu's.
Oh and if you ever have an ignition or fuelling fault that your preferred garage can't fault find, He's your man (he doesn't just map cars, I've used him twice now to fix/fault find problems). Top bloke

[fausTVR]

Just my 2p here, but transmission losses would surely be a more or less flat figure, say 40-50 BHP. A percentage would infer that losses rise in direct proportion to engine output, which seems very unlikely. We're talking steel gear wheels here, not friction bands, torque converters, etc.

Admittedly losses will rise with output but only very modestly, no?

[carsy]

fausTVR said:

Just my 2p here, but transmission losses would surely be a more or less flat figure, say 40-50 BHP. A percentage would infer that losses rise in direct proportion to engine output, which seems very unlikely. We're talking steel gear wheels here, not friction bands, torque converters, etc.

Admittedly losses will rise with output but only very modestly, no?

Sounds reasonable to me. Anybody

[QBee]

I had bigger injectors and the 20 AM fitted to my V8D Chim 500, and my results were 300 BHP/ 330 Torques. And no lean running the top end. This was after re-mapping by Mark Adams at standard fuel pressures. I do have stage 3 heads, a stealth cam and so on, so don't know how much of the extra was down to the injectors and AFM.

Mark charges £60 plus VAT per hour for his time, but you do need to pay extra for hiring the rolling road, as he doesn't own one. He is a great guy.

Contact details are:

http://www.tornadosystems.com/shopcustcontact.asp

[blitzracing]

fausTVR said:

Just my 2p here, but transmission losses would surely be a more or less flat figure, say 40-50 BHP. A percentage would infer that losses rise in direct proportion to engine output, which seems very unlikely. We're talking steel gear wheels here, not friction bands, torque converters, etc.

Admittedly losses will rise with output but only very modestly, no?

Never got my head around this one- 50 bhp = 40kw is lost heat- thats about twice the size of my central heating boiler at full output. Why dont these components fry then- even with airflow over them you would know about it heat wise....

[QBee]

blitzracing said:

fausTVR said:

Just my 2p here, but transmission losses would surely be a more or less flat figure, say 40-50 BHP. A percentage would infer that losses rise in direct proportion to engine output, which seems very unlikely. We're talking steel gear wheels here, not friction bands, torque converters, etc.

Admittedly losses will rise with output but only very modestly, no?

Never got my head around this one- 50 bhp = 40kw is lost heat- thats about twice the size of my central heating boiler at full output. Why dont these components fry then- even with airflow over them you would know about it heat wise....

Try sitting in my car in traffic on a hot day with the roof on.....then you will know exactly where the heat goes!

[fausTVR]

blitzracing said:

fausTVR said:

Just my 2p here, but transmission losses would surely be a more or less flat figure, say 40-50 BHP. A percentage would infer that losses rise in direct proportion to engine output, which seems very unlikely. We're talking steel gear wheels here, not friction bands, torque converters, etc.

Admittedly losses will rise with output but only very modestly, no?

Never got my head around this one- 50 bhp = 40kw is lost heat- thats about twice the size of my central heating boiler at full output. Why dont these components fry then- even with airflow over them you would know about it heat wise....

It is a can of worms this one. Nearly all that lost power dissipating away as heat, as you say it's hard to imagine where it all goes. Not only friction losses in the gearbox and diff but mechanical twisting, bending forces going through the chassis which holds the transmission in place. That's a lot of gubbins to absorb all that power being handled. The oils in the tranny serve to tranfer heat from the hotspots to the casings so it can be convected away also.

50 BHP losses is far more than you may expect, but that's low compared to what a supercharger demands.