excellent! I await the results with baited breath

Quote:

Quote:

Mate, I only went to school to eat my lunch! But the kicker is, I lived accross the road from school. So I went home for lunch everyday. So really, There wasn't much learning going on, Hence my misspelling. Hell, it's a miricle I can even read or write!

Is that a fault of the edumacation sistem or the fuct your frum Nuu Zilland ?

Righto. preliminary results are in:

Dyno comparison

When I brought it in it was running very rich (deliberate) and still had the standard ignition total advance, so the timing was retatded back to 0 deg BTDC, to avoid getting too much advance in the top end. It ran 85rwhp as I had tuned it, but on the road felt miles ahead of the 72 rwhp which it ran on a different dyno- so as expected, the dyno numbers don't tell the whole story.

We took some fuel out and welded up the ends of the guide holes for the dizzy weights to prevent them from getting full advance.

turned out to be too much fuel and too much advance change & it pinged and dropped some horses.

took the dizzy apart again and filed some of the weld back out & changed the carby jets again. With a bit more stuffiung around we came back with 103rwhp with a total of 18deg of advance.

But here's the real story- Torque. when you do the re calculation, the flywheel torque comes out at around 210 Nm- considerably more than a SR20DE, more than a 108kW 4agze, and it is equaling a 120kW 4-AG 20V by 2200 rpm!!!

I think there is possibly more grunt to be had with more adjustment of the dizzy curve, to try and hold on to the torque for a bit longer.

One of the interesting things to come out of it was that the carby size is ok for this application. we attached a vac guage to the port in the carby base and didn't see more than 1-2 in/Hg at full throttle. if the carby was genuinely too small there would have been a significant vac signal from the carb.

Anyways, happy for the moment, just need to get it to hold up through the top end & I should see 110-115 rwhp which was the target figure.

I expected more
But...... HP isn't everything
It certainly felt torquier than my race motor even though it was raining

Keep tuning

there's plenty more ponies in there, it's just a matter of find a way to let em out. If you look at the graph, the peak power is at 4800rpm. that's like a old school v8, not an A series. If I can get the torque curve to mirror the original, that should get me up to at least 110-115 rwhp. then for the water injection.

All dynos are different. I'd hazard a guess that if I went back to hyperdrive I'd pick up 5-10% on their dyno.

nice progression!

i wouldn't think you would gain much more rpm as the 1500 don't rev. maybe 5500rpm tops. just a guess

It still whips round to 7k in first & second if you're not quick with the changes, but by third it's starting to labour in the top end.

Still comes up feeling gutless with 2 people on board. curse of the light car.

Here are a couple of things I found interesting & thought I might share:

calculated 'ideal' 10psi power increase

EDIT: 'boosted hp/tq are the modelled values, '10psi' is the actual.

this is what you would get if there were no belt drive losses and no heat losses.


what I got.....

up untill the torque drop off at around 4800rpm, the result is almost identical to the modelled result for 7.5psi. no real change in the torque curve at all. now that is really spinning me out.

Got down to the drags last weekend

14.7 @ 89mph (144km/h)

2.1 sec 60 ft
a lsd and fatter tyres (185's at the mo)would knock a couple of tenths off of that- I was dropping the clutch at 2800rpm

the horsepower/et calcualtors came up with 89mph for my 104 rwhp, but reconed I should be running 15.2

shows the difference a bit of torque can make

before the blower it ran a 16.9 @ about 75mph, so bang for buck factor is pretty good!