Manifold / Dyno Performance Discussion

[Nick The Greek]

Good to hear from you Aido  :) You wouldn't believe the amount of testing and benchmarking we have done on these manifolds because we wanted to make sure that they were good.

We may show our results on here but to be honest we were dissillusioned by the overwhelming negativity we got to the Monster thread and some other threads. Some people have spoilt it for those that are genuinely interested and enthusiastic who like to see more information in the public domain. The other issue is that inevitably some people will attempt to compare our results which are entirely accurate to those taken on rollers which suffer from all sorts of accuracy problems, so any form of comparison is difficult or pointless.  :)

Piccies will definately be posted.

←

Will you be posting bhp gains?

[Dave-Ellen]

We may show our results on here but to be honest we were dissillusioned by the overwhelming negativity we got to the Monster thread and some other threads. Some people have spoilt it for those that are genuinely interested and enthusiastic who like to see more information in the public domain. The other issue is that inevitably some people will attempt to compare our results which are entirely accurate to those taken on rollers which suffer from all sorts of accuracy problems, so any form of comparison is difficult or pointless.  :)

Piccies will definately be posted.

←

Mark...I cant see how you can say that "any form of comparison is difficult or pointless"

If you dyno the car as it came in then after the mods have been fitted (on the same day) then surely the difference (at the wheels) is worthwhile information ?

I take your point about different dynos/operators but as I've outlined above that test must be useful (all done on same day).

With Mikes we have every chart showing it with the prolex manifold, OEM manifold & Xerd pipe & OEM set up_-_ all done in a solid 5 hour session (with all dyno runs done by operator all we did was fit/refit parts between sessions)

Hopefully we will have a section on our site (a la TTE) where the consumer can see the gains on offer and not rely on hyperbole or hearsay.

[tdiplc]

We may show our results on here but to be honest we were dissillusioned by the overwhelming negativity we got to the Monster thread and some other threads. Some people have spoilt it for those that are genuinely interested and enthusiastic who like to see more information in the public domain. The other issue is that inevitably some people will attempt to compare our results which are entirely accurate to those taken on rollers which suffer from all sorts of accuracy problems, so any form of comparison is difficult or pointless.  :)

Piccies will definately be posted.

←

Mark...I cant see how you can say that "any form of comparison is difficult or pointless"

If you dyno the car as it came in then after the mods have been fitted (on the same day) then surely the difference (at the wheels) is worthwhile information ?

I take your point about different dynos/operators but as I've outlined above that test must be useful (all done on same day).

With Mikes we have every chart showing it with the prolex manifold, OEM manifold & Xerd pipe & OEM set up_-_ all done in a solid 5 hour session (with all dyno runs done by operator all we did was fit/refit parts between sessions)

Hopefully we will have a section on our site (a la TTE) where the consumer can see the gains on offer and not rely on hyperbole or hearsay.

←

I believe I did offer some helpful insights on Mr Morse's thread.

[Mr Morse]

Mark - I don't think Dave is having a pop......but without quantifiable data (i.e. dyno chart pre/post modification) it's all rather vague and hearsay to quote numbers that are not published in the public domain.

[TheDon]

maybe the only realistic way to solve this is to put both dynos to test on the same car on the same day in the same conditions???

[Mr Morse]

maybe the only realistic way to solve this is to put both dynos to test on the same car on the same day in the same conditions???

←

I don't think this is an issue of "which dyno is right and which one is wrong"

More the point that the value of a modification is worthless unless it's quantatative value can be shown.

[Dave-Ellen]

maybe the only realistic way to solve this is to put both dynos to test on the same car on the same day in the same conditions???

←

laudable but impractible...........

"Argument" is not about diff dynos.

Its about the % increase gained from having a dyno run pre mod then post mod. Prolex-UK are happy to do this to enable the customer to make an informed choice. If other tuning companies dont want to the I suppose its up the customer to make his/her decision based on whatever data they can find.

[tdiplc]

Mark - I don't think Dave is having a pop......but without quantifiable data (i.e. dyno chart pre/post modification) it's all rather vague and hearsay to quote numbers that are not published in the public domain.

←

I agree, but it is still pointless publishing inaccurate data (although the Yanks have been getting away with it for years).

Personally I think that your power curve (and figure) is wrong because it's a classic "transmission drag" shape. I'm not having a dig, just pointing out the obvious.

Obviously I'm not interested myself, but you are welcome to a free power run if you want to find out for yourself :)

[tdiplc]

maybe the only realistic way to solve this is to put both dynos to test on the same car on the same day in the same conditions???

←

I don't think this is an issue of "which dyno is right and which one is wrong"

More the point that the value of a modification is worthless unless it's quantatative value can be shown.

←

I agree entirely which is why accurate data is so important.

[Mr Morse]

Going slightly

How often and by whom is a dynomometer calibrated? Is this an IS09001 requirement?

[Dave-Ellen]

Mark - I don't think Dave is having a pop......but without quantifiable data (i.e. dyno chart pre/post modification) it's all rather vague and hearsay to quote numbers that are not published in the public domain.

←

I agree, but it is still pointless publishing inaccurate data (although the Yanks have been getting away with it for years).

Personally I think that your power curve (and figure) is wrong because it's a classic "transmission drag" shape. I'm not having a dig, just pointing out the obvious.

Obviously I'm not interested myself, but you are welcome to a free power run if you want to find out for yourself :)

←

deff but the reason "my" graph looked odd was due to the car being an auto and having problems with it going into kickdown mode (supras dont do that I'm told)....However..........the fact is the graph stands up as the runs were done on the same car so the % diff is reliable.

On our american cousins & bhp gains I'd tend to agree. the xerd pipe gave about 3 bhp @ wheels against the 10/13 claimed...........

[tdiplc]

I think everyone is missing the point here.

I have been actively involved in dyno's all my adult life so I I'm not completely clueless about these things :duh:

The point is this; Dave & Mr Morse's intentions are good, but publishing data opens them up to questioning, and in this case the question is the accuracy of the results.

I'm not saying that I am right and they are wrong, I am just saying that there is a question which seems obvious (to me) from the shape of the power curve.

Sorry I mentioned it now

[Mr Morse]

We are aware of the "trough" in the shape of the power curve, which I believe was explained in a previous post.

This has been an R&D project for all involved and by published our results in the public domain (both on LOC and on IS300.net) we are asking members to comment on these results. We have nothing to hide by publishing what is a set of very comprehensive data.

Thank you for your offer of a free RR run, but this would be meaningless unless it involved exactly the same procedure as before, whereby the car was tested with the full decatted system and progressively brought back to standard, re-tested each time. At each stage, the RR testing was carried out by an independent 3rd party to ensure transparency.

[tdiplc]

Mark - I don't think Dave is having a pop......but without quantifiable data (i.e. dyno chart pre/post modification) it's all rather vague and hearsay to quote numbers that are not published in the public domain.

←

I agree, but it is still pointless publishing inaccurate data (although the Yanks have been getting away with it for years).

Personally I think that your power curve (and figure) is wrong because it's a classic "transmission drag" shape. I'm not having a dig, just pointing out the obvious.

Obviously I'm not interested myself, but you are welcome to a free power run if you want to find out for yourself :)

←

deff but the reason "my" graph looked odd was due to the car being an auto and having problems with it going into kickdown mode (supras dont do that I'm told)

←

That's exactly my point. The power graph is not accurate because it has recorded transmission drag as "power". Some would say that the power graph published is pointless without accuracy.

Anyway, good luck with your manifolds.

[tdiplc]

We are aware of the "trough" in the shape of the power curve, which I believe was explained in a previous post.

This has been an R&D project for all involved and by published our results in the public domain (both on LOC and on IS300.net) we are asking members to comment on these results. We have nothing to hide by publishing what is a set of very comprehensive data.

Thank you for your offer of a free RR run, but this would be meaningless unless it involved exactly the same procedure as before, whereby the car was tested with the full decatted system and progressively brought back to standard, re-tested each time. At each stage, the RR testing was carried out by an independent 3rd party to ensure transparency.

←

The main point is that doing a power run on an accurate machine will prove whether your published power curve is right or wrong, and whether your testing has any merit.

If your power curve is the same on an accurate machine, then you have every right to claim validation on your results, if not then you will need to start again.

[Mr Morse]

Going slightly 

How often and by whom is a dynomometer calibrated? Is this an IS09001 requirement?

←

Which takes us back to this post........

[Bazza]

kinda feel this thread has gone a bit "off topic"

so getting back to the original thread topic ...

mark for obvious reasons, i wont be interested in the manifold anymore

i still await in anticipation at what you have produced

and....

No firm decisions have been made yet. Thank you to those that volunteered, you can expect something nice from TDi if you're not selected for this manifold  :D

←

something nice eh :D

especially if it fits an EP82

[tdiplc]

Going slightly 

How often and by whom is a dynomometer calibrated? Is this an IS09001 requirement?

←

Which takes us back to this post........

←

We diarise it to calibrate our machine every month. I don't know if it's an ISO requirement but we do it to ensure repeatability.

The actual power figures will often vary from one machine to another, but the power curve should be the same (unless there is transmission drag etc).

[aido]

What does transmission drag actually mean Mark, does it just mean that the dyno confuses this with higher power?

Mine is going in tomorrow for a quick dyno before it's all taken to bits at the weekend, guessing this isn't a problem on a manual, but I do have belt slippage problems so I'll be sure to cover them in anti slip before putting it near the dyno!

Will be having an auto box next I reckon as my arm is still dodgy so I'm not great with manual boxes at the minute!

[Monster-Mat]

the friction generated within the gearbox, and driveline aido......

auto boxes suffer it in greater amounts due to there design

[tdiplc]

What does transmission drag actually mean Mark, does it just mean that the dyno confuses this with higher power?

Mine is going in tomorrow for a quick dyno before it's all taken to bits at the weekend, guessing this isn't a problem on a manual, but I do have belt slippage problems so I'll be sure to cover them in anti slip before putting it near the dyno!

Will be having an auto box next I reckon as my arm is still dodgy so I'm not great with manual boxes at the minute!

←

To do a power run on a rolling road, you accelerate up to maximum engine speed and de-select a gear (which is very easy with manual transmission becasue you just depress the clutch, but very difficult with auto trans because if you can imagine putting it into neutral at full throttle is not good for the engine and trans, but trying to lift off the throttle and put it into neutral at the same time will normally record some drag as the engine decelerates just before disengaging a gear - tricky stuff!).

A rolling road measures the power (torque actually) on acceleration then guestimates the transmission losses as the engine coasts down out of gear, then adds the two together to give an estimated engine power curve. If there is any trans drag or the gear is not de-selected at all the estimated power curve will be much higher.

The best thing to do for any meaningful testing with a rolling road is to forget about the "flywheel power" and just concentrate at the power at the wheels as this eliminates the potential for trans drag errors.

Hope I explained well enough :duh:

[Rob]

well this has gone very off topic ........ so

i think i have this right, i dont really think that it makes much difference which dyno is used or if one is more accurate than the other, providing that any error % remains the same throughout the power level, ie from 1hp thru to say 600hp( as an example only). now based on this, if a car is tested before AND after a mod - a difference ( hopefully) should be shown and that difference can be put forward to the public as a % ie with this mod it showed a 5%, 10%, 15% increase in overall power/torque etc

is it fair to say that would be true?

edited to make it a bit clearer

[MacRS200]

100%^^^^^ true IMHO

Most people want comparitive not absolute figures so calibration is irrelevant.

[Mr Morse]

now based on this, it should also not matter if a car is tested before and after a mod - a difference ( hopefully) should be shown and that difference can be put forward to the public as a % ie with this mod it showed a 5%, 10%, 15% increase in overall power/torque etc

←

But the car has to be tested before the mod is fitted in order to establish a baseline, surely? Otherwise what are you comparing your performance gains against?

[MacRS200]

now based on this, it should also not matter if a car is tested before and after a mod - a difference ( hopefully) should be shown and that difference can be put forward to the public as a % ie with this mod it showed a 5%, 10%, 15% increase in overall power/torque etc

←

But the car has to be tested before the mod is fitted in order to establish a baseline, surely? Otherwise what are you comparing your performance gains against?

←

Think that is what was ment Mike. Should be a comma after "not matter" :D