My Large Extended Ports
06-02-2005, 11:42 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 162
The laws of physics are on my side. Its a basic rule of thumb calculation to see if the power delivered for a particular boost level makes sense. In your case it doesn't. The most likely cause of this is a dyno that has either not been calibrated properly, has been set high on purpose to give customers a 'good feeling' or is being operated by someone who is not properly qualified.
Whichever it is, the numbers do not stand up to basic scrutiny. Its not my theory. Its the ideal gas law. PV=nRT.
Whichever it is, the numbers do not stand up to basic scrutiny. Its not my theory. Its the ideal gas law. PV=nRT.
06-02-2005, 04:25 PM
#32
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 20
[quote name='BNA_ELLIS' date='Jun 2 2005, 07:25 AM']Yes I have areas to learn regarding engine porting. I listen to intelligent people who have built and continue to build good strong engines, and I put into practise what I have been taught. So far so good. Read the post properly you see I didn't close off a thought that was put to me. All Bill done is what he always does rubbishes anything anyone else achieves and makes out that his theories mean more anything else.
Yes I know you and him are buddies so go ahead agree with him. His mouth is obviously a better dyno than Geffs DYNO DYNAMICS as he estimates I only have 450fwhp, 450fwhp must be accurate why? because Bill said so.
Come on Carl lets not get down road of my one is bigger than yours that's not the topic here, what have the big ported engine you built done down the strip? as you said times & speed up the strip is where it counts.
[/quote]
Well Clives car was reasonably quick for a full weight FD at a 12.2 1/4.Those ports were smaller than yours are on the primaries but larger on the secondaries.Clive was running 1.1 bar boost at the time.That was in January of last year.His car is running a full interior and even has the Aircon in working order.Clives car was making 365hp at the hubs on a hub dyno at the time,so some discrepency between your power and his for similar times.I reckon that Clives car had around 410 hp at the fly then.
Don't get me wrong Brian,you are doing a good job which is great to see,and no doubt the jap ported engines you have pulled down have helped,but your 1/4 mile figures don't seem to come up to scratch with your power figures.You are good mates with Geff at ReWorx,just like I am with Bill,but maybe the DD rollers do need checking out?Just looking at it logically.You are the man to ask him since you are his mate.
Don't want to be ,just trying to help,as I did on Monday when you asked me.I want to see quicker and quicker times in the UK,so please take the thoughts on board.
Regards
Carl
Yes I know you and him are buddies so go ahead agree with him. His mouth is obviously a better dyno than Geffs DYNO DYNAMICS as he estimates I only have 450fwhp, 450fwhp must be accurate why? because Bill said so.
Come on Carl lets not get down road of my one is bigger than yours that's not the topic here, what have the big ported engine you built done down the strip? as you said times & speed up the strip is where it counts.
[snapback]720207[/snapback]
[/quote]
Well Clives car was reasonably quick for a full weight FD at a 12.2 1/4.Those ports were smaller than yours are on the primaries but larger on the secondaries.Clive was running 1.1 bar boost at the time.That was in January of last year.His car is running a full interior and even has the Aircon in working order.Clives car was making 365hp at the hubs on a hub dyno at the time,so some discrepency between your power and his for similar times.I reckon that Clives car had around 410 hp at the fly then.
Don't get me wrong Brian,you are doing a good job which is great to see,and no doubt the jap ported engines you have pulled down have helped,but your 1/4 mile figures don't seem to come up to scratch with your power figures.You are good mates with Geff at ReWorx,just like I am with Bill,but maybe the DD rollers do need checking out?Just looking at it logically.You are the man to ask him since you are his mate.
Don't want to be
Regards
Carl
06-02-2005, 11:42 PM
#34
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: NJ
Posts: 17,839
[quote name='Zero R' date='Jun 2 2005, 11:37 PM']Wow, I feel like I'm on the other forum.
[/quote]
i agree!
i am reading a whole bunch of nonsense.
i also agree the car should trap higher than 123mph
[snapback]720552[/snapback]
[/quote]
i agree!
i am reading a whole bunch of nonsense.
i also agree the car should trap higher than 123mph
06-03-2005, 12:47 AM
#35
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 8
[quote name='bill shurvinton' date='Jun 2 2005, 08:42 AM']The laws of physics are on my side. Its a basic rule of thumb calculation to see if the power delivered for a particular boost level makes sense. In your case it doesn't. The most likely cause of this is a dyno that has either not been calibrated properly, has been set high on purpose to give customers a 'good feeling' or is being operated by someone who is not properly qualified.
Whichever it is, the numbers do not stand up to basic scrutiny. Its not my theory. Its the ideal gas law. PV=nRT.
[/quote]
A T51 SPL is basically the same as the GT42 102mm, and the GT42 lays down 520-550rwhp based on port work, at 1.2 bar. Does that mean that every dyno that makes 550whp on a T51SPl/GT42 is trash? No... Many people have done it... You cannot prove that EVERY dyno is WRONG... I understand that people can tweak dynoes, but 550whp is absolutely possible.
I tuned a 13B steet ported with a T72 turbo ( smaller than the T51SPl),and the car did 443whp at 14spi spike falling to 11psi. I can email you many runs of 430-440whp. The boost controller was not doing its job ( old HKS EVC 3, showing 5psi with the car not running). Otherwise a T72 at 1 bar will put down 450whp. a T51SPL, which flows 10 more pounds that the T72, at running 3more psi, will be in the 520-550rwhp range.
Also, dyno dynamics is the lowest reading dyno of them all. So 478rwhp is amazing, considering the car is not even tuned yet.
You are talking about physics here, but how many 13Bs with bigger turbos have you PERSONALLY tuned on a DYNO?
Also, if you look at the GT24 102mm compressor map, you can see that at 2.2 the turbo flows about 52lbs. So that is roughly 520rwhp. So with the race gas, extra timing, etc 550rwhp is really possible.
I have to agree about the trap speed, 123mph is too low unless he messed up majorly...
Whichever it is, the numbers do not stand up to basic scrutiny. Its not my theory. Its the ideal gas law. PV=nRT.
[snapback]720243[/snapback]
[/quote]
A T51 SPL is basically the same as the GT42 102mm, and the GT42 lays down 520-550rwhp based on port work, at 1.2 bar. Does that mean that every dyno that makes 550whp on a T51SPl/GT42 is trash? No... Many people have done it... You cannot prove that EVERY dyno is WRONG... I understand that people can tweak dynoes, but 550whp is absolutely possible.
I tuned a 13B steet ported with a T72 turbo ( smaller than the T51SPl),and the car did 443whp at 14spi spike falling to 11psi. I can email you many runs of 430-440whp. The boost controller was not doing its job ( old HKS EVC 3, showing 5psi with the car not running). Otherwise a T72 at 1 bar will put down 450whp. a T51SPL, which flows 10 more pounds that the T72, at running 3more psi, will be in the 520-550rwhp range.
Also, dyno dynamics is the lowest reading dyno of them all. So 478rwhp is amazing, considering the car is not even tuned yet.
You are talking about physics here, but how many 13Bs with bigger turbos have you PERSONALLY tuned on a DYNO?
Also, if you look at the GT24 102mm compressor map, you can see that at 2.2 the turbo flows about 52lbs. So that is roughly 520rwhp. So with the race gas, extra timing, etc 550rwhp is really possible.
I have to agree about the trap speed, 123mph is too low unless he messed up majorly...
06-03-2005, 02:32 AM
#36
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: london uk
Posts: 79
[quote name='Kaboom!' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:25 PM']Well Clives car was reasonably quick for a full weight FD at a 12.2 1/4.Those ports were smaller than yours are on the primaries but larger on the secondaries.Clive was running 1.1 bar boost at the time.That was in January of last year.His car is running a full interior and even has the Aircon in working order.Clives car was making 365hp at the hubs on a hub dyno at the time,so some discrepency between your power and his for similar times.I reckon that Clives car had around 410 hp at the fly then.
Don't get me wrong Brian,you are doing a good job which is great to see,and no doubt the jap ported engines you have pulled down have helped,but your 1/4 mile figures don't seem to come up to scratch with your power figures.You are good mates with Geff at ReWorx,just like I am with Bill,but maybe the DD rollers do need checking out?Just looking at it logically.You are the man to ask him since you are his mate.
Don't want to be ,just trying to help,as I did on Monday when you asked me.I want to see quicker and quicker times in the UK,so please take the thoughts on board.
Regards
Carl
[/quote]
As I said if I don't have 470rwhp it's not an issue. Maybe I should be trapping higher even with bad starts for a car with my claimed power. Unfortunately I don't have nought over here to compare against really apart from my last car which had 424rwhp at 1.1bar which the owner did 11.8 at 120 something on normal street tyres.
As you desire to change the topic of thread so be it. First off you are quite ill informed, more rumours seem to come out of Newbury than in area51.
Clives car is about all you have on your cv and that's not too pretty, what terminals was that again 107?108? and if my memory serves me right the engine blew up on that run. Lets call it a day, as I had a problem with your friend that spends all his life in a lab not with you.
Don't get me wrong Brian,you are doing a good job which is great to see,and no doubt the jap ported engines you have pulled down have helped,but your 1/4 mile figures don't seem to come up to scratch with your power figures.You are good mates with Geff at ReWorx,just like I am with Bill,but maybe the DD rollers do need checking out?Just looking at it logically.You are the man to ask him since you are his mate.
Don't want to be
Regards
Carl
[snapback]720380[/snapback]
[/quote]
As I said if I don't have 470rwhp it's not an issue. Maybe I should be trapping higher even with bad starts for a car with my claimed power. Unfortunately I don't have nought over here to compare against really apart from my last car which had 424rwhp at 1.1bar which the owner did 11.8 at 120 something on normal street tyres.
As you desire to change the topic of thread so be it. First off you are quite ill informed, more rumours seem to come out of Newbury than in area51.
Clives car is about all you have on your cv and that's not too pretty, what terminals was that again 107?108? and if my memory serves me right the engine blew up on that run. Lets call it a day, as I had a problem with your friend that spends all his life in a lab not with you.
06-03-2005, 02:51 AM
#37
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 20
[quote name='BNA_ELLIS' date='Jun 2 2005, 11:32 PM']As I said if I don't have 470rwhp it's not an issue. Maybe I should be trapping higher even with bad starts for a car with my claimed power. Unfortunately I don't have nought over here to compare against really apart from my last car which had 424rwhp at 1.1bar which the owner did 11.8 at 120 something on normal street tyres.
As you desire to change the topic of thread so be it. First off you are quite ill informed, more rumours seem to come out of Newbury than in area51.
Clives car is about all you have on your cv and that's not too pretty, what terminals was that again 107?108? and if my memory serves me right the engine blew up on that run. Lets call it a day, as I had a problem with your friend that spends all his life in a lab not with you.
[/quote]
Rumours?Ask your other mate Tim.They started from YOU to him then from Dorset to everywhere else.
Tell me then if I am wrong!LOL!
Clives engine had a cracked tip that we found only after pulling the engine to port it for more power.
Anyway I have quite alot of race engines to my credit and my customers have won many circuit race's and championships with them,unlike nearly every other tuner apart from Pip in the UK I actually build more than just straight line drag engines.
Also as I said to you in an earlier thread,YOU ARE DOING A GOOD JOB!This is just to try to help that's all.If the measuring device is not reading reasonably ok then where are you?
Regards
Carl
As you desire to change the topic of thread so be it. First off you are quite ill informed, more rumours seem to come out of Newbury than in area51.
Clives car is about all you have on your cv and that's not too pretty, what terminals was that again 107?108? and if my memory serves me right the engine blew up on that run. Lets call it a day, as I had a problem with your friend that spends all his life in a lab not with you.
[snapback]720655[/snapback]
[/quote]
Rumours?Ask your other mate Tim.They started from YOU to him then from Dorset to everywhere else.
Tell me then if I am wrong!LOL!
Clives engine had a cracked tip that we found only after pulling the engine to port it for more power.
Anyway I have quite alot of race engines to my credit and my customers have won many circuit race's and championships with them,unlike nearly every other tuner apart from Pip in the UK I actually build more than just straight line drag engines.
Also as I said to you in an earlier thread,YOU ARE DOING A GOOD JOB!This is just to try to help that's all.If the measuring device is not reading reasonably ok then where are you?
Regards
Carl
06-03-2005, 03:17 AM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 162
If by every dyno you mean dynojets, then yes. They are horrendously innacurate.
Let's go back to first principles. A turbo is a torque multiplier. In an isothermal system the boosted torque is simply the NA torque times the pressure ratio. In a real system the adiabatic nature of a turbo means that this is not true, but it gives us an upper boundary for a perfect turbo/intercooler setup.
So at a pressure ratio of 2.2 if the inlet temperature is the same as ambient, you will get 2.2 times the torque that the normally aspirated engine gives you. You cannot get more than this.
You have said that 550whp is possible at 2.2 bar. Lets just assume for the moment that all the tyre/tranmission losses magically disappear and the 550 is real repeatable flywheel HP. Let us also assume that this 550 is at 7500RPM.
550/2.2 is 250HP or 175lbft of torque. Now, even with carefully tuned exhausts and inlets I have not seen any evidence that a street port can get to that sort of torque. Bridge ports yes, but not street ports. 160lbft is nearer the mark, and that's with higher comp rotors.
But being optimistic and taking the 160lbft number for the big street port and tweaked inlet gives 160*7500/5250=228HP at 7500. Times 2.2 and for a perfect turbo/intercooler setup you get 502HP. This is the absolute maximum. You will actually get less.
You cannot magically create power from nowhere. That is what I am trying to say.
Let's go back to first principles. A turbo is a torque multiplier. In an isothermal system the boosted torque is simply the NA torque times the pressure ratio. In a real system the adiabatic nature of a turbo means that this is not true, but it gives us an upper boundary for a perfect turbo/intercooler setup.
So at a pressure ratio of 2.2 if the inlet temperature is the same as ambient, you will get 2.2 times the torque that the normally aspirated engine gives you. You cannot get more than this.
You have said that 550whp is possible at 2.2 bar. Lets just assume for the moment that all the tyre/tranmission losses magically disappear and the 550 is real repeatable flywheel HP. Let us also assume that this 550 is at 7500RPM.
550/2.2 is 250HP or 175lbft of torque. Now, even with carefully tuned exhausts and inlets I have not seen any evidence that a street port can get to that sort of torque. Bridge ports yes, but not street ports. 160lbft is nearer the mark, and that's with higher comp rotors.
But being optimistic and taking the 160lbft number for the big street port and tweaked inlet gives 160*7500/5250=228HP at 7500. Times 2.2 and for a perfect turbo/intercooler setup you get 502HP. This is the absolute maximum. You will actually get less.
You cannot magically create power from nowhere. That is what I am trying to say.
06-03-2005, 08:22 AM
#40
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: london uk
Posts: 79
[quote name='Kaboom!' date='Jun 2 2005, 11:51 PM']Rumours?Ask your other mate Tim.They started from YOU to him then from Dorset to everywhere else.
Tell me then if I am wrong!LOL!
Clives engine had a cracked tip that we found only after pulling the engine to port it for more power.
Anyway I have quite alot of race engines to my credit and my customers have won many circuit race's and championships with them,unlike nearly every other tuner apart from Pip in the UK I actually build more than just straight line drag engines.
Also as I said to you in an earlier thread,YOU ARE DOING A GOOD JOB!This is just to try to help that's all.If the measuring device is not reading reasonably ok then where are you?
Regards
Carl
[/quote]
Great! Bevis is telling how much power I got and Butthead is telling what I didn't say. My last post on this bitching, but I suggest you get your info correct before you start posting what came or in this case did not come from outta my mouth.
Tell me then if I am wrong!LOL!
Clives engine had a cracked tip that we found only after pulling the engine to port it for more power.
Anyway I have quite alot of race engines to my credit and my customers have won many circuit race's and championships with them,unlike nearly every other tuner apart from Pip in the UK I actually build more than just straight line drag engines.
Also as I said to you in an earlier thread,YOU ARE DOING A GOOD JOB!This is just to try to help that's all.If the measuring device is not reading reasonably ok then where are you?
Regards
Carl
[snapback]720656[/snapback]
[/quote]
Great! Bevis is telling how much power I got and Butthead is telling what I didn't say. My last post on this bitching, but I suggest you get your info correct before you start posting what came or in this case did not come from outta my mouth.