Tony's BHP

Discussion in 'Engine Tech' started by Alky V6, Aug 30, 2010.

  1. Alky V6 Let's go racing, boyz!

    Message Count:
    12,674
    Offline
    So, you're busting me because you know better. You have all the answers. Come to think of it, I don't recall you providing anything that even remotely resembled an answer on either of these threads.

    In fact, why don't you do the math on my fuel consumption right here on this thread for everyone. Frankly, I don't think you can, but you did ask for my fuel consumption figures so, I figure you must be able to do something with the numbers. Com'on Tony. Let's see what you can do, other than belly ache about something you can't comprehend.
  2. Alky V6 Let's go racing, boyz!

    Message Count:
    12,674
    Offline
    It's hard to dispute fuel consumption data, so here's your one chance Tony. If there was ever a golden chance, this one is it. Prove me wrong.
  3. John Wilde Administrating and Player Hating

    Message Count:
    8,389
    Offline
    Guys,

    There is a lot of information out there.
    Let's not make these debates and information exchanges attacks.

    Not that anyone asked me I think that Tony and Don
    have different goals and approaches on how to get there.

    -Tony wants to be the king in TSO. (CEO)
    He has had a very successful run and works with some of the
    best people in the community to achieve his goals.
    I am excited to see what the chassis improvements can bring.

    -Don sees his car as a science project. (Mad Scientist)
    He wants to figure everything out himself to give himself a deeper
    understanding of every aspect of the car.
    He is only in competition with his own understandings and developments.

    There is enough room in the community for each idea and one does not need to step on the other.

    Who's car or accomplishments are more impressive should only matter to the perspective owners.

    I would gladly spend the day with either and try to learn as much as possible.
  4. Otto J www.ottosperformance.com

    Message Count:
    7,731
    Offline
    There is definetly some variance with fuel consumption.
    For instance, if you are running your car rich it is using more fuel than needed for a certain amount of power and you are you using unburnt fuel to make a calcuation.
    To be exact you will have to be on the cusp of perfect air/fuel.
    for an example, the FAST makes a calculation of how many #s per hour of fuel you are using,if I have a car tuned rich it will show a higher number,as I lean it out the number goes down but i make more power as it is leaned out.

    I am not judging your a/f ration here and i may be splitting hairs.
  5. cdsttype Member

    Message Count:
    229
    Offline
    I don't think people think that.I think what that they see is you making
    50 percent of your advertised potential power.:rolleyes:
  6. S2V6RACER Banned

    Message Count:
    3,693
    Offline

    Right Otto, there is a variation. It seems no matter where we go with this, there is a question of what the real number is. For the record I'll go with the 888 RWHP the dyno said. I think I'll look back at the fuel calcs on that pull and post them up so we can see about how much the drivetrain was loosing.
  7. Alky V6 Let's go racing, boyz!

    Message Count:
    12,674
    Offline
    That's true Otto. I'm not absolutely sure on the bsfc. Maybe someone can help me with that.
    I'm recording 10.8 to 11.4 at the end of an 1/8 mile pass. My a/f meter reads out gasoline numbers. All someone needs to do is convert that to lambda, and then convert that to an a/f for methanol fuel.

    Even if my bsfc was 1.3, which is on the rich side for methanol, what would that come out too? Heck! Use 1.35 bsfc. What's that?
  8. Alky V6 Let's go racing, boyz!

    Message Count:
    12,674
    Offline
    How do you figure?
  9. S2V6RACER Banned

    Message Count:
    3,693
    Offline
    795 lbs/hr where the car made 888 RWHP. Works out to about 1325 BHP at .6 bsfc and 33% +- loss through the drivetrain, but yet good enough to run 8.29 @ 168+ :confused: Tune was within 2% of where it is at the track and A/F was the same as the figures used above. Dyno was a Mustang.
  10. Alky V6 Let's go racing, boyz!

    Message Count:
    12,674
    Offline
    Interesting. What is the weight of the car? What trans and TC?
  11. John Wilde Administrating and Player Hating

    Message Count:
    8,389
    Offline
    Thanks Ted, this is great real world information.
  12. turbobuick Member

    Message Count:
    955
    Offline
    MD dyno's are overly stingy IMO and need to much attention to the setup than they are worth. FYI My car on a MD dyno made 697, next day at the track it went 8.50's@163, not exactly accurate but not a bad tuning method since you can load the car.

    When I was talking about estimating HP from the amount of fuel I was thinking more in terms of measuring it with fuel flow meter. One on the feed and one on the return. You would then have a mass of fuel used, wieght, distance, MPH and time and could come up with a pretty accurate number as far as HP. Racepak makes them how about it Ted?
  13. S2V6RACER Banned

    Message Count:
    3,693
    Offline
    3410#, TH-400 and a Twisted 6 PTC converter.
  14. S2V6RACER Banned

    Message Count:
    3,693
    Offline
  15. Alky V6 Let's go racing, boyz!

    Message Count:
    12,674
    Offline
    So what do you think about all that? What's the chance you got a bad number some where?
    I'm assuming that TC shouldn't be giving an answer like that.
  16. S2V6RACER Banned

    Message Count:
    3,693
    Offline

    Honestly, I feel if I was on the quest for a BIG dyno number I would keep going somewhere else and keep making pulls till I was happy with a big number and then I could brag about making more HP than anybody else in the world with a V6, but in reality there comes a time when you have to back it up at the track. I already had been 137+ (660') with the fresh engine so I knew better than to let that 888 RWHP number bother me (too much ;) ).

    I do not understand how the Mustang dyno computes RWHP, or have I put any effort into learning that at this point so I would have to think it's a matter of calibrations, ect, and absolutely nothing to do with the converter.

    I was never a fan of dynos, I only went there to chase down a bad crank signal problem I was having, as I have found a pretty good way(s) to predict the fueling map up top with the limited experience I have and after seeing what the track proven tune looked like there on the dyno I would recommend to anybody hitting the dyno (Mustang) real quick with a un-tuned combo before going to the track, I am not familiar with Dynojets, I have heard many blowing up their engines because the tune is quite different at the track. I would recommend using Cal, or somebody who has a history of dyno tunes and then track performance to back it up.
  17. Alky V6 Let's go racing, boyz!

    Message Count:
    12,674
    Offline
    Very good post.
  18. bison Moderator

    Message Count:
    12,909
    Offline
    +1. It is used to dial in your specific car. For a comparison to another car on another dyno its useless and doesnt mean dick anyway. 137mph in the eighth. That says plenty.
  19. Dusty Bradford Well-Known Member

    Message Count:
    4,581
    Offline
    We did a couple converters for those dyno shootout cars a couple years ago. We put very tight 10" nitrous converters in them for the big dyno numbers but they won't fall out of a tree at the race track.

    You see, when a car is dyno'd in 3rd gear and the car makes a ton of power. All it does is flash the converter because your loading it with a lot of torque and a trans ratio of 1.0. It's not like a stick car where you just mat it at 3k. A fast car on the track won't always show big hp #'s on the dyno unless the dyno operator is familiar with big power converter equipped cars.
  20. SGRIM Owner/Admin TB.com

    Message Count:
    15,265
    Offline
    +1

Share This Page

^ Top