Went To Wsid,not Happy!

[gogo]

He also told me that if I want more power down low I need exhaust,springs and injectors..    

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think so!!!

Injectors will clearly limit the amount of fuel that can be delivered - this is generally an issue at higher RPM, but can also be a limitation if you have very high boost levels through the mid- range.

The standard exhaust can be retained for much higher power levels than you are running (over 300rwkw), and again losses should be approximately proportional to the square of the flow - higher exhaust flow will tend to be more of an issue at high rpm (again depends on relative boost levels... ).

And valve springs are mainly susceptable at high rpm when they require greater force to move the valve in less time, and can be subjected to higher heat soak.

Injectors are a limitation on power across the range, but they should definitely be able to provide enough fuel to produce (relatively) silly amounts of torque through the mid range without doing any more mods. These guys clearly do not have an accurate appreciation of the capacity of the EDIT.

Good luck with resolving it!

Ben.

[Dr Z]

I just read one of my older posts.It looks like ive said its C&V.Its not and I apoligize to them if people thought it was.Its CRD..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Glad its not C&V.

You now have good benchmarks provided by our community to share with CRD so they can be more in touch with your tuning expectations matching those achieved by other tuners. If they dont sort it out for you, PM me.

Best wishes.

[geea]

I will post up a graph over the weekend.I didnt have it running the standard tune 2fardown.I would be happy if it was only that..

I spoke to one of the guys there this morning who only seems to answer phones all day and he reckons that the times are about right for what I have..After I picked myself up off the floor I told him that there are guys who have done similar times in standard cars and some guys have done around a second quicker with 8+mph..

I will be going to see them on Saturday and speaking to the guy who dynoed it not the receptionist..

He also told me that if I want more power down low I need exhaust,springs and injectors..    

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What you need to do is attend the BVW2 and whilst here drop the car in to HPF or Nizpro and get a retune. It will give you the best results and the car will feel like a new car.

Geea.

[Turbo6man]

Totally agree with Dr Z and drop the humuduty idea it's an absolute red-herring.  No humidity would not have a discenable imact on the performance of your engine and advice like oxygen doesn't burn and humidity has a greater impact on the turbo's performance than intake air temperature and quite wrong. 

A trip to you know who in Melbourne will get you on the right track and put a smile back on your dial.

Dingah

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Without punctuation it is difficult to know exactly what it is you're trying to say in your post.

However that piece I highlighted is quite clearly stated and seems to be directed at something I posted. (I don't think anyone else raised the point).

It was not "advice" - it was a clear and accurate statement of fact. Oxygen DOES NOT burn. There it is again for you - please read it slowly and let it sink in because it IS an indisputable FACT - NOT my "opinion" or "advice".

I think I agree with the gist of everything else you posted (if my interpretation of your post is correct).

[ford number 1]

geea I would love to come down for the BVW2 but I cant see the boss(wife)being too happy about me going away for a few days considering she is 6mths pregnant.I will be showing CRD some dyno sheets from other tuners tomorrow or Monday and seeing what the tuner thinks..

I left a msg for him to call me back today but didnt hear back..

Its obvious by looking at torque and power graphs my tune is down alot on kw and Torque between 60-100kmh compared to a HPF graph that I found on here.This you would think is why Im not getting the mph or time..

Edited 17/03/06 11:42 AM by ford number 1

[ford number 1]

Dyno gragh with torque and power..the 164.9 was standard.Had dramas with EBC.Other one is boost.. Edited 17/03/06 12:15 PM by ford number 1

[gogo]

Totally agree with Dr Z and drop the humuduty idea it's an absolute red-herring.  No humidity would not have a discenable imact on the performance of your engine and advice like oxygen doesn't burn and humidity has a greater impact on the turbo's performance than intake air temperature and quite wrong. 

A trip to you know who in Melbourne will get you on the right track and put a smile back on your dial.

Dingah

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Without punctuation it is difficult to know exactly what it is you're trying to say in your post.

However that piece I highlighted is quite clearly stated and seems to be directed at something I posted. (I don't think anyone else raised the point).

It was not "advice" - it was a clear and accurate statement of fact. Oxygen DOES NOT burn. There it is again for you - please read it slowly and let it sink in because it IS an indisputable FACT - NOT my "opinion" or "advice".

I think I agree with the gist of everything else you posted (if my interpretation of your post is correct).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

okay - I will a little (light heartedly)

Just for the record - pure hydrogen DOES NOT burn either - needs something like oxygen to react with... That is a fact!

One could argue that the most common element to be combined with others in most combustion we normally would use is oxygen - so one could argue that it does in fact 'burn' although it is not the energy source, just the element reducing it...

Also - am curious about the original post... (more genuinely now) - As I understood it the majority of experimentation with water injection generally (not so much specifically with turbo engines) was to achieve one of three related things:

1) Either improve fuel economies by providing 'internal cooling' allowing quite lean mixtures to enter the cylinder, and not reliant on rich fuel mixes to keep temps down (waste water rather than fuel).

2) To effectively improve the octane rating of fuel, by dampening temperature increase of the charge in the cylinder, thereby decreasing chance of knock (the enthalpy change of water to steam is significant, and for steam increases quite significantly with temperature - which means for the same input heat from cylinder walls etc lower net temp rise)

3) (more rare) Reduce temperature in the cylinder to minimise risk of melting holes in pistons or other mechanical damage

I can appreciate that the direct injection of cool water (liquid) into a hot gas stream will lower its temp and as a result increase its density, however that is why we have intercoolers fitted. I would have expected that humid air would have minimal impact (or perhaps a slightly net adverse impact) on performance. Having a couple of percent of steam (I am struggling to remember partial vapour pressure calcs and don't have my books with me... ) would act to dilute the other gases present in dry air - including the 'available' oxygen that we actually want to deliver.

Whilst I also recognise that oxygen is present in water, water is a normal by-product of combustion, so I would have thought that this will add little to no value (again I have not checked the exact molecular weight of the various stoichiometric permutations for converting H2O and fuel products into unburnt H2 and other combustion products such as CO).

Interesting – wonder weather (haha) more cars suffer from pinging on low humidity days than high (admittedly, I would not expect the the difference normal atmospheric humidity would make on this would be much, but could be some... ).

Anyway - hope you don't mind a little stir...

Ben.

[gogo]

Dyno gragh with torque and power..the 164.9 was standard.Had dramas with EBC.Other one is boost..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Back on topic...

Torque doesn't look too bad all in all down low (could be stronger but... ) - what is the deal with the massive fade in torque on the edited curve, and much lower rpm cut? That doesn't seem right to me...

[Dr Z]

Dyno gragh with torque and power..the 164.9 was standard.Had dramas with EBC.Other one is boost..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for scanning the dyno charts. Here are my views:

1. In stock form, that dyno reading of 164.9 rwkw is on the low side. In fact, I cannot recall seeing any lower on an auto XR6T unless there was something amiss with the car. Anyone else recall lower? Given this, I would have the car totally checked over, all hoses, intakes etc to make sure everything is OK.

2. It would be good to see your AFR's if you have them. Like gogo, I am concerned that your torque is not very strong down low then tapers off quickly. With some more adept tuning with the AFR, tining and boost you could get that fatter torque earlier holding up with AVERAGE power being higher.

3. This may seem like a silly question, though lets check everything. How much torque management has been adjusted? How much do you feel comfortable with? Do you want the torque tags taken down to their lowest levels? If so, check with CRD that this is what they have given you.

I hope this helps and no doubt other community members will share their insights too.

Safe and happy driving...Dr Z.

[turb06]

yeah that is a low initial figure, mine was 168kw and that was the worst I knew of, mind you I have 235rwkw now and I am positive I will be in the 13's.

Dazza.