08-10 SS Turbocharged General Discussion Discuss the 2008 - 2009 Chevy Cobalt SS Turbocharged. On sale since the second quarter of 2008.

Bnr k04-gt28

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-02-2011, 01:43 PM
  #901  
Senior Member
 
Terminator2's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-25-08
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,478
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by SKY888
here's the dyno of the kappa that made 371whp which was tuned by DDM





power went up fast.....but falls down quickly as well.......

That is on 93 octane, no meth/water, intercooler, high flow cat, exhaust and an intake
That would be an epic dynocom fail from the looks of that graph. When they had the dynocom I used set up like that my car showed a graph just like that except it did not fall off that hard up top.
Old 02-02-2011, 01:47 PM
  #902  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Stamina's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-09-09
Location: Tejas
Posts: 4,377
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Terminator2
That would be an epic dynocom fail from the looks of that graph. When they had the dynocom I used set up like that my car showed a graph just like that except it did not fall off that hard up top.
Incorrectly loaded dyno?
Old 02-02-2011, 01:48 PM
  #903  
Senior Member
 
RyRidesMotox's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-23-10
Location: Carlsbad, CA
Posts: 3,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That thing made nothing til 4k pm, weird.
Old 02-02-2011, 02:01 PM
  #904  
Senior Member
 
Terminator2's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-25-08
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,478
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by RyRidesMotox
That thing made nothing til 4k pm, weird.
That is another reason I think it was a dynocom calibration screw up.
Old 02-02-2011, 02:06 PM
  #905  
Senior Member
 
Terminator2's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-25-08
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,478
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Stamina
Incorrectly loaded dyno?
Yep or incorrectly calibarted software to interpret the dyno's results. This happened me one time. The dynocom spit out 520 ft lbs at 4700 RPMs and 440 whp at 5700 RPMs LOL. They had to fix fix something in the calibration. It made 393 wrtq at 3600 RPMs and 363 whp at 5250 RPMs. Still read higher than the dynojet I used at 378 wrtq at 3500 RPMs and 342 whp at 5300 RPMs.
Old 02-02-2011, 02:07 PM
  #906  
Banned
 
08SSTCRD's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-29-09
Location: USA
Posts: 1,060
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Terminator2
That is another reason I think it was a dynocom calibration screw up.
What is a dynocom??

Never heard of that, I've used Mustang Dynos and DynoJets though.
Old 02-02-2011, 02:13 PM
  #907  
Senior Member
 
Terminator2's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-25-08
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,478
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by 08SSTCRD
What is a dynocom??

Never heard of that, I've used Mustang Dynos and DynoJets though.
Load type dyno kinda like a mustang dyno. They can read anywhere from the same as a dynojet to up to 10% higher depending on operator error.
Old 02-02-2011, 02:14 PM
  #908  
Former Vendor
iTrader: (6)
 
BYT*SS*TURBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-01-09
Location: NEPA/North NJ
Posts: 5,973
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any of the load dyno's can be skewed to read eitherway really. This is why I like to street tune cars first then dyno. If the AFR or trims are way off, the load is way off. Another tell tale sign is the IAT or EGT (if you have a real EGT gauge) and sometimes the ECT will even rise way up.
Old 02-02-2011, 03:15 PM
  #909  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Stamina's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-09-09
Location: Tejas
Posts: 4,377
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
In layman's terms: He's talking about loading the dyno in such a fashion as to simulate road conditions with the car, which is important with cars that have turbos, because proper engine/dyno load is what helps spool and keep spooled.

A smaller roller means less rotational inertia, which means that small changes can affect the roller and be picked up by the dyno computer. A larger roller means more rotational inertia, which is better for helping cars with big turbos build boost as they would when off the dyno.

Last edited by Stamina; 02-02-2011 at 03:20 PM.
Old 02-02-2011, 03:30 PM
  #910  
New Member
 
bphage's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-01-11
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
An easy way to think of it is how sensitive is the dyno. So a roller with less weight takes less effort to change its speed making it more sensitive to subtle changes in power; a roller with more weight or takes more effort so will be less sensitive to small changes in power.

So sensitivity is how little of a fluctuation that can be detected by the dyno; they are making the argument that they can get superior tuning because they can see changes in engine response that others can not.
Old 02-02-2011, 03:57 PM
  #911  
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
ATLsilverSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-22-09
Location: georgia
Posts: 1,567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tglems
Ugh, that is an ugly graph
no freggin crap


can you say....RETUNE
Old 02-02-2011, 08:29 PM
  #912  
Senior Member
 
FF_ace's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-08-06
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 3,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HHRSSouth
TGlem, you know the GM braided hose and fittings, that go from the manifold to the turbo (not the one that goes to the air intake, the other one). Well I got mine off successfully. What are you doing there? Are you running a K&N Breather there or a catch can of some sort?

The reason I ask is, I remember reading NOT to block it off because it helps out the valve cover in some way.
Put a breather filter on it
Old 02-02-2011, 08:29 PM
  #913  
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
tglems's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-01-09
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I was just gonna do a breather. To be honest my line is still just dangling until I can find a small enough breather to fit as when I checked autozone they were all too big. I have to admit it's a little ugly right now but at least it works
Old 02-02-2011, 10:00 PM
  #914  
Senior Member
 
1LowLS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-16-10
Location: Queen Creek,AZ
Posts: 8,399
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
your car?Ugly?NEVAR!!!!!!
Old 02-02-2011, 10:43 PM
  #915  
Senior Member
 
hunter19707's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-02-09
Location: The Buckeye State
Posts: 2,670
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by cubaniche
Yes. As long as the housing and all its exterior parts are good. The internals all get tossed out anyways
What about a crack where it connects to the downpipe?
Old 02-03-2011, 07:46 AM
  #916  
Member
 
pbass's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-05-10
Location: Virginia
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
OK so what kind of dyno has this heavy roller everyone's buzzin' about?
Old 02-03-2011, 09:17 AM
  #917  
Former Vendor
 
Matt M's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-03-08
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Stamina
In layman's terms: He's talking about loading the dyno in such a fashion as to simulate road conditions with the car, which is important with cars that have turbos, because proper engine/dyno load is what helps spool and keep spooled.

A smaller roller means less rotational inertia, which means that small changes can affect the roller and be picked up by the dyno computer. A larger roller means more rotational inertia, which is better for helping cars with big turbos build boost as they would when off the dyno.
Actually, it sounds like he was saying the opposite. He was saying that by having lighter rollers, it is easier for them to change speeds which can show smaller changes in power output from the wheels. While that may be true to some extent, the load would be unrealistic, especially for a turbo car. Either way, the car that was dyno'd in the previous chart needs to be dyno'd somewhere else. I really doubt that he is losing 120whp by the time he hits 6500rpm. Since it looks the same with the stock turbo, at least you can tell it's not the turbo upgrade causing the issue.
Old 02-03-2011, 12:37 PM
  #918  
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
tglems's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-01-09
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by hunter19707
What about a crack where it connects to the downpipe?
Every K04 has a crack there. No big deal.
Old 02-03-2011, 12:45 PM
  #919  
Senior Member
 
09BlueBaltSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-13-09
Location: Davie, Fl
Posts: 2,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is the crack in the divider(normal) or on the flange area(not normal)
Old 02-03-2011, 03:07 PM
  #920  
New Member
 
bphage's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-01-11
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Matt M
Actually, it sounds like he was saying the opposite. He was saying that by having lighter rollers, it is easier for them to change speeds which can show smaller changes in power output from the wheels. While that may be true to some extent, the load would be unrealistic, especially for a turbo car. Either way, the car that was dyno'd in the previous chart needs to be dyno'd somewhere else. I really doubt that he is losing 120whp by the time he hits 6500rpm. Since it looks the same with the stock turbo, at least you can tell it's not the turbo upgrade causing the issue.
Spot on, the lighter it is the more sensitive it is and the argument is that they can tune better as a result... I don't know that the argument holds true or not.

For example: If a normal dyno is only sensitive enough to see +/- 5hp and the lighter roller dyno is able to see +/- 1 hp then is the tuner able to create a better tune? Maybe maybe not... maybe it takes 3 more pulls to program the care to get the benefits and they don't do it... or maybe to get that extra power would take a more aggressive tune that people are not willing to use on a daily driver... or it can simply be a limitation of the computer itself... point is there are a lot of assumptions being made in that argument.
Old 02-03-2011, 03:14 PM
  #921  
Former Vendor
iTrader: (6)
 
BYT*SS*TURBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-01-09
Location: NEPA/North NJ
Posts: 5,973
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't see how you can tune better when it ISN'T simulating what the car will see on the road. I can certainly see how you can fudge numbers in your favor but that won't make the car run better...
Old 02-03-2011, 03:24 PM
  #922  
New Member
 
bphage's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-01-11
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BYT*SS*TURBO
I don't see how you can tune better when it ISN'T simulating what the car will see on the road. I can certainly see how you can fudge numbers in your favor but that won't make the car run better...
I don't know enough about that dyno, and word has it you know your stuff. So I will only say that it is still possible to design a low inertia roller dyno that has the ability to simulate street load conditions... I don't know if this is the case or not; but all things being equal the argument being made was that they can better see the engine's response with the low inertia dyno.
Old 02-03-2011, 04:17 PM
  #923  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
elecblue06's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-19-07
Location: newburgh,ny
Posts: 14,911
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
i thought the 2871 came with a new water line or something?
Old 02-03-2011, 04:20 PM
  #924  
Former Vendor
iTrader: (6)
 
BYT*SS*TURBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-01-09
Location: NEPA/North NJ
Posts: 5,973
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looks like a new Banjo Bolt.
Old 02-03-2011, 04:26 PM
  #925  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
elecblue06's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-19-07
Location: newburgh,ny
Posts: 14,911
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by BYT*SS*TURBO
Looks like a new Banjo Bolt.
ahh i thought it was a whole new line / i couldnt see it on my small netbook screen lol


Quick Reply: Bnr k04-gt28



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:15 PM.