Dyno results and info on intakes
03-12-2009 | 08:37 AM
#53
Senior Member
Joined: 02-03-08
Posts: 3,454
Likes: 1
From: Port Perry Ontario
Short of moving brake lines, or sheet metal, its hard to fit anything larger in the inlet tract on a Cobalt. It takes care, intelligent installation work and some superior fabrication skills. I am hard pressed to get excited by the skill sets shown here by some posters (Oh I stripped the oil change drain plug/crushed the laminova tubes/broke my wheel studs/) or the "test results support existing prejudice" zoomer posts
Then I look at the time attack car and realise that the inlet tube was not changed, the filter housing was with a K&N in the stock location. No filter box. Hopeless for everyday use.
-T/A in 05: 312 whp with stock inlet tube without nitrous. (TVS)
-Area47 in 07: 300+ with stock bottom end and inlet tube. (TVS)
Then i re-read the zoomer posts.
Then some of the rodimus prime posts. O darn why did i sign on this am? well bro' at least your car runs now.
now this is a good post! add water intrusion to design requirements...
Last edited by qwikredline; 03-12-2009 at 08:38 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
03-12-2009 | 10:52 AM
#54
Former Vendor
Joined: 06-03-08
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 8
From: Grand Rapids, MI
yea its awesome for trying to say "look how badass our stuff is" ....
and not testing other competitors. i understand they had the injen laying around already though. i would LOVE to see a ***** out comparison between many different intakes, and would actually gain alot of respect for zzp conducting such a comparison
and not testing other competitors. i understand they had the injen laying around already though. i would LOVE to see a ***** out comparison between many different intakes, and would actually gain alot of respect for zzp conducting such a comparison
03-12-2009 | 12:15 PM
#55
Senior Member
Joined: 03-03-06
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Matt, any chance next time you guys could test them in speed density? Not bashing but my concern is with whp of each intake so close to each other and being that you are changing the MAF housing each time its easy to have jumped a cell/row in the spark table on one of the intakes tested since the spark table's one axis is airflow calculated from the MAF. In my own tests I've found that a single degree of spark added 5whp on stock supercharger cars and could explain the differences in intake pipes that you are testing.
03-14-2009 | 03:37 PM
#56
Thread Starter
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (1)
Joined: 12-13-05
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 3
From: Grand Rapids, MI
Matt, any chance next time you guys could test them in speed density? Not bashing but my concern is with whp of each intake so close to each other and being that you are changing the MAF housing each time its easy to have jumped a cell/row in the spark table on one of the intakes tested since the spark table's one axis is airflow calculated from the MAF. In my own tests I've found that a single degree of spark added 5whp on stock supercharger cars and could explain the differences in intake pipes that you are testing.
I think most of you are missing the point of this thread and I don't think it should have been moved to the ZZP section. We did not do a test to see if our intake was the best. I do not believe there to be significant performance differences in the tube of same diameter. The injen is 2.75 so it makes for a good test of all intakes that are 2.75 and ours is 3" so it does the same for 3" intakes.
Stock intake was only 8 WHP less than ours and 8.5 less than perfect. We consider the testing on intake tubes to be complete at this point and testing other brands wouldn't make much sense to me unless they were right there. People here would interpret the results wrong anyway. Once we saw the pipe wasn't the restriction anymore, we moved to filter and TB and blower inlet. That is where the data is more important currently.
Everyone here just wants a simple test of intakes to see 'what's the best' and you can't do a test like that. If we did the AF ratio would change, then we could test like Witt said w/o the MAF but then people would complain about it not being how they run it. All the dyno info wouldn't apply anyway to their car and we'd get into discussing one intake better than another depending on if you tuned it or not.
03-14-2009 | 10:22 PM
#58
Former Vendor
Joined: 06-03-08
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 8
From: Grand Rapids, MI
I'd like to add that I have personally made over 250 dyno pulls in cobalts in the last couple months. My job is fun, and it's going to be more fun in a couple months when we dial in Ryan's twincharge setup.
03-14-2009 | 10:31 PM
#60
Former Vendor
Joined: 06-03-08
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 8
From: Grand Rapids, MI
03-15-2009 | 01:59 AM
#61
Senior Member
Joined: 09-05-07
Posts: 5,190
Likes: 2
From: FL.. FT LAUDERDALE/MAIMI
If someone wants to loan a TVS, we will do it. We already have the GMPP exhaust and 3" exhausts here. Otherwise, if someone is installing a TVS on their own car and wants to come out for some dyno testing, we can do that too. I'm very pleased with our dyno testing so far. With an LS4 TB and our adapter, we are up to 262whp still running a stock exhaust. I'm thinking that 300whp should come fairly easy with single pass IC, headers, DP, exh, 2.6, and 100 octane + timing.
I'd like to add that I have personally made over 250 dyno pulls in cobalts in the last couple months. My job is fun, and it's going to be more fun in a couple months when we dial in Ryan's twincharge setup.
I'd like to add that I have personally made over 250 dyno pulls in cobalts in the last couple months. My job is fun, and it's going to be more fun in a couple months when we dial in Ryan's twincharge setup.
03-15-2009 | 04:03 AM
#62
Former Vendor
Joined: 06-03-08
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 8
From: Grand Rapids, MI
03-15-2009 | 12:26 PM
#64
Senior Member
Joined: 09-05-07
Posts: 5,190
Likes: 2
From: FL.. FT LAUDERDALE/MAIMI
I don't know how to say this without being a dick but here goes.
I don't know what you are trying to say Area but Tim was correct and you seem to not understand how the PCM works.
For one, the PCM moves the fuel in chunks. In other words 9000hz is no different than 9030hz. The PCM only has a set number of cells to use for fueling and although the MAF is basically infinitely variable, the PCM is not.
2nd, the last cell in the PCM is the last cell. Once you hit it fueling is set to an exact point.
This right here "it plays into each other. the 11k cell is used to carry the rest of the load perse' above this. it get's done all day every day on turbo lsj's with a good sized turbo. hell i am close to the end of it with the tvs, and will be over this mark with new parts coming.
log maf vs error % or maf vs afr which ever you chose to do. do the usual maf scaling. then set the 11k cell to a desired air flow number and run with it. you are stuck at this, and it's not a bad thing. 500whp can be made, and has been made doing this. if the wastegate freaks, or boost controller freaks. hold on, because you have no built this level of error compensation into it, and can't. so you are at the mercy of these two things to work right and make life happy."
is a bunch of ****. I'm not even going to comment on it's accuracy. I'm just saying it makes not sense. It's a bunch of words and quotes from PCM tables that have nothing to do with the subject. You're posts bother me because you overcomplicate very simple ideas seemingly to come accross as knowing something that others don't. This is followed by people who don't understand what-so-ever posting pics bowing. This isn't a good thing. The readers are now less intelligent for having read the post.
But back to the PCM. So say the 2nd to last cell is 10,800 and the last one is 11,100.
The PCM doesn't use hz in 1 hz increments as I stated above. In 1/2 meg PCM boxes (used to 2004) the PCM saw frequency in 125hz increments. So it would 'click' more duty cycle every time the hz were 125 higher. If it was in between it rounded to the nearest 125 hz increment. Newer 1 meg boxes I'm guessing have more resolution. So maybe they round in 75 or 50 hz increments but I can assure you they round.
Now using above if you are at 10,800 or 10,830 it's going to give the same amount of fuel. It will round to 10,800 and use what you have in that table. If it's in between 10,800 and 11,100 it will round to some increment (whatever it's resolution is) and extrapolate from that point a number in between what you have loaded in the 10,800 and 11,100 tables. Once you get to 11,100 the PCM is done adding fuel. Doesn't matter if you flow more air, it will not add any more fuel EXACTLY as Tim indicated. There is no PCM work around, despite the rumors. You cannot program the PCM differently. You cannot change the MAX MAF. There is nothing you can do to 'fix' the problem in the PCM. You have to use an external solution to change the MAF itself and how it reads.
Now there is a slightly ghetto way to help the situation. You can program the last cell in the PCM too high. This means that once you pass 10,800 the car will run too rich with peak richness being at 11,100. Then as you pass 11,100; say 11,300 when the car is flowing more air the car is leaning out because you're moving more air without adding more fuel. Eventually you get to the right AF ratio again and then as you flow even more air you go lean. This lets you sqeak a little more out of a maxed MAF situation but nothing that would let you get to 500WHP on a MAF maxed below 400WHP.
I don't know what you are trying to say Area but Tim was correct and you seem to not understand how the PCM works.
For one, the PCM moves the fuel in chunks. In other words 9000hz is no different than 9030hz. The PCM only has a set number of cells to use for fueling and although the MAF is basically infinitely variable, the PCM is not.
2nd, the last cell in the PCM is the last cell. Once you hit it fueling is set to an exact point.
This right here "it plays into each other. the 11k cell is used to carry the rest of the load perse' above this. it get's done all day every day on turbo lsj's with a good sized turbo. hell i am close to the end of it with the tvs, and will be over this mark with new parts coming.
log maf vs error % or maf vs afr which ever you chose to do. do the usual maf scaling. then set the 11k cell to a desired air flow number and run with it. you are stuck at this, and it's not a bad thing. 500whp can be made, and has been made doing this. if the wastegate freaks, or boost controller freaks. hold on, because you have no built this level of error compensation into it, and can't. so you are at the mercy of these two things to work right and make life happy."
is a bunch of ****. I'm not even going to comment on it's accuracy. I'm just saying it makes not sense. It's a bunch of words and quotes from PCM tables that have nothing to do with the subject. You're posts bother me because you overcomplicate very simple ideas seemingly to come accross as knowing something that others don't. This is followed by people who don't understand what-so-ever posting pics bowing. This isn't a good thing. The readers are now less intelligent for having read the post.
But back to the PCM. So say the 2nd to last cell is 10,800 and the last one is 11,100.
The PCM doesn't use hz in 1 hz increments as I stated above. In 1/2 meg PCM boxes (used to 2004) the PCM saw frequency in 125hz increments. So it would 'click' more duty cycle every time the hz were 125 higher. If it was in between it rounded to the nearest 125 hz increment. Newer 1 meg boxes I'm guessing have more resolution. So maybe they round in 75 or 50 hz increments but I can assure you they round.
Now using above if you are at 10,800 or 10,830 it's going to give the same amount of fuel. It will round to 10,800 and use what you have in that table. If it's in between 10,800 and 11,100 it will round to some increment (whatever it's resolution is) and extrapolate from that point a number in between what you have loaded in the 10,800 and 11,100 tables. Once you get to 11,100 the PCM is done adding fuel. Doesn't matter if you flow more air, it will not add any more fuel EXACTLY as Tim indicated. There is no PCM work around, despite the rumors. You cannot program the PCM differently. You cannot change the MAX MAF. There is nothing you can do to 'fix' the problem in the PCM. You have to use an external solution to change the MAF itself and how it reads.
Now there is a slightly ghetto way to help the situation. You can program the last cell in the PCM too high. This means that once you pass 10,800 the car will run too rich with peak richness being at 11,100. Then as you pass 11,100; say 11,300 when the car is flowing more air the car is leaning out because you're moving more air without adding more fuel. Eventually you get to the right AF ratio again and then as you flow even more air you go lean. This lets you sqeak a little more out of a maxed MAF situation but nothing that would let you get to 500WHP on a MAF maxed below 400WHP.
see he said I MEANING he has one
03-15-2009 | 12:37 PM
#66
Senior Member
Joined: 12-28-05
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
From: Birmingham, Alabama
03-15-2009 | 12:50 PM
#68
Member
Joined: 04-15-06
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
From: Wyoming, MI
If someone wants to loan a TVS, we will do it. We already have the GMPP exhaust and 3" exhausts here. Otherwise, if someone is installing a TVS on their own car and wants to come out for some dyno testing, we can do that too. I'm very pleased with our dyno testing so far. With an LS4 TB and our adapter, we are up to 262whp still running a stock exhaust. I'm thinking that 300whp should come fairly easy with single pass IC, headers, DP, exh, 2.6, and 100 octane + timing.
I'd like to add that I have personally made over 250 dyno pulls in cobalts in the last couple months. My job is fun, and it's going to be more fun in a couple months when we dial in Ryan's twincharge setup.
I'd like to add that I have personally made over 250 dyno pulls in cobalts in the last couple months. My job is fun, and it's going to be more fun in a couple months when we dial in Ryan's twincharge setup.
03-15-2009 | 01:40 PM
#70
Former Vendor
Joined: 06-03-08
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 8
From: Grand Rapids, MI
03-15-2009 | 01:42 PM
#72
Former Vendor
Joined: 06-03-08
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 8
From: Grand Rapids, MI
Matt, I have talked w/ Tim about my TVS, as soon as it shows up I plan on bringing it in to you guys. You can test w/ it if you want. As long as you work w/ me on my dyno tune. I will be running ZZP shorty header, downpipe, and QTP electric cutout 3". Dual pass, cobra H/E, LS4 and 3" intake. I ordered the TVS w/ 80mm and 75mm pullies to add more variables. PM me if you have any ?'s.
