Dyno results are in

[dave0r]

anyways thought F'it i'll take the car to get tuned now so i can see what sorta differance the ITBs will "Actually" make

here is the engine as is after the budget rebuild



so about 102-3wkw, (138WHP for you US ppls) loving the flat torque line..explain why it feels so "slow" no changes in its power band

Specs are
"block"
9.8:1 OEM Astina GT pistons
ACL bearings, but stock rings (re-used even)
stock conrods but shot-peend
BP02 crank, balanced/polished
stock pullys, harmi balancer etc (could have made some new ones and got more HP)

"Head"
polished BA japspec head, tiny porting, removed castings
KJ2 BP valves
Jap spec exhaust cam - BP06
Astina GT ExhINT cam using BP05 exhaust cam (Astina GT) using a DIY camgear mod to suit
Stock Astina GT inlet manifold, BP26 T/B (its has 4wires so i used it)

"Ehaust"
Stock OEM 4-1 Cast POS!, polished internally and enlarged flange from 1.7" to 2"
Mazdaspeed 2" exhaust system taken from a BA lantis type r, diy'd to fit, and a cheap o nasty muffler thats 2.5" in and out ..1 res and 1 muff

"misc"
Link G3 LEM, Mitsi Vr4 wasted spark setup


Toyota Ae111 Blacktop 4age-20V ITBs with exhaust upgrade made 96wkw (same dyno) and these are ment to be 125KW at flywheel so im guessing a easy 134KW in my car now .the Astina when i first did the GTX conversion on its first run made 105wkw, on the same dyno , and my car feels almost the same

[almighty4wd]

wow, the tq is weird. flat. like, that's bizarre. any ideas why or what caused that?

[dave0r]

wow, the tq is weird. flat. like, that's bizarre. any ideas why or what caused that?

im going to take a guess and say its the BP02 crank not having the extra weight in it
everything else is the block is from the original engine, or it could be the exhint cam being out 1-2 degress?

[almighty4wd]

hmmm. possible on the cam, but I doubt its the crank, that would only affect it at lower rpms, higher up and the moment of inertia would change it. I haven't really studied the exhintake mod, but from what I have read it should actually increase tq. but maybe that was only FI applications, not NA. hmm. worth a study....

[projectmx]

i'm confused on the itb's... did you saw you dropped down hp when you dyno'd with them on?

[almighty4wd]

so I stared at the graph more...the tq is measured in nm right? well, the line starts at around 260nm, which is about 190ft lbs. that's alot, and it climbs to 350nm (258ftlbs). is the graph messed up or is it reading the numbers from the right and not left? somewhat confused now that I stare at it longer.... if the left, that's ungodly tq., if right, thats...well terrible.

I do see the graph has KW and HP listed on the right, so I thought I'd ask. just seems too weird.

[Skuce]

the TQ/HP cross over isn't at the point where it comes up on graphs over here. So I would assume it's just with the way things are calculated.

[bandman659]

the TQ/HP cross over isn't at the point where it comes up on graphs over here. So I would assume it's just with the way things are calculated.

Yeah, by the formula, the torque and HP should theoretically be equal at 5252 RPM.

[bandman659]

Hokay, using some Excel-fu along with a pencil and a ruler, here's a graph of torque/hp at the wheels in good ol' Murrican units. Looks like torque peaks around 4500 rpm at about 124 lb-ft. I used the formula Torque = (HP*5252)/RPM to approximate torque at the wheels. If anyone wants, I'll send the spreadsheet along so you can play with it and not have to estimate HP & RPM from the graph. PM me your email address and I'll send it along.

This is what happens when I've got some time on my hands.

[dave0r]

thanks for converting dude, now the US ppls can have some idea

yes NZ dyno do display different results to your US dynos
i heard them talking about the flat T/Q curve and sorta in deep thought about it? they didnt ask what i had done to the engine, but its really strange i have all this extra t/q downlow in the revs, but it doesnt really change at all when driving, it just goes and the pull is the same right over the powerband.
we even played with the vics setup , changed a few rpm switch points, 4000 = bad ,5400 = very good, 5000 ok but lost some tq then


Edit ; this dyno run has NO ITB's on it, i wanted to see what power the stock manifold will make first

[1967cutlass]

Couple things: I'd dyno it with the normal cams and see what that does. I know this is debatable but I've ridden in three exhintake'd cars and they didn't seem to run any better if as good as ones with normal cams. It could be that they're hard to tune or something, I don't know.

Second of all, do you have plans for a better exhaust system? What is your ignition timing set at?

[dave0r]

id like to dyno the car with the BP22 factory inlet cam 237deg/8.5lift

exhaust system yes,but im only going to try and find a 2nd gen tube manifold (we have afew in NZ , not alot)

as you can see in the graph its still got power at 7200 starts to drop just after that, so the exhaust system can cope with the gassing going out and this is with a 2" mazdaspeed system from the flexy back, im supprised it still has power at high in the revs id expected it to drop off at 6500, but the head isnt that chocked yet.

[projectmx]

so any word on the dyno with the IRTB set up added on?

[dave0r]

the dyno with the ITB's will be a while away yet

the car runs so rich that it floods the car during cold starts
and i havent bothered to take it back yet...its on my todo list

but once i finish the setup it'll be dyno'd with the ITB's and / or maybe the BP22 cam