Fair enough, but after spending the longest amount of time on the dyno and completing 4 runs over 3 would you class an intercooler with a final temp of 57 over 50 degrees "outperforming" the other?
Printable View
Fair enough, but after spending the longest amount of time on the dyno and completing 4 runs over 3 would you class an intercooler with a final temp of 57 over 50 degrees "outperforming" the other?
Actually, the longer the cars sat idling on the dyno with the massive fans running the cooler they got. There was more than 2mins between your 2nd last run and last run compared to about 30s for everybody else. So that low start temp for the last run means nothing. The only car that was very consistent (and quick to return to start temp) by a huge margin was the forge ....Quote:
Originally Posted by VWindahouse
If we started you at 40 a 20 degree increase would have been 60? Outperformed, yes
Really? then why did you say thisQuote:
Originally Posted by Sharkie
We actually spent some time coaxing the temps down for the last run on your car ....
Hoyhoy.Quote:
Originally Posted by VWindahouse
Ta Anthony, nice compliments, ya gona give me a fat head.
P.S. Is there any chance of you & Johan shaking hands & calling a truce on your differences, please.
One factor you need to put in the figures (that had not been calculated) is the ambient temperature.
First run at 9-00am we had an ambient of 17 degrees, at 1-00PM we had an ambient of 24.5 degrees. So the cars run later had a disadvantage of almost 8 degrees celcius.
If you used different dyno correction figures (which we chose not to), the cars run at a hotter ambient may have had an extra 3 - 4 % more power and torque added rather than that of the ones run earlier (they may have been normalised down 3 or 4 %.
This obviously has a great bearing on the results, INCLUDING the ability for the intercooler to do its job.
Taking donations for a temperature controlled dyno room - $750,000 should cover it
Quote:
Originally Posted by VWindahouse
All who there would have seen James gently blipping the throttle between runs to speed up the temp drops between runs. On your car as stated a few times, being the first Polo to run, we spent extra time doing that to get the start temps down for the last run.
With 15 more cars to go on the dyno, it simply was not feasible timewise to do the same for all.
I stand by the results and my comments as to why & how the results were achieved. Sorry you don't like it, but there it is. Others can have a look and form their own opinions.
That said, I still believe the SEAT cooler to be better than the Forge performance wise, just not as good as its being made out to be. This is backed up by Jason, regardless of having the worst FMIC there (sorry Jason), posting really impressive results.
Yep you're all absolutely right. Thanks again for the data logging, and I'm more than happy with the power and torque figures along with the actual boost v's requested which I'm currently popping into a graph.
Cheers!
Dont do that, thats no fun lol :emo_baghead:Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy
hey guys just like to chime in and say thanks to guy and everyone for putting on such a great day. i hope these kind of things start to
happen more often. in regards to my results it turns out the boost hose going to the n75 had almost completely ripped in half so i had next to no boost control, that would explain the 29psi boost spike and shirt fueling. hose is fixed and new fuel filter in, hopefully get it back on the dyno to see what it can really do! again thanks to everyone who helped organise this day.
Nice one mate! Can't wait for the results :eek: