New Forced Induction, New Numbers

[lowellhigh79]

To say that I dont know what is going on with my car is pretty far off base, and excuse me if im not intelligent enough to catch the Barry Bonds reference. "we" didnt settle an issue as there was never an issue, I have never or will ever give flase info regarding any work we do to "My" car. As for the builder he knows his motors and knows how to tune them (the end results speak for themselves), Im guessing he told you what you wanted to hear and didnt tell you everything that he did to the rest of the motor,thats his perogative. If I would have used nitropropane I would have said I did and I would be still using it. Please don't insult me again by trying to suggest I doctored the numbers or changed something after the fact, again, I have nothing to prove to you or anyone else on this board. I am probably one of the few on here who tells it like it is 100% of the time.


Armando

Armando,

Frank was pretty sincere in his messages and I'm sure he is an excellent tuner/ builder with much to share. What we are talking about is nearly 2-3 times the amount of torque at 2800 rpm than ANY non O2 supplemented NSX motor can make at the same rpm. Are you aware that your dyno plot at 2800 rpm is making more torque OFF BOOST (aka "still NA at this point") than most Comptech SC'd do at peak torque? If you are one of the few on here who tells it like it is, what is your explanation then? No "Ancient Chinese Secrets" accepted.

Regards,

Danny

 

[lowellhigh79]

Im curious as to what dyno you are looking at. Mine at 2800 rpm shows about 240 ft lbs of tq. But if it lets you sleep better thinking I used nitropropane of even NOS, then knock yourslef out.


Armando

The plot you started this thread with. About 330 ft-lbs at 2800 rpm.

Regards,

Danny

 

[MiamieNeSeX]

Here are Adam S. NSX motor specs. Pick that one apart for awhile and say it isnt so.

3.2 liter Honda Motor (Original NSX motor)
1093hp @ 8600 RPM
680ft.-lbs @ 6500 RPM
Saenz connecting rods
Wiseco pistons
Twin Tial Sport turbos
Custom Hogan’s intake manifold
Cylinder heads ported by West Coast Cylinder Heads
Ferrera valve train components (springs, retainers valves)
Barnes custom built dry sump oil system
DC Sports custom exhaust manifolds
Nology ultra low resistance CD coils
MSD pro plug wires
RC Engineering 160 lb/Hr. motorsport injectors
Web Cam modified stock cam shafts

 

[MiamieNeSeX]

The plot you started this thread with. About 330 ft-lbs at 2800 rpm.

Regards,

Danny

?

 

[lowellhigh79]

Here are Adam S. NSX motor specs. Pick that one apart for awhile and say it isnt so.

3.2 liter Honda Motor (Original NSX motor)
1093hp @ 8600 RPM
680ft.-lbs @ 6500 RPM
Saenz connecting rods
Wiseco pistons
Twin Tial Sport turbos
Custom Hogan’s intake manifold
Cylinder heads ported by West Coast Cylinder Heads
Ferrera valve train components (springs, retainers valves)
Barnes custom built dry sump oil system
DC Sports custom exhaust manifolds
Nology ultra low resistance CD coils
MSD pro plug wires
RC Engineering 160 lb/Hr. motorsport injectors
Web Cam modified stock cam shafts

Not sure what your point is as I have everything on the list and possibly more except for the dry sump and the Hogan intake systems. BTW Stephen Papadakis had 1600 whp NSX setup, but what does that prove? I'm sure they would both like to know how you got 340 ft-lbs at 2800 rpm off boost without any O2 supplementation in a 3.x NSX motor too. I should know, since I actually asked one of them if it was possible. My silly question got a single word answer, "NO" and

Regards,

Danny

 

[MiamieNeSeX]

Not sure what your point is as I have everything on the list and possibly more except for the dry sump and the Hogan intake systems. BTW Stephen Papadakis had 1600 whp NSX setup, but what does that prove? I'm sure they would both like to know how you got 340 ft-lbs at 2800 rpm off boost without any O2 supplementation in a 3.x NSX motor too. I should know, since I actually asked one of them if it was possible. My silly question got a single word answer, "NO" and

Regards,

Danny

You might build a nice car but your dyno reading skills suck. Although thanks for adding 100 lbs of tq to my 240 at 2800.


Armando

 

[lowellhigh79]

Im curious as to what dyno you are looking at. Mine at 2800 rpm shows about 240 ft lbs of tq. But if it lets you sleep better thinking I used nitropropane of even NOS, then knock yourslef out.


Armando

Armando,

My dyno reading skills are just fine, however you can't read your own car's dyno plot. Pick your poison: 240 ft-lbs and 290 rwhp or 330 ft-lbs and 175 rwhp at 2800 rpm OFF BOOST. Either way you look at your graph, not possible without O2 supplementation.

Regards,

Danny

ps. I'd go with the 330 ft-lbs/175 rwhp. The 240 ft-lbs/ 290 rwhp @2800 rpm set of numbers is IMPOSSIBLE. Care to know why?

 

[Elite]

Well to everyones defense, the lines are a little hard to follow where they intersect.

Armando, have you dynoed the car again since these charts? Just curious because if I remember correctly, very early in this thread there was mention of the plot to be off a certain amount of rpm's right? If that is the case, it will throw all the #'s off. I got this info from someone I trust to know what he is talking about concerning the DD dyno/charts.

Basically I trust you believe you did nothing to deceive, but I think there may be a mistake by the dyno. And it probably has everything to do with the lack of a good rpm signal during your runs.

Another run with a solid tach. signal could end this discussion for good(even though I understand you do not care what anyone thinks). Just a thought.

 

[MiamieNeSeX]

From a previous post

It made about 255 HP at 4 psi and as for the rpm, it is a little closer to 4100
rpm. The dyno is calculating rpm against wheel speed since there really is no
good way to get a tach singal on the coil. So even though is shows on the sheet 3700, you have to take into account as the tire grows it through rpm number off a little bit. But as for the power and torque numbers, they are
very much so correct, If you read up on the dyno dynamics dyno you will see
that they have an eddie current system, and are quite accurate. The car ran
up to about 7700 rpm, and the reason we didnt turn it any higher is because
the waste gate is too small and I was afraid of boost creep. Please don't forget that we are also running metanol injection on this car and that helps
the horse power and the torque. .

 

[lowellhigh79]

From a previous post

Well to everyones defense, the lines are a little hard to follow where they intersect.

Elite,

One can easily confirm mathematically which torque graph points are correct(HP= TQ x RPM/5252); which is why 240 ft-lbs/ 290 rwhp @2800 rpm is impossible . In this case, 175.9 hp= 330 ft-lbs x 2800 rpm/5252. BTW I wasn't the one who started criticizing anyone's dyno reading skills.

Armando,

This type of "fuzzy" logic is similar to explaining how a lightweight boxer can "look" as big as a welterweight by the night of the fight, but the numbers we're talking here are HEAVYWEIGHT numbers. Frank went down this path before. It wasn't convincing then, and it's even less convincing now. The admission of Nitropropane was the final outcome and we subsequently welcomed him into the community. I believed, at least on my end, that all was well and that your achievements, Frank's expertise, and the inclusion of Nitropropane as another performance option was the net result. I suggest you reread your own entire thread thoroughly again before reanimating it from previous points in the discussion.

Regards,

Danny

 

[MiamieNeSeX]

I'm sure they would both like to know how you got 340 ft-lbs at 2800 rpm off boost without any O2 supplementation in a 3.x NSX motor too. I should know, since I actually asked one of them if it was possible. My silly question got a single word answer, "NO" and

Regards,

Danny

Armando,

300 ft lbs at 2800 rpm on less than 0.5 psi of boost just is not possible on gas, air, methanol and water alone.

Regards,

Danny

Please enlighten us as to what dyno you are looking at or which calculator you are now using.

HP=TQ*RPM/5252


at 2800 rpm the tq shown is about 245 which is about 130 hp.


at 7200 rpm the tq shown is about 525 which is about 719 hp.

 

[D'Ecosse]

As an unbiased observer, Armando, I have to support the argument that you are the one who is reading it wrong
In your post above, your arrow is pointing to the HP curve at 2800, not the torque curve.

The equation for the relationship between Torque & Horsepower is well established, a quick internet check will validate that for you.

HP=TQ*RPM/5252

By looking at the shape of each curve individually, you pretty much expect the HP to be changing somewhat linearly because it is directly proportional to the multiple of the rpm (if it were to be at all flat, that could only happen because the torque would be dropping just as quickly as the rpm was rising, a most unlikely scenario)
So the shape alone tells you the lower part of the chart at 2800 is the HP curve - look at any HP curve & you will find an almost exactly similar shape with a linear curve proportional to rpm.

But then when you do the math it is absolutely irrefutable; try plugging in the numbers that could be possible from each scenario depending on which graph you think is which.
1) The 'top' curve at 2800 viewed as torque:
Reading from chart, that would make HP = ~175; TQ = ~ 335

Then the equation would be HP = (335*2800)/5252 = 178 which is ~ 175

Graph & Equation fit!

2) If the bottom curve at 2800 is viewed as the torque one
Reading from chart, that would make HP = ~280; TQ = ~ 245

Then the equation would be HP = (245*2800)/5252 = 130 which is very far removed from the 280 on the 'chart'!

Graph & Equation don't fit!

3) From your other reference point, which appears to be without conjecture as to which curve is which, the math is again supported

at 7200 rpm the tq shown is about 525 which is about 719 hp

HP = 525*7200/5252 = ~ 720 which is indeed approx what the dyno plot shows.

Respectfully, you are confusing the lines of the graph - the respective parts of the curves as delineated by the colours shown.
TQ is green, HP is purple

ou

 

[lowellhigh79]

Please enlighten us as to what dyno you are looking at or which calculator you are now using.

HP=TQ*RPM/5252


at 2800 rpm the tq shown is about 245 which is about 130 hp.


at 7200 rpm the tq shown is about 525 which is about 719 hp.

Armando,

If the line you choose to call the torque line is supposedly 245 ft-lbs at 2800 rpm, the "OTHER" line that intersects at 2800 rpm ("the hp line by default") shows 290 hp, not 130 hp. Therefore, the set of points at 2800 can only be 330 ft-lbs/175 hp and not 245 ft-lbs/ 290 hp.

Regards,

Danny

 

[MiamieNeSeX]

Point taken, I see my mistakein reading the dyno. So then the dyno was doctored hmmmm such a good job I even fooled myself and its not even April.



Armando

 

[Mark911]

This has got to be one of the most entertaining links I've read in a long time. Keep it up guys . . . . . Mark

 

[01blacks4]

armando dont worry about it...you where just so blinded by that 7 f#%kin 14 that it is an easy mistake to make

 

[lowellhigh79]

This has got to be one of the most entertaining links I've read in a long time. Keep it up guys . . . . . Mark

Mark,

Funny in a sad and stupid sort of way. Calls into question if the top end (714 rwhp) also required nitropropane, which I was giving the benefit of the doubt that it was used only on the bottom end to make up for the lag on such a large turbo. BTW, how's your LS swap coming along? Should be an absolute beast once you are done.

Regards,

Danny

 

[lowellhigh79]

Point taken, I see my mistakein reading the dyno. So then the dyno was doctored hmmmm such a good job I even fooled myself and its not even April.



Armando

Armando,

Keep fooling yourself and all those who want to believe that you didn't use nitropropane. Doctoring the plot is much harder to do.

Regards,

Danny

 

[MiamieNeSeX]

Armando,

Keep fooling yourself and all those who want to believe that you didn't use nitropropane. Doctoring the plot is much harder to do.

Regards,

Danny

. No nitropropane was used .


Armando

 

[MiamieNeSeX]

armando dont worry about it...you where just so blinded by that 7 f#%kin 14 that it is an easy mistake to make

No worries here buddy, gonna have to redyno with scientist,some video and a group of impartial car guys the next time.


PS Do you know where I could pick up some of that nitropropane, seems to be all the rage these days.


Armando

 

[lowellhigh79]

Ill keep fooling myself and you keep blowing smoke up your own ass by posting the cover of the magazine as your avatar. No nitropropane was used .


Armando

-I'll keep fooling myself (aka 330 ft-lbs @ 2800 rpm off boost from 3.x motor)

-and you can keep blowing smoke up your own ass by posting the cover of the magazine as your avatar:biggrin: (aka Feels great, you ought to try it!)

-No nitroropane was used (aka.. anyone want to fill in this blank?)

Regards,

Danny

 

[lowellhigh79]

No worries here buddy, gonna have to redyno with scientist,some video and a group of impartial car guys the next time.


PS Do you know where I could pick up some of that nitropropane, seems to be all the rage these days.


Armando

Frank has some. The guy whose shop is on your avatar.

Regards,

Danny

 

[The Kid]

This has got to be one of the most entertaining links I've read in a long time. Keep it up guys . . . . . Mark

More like Pathetic, if Armando put down 714 hp and has the dyno sheet to prove it, whats the big deal? Seems like alot of people are jealous or dont like the competition:wink:

 

[NetViper]

330 TQ @ 2800 off boost is unreal to me. It is nearly 2x a stock 3.0. I didn't make that much with 12lbs of boost at 8,000 RPM. The car must be a freaking rocket.

 

[lowellhigh79]

More like Pathetic, if Armando put down 714 hp and has the dyno sheet to prove it, whats the big deal? Seems like alot of people are jealous or dont like the competition:wink:

Kid,

No jealousy or fear of competition here. The big deal has never been about the 714 rwhp, which was commended by me several times in previous posts to both Frank and Armando. The BIG DEAL is how it was done. Kid, if you got his system and expected 714 rwhp on the top end AND also the 330 ft-lbs @ 2800 rpm off boost (0.5 psi is essentially still NA) but found out later that you needed to play with nitropropane (a known carcinogen) in addition to the methanol and water, how would you feel?

What if another member running a similar CTSC setup like yours posted a dyno plot with HUGE torque down low, in the order of 2-3 times, and a peak hp in the 500 range, then his builder admits later that he used NOS or nitromethane or nitropropane, but later that member comes back on and denies it. Are you now jealous or simply don't like the competition? Do you even realize that getting 330 ft-lbs @ 2800 off boost without any O2 supplementation in a 3.x NSX motor is a MUCH MUCH BIGGER (aka impossible) achievement than the 714 rwhp. I would put this achievement at the level of getting over 2000 rwhp from a 3.x NSX motor. In fact, guys like Stephen Papadakis at AEM, WHEN he was drag racing, and Adam Saruwatari couldn't even come close at that rpm.

The BIG DEAL is misleading people. Intellectual honesty- Frank (Armando's builder/tuner) has it, but Armando doesn't. I would hope others on this forum will appreciate the honesty. Those who don't expect intellectual honesty can continue to fool themselves. Sorry to have to be so blunt but which one are you?

Regards,

Danny