no2 to spool turbo

[Dusty Bradford]

Com'on. Really? I'm not as naive as you might think.

When was the last time you heard of someone pumping out 1600 hp with 1.835" intake valves? Even I know that if a sim told me I might achieve 1600 hp with 1.835" valves, it would be a gross error. Do you seriously believe it's possible, Dusty. Seriously? I thought you knew your stuff.

You are saying in your other post that your intake and header design has made a head that flows 210 on the bench, flow 310 in the real world. Is the 310 at 28psi of intake pressure or is the sim calculating this would be the flow at 28in/h2o. You can trick a flow bench by raising the testing pressure.

I'm not sure where the 1600hp comes in at. You had mentioned your heads were a restriction compared to modern day heads. I'm just pointing out that if the sim is correct, they are not a restriction. So I'm wondering why you feel they are a restriction when the sim tells you they are not?

 

[Alky V6]

You are saying in your other post that your intake and header design has made a head that flows 210 on the bench, flow 310 in the real world. Is the 310 at 28psi of intake pressure or is the sim calculating this would be the flow at 28in/h2o. You can trick a flow bench by raising the testing pressure.

I'm not sure where the 1600hp comes in at. You had mentioned your heads were a restriction compared to modern day heads. I'm just pointing out that if the sim is correct, they are not a restriction. So I'm wondering why you feel they are a restriction when the sim tells you they are not?

I don't think I said, "flow 310 in the real world". I'm saying that the software required me to raise the head flow numbers beyond real world head flow numbers (210) to get the sim to match real world results. At this point, I have absolutely no idea what the 'exact' real world flow bench numbers are. I thought they were 210. That's what the head porter told me, but what do you think? Do you think he was possibly wrong? Or, do you think it's possible to squeeze out a high 8 pass with 1.835/1.5 valves flowing at 210 on the intake with 28 psi boost? You have much more real world experience than I.

BTW, the flow in the sim is set at 25 inches water. What does that mean? I think that means the sim is using less pressure for the flow entry of 310, is that right?

As I've stated earlier, up to this point in the tune up of the car, I've had to adjust the flow numbers in the sim to match real world performance. Up to this point in the real world tune.
Now focusing on the sim, I have attempted to throw more boost at the sim and the sim is showing a choking at around 35 psi boost and a little bit over 1200 bhp. Why the sim needs to have those big flow numbers to match real world to this point, but still shows it choking so early is one of the mysteries of the sim. In short, I don't have an answer for you there, Dusty. I don't consider the sim gospel, but I do use it to see what kind of interesting things it throws back at me. Some of it is clear. Some of it makes no sense. It's the 'makes no sense things' that make me think.

Is the sim having a problem mimicking the pressure pulse tuning, but still recognizes by the dimensions entered for the port that the mach number will still govern the point where the port chokes? One theory.

I think the 1600 came from the calcs I did on Tony's car. I guess some are thinking I should be able to pump out close to that with more boost?

 

[cdsttype]

I don't think I said, "flow 310 in the real world". I'm saying that the software required me to raise the head flow numbers beyond real world head flow numbers (210) to get the sim to match real world results. At this point, I have absolutely no idea what the 'exact' real world flow bench numbers are. I thought they were 210. That's what the head porter told me, but what do you think? Do you think he was possibly wrong? Or, do you think it's possible to squeeze out a high 8 pass with 1.835/1.5 valves flowing at 210 on the intake with 28 psi boost? You have much more real world experience than I.

BTW, the flow in the sim is set at 25 inches water. What does that mean? I think that means the sim is using less pressure for the flow entry of 310, is that right?

As I've stated earlier, up to this point in the tune up of the car, I've had to adjust the flow numbers in the sim to match real world performance. Up to this point in the real world tune.
Now focusing on the sim, I have attempted to throw more boost at the sim and the sim is showing a choking at around 35 psi boost and a little bit over 1200 bhp. Why the sim needs to have those big flow numbers to match real world to this point, but still shows it choking so early is one of the mysteries of the sim. In short, I don't have an answer for you there, Dusty. I don't consider the sim gospel, but I do use it to see what kind of interesting things it throws back at me. Some of it is clear. Some of it makes no sense. It's the 'makes no sense things' that make me think.

Is the sim having a problem mimicking the pressure pulse tuning, but still recognizes by the dimensions entered for the port that the mach number will still govern the point where the port chokes? One theory.

I think the 1600 came from the calcs I did on Tony's car. I guess some are thinking I should be able to pump out close to that with more boost?

i know i could make your car go high eights based on your current results.

 

[Alky V6]

i know i could make your car go high eights based on your current results.

I'm pretty sure it's already capable, based on current results.

 

[bison]

i know i could make your car go high eights based on your current results.

Thats it? Imo it should run mid to low 8's without any N2O.

 

[HighPSI]

I have absolutely no problem with that. In fact, I think that's pretty close for a rwhp number.

Next time you start throwing hp numbers around, please specify whether you're talking about bhp or rwhp. I think without the clarity, it confuses some people.

What is Don's fuel consumption rate?

YOU were the one throwing hp numbers around after people started questioning your numbers YOU corrected your signature to reflect bhp

Don is using 462-466#/hour of Q16 fuel.

 

[HighPSI]

Sorry. Don't have an answer for that one. I say pull the engine and throw it on an engine dyno. That way we'll have some hard copy to go by instead of all this guessing going on.

Sounds to me a lot like you are doing. If you are going to claim hp numbers (which we usually don't), put it on an engine dyno and stop the guessing. I am sure we can get Don's car over 1200bhp if I run it extra rich and say it has 29% drivetrain loss

 

[Alky V6]

Thats it? Imo it should run mid to low 8's without any N2O.

Based on current results.

 

[Alky V6]

Cal. What do you think about this?

795 lbs/hr where the car made 888 RWHP. Works out to about 1325 BHP at .6 bsfc and 33% +- loss through the drivetrain, but yet good enough to run 8.29 @ 168+ Tune was within 2% of where it is at the track and A/F was the same as the figures used above. Dyno was a Mustang.

 

[HighPSI]

Thats it? Imo it should run mid to low 8's without any N2O.

I would agree, provided you have "the chasis setup for 8 sec assault", "the AMS1000 isn't setup for Dummies", "the rear downforce wing" is adjusted correctly, the "launch strategy is incorporating the BOV", the "ultimate turbo anti-lag system" is adjuted correctly, the "nitrous/methanol anti-lag syetem afterburner" spools the turbo quick enough, and the track loads the engine correctly so it doesn't blow up.

 

[Alky V6]

YOU were the one throwing hp numbers around after people started questioning your numbers YOU corrected your signature to reflect bhp

Don is using 462-466#/hour of Q16 fuel.

You're right about that. I had my figures listed as hp. I had no idea that anyone would actually think that I was talking about RWHP. I figured that people would be able to look at the number and figure out that I must be talking about bhp. I was wrong about that, I guess. I'm sorry. Now it's clearly labeled. Hopefully, it won't confuse anyone any longer.

 

[Alky V6]

Sounds to me a lot like you are doing. If you are going to claim hp numbers (which we usually don't), put it on an engine dyno and stop the guessing. I am sure we can get Don's car over 1200bhp if I run it extra rich and say it has 29% drivetrain loss

I'll be PMing the engine over this winter. Want to provide an engine dyno session?

 

[Alky V6]

I would agree, provided you have "the chasis setup for 8 sec assault", "the AMS1000 isn't setup for Dummies", "the rear downforce wing" is adjusted correctly, the "launch strategy is incorporating the BOV", the "ultimate turbo anti-lag system" is adjuted correctly, the "nitrous/methanol anti-lag syetem afterburner" spools the turbo quick enough, and the track loads the engine correctly so it doesn't blow up.

I figure this car might get to 8.6s. No faster. If it does go faster, that will be a nice surprise.
I'll be tuning the car in slowly. I have no need to hurry. Don't want to end up on my roof.

 

[Alky V6]

Cal. What do you think about this?

795 lbs/hr where the car made 888 RWHP. Works out to about 1325 BHP at .6 bsfc and 33% +- loss through the drivetrain, but yet good enough to run 8.29 @ 168+ Tune was within 2% of where it is at the track and A/F was the same as the figures used above. Dyno was a Mustang.

Cal. I'm interested in your take on this.

 

[HighPSI]

Cal. What do you think about this?
Tune was within 2% of where it is at the track and A/F was the same as the figures used above. Dyno was a Mustang.

What do i think? I think your car shouldn't blow up if you use that dyno since it is within 2% of the track. 8.29 with 888rwhp is getting it done, car must be light or has a real POS convertor. Let's get back to the BUICK content of this thread, ie Don's car..

You agree with me that Don's car is making at least as much rwhp as yours, yet he is using a stock block, 880hp turbo, and 446#/hour of fuel with a race convertor that spools on a pro-tree without NOS assist. Please explain why he is able to have the same rwhp and much, much less bhp?

Edit: I am going to spend the rest of the day with my family. I'll try and respond tonight.

 

[Alky V6]

What do i think? I think your car shouldn't blow up if you use that dyno since it is within 2% of the track. 8.29 with 888rwhp is getting it done, car must be light or has a real POS convertor. Let's get back to the BUICK content of this thread, ie Don's car..

You agree with me that Don's car is making at least as much rwhp as yours, yet he is using a stock block, 880hp turbo, and 446#/hour of fuel with a race convertor that spools on a pro-tree without NOS assist. Please explain why he is able to have the same rwhp and much, much less bhp?

Edit: I am going to spend the rest of the day with my family. I'll try and respond tonight.

That's not my car, Cal.

 

[JOHNDEEREGN]

, "the AMS1000 isn't setup for Dummies", "the rear downforce wing" is adjusted correctly, the "launch strategy is incorporating the BOV", the "ultimate turbo anti-lag system" is adjuted correctly, the "nitrous/methanol anti-lag syetem afterburner"

Sorry, dont take it personal but this is the mental picture I get :biggrin:

 

[John Wilde]

Sorry, dont take it personal but this is the mental picture I get :biggrin:

I wonder what size AN Fitting that wrench is for?

 

[Alky V6]

I wonder what size AN Fitting that wrench is for?

That one's a 48.
Hey! I didn't give permission to post my picture!

 

[Alky V6]

What do i think? I think your car shouldn't blow up if you use that dyno since it is within 2% of the track. 8.29 with 888rwhp is getting it done, car must be light or has a real POS convertor. Let's get back to the BUICK content of this thread, ie Don's car..

You agree with me that Don's car is making at least as much rwhp as yours, yet he is using a stock block, 880hp turbo, and 446#/hour of fuel with a race convertor that spools on a pro-tree without NOS assist. Please explain why he is able to have the same rwhp and much, much less bhp?

Edit: I am going to spend the rest of the day with my family. I'll try and respond tonight.

Don't know, Cal.