Ignorance is bliss eh?

 

Yep, I know... Too much reality can be a killjoy.

Talking about reality, in case someone did not notice, that spike is worth some 20HP...

 

[QUOTE]i still say you're jealous

 

Luis, I made a committment not to participate in technical discussions here, and I'm sticking by it - I'm not wasting my time repeatedly explaining the same things to the same people and still having to deal with "I don't believe it" or the "wishful thinker" crap. Displayed torque numbers on a Dynapack are not corrected, hp numbers are - hence the SAE comment. Rather simple isn't it? But its always more fun to look for conspiracies and such. If you want to learn more about how dynos work and the differences between the various chassis dynos out there, you can search some of my posts on here for starters and then proceed onward from there. Its not my job to educate you nor do I have any desire to do so - moreso now than in the past.


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Luis

 

Looking at the Back-cracker's MY04 dyno result(http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-article?...ticle_id=171514), the uncorrected torque for the two consecutive dyno runs at 6000rpm differ by about 3 ft-lb(~136 vs. ~139 ft-lb) and show essentially identical SAE corrected HP. Since SAE correction factor depends on 3 variables(intake air temperature, absolute pressure, and humidity) and assuming only the air temp varied, using SAE-J1349 formula, my calculation indicate intake air temperature difference of about 20F between the two dyno runs.

UL, Does this agree with your measurement? If it doesn't violate your "only non-technical discussion" commitment, can you post the measured intake temperature of the two dyno runs?
BTW, I hope you will reconsider your decision. Your technical posts have always been excellent, and if it is no longer offered, I think it will be a big loss to S2KI community.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ultimate lurker
Luis, I made a committment not to participate in technical discussions here, and I'm sticking by it - I'm not wasting my time repeatedly explaining the same things to the same people and still having to deal with "I don't believe it" or the "wishful thinker" crap.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RedondoS2K
Looking at the Back-cracker's MY04 dyno result(http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-article?...ticle_id=171514), the uncorrected torque for the two consecutive dyno runs at 6000rpm differ by about 3 ft-lb(~136 vs. ~139 ft-lb) and show essentially identical SAE corrected HP. Since SAE correction factor depends on 3 variables(intake air temperature, absolute pressure, and humidity) and assuming only the air temp varied, using SAE-J1349 formula, my calculation indicate intake air temperature difference of about 20F between the two dyno runs.

 

Redondo, humidity and pressure do vary. The temp differences between the two car tests was only about 4-5 deg F. However, humidity was 55-56% for the 04 runs and only 15-16% for Backcracker's runs. Pressure was also higher for Backcracker's runs - about 0.2"Hg higher.

Luis, between 6200 and 6700 rpm the green hp line (Backcracker) is between 1.5-2 hp lower on average than the red line. Below that it crosses back and forth. You're not being an inquiring mind, you're attempting to prove your point. If you can resolve 1 hp differences in scale visually, more power to you, but I had to zoom my dyno viewer software in at about 6x-8x magnification to see it well. The dyno software does not make mistakes and all the numbers add up - you're not going to find fault there.

UL

 

In my field, medicine, inquiring investigators often disagree about the meaning of experiments early in the exploration. Eventually, as more data from different labs accumulates, these differences usually resolve.

Inquiring minds often "shade" their interpretation of the data to favor their "favorite hypothesis." The world is not so kind as to change itself to suit our wishes. Eventually, one shade of a view has to give way to another shade.

I'm glad UL and Luis are having this conversation. It only raises my respect for both of you. For my part, with the TOV data replicated pretty much with the Back-cracker data, I'm more and more convinced that the cumulative changes from the MY03 2.L car to the MY04 2.2L car are siginifcant. The changes may be attributable to the ECU, the gearing, the stroked engine, or pixie dust, as far as we know so far.

I'm glad this thread is alive.

Please, BOTH OF YOU, no------all of you!, Keep the conversation going.

Those of us with interest but with minimal automotive skill and experience want to listen.

Barry, a phyisician not an automotive engineer, in Sheridan, Wyoming

 

nice write up barry, same for UL.

As long as its kept in an mature matter its ok, if not i think its a waste of time. present data that proves your point, dont prove your point by manipulating data.

ps. can we all just get along.