Dyno for FFS Coldside Automatic - How much WHP?

[gludlow]

I'll be having my 2001 Coldside Dyno'd, probably Thursday. I thought I'd start a poll to see what the max HP will be. Not sure how many people will respond with only a couple days...

Car is a 2001 Automatic transmission with Tom's Coldside kit, including timing card. Car engine and exhaust is stock except for a Racing Beat single-tip muffler.

[gludlow]

I should add that the engine has 65k miles, and the kit is being installed by a professional installer (AIM Tuning in Indianapolis).

And don't be afraid to hurt my feelings. I'd be happy with 180, hoping for about 195. Expecting about 190.

[socal pat]

I should add that the engine has 65k miles, and the kit is being installed by a professional installer (AIM Tuning in Indianapolis).

And don't be afraid to hurt my feelings. I'd be happy with 180, hoping for about 195. Expecting about 190.

Be nice to that new motor!! I'll guess 185 whp and say get ready for that RB muffler to sound totally different !! :cool:

[Gman7007]

I voted on Super Tuesday!

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

I read that three times and was about to ask what that had to do with the topic at hand. Good one. Got me.

I voted on Super Tuesday!

[MS2KSE]

and the kit is being installed by a professional installer (AIM Tuning in Indianapolis)..
Please post what the install and dyno tune costs were.I think it would be nice to have a little data base of what installed & tuned costs are around the country ??

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Installs at Mike's Place are ~$750 and tuning is $85/hr.

This is the first install for AIM and is probably more. Tuning should be no more than 1 hour unless we run into problems as this is the first of it's kind. It will be interesting.

[gludlow]

Great response rate so far! No word yet from AIM today, but they said they'd Dyno it Thursday (Feb. 6th).

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Well, I know for a fact that they were out test driving it about 1.5 hours ago. :). I have not heard back since. Don't know if that is good or bad.

[gludlow]

The weather in the midwest is pretty bad today; rain, sleet snow over most of IL/IN. Hope he didn't have an accident out there ;-)

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

He did say it was cold.

Thinking about the bad mid-west weather, my heart and prayers go out to all the weather/tornado victims yesterday/today.

[gludlow]

Definitely! The Caterpillar facility in Oxford, MS was totally leveled last night around 9:00PM. Luckily, no one there was injured but it's going to affect a lot of people while they rebuild. But compared to some, they are lucky.

[gludlow]

Got an update, but no dyno; car was tuned today and it's running a little rich. I'll get it dynoed tomorrow. Shane's butt dyno says 175, but he's used to driving a true monster of a Miata, "The Fish" so we'll see if he's rating it a little low ;-)

Real numbers tomorrow night or Saturday morning (we may stay the night in Indianapolis).

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

I got to go along on the test drive today. It was a blast even if it WAS only by telephone. What I gathered is that it upshifts and downshifts like a stock Miata but with a 'slightly' larger engine. :) He said it just snaps to attention when you hit the pedal and it downshifts. I think you will have ample power to pass.

It does appear to run a touch rich above 6000 RPM. That could be easily due to the addition of a torque converter to the 'load' on the engine as the PC-Pro computes fuel required based on RPM, Boost and load. Clutches don't have any 'slip'.

Anyhow, from my 'test ride' I would say it is probably going to be fun to drive. My only concern would be accelerating through a sweeping turn and have it downshift halfway through the turn. Shane was describing some sort of pressure lockout to the clamp up part of the torque converter to stop it from downshifting while in boost. Not exactly sure what he has in mind but it might be worth looking into if not too expensive. The "problem" with Coldsides is that they produce the same high torque at any RPM/boost. So, if it downshifts under foot to the floor, hang on to your hat. ;)

[gludlow]

The "problem" with Coldsides is that they produce the same high torque at any RPM/boost. So, if it downshifts under foot to the floor, hang on to your hat. ;)

You may not believe it, but we Automatic drivers get a pretty good feel for our cars, too; I know *exactly* when my car is about to downshift. I'll have to be a bit more careful about road conditions/turning, but it won't sneak up on me.

The pressure switch was more for the power than the downshift, I thought. Again I'm no mechanic, but he said that because of the converter, at "low" boost a lot os lost in the slipping. He thinks that locking the torque converter while in boost will get more power to the wheels at all RPM/boost. I do not know if that would prevent downshifting.

I may try that at a later date; after all, I need something to look forward to!

[gludlow]

And the results are in! I wasn't able to get a smooth graph due to downshift, but over about 3K RPM came out ok. The results....

155HP and about 130 ft/lb torque!

So... I', not sure what's going on. The dyno was a Dynojet (?) and was recent calibrated by AEM. He has a couple of stock miata runs, the 99 came in at 105HP, the 1990 at about 100. However, they didn't have an A/F hookup, so I'm kinda upset about that. They also had problems getting the RPM right; one run had me at 500ft/lb torque (wohoo!) and 800 WHP.

So either the dyno is wrong, or something's still amiss with the car. I think something is going on between the transmission, powercards, and timing card. The guys at AIM set the timing back not just in the high end but mid-boost levels. I can't decipher the A/F gauge while driving, most the time it's between 14 and 15.5, but when I hit the pedal it goes to 13 and slowly drops to to (when I release the pedal).

I have the original files, but no nice graph to post yet. Hopefully soon!

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Well, I got the graphs open that you sent me and none of them make any sense. They only show going to ~3300 RPM and are all over the map with oscillations. First thing thay should have done was tie open the bypass valve on the blower and do a baseline run so we knew what the engine/trans looked like without boost. Second, with no A/F reading it is hard to make any judgement there. As we discussed over the phone, it was going rich above about 5000 RPM. We need to re-flash the cards to reduce the fuel up top. There can easily be 15 WHP lost there. The 01-05 don't like 'rich' like the other years.Also, Shane said he pulled a lot of timing and yet it was still pinging. He also said he turned the E-Cool all the way down. I'd venture to bet there is 180-190WHP sitting there waiting to come out when properly tuned.

I found a couple DynoJets clsoe to you that we could tune at. Maybe I just need to make a drive to Illinois? :)

[gludlow]

I downloaded the WinPEP software to graph the results; you're right, these don't make any sense! The guy running the software did get some graph that had up to 7k RPM, though. He had to ste the timing to 720 degrees? I can't seem to do that with the software I downloaded. Or maybe he didn't save the results.

My graph returned below. I like the first run better; 155HP at 3,500RPM and 250 fl/lb torque! ;-)

I think I should ask for my money back.

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

A/F would have helped a lot. Don't know why they couldn't get RPM and A/F to work. I guess I don't believe the 155WHP any more than I believe the 500Ft-lbs torque. Of course I've been told that the DynoJet measure HP at the wheels and Torque at the crank. Maybe that torque converter in your auto transmission has 350 ft-lbs of torque loss? ;) LOL

[gludlow]

I'm getting money back from the dyno run! Phew:2guns:

[FormerDatsun510Man]

That problem would have been easily fixed. All that happened was they selected the wrong firing cycle in the Winpep software. This caused the rpm's to read by half. Actually though, you can still use that graph. If you divide the torque scale by 2 and multiply the rpm scale by 2 you will have the correct hp and torque curves (at least the ones in red). I don't know what the blue lines are though.

Btw, this is further proof that the Dynojet really is just measuring rwhp and not torque. You see, even with the wrong rpm it got the rwhp correct. However, since it "saw" the engine rpm input as being half of what it was in reality, it calculated twice the torque at half the rpm. In other words, that is the torque numbers it had to calculate in order for the rwhp to come out correct for the lower rpm values.

Bill

[gludlow]

That problem would have been easily fixed. All that happened was they selected the wrong firing cycle in the Winpep software. This caused the rpm's to read by half. Actually though, you can still use that graph. If you divide the torque scale by 2 and multiply the rpm scale by 2 you will have the correct hp and torque curves (at least the ones in red). I don't know what the blue lines are though.
...Bill

Bill-
I hope not; I would think the kit could put out more than 155WHP at 10 PSI, even on an automatic. The guy did fiddle with the firing cycle as we did runs until we got a run to hit 7k RPM with similar HP numbers (just under 155). 'course the powercards have a little bug in them, maybe that was sapping power.

However, if you were there with us you'd probably question the results like I do. It took them 30 minutes just to get the dyno going (a problem with a fuse messed up the dyno brake), no A/F hookup, and it took 3-4 runs before they got the RPM measured right, but somehow didn't save those runs.

I'm going to get it re-dynoed and tuned with Tom's help, then I'll have a reliable number to go off.

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Bill,

If I trusted the numbers, I would agree with you. Somehow, I just don't trust the numbers. Dynos that can't get their A/F working shouldn't even run. We are pretty sure it was running rich based on the PC-Pro problem mentioned in the 'problems' forum. The question is HOW rich? With no A/F numbers, and un-reliable RPM numbers, I'll pass for the moment. I don't think I have ever had a kit make 155 WHP even on it's worst day.

[FormerDatsun510Man]

Understood :). From what I have seen the Coldside torque curves are about as flat as flat can be. The red dyno run indicates a tuning problem with the way the torque dips down then comes back up a little. If that 130 ft-lb were held to 7000rpm, which I believe will occur once you get the a/f ratio tuned right that would be 7000/5252*130 = 173rwhp. Yeah, but I guess the real answer is to get it back to the dyno with the dyno actually working right and then to see :biggrin:

Bill

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Well, if 175 is all we get, there are a lot larger pulleys than 105 sitting around. :)

Bill, any idea what the losses are for an automatic? I think we will have him pull the belt and wire the bypass open the next dyno trip so we can get a relative baseline. I know it isn't perfect that way but it is best we can do at this stage.

[FormerDatsun510Man]

Based on the research I did for the PC Hotrod program, I put the automatic drivetrain losses around 5%. This would equate to about a 8-9rwhp power difference at the 180-190rwhp power level.

Bill

[gludlow]

Based on the research I did for the PC Hotrod program, I put the automatic drivetrain losses around 5%. This would equate to about a 8-9rwhp power difference at the 180-190rwhp power level.

Bill

I saw a very recent run on a stock 1999, it got 99WHP on 95 torque, California car. That would naturally suggest about 5% loss v manual.

If I'm really only pulling 155 now, I'm quite pleased! If we can fix the rich and tuning and get to 175 I think that'll be plenty fast. At least for now...:devil2:

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Base on a 1999 manual would be 110-115. A CA car would lean towards the 110 and a federal car towards the 115. Here is the baseline from my 05. If the automatics are 95, that would be 16WHP less. However, like I said, I know how to correct that. :)

http://www.fastforwardsuperchargers.com/Dynos/Tom-05-Baseline.jpg

[gludlow]

Nice A/F line on that run! I just figured with the 1999 not having the VVT, it would be the same as the NA 1.8 (105 WHP). But that dyno proves me wrong :-)

Wohoo, I'm starting to sound like I know what I'm talking about :devil:

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

On the older engines, Mazda used different cams for the automatic. I think that led to HP loss as well as the Torque converter. maybe Mazda was afraid of the automatic? :) I still predict that we will have yours up close to 190WHP before we are done. Remember, you have EXACTLY the same kit that I do EXCEPT the 130mm pulley. :)

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

If you like nice A/F curves, I think these are pretty good?

http://www.fastforwardsuperchargers.com/Dynos/Tom99.jpg

[gludlow]

Smoooth as silk! What did you do different in the green run to bump torque and HP? Looks like it was 17 runs later :eek:

I think if I charted my A/F, it would be dipping below 10 a few times. Heck, it might even look like rollercoaster road!

I think you should post some of these runs in the forum and make them sticky; I'd love to have seen them. They might be there but too old to display?

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

We ran it hard for a lot of runs and got it good and hot. That is probably why it is a bit higher? :) Don't say a word, Bill!!! :)

The 'FFS Dyno section doesn't have a lot of them and they are easy to find. I will put this in there. I KNOW there is 230 waiting in there for me to let it out. I really don't know why that 224.48 couldn't have been 225.000? ;) Keep in mind that my engine is getting a little tired. It has 138,000 miles now and has been 200+ since ~30,000. There has been some serious abuse along the way as the keys have been handed to people at Deal's Gap to go and enjoy as well as several racetracks. Seems like I find the best way to life test it is to hand the keys to somebody and say "Have fun". Some of the testing has yielded some serious knock as well as the many time when I had WI that the W ran out. When you think of 220WHP "NON-INTERCOOLED" :) it strikes a chord. :scooter:

Bill said that if I could get 225, he might consider swapping his hotside for a Coldside. I will get there. I might have to use something a little stronger than 91 octane, however.

[gludlow]

93 Octane is plentiful up here, and it's pretty cold outside... ;-)

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Springtime here. 81F today.

[Mark]

Springtime here. 81F today.

We peaked out around 8F . Started out at -8.

[FormerDatsun510Man]

Tom, that looks great!! I am surprised that you can run it that lean, without a big fat A/A IC up front and not get knock! :biggrin: A few technical questions :). What sort of timing retard are you running with the PC TC card? This was on 91 octane? Can you beat on it pretty hard on the street without it pinging? Is the stock ECU seeing any knock? Sorry for all the questions LOL. It isn't like I am in disbelief, but actually it is because this has me curious about the possibility of going Coldside in the future. Basically, if I can run this setup (130 pulley) on a Coldside and beat the crap out of it on the street on regular pump gas (93 octane around here) and not get ping I would be ready to make the switch whenever the finances are able to handle it. On the other hand, I don't want to risk problems with the engine either. I drive pretty hard and at the track I run the same 93 octane pump gas without any problems with my current setup. Maybe, this is time for a another thread on this?

Congratulations on the achievement! Running this kind of power non-intercooled in the past was unheard of and basically undoable!

Bill

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Bill, I was stretching a point about the 91. It was more like 95 octane. The 99 seems to like it a little on the lean side. When you have to turn up the rich fuel to avoid knock, you are bandaiding a problem of too much heat in the intake charge. I would think you could run your 99 R4 A/A at a little above 12:1 as well. If you have to turn up the fuel to cure knock that timing won't get rid of, it is pre-ignition caused by heat or low octane. Only cooling and better fuel will cure that. Nothing else. If timing will cure it, then heat again is nt the problem but simply octane. No matter how cold you make the incoming air, pretty soon you have so much compressive heat inside the cylinder that you will pre-ignite 91 octane. Only two cures I know for that are more octane or lower compression. For those days where the other 10-15 WHP are absolutely tantamount, 101 is cheaper than a new engine.

Seriously, I run the piss out of the car on 91 octane with a couple degrees of timing pulled (so heat is not the problem) but I only get around 115WHP (and a lot of low end torque :)) because octane is the problem. To actually get the WHP up, I have to increase the octane so I can cut the timing retard.

I think it would have been better if my engine weren't so tired too. :) 138,000 miles with 108,000 of that above 200WHP is starting to show it's toll. The engine is now consuming 1 quart of oil in 3000 miles and that is not a good sign. Not sure if dropping the boost back below 15PSI might cure that? Or if a new set of pistons/rings would be wiser?

[FormerDatsun510Man]

I don't have to enrichen the fuel on my setup to avoid knock. I can actually run over 13.5:1 and it still won't knock. I run 12:1 because I think it is a safer a/f ratio to run at the power level I am at. One can still burn holes in the pistons even without knock :).

From the sounds of it, I guess I will probably stay with my R4 setup. Probably due to the FMIC, I can beat the crap out of it on the street on pump gas and not even a hint of knock. I gave it a good workout last weekend with my OBDII scan tool and she kept running 23.5-24 deg up top no matter how many times I ran it through the gears. Also, thanks to the PC Pro and all your help there, she idles perfectly and has great driveability.

It is remarkable what you have done though. The efficiency of the Coldside is unmatched IMHO. I was considering Coldside because I like simple, it looks so clean and beautiful under the hood with unmatched quality... basically the MP62 perfected IMO. Also I would probably cut a good 25-50lb off the weight of my setup. At the same time, I admit I am a bit addicted to the power level I am at right now. I am kinda of a power whore LOL. It will actually pull a Mustang GT500 from a roll :biggrin: Tested at the "track" of course :biggrin: :biggrin:

Bill

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

Dyno theory says add fuel until you lose power. I think it was close enough to 12:1 to race at. If I had your engine I think it would have made much better numbers. I would rebuild it now but it is too much fun. I am now at the stage of go till she blows. That engine owes me absolutely nothing at this stage. It has been 138,000 miles of absolute blast. Well, 132,000 anyhow. It had 6,000 on it when I bought it in 2002. This July 4th will be 5 years at 200+. I suppose I should also subtract 5,000 or so miles for the short period it had that built engine in it. People that sell Wiseco pistons for street use should be horsewhipped.

[FormerDatsun510Man]

One quart every 3000 miles isn't that bad :biggrin:. My engine was consuming about a quart every 1000 miles while at BRP and it was the test guinea pig. From what I saw, it surprisingly didn't impact the hp numbers too much... it was notably down a few hp compared to fresher engines, maybe 5rwhp or so. It was a testament to the build quality of the BP engine. However, it was when I was burning a quart every 200 miles :biggrin: that I decided I NEED a new engine LOL. It did take care of a lot of mosquitos down here though :biggrin:

Remember, though my engine is a stock rebuild I have factory 9:1 pistons. Compared to the 9.5:1 pistons in a completely stock '99-'00 engine that would reduce power output by about 2-3%.

Bill

[Tom @ Fast Forward]

One quart in 200 was about what the built engine drank on the street. I will admit that it was near zero consumption on the track where it got hot and stayed hot.