Ron Pope Motorsports                California Custom Roadsters               

Anyone dyno'ed their ride?

deckofficer

Banned
Followed all of the good suggestions from Hotrod46 Mike, and others. Pleased to report my Track-T has much improved street manners. I did want to use a Rochester Q-jet but the needed spacer for my intake manifold was too thick for air cleaner clearance with the hood. Went with the 600 cfm Edelbrock with vacuum secondairies AND an electric choke. No more stabbing the throttle to keep running when cold. Also replaced my race style Mallory distributor with a new Mallory with vacuum advance. Did not have access to a distributor machine so paid to have the curves dialed in at a shop that then does the final tuning on a chassis dyno. Puts 311 hp to the rollers @ 5874 rpms vs. 385 hp at the engine @ 6100 rpms. I wish the chassis dyno tech would have looked closer at the engine dyno sheet because he would have seen that after the power fell off just a bit at 5900 rpms, it rose again for a points limited power at 6100 rpms. So I still do not know what this engine is capable of but have to go with the engine builder who says he has built dozens like mine and if they have solid state points (like mine now has) that it pulls 425 to 430 on the engine dyno @ 6400 rpms. Has anyone else dyno'ed their ride and what are your numbers?
 
Hey all.
On dyno power,how many horses on the wheels = horses on the flywheel?????
Us old farters have a need to know.

Tom...
 
tom buckley said:
Hey all.
On dyno power,how many horses on the wheels = horses on the flywheel?????
Us old farters have a need to know.

Tom...

Most folks say you lose 10-20% of flywheel horsepower thru the drive train, depending on gears, tire height, trans, etc.
 
Mine goes to the dyno tomorrow. I'll post the results when I get them, although I believe I have the only W motor here, so there might not be any real comparison with SBC or BBC cars.

Jeff
 
I made 627hp at the flywheel at 5800 revs.

671 blown 454 with flat tappet hydraulic cam. Running about 8% over on pumpgas. Had a soft alloy head and it blew the head gasket. :cry: all care & no responsibility by the dyno guy, but it wasnt his fault

We fitted up EFI on the blower last year & took it to the dyno and there was a problem (huge leanout) and the motor expired. :cry: all care & no responsibility by the dyno guy, but I think it was his fault.

New motor is pumpgas 548 cubes with the 671 on it, new solid roller cam and a pair of big Dominator carbs and its not going anywhere near the dyno.

I know the top guys all use them but I dont have enough spare cash to do a third engine in 12 months.
 
HotRod Todd,

That is a huge number! This isn't a street driven rod, is it? If so, what is the weight and what is it like trying to max out accelleration without frying the tires? I have less than 1/2 that power and now that the low end power is up, I now have traction issues that I hope a new set of Mickey Thompson S/R's will address.
 
100% street legal. Is heavy - weights about 2500lbs without me in it.

Ran a best of 10.2 @132mph. I left the line at idle and then it accelerated away happily with no frying of the tyres.

Theres photos of it on here

New engine will be less streetable and probably a genuine 850-900hp. But I will still take it out cruising
 
deckofficer said:
HotRod Todd,

That is a huge number! This isn't a street driven rod, is it? If so, what is the weight and what is it like trying to max out accelleration without frying the tires? I have less than 1/2 that power and now that the low end power is up, I now have traction issues that I hope a new set of Mickey Thompson S/R's will address.

What he doesnt tell ya,is that LARGE cajones is part of the recipe,and its quite wide when leavin the line at the strip,if you know what I mean...and yes,when he was living up in our neck of the woods,he was out puttering around town all the time.Just doesnt pay to sneeze under acceleration..;)
 
What were your numbers?
441 ft. lbs torque @ 4380, 382 HP @ 4555. If I could push the RPM's to 7000 I could brag about around 600 HP, but that ain't gonna happen. 441 ft. lbs of torque makes me happy though. 257 ft. lbs. at idle. I'm sure that having 6 two barrels, no vacuum advance, and a host of other things that are on there to look pretty don't help with the numbers or for that matter with the efficiency of the engine, but what can you do? It lights the tires if I want to show off, beats all the tuners, and most importantly, everybody loves a T-bucket.

Jeff
 
Jeff,



I love your numbers!!! I prefer to short shift my Track-T but you would blow me into the weeds doing the same thing. I know it is like comparing apples with oranges, my small block vs. your big block, but that much hp to the rollers at only 4555 rpms, your ride must be a real hoot to drive. I wish I could fit a small positive displacement blower under my hood cause without it there is no way I could enjoy the amount of power you can produce at such a lazy rpm. You must have been doing the "T" thing for quite awhile to come up with a 409 with so much power so low in the rpm band. When I let my 30 something, school teacher niece drive my car, I mentioned how she did here on the forum and was overwhelmed by posters saying they would NEVER let anyone drive their ride. That is too bad as we could all learn alot from swapping rides for a short drive. I know that your "T" would be a real education for a lot of us and mine with a manual tranny could be interesting to some.

I'll be heading back to Northern California this Saturday where I have both the engine dyno and chassis dyno sheets so I can extropalate what your numbers could of been if you would have allowed a higher rpm test. Are you the kind of owner/builder that refuses to mistreat their ride by asking for any rpm above 4600 ?



Bob
 
Are you the kind of owner/builder that refuses to mistreat their ride by asking for any rpm above 4600 ?

Bob

Max torque = max rate of acceleration. When you reach that point it's time to grab the next gear and hit it again. I realize things aren't that simple in the racing world, but for just playing around it works OK. In third gear I'm at around 2500 rpm at 55 mph. I don't know what that would translate to at 5000 rpm, and I don't plan to find out, so I never get up to very high rpm's. Besides, on a sunny afternoon in SoCal, you don't want to go faster than the scenery at the beach, if you know what I mean.

Hope to see you at the Fun Run in August.
 
I am doing the 101 fun run for the first time. I left my checkbook in NorCal and will send Dennis my club dues when I get back north. I'll be driving the "T" back down in July then back north and again in Aug for the fun run. When you say "grab the next gear" does that mean you have a manual in your 409 powered "T"? I would like to try the Audi 4.2 diesel V8 in my Track-T. 326 hp at 3200 rpms and 490 lb/ft at 1600 rpms. Also 100 lbs lighter than my sbc. Talk about being able to short shift!!! 50+ MPG would be nice also.



Bob
 
I am doing the 101 fun run for the first time. I left my checkbook in NorCal and will send Dennis my club dues when I get back north. I'll be driving the "T" back down in July then back north and again in Aug for the fun run. When you say "grab the next gear" does that mean you have a manual in your 409 powered "T"? I would like to try the Audi 4.2 diesel V8 in my Track-T. 326 hp at 3200 rpms and 490 lb/ft at 1600 rpms. Also 100 lbs lighter than my sbc. Talk about being able to short shift!!! 50+ MPG would be nice also.



Bob
That was just a figure of speech. I have a TH350, and wish it was a full manual 700R4. Had I known that a 700R4 had a 3.06 1st gear I would have started with that instead, now I am hoping to change next winter.
 
I think you and I are going to get along just fine, because had I not found a manual, I would have gone with a 700r overdrive with a lock up torque converter. Yes they have a lower 1st gear, not that we even need that, but more important is the overdrive and lock up. When I was looking, I only checked out the T's with manuals, AOD's, and 700r's. With the low rpm grunt your engine has, you would have no need for a high rpm stall speed converter other than reducing creep at the intersections, but I would just slip into neutral rather than creating the heat and loss of efficency of a high stall speed.
 
441 ft. lbs torque @ 4380, 382 HP @ 4555. If I could push the RPM's to 7000 I could brag about around 600 HP, but that ain't gonna happen. 441 ft. lbs of torque makes me happy though. 257 ft. lbs. at idle. I'm sure that having 6 two barrels, no vacuum advance, and a host of other things that are on there to look pretty don't help with the numbers or for that matter with the efficiency of the engine, but what can you do? It lights the tires if I want to show off, beats all the tuners, and most importantly, everybody loves a T-bucket.What a nice little torque monster, mine was only 383.5 lb/ft @ 4400 peak is 391.1 @ 4000. As far as hp, at your lower rpm I only produce 333.7 hp@4600 and peak was a points limited 384.7 hp @ 6100. If and it is a BIG IF your motor responds to rpm increase like mine, you would produce 440.4 hp at 6100. Depending on cam and a lot of other factors, could be a lot differant.


Bob
2

Jeff
What a nice little torque monster, mine was only 383.5 lb/ft @ 4400 peak is 391.1 @ 4000. As far as hp, at your lower rpm I only produce 333.7 hp@4600 and peak was a points limited 384.7 hp @ 6100. If and it is a BIG IF your motor responds to rpm increase like mine, you would produce 440.4 hp at 6100. Depending on cam and a lot of other factors, could be a lot differant.
 
I screwed up, the above post was on the engine dyno, not the rollers. On the rollers the numbers are less of course, but you beat me bad because your roller numbers are higher than my engine dyno numbers. So if your engine can do 440 hp to the rollers, then the engine would probably crank mid 500 hp. My roller numbers are 308.2 lb/ft @ 3962 rpms and as I mentioned at the beginning of this thread 311.0 hp @ 5874 rpms. Your motor is a lot stronger than mine.
 
It's easy to make magic numbers on a dyno.

You always dyno in the early morning or late evening for best air quality. Late October, you say? All the better.

Measure the barometric pressure and enter it into the console at least 2-3 inches lower. If it's a beautiful day, then deduct 4-5 inches. Never tell the dyno you measured 30.2 inches when you can tell it 26.2 inches.

Watch EGTs and lean on the jetting and timing as far as you dare.

For the last pull of the day, you always remove the air turbine from the carb, 'just to show how much it restricts the air flow'. But here's the trick - you must be in the dyno room alone, so you can remove the inlet air temperature sensor from the turbine. Once it is removed, hang it down the back side of the motor, so it is close to one of the header collectors.

Now make the pull and when the recorded numbers are printing, distract the customer's attention long enough to print the corrected numbers sheet. The corrected sheet is what you want the customer to see, because it will be 'true Texas horsepower'. :D

Several years back, we had a customer and very good friend of the shop we did Comp Eliminator motors for, who decided he wanted to step up to Pro Stock. He's a rather impatient sort, but has the finances to back it up. He purchased two used 500" motors from two different shops in Texas. He had the sheets on both motors and brought both to us for a quick B.S. check, just to keep everyone honest. One motor had been built at Reher-Morrison and you could nearly lay our sheets atop theirs. We were <2 horsepower apart. The other engine was from a different shop (which will remain unnamed). We couldn't get within 20 horsepower of that one and beat ourselves up trying to sort the problem. Then we noticed the barometric pressure clearly indicated they had dyno'ed the motor in the eye of a hurricane, with air inlet temperatures approaching 200° F.

On another occasion, we dyno'ed a Super Stock motor that was still warm from Lingenfelter's dyno. Our numbers were identical to what John had recorded.

It's sad to say some shops are willing to toss ethics out the window to make themselves look better than they really are. A SuperFlow printout will show a theoretical number that is calculated to show an approximate parasitic horsepower loss figure. Obviously, you cannot measure something that wasn't there to be measured, but some dyno operators will add the parasitic loss number back to what was measured to pump up the number.

When it comes to a chassis dyno, you are measuring rear wheel torque/horsepower. With that number, there is no way to accurately determine horsepower at the crank flange. You can guesstimate the number, but that is as good as it gets. Unless you know the exact percentage of coupling loss for your particular torque convertor or the percentage of clutch slippage, the parasitic loss of the transmission and the parasitic loss of the differential, all you have is a rear wheel number.

And we're not addressing the issue of calibrating the absorption unit in the test cell itself. It's a bit like that torque wrench in your toolbox - when was it last calibrated?

A dyno is a tool to measure power and torque, so engine output numbers can be re-evaluated after making engine changes. Did it get better or worse? At what RPM range the change appear? Hang a heavy balancer on the motor and the dyno will make you smile. Take that motor to the racetrack and the motor will accelerate like a slug. :D The only numbers that are real are the numbers you recorded on a given dyno with a given motor on a given day. Anything else is guess-work.
 
Mike,

I'm aware of some of the tricks dyno techs can do to enhance the numbers but don't think any were used on either the engine run or the run on the rollers. The engine builder would have had the most to gain by fudging numbers but built the motor with the owners supplied block and distributor. Motors that he builds using all his selected parts for circle track racing would fall within 5 hp of each other 425 to 430 hp. The first owner/builder told this engine builder it was for his track-T, the engine builder thought he was building for a circle track racer and could not understand why the owner wanted to keep his old vintage Mallory point type distributor. On the engine run he told him that the hp numbers were the same as the other engines he builds up to the rpm that point float became an issue.



On the roller dyno, all they had invested was running distributor curves for me and I told them that this run would be a baseline for evaluating future improvements. I am not totally dependant on dyno techs as I have owned a G-Tech ever since they were offered. When makng performance improvements to an 8000 lb diesel Ford F-350, you don't always feel seat of the pants improvements. The G-Tech keeps the dyno runs to just a few and I won't modify a car/truck without it. Major car magazines have been coping out by using it for years and most readers don't know their 0-60 and 1/4 times were done not at a track but on just a level and straight stretch of road and the G-Tech
 

     Ron Pope Motorsports                Advertise with Us!     
Back
Top