The Diesel Garage banner

1 - 20 of 49 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,230 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Congrats on 756 IBDMAXIN
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,645 Posts
Nothing like giving the ol dmax a "message in a bottle" if you will :evil:

Great run, Wade...And thanks for becoming a member here :Thumbup:
 

·
11 Second Truck Club
Joined
·
397 Posts
Good numbers for sure! What kind of dyno?
 

·
11 Second Truck Club
Joined
·
397 Posts
Kennedy Diesel is working on a test set. I would imagine that there are others doing it too but so far I have been very happy with the KD forty overs I am running in my truck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I don't know what the raw figures were but it is good enough for a 112+mph 1/4 pass at our local 6000+ft elevation track. The truck comes in at 7200+lbs (4D LB 4WD). One program and a single shot of N2O. That all folks. No fuel upgrades yet, but on the way.
 

·
Diesel Nutbag
Joined
·
548 Posts
Super Diesel said:
I don't know what the raw figures were but it is good enough for a 112+mph 1/4 pass at our local 6000+ft elevation track. The truck comes in at 7200+lbs (4D LB 4WD). One program and a single shot of N2O. That all folks. No fuel upgrades yet, but on the way.
I think this is a great example of how the CF's you guy's use at higher altitudes don't work well for our turbo diesels! :poke: ;) And this is not meant to take away from a great dyno run at all!! :bow:


Using Smokemup.com for trap speed, which is by far the most accurate hp calculator available, 7200 lbs. @ 112 mph = 686.9 rwhp.

My truck at 7900 lbs. has run several 108's for a 679.3 rwhp.

When I dyno(Dynojet), my raw numbers in that config. are 625. Then negativly corrected(0.98) to 612.

Assuming IBDMAXIN's dyno run was done useing a 1.2 cf(probably pretty close), his 756 would yield a raw number of 630.

Both the calculator and raw numbers are almost identical for what each truck does in it's own location.

If the correction factor was truely valid, that would mean IBDMAXIN's truck would gain 140 hp by coming down to near sea-level. Now granted, I do believe you will gain or loose going from sea-level to altitude and vice versa, but it's going to be more like 30-50 hp with a forced induction motor not 140 :shrug:

Again, nothing against IBDMAXIN's dyno run!! I KNOW how much work it takes to achieve 600+ runs and I congratulate him. :) I just don't think these correction factors setup for non-forced induction motors work for our application :shrug:
 

·
DPM Mobile Dyno
Joined
·
508 Posts
Dockboy said:
I think this is a great example of how the CF's you guy's use at higher altitudes don't work well for our turbo diesels! :poke: ;) And this is not meant to take away from a great dyno run at all!! :bow:


Using Smokemup.com for trap speed, which is by far the most accurate hp calculator available, 7200 lbs. @ 112 mph = 686.9 rwhp.

My truck at 7900 lbs. has run several 108's for a 679.3 rwhp.

When I dyno(Dynojet), my raw numbers in that config. are 625. Then negativly corrected(0.98) to 612.

Assuming IBDMAXIN's dyno run was done useing a 1.2 cf(probably pretty close), his 756 would yield a raw number of 630.

Both the calculator and raw numbers are almost identical for what each truck does in it's own location.

If the correction factor was truely valid, that would mean IBDMAXIN's truck would gain 130 hp by coming down to near sea-level. Now granted, I do believe you will gain or loose going from sea-level to altitude and vice versa, bt it's going to be more like 30-50 hp with a forced induction motor not 130 :shrug:

Again, nothing against IBDMAXIN's dyno run!! I KNOW how much work it takes to achieve 600+ runs and I congratulate him. :) I just don't think these correction factors setup for non-forced induction motors work for our application :shrug:
Good post Greg. I'll add that correction factors are great for tuning, but on the track you can toss them out the window. And Dyno runs made a week before the track may calculate, and may not depending in the air quality each day.

At the TS event, we had no correction to a slight correction (never more than 1.01 or 0.99 all weekend. Every truck I did the math on that ran the dyno then ran on the track calculated out pretty darn close. And I am one that uses SmokeMup.com on a regular basis. And finally, N2O passes on the dyno may not calculate out either. You can notice on some runs that bottle pressure will fall off after the inital burst. This will result in less hp going down the track than the peak number generated on the dyno.

And awesome run with the Max. Gotta love it seeing all of this HP this year. I'm hoping someone will lay down a 800+ at IRP this year. :Thumbup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,943 Posts
Stupid question here: Are any of the D'max's making 700+ on fuel alone? If not what is the bottleneck?
 

·
11 Second Truck Club
Joined
·
397 Posts
Clint at ATS with his truck is said to have crossed over 700 with is modified CP3 pump, big turbo and propane at May Madness. I don't know if the propane was needed to get it over 700 or not.

I don't know the correction factor either.

Right now our two biggest hurdles are the turbo and the CP3 pump to make 700 on fuel.
 

·
ATS Diesel Performance
Joined
·
147 Posts
BMDMAX said:
Clint at ATS with his truck is said to have crossed over 700 with is modified CP3 pump, big turbo and propane at May Madness. I don't know if the propane was needed to get it over 700 or not.

I don't know the correction factor either.

Right now our two biggest hurdles are the turbo and the CP3 pump to make 700 on fuel.
From what I've heard, the propane on Clint's truck adds about 100hp or right around there. It's still extremely impressive to see a truck run 600+hp on #2 only esspecially when it's a D-Max.

Thanks for all the comments guys!!! Let's all make it a good year for the Diesel's!!!

Cheers, Wade
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
The correction was for sea level. Lets keep in mind he ran at 112+mph through the 1/4 at 6000ft elevation track. WAAAAY different than running at a 2000ft or below track. The terminal speed will be much higher at lower elevation. Any doubters care to try it? My 8100+lbs truck ran though the traps at 111mph with a NO BOOST LAUNCH (from idle) and I blew the head gasket at the 1/8 mile and coasted though the traps. This was done at the same 6000+ft elevation track. 800+hp will be showing up soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,943 Posts
Super Diesel said:
The correction was for sea level. Lets keep in mind he ran at 112+mph through the 1/4 at 6000ft elevation track. WAAAAY different than running at a 2000ft or below track. The terminal speed will be much higher at lower elevation. Any doubters care to try it? My 8100+lbs truck ran though the traps at 111mph with a NO BOOST LAUNCH (from idle) and I blew the head gasket at the 1/8 mile and coasted though the traps. This was done at the same 6000+ft elevation track. 800+hp will be showing up soon.
If I read this correctly you are saying you will gain MPH not ET by going down in elevation?
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
706 Posts
Congratulations! The only thing is a 6000 ft correction factor isnt worth much when your creating your own atmoshere with Nitrous oxide.Run it on diesel only and thats a diffrent ball game,and even then turbo diesels lose much less than NA gas motors that the correction factor was really designed for.I know there is more lag at 6000ft,and that the power will be down a very slight amount,but nowhere near what the correction factor shows.
 

·
Diesel Nutbag
Joined
·
548 Posts
John DiMartino said:
Congratulations! The only thing is a 6000 ft correction factor isnt worth much when your creating your own atmoshere with Nitrous oxide.Run it on diesel only and thats a diffrent ball game,and even then turbo diesels lose much less than NA gas motors that the correction factor was really designed for.I know there is more lag at 6000ft,and that the power will be down a very slight amount,but nowhere near what the correction factor shows.
:agreed: Johnny!! :Thumbup:



Super,

Nothing against your guys accomplishments, they are awesome! BUT, the simple truth is the truck put ~630 rwhp to the ground :shrug: You guy's can claim 756 corrected if you want, but as long as the truck runs around at that altitude and that area.............It's a 630 rwhp truck!!!! :shrug: On the street it performs like it has 630 hp, on the strip it performs like it has 630 hp because that is what it puts to the ground ;)

If it puts 750+ to the ground at sea level.........GOOD JOB!!!.........but I highly doubt it! :poke: I would be willing to bet if the truck comes to sea level EXACTLY as it is you are looking at about 660-670 max. on a dyno.

Which is still a great accomplishment by the way!! :bow:
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
706 Posts
Exactly,it is an excellent accomplishment,and I didnt mean to take away from it,but being an ex N20 user myself,I know how easy it is to create your own conditions as far as incoming air is concerned.There isnt a doubt in my mind that 800hp will be reached soon,at least on the dyno. I was never able to get to 700 with a single and drugs,I just never had the time to commit for tuning and i never had the best injectors at the time.I gave up,and went with twins,and the best injectors. What shows true hp is trap speed, and when i was running the spray i was only able to get 109.25 MPH,but a 12.26ET.My Hp was 640-650 RWHP on average.(dynojet 248)I went to twins and my Hp on the dyno dropped to 583-603ish,but my trap speed is up almost 2 full MPH,and ET is roughly the same.The truck felt incredible with the spray,the 'hit" was awesome,but in actualtiy it is quicker or at least the same now,and faster in the 1/4 than before.So dyno numbers really arent everything,the true Hp is backed up at the track.
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts
Top