The Diesel Garage banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
1,130 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Truck is an 04 F350 with a stock intake and exhaust and a Quad 160 in the 160 setting. Stock tires and stock rear end gear. Pulls were run in OD as I don't have a dyno tune from SCT.

Stock
239.2 RWHP
460.4 RWTQ

Best HP run
392.9 RWHP
716.9 RWTQ

Best TQ run
390.5 RWHP
739.3 RWTQ

Raw Numbers for HP were
Best HP run 358.1 RWHP
Best TQ run 355.8 RWHP

So it appears that the correction factor ~ 8.9%

Temp here was 83* and humidity was 28%. Elevation is 2590.


I believe on the 739 RWTQ my TC came unlocked and skewed that reading a bit. The 716 the TC stayed locked the whole run up to the speed limiter.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
1,130 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Good to meet you to rob. Your numbers were definitely impressive.

When did you say that test and tune was at Firebird?
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
142 Posts
tgatch said:
Good to meet you to rob. Your numbers were definitely impressive.

When did you say that test and tune was at Firebird?
Next race is Friday night the 19th and the Hot Truck National is Sunday 21st. These are bracket races though and not test and tunes. Next test and tune is June 10th. Come on out on Sunday, should be a hoot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,836 Posts
Good Run's Tom...nice to see some numbers for Quad's 160...lock it in 4th and probably right there with the SCT..
j.schall
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
142 Posts
bobo said:
Good job, Tom!!!


Rob,
Are those numbers in your sig what you laid down?
Pulled a 578HP/1103 torque on #2 only. IdahoCTD twins and Bobo's efi tune:Thumbup:
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
1,130 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
There was a Cummins there that laid down a corrected 611 RWHP another that laid down 1300+RWTQ with ~580RWHP.

The one that impressed me was the 92 12 valve that put down 371RWHP and 940 RWTQ!!! I think that kid had about $5,000 or so wrapped up in the WHOLE truck.

All of those Cummins trucks were impressive with their TQ to HP ratio.

There were 3 Fords, my 04 6.0 and two 2000 7.3's. Both of the 7.3's put down 219 RWHP stock. There were 4 or 5 Duramaxes. And the rest were Dodges. I believe they ran about 30 trucks through.

Jschall,

I'm sure with intake and exhaust I would have been over 400. Heck with cooler temps I probably would have been over 400. Yes I know, it would be a corrected 400.

One thing I noticed was the guys that had manuals would run in direct and OD the HP would stay the same, but the torque would go up. It would also come on quicker. I'm guessing because the trucks would have more load and therefore build more boost.
 

·
Destroked
Joined
·
1,658 Posts
What dyno was that?
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
1,130 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
The 611 RWHP Dodge had 240HP injectors, water and meth, and a bigger turbo. The 1300 RWTQ beast was a twin turbo Cummins with nitrous I believe.

The Dyno was a DynoJet here in Meridian, ID at Meridian Motorsports.

Side note.. Rob did you notice the 2 big vats they had there? I guess the guy is going to try making up Bio-diesel in one, the other is going to be race diesel.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
142 Posts
I did hear him talk about the bio and race fuel. Should be interesting.

I had a good time meeting a bunch of new(to me) diesel junkies, nice to knock ideas around. Especially now that so many things work the same on all the big three.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
1,130 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
OK.... Something ain't adding up. I'm looking at the raw numbers on my Dyno. Mine were printed up with MPH so I'm having to convert them over to RPM which is no big deal (MPH*Rear Gear*Trans gear*336)/tire dia in inches = rpm. Also my raw number Chart doesn't have the torque printed out just the HP. Again no big deal (HP *5252)/RPM=Torque.

So here is my problem. Corrected numbers show a Peak HP of 392.9 with a Peak TQ of 716.9. But using the Graph I got for my Raw numbers the picture calculates out differently. Peak HP of 358.1 was at 90 mph which works out to 2530 RPMS. Ok so I have the following:

(358.1*5252)/2530 = 743.4 (17 lbs-ft higher than the peak TQ listed on my corrected numbers)

Also using the sam graph My peak TQ appears to be at 87 MPH which is 2446 RPMs where my HP is right at 349. So here we have the following:

(349*5252)/2446 = 749.4. (23 Lbs-ft higher than the peak TQ listed on my corrected numbers)

So what gives?
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
140 Posts
This is because you were on an inertia dyno. The actual torque your truck makes is higher than what the dynojet is going to show simply because the truck is accelerating too fast. You also have to figure in some tire slippage and distortion because of the rate of acceleration.

The dynojets are great for measuring gains and being consistant, but if you 3want to get technical you need to find something like a Superflow and run a controlled acceleration test or a 12-15 sec sweep test. The torque numbers will rise and the hp numbers will be ever so slightly smaller.

You still need to use a SAE correction factor for altitude humidity and air temp.

Raw numbers are ok to look at, but they will not be consistant from dyno to dyno because of conditions. IF you always use the correction factor you will always be consistant.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
1,130 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
I'll buy that to a point Quad....

How can the HP be 392.9 and the TQ is only 716 if the HP is figured from the torque?

392.9 HP at 90 MPH should be 815.6 lbs-ft. Again my RPM at 90 MPH in OD is 2530 so the math is as follows:

(392.9*5252)/2530=815.6

Using the torque values I see Listed in the Corrected number for my 392.9 HP run at Peak HP I come up with a totally different HP number. Hard to say, but it is really close to 710lbs-ft. So the following:

(710*2530)/5252=342HP.

So I guess my question is, how can the HP be so high when the torque is where it is?

On my graph that was printed out show 578.6 lbs-ft at 80 MPH. 80 MPH in OD is 2260 RPMs.

(578.6*2260)/5252= ~248HP

Yet the HP reads 282.9 at that point.

(282.9*5252)/2260=~657lbs-ft

So you see my confusion? The math just doesn't add up.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top