Volumetric Efficiency Comparo
#62
Awesome. Thanks Ken.
#63
This is what i get for you and MBailey. I have just taken approx figures from the graph on the first page of the thread - how do we think that compares? I don't know whether the correlation will be identical for 997 v 996.
Last edited by 996ttalot; 01-04-2011 at 05:56 PM.
#64
Are you saying that you could use the same correction factors for different types of turbos?
#65
When I done the rough graph of you and ttdude, the figure for you looks low, but it was a quick taking the values of the graph on the first page. Also when you produced the VE numbers for your car, was that at the maximum they could be e.g. boost levels, fueling etc?
Ken
#66
Mike I don't know. I have used the same for k16 v k24 and it worked fine when comparing x50 against std 996 turbo k16 v my set up.
When I done the rough graph of you and ttdude, the figure for you looks low, but it was a quick taking the values of the graph on the first page. Also when you produced the VE numbers for your car, was that at the maximum they could be e.g. boost levels, fueling etc?
Ken
When I done the rough graph of you and ttdude, the figure for you looks low, but it was a quick taking the values of the graph on the first page. Also when you produced the VE numbers for your car, was that at the maximum they could be e.g. boost levels, fueling etc?
Ken
Interesting graph... I dont know if its high or low since my car has never been dynoed. The log used for the VE calculation about a year old and I have made some power gains since then. Regardless, its very interesting data and I really appreciate you and Dave working so hard to draw so many valuable conclusions from it!!
#67
Mike I don't know. I have used the same for k16 v k24 and it worked fine when comparing x50 against std 996 turbo k16 v my set up.
When I done the rough graph of you and ttdude, the figure for you looks low, but it was a quick taking the values of the graph on the first page. Also when you produced the VE numbers for your car, was that at the maximum they could be e.g. boost levels, fueling etc?
Ken
When I done the rough graph of you and ttdude, the figure for you looks low, but it was a quick taking the values of the graph on the first page. Also when you produced the VE numbers for your car, was that at the maximum they could be e.g. boost levels, fueling etc?
Ken
#68
Thanks Ken!!
Interesting graph... I dont know if its high or low since my car has never been dynoed. The log used for the VE calculation about a year old and I have made some power gains since then. Regardless, its very interesting data and I really appreciate you and Dave working so hard to draw so many valuable conclusions from it!!
Interesting graph... I dont know if its high or low since my car has never been dynoed. The log used for the VE calculation about a year old and I have made some power gains since then. Regardless, its very interesting data and I really appreciate you and Dave working so hard to draw so many valuable conclusions from it!!
If that is the case, then I would have thought that you would have needed more power, or you are running less weight perhaps?
I think you need to go out and get another datalog!!!
#69
Okay it is getting late here (1am) so I sign off for tonight and catch up later today.
#70
Interestingly, the graphed hp is almost exactly what Todd Z estimates my car is making so it may be very accurate.
#74
Sleep? What's that?!
Yeah, his VE hits 300 or so. It would be interesting to see his 60-130 run with that profile.