Test Results on K&N drop in filter... Yes it works!

[Samoan Tsunami]

Well the second set of results are in. K&N filter.... = GOOD.

Theres many types of dynos out there. not all numbers can be compared with other numbers just out front. mustang dynos are usually higher than dynojets, load dynos usually dyno the lowest, but results are like hydraulic dynos which are extremely accurate in detecting change, but tend to be 16% lower than dynojet and dynapacks. dynapacks and loading dynos are usually more accurate due to to smaller or non existence of any kind of roller that can create a variable from the inertia of the roller. if you dont have a roller to begin with, then thats one less variable to factor in (tire slippage, tire pressure, strapping tightness of the "oh shhhhh---T!" straps that keep the car from jumpin off) both mid atlantic motorsports and agile auto used to be closer, but agile auto moved about 20-30 miles north of where they were. and mid atlantic was only about 12 out of their old location. plus i know the guys more who do the tuning for the drift team Drift Alliance in the Formula Drift competitions. so for now its Mid-Atlantic for me.

This time i used their newest dyno to the shop which is produced by Dyno Dynamics out of Austrailia. its more of a tuning dyno as opposed to some inertia dynos. Inertia dynos dont tend to pick up the smaller blips and surges throughout the entire rpm (very useful in tuning if you plan to tune throughout the rpms as accurately as possible...no point of having high max power if the rest of the powerband is choppy). its due to the size of the roller. remember the old physics law of kinetic energy....bodies in motion stay in motion until another force acts upon it... but the larger the part in motion, the more force it will take to alter the course. larger inertia rollers on dyno jets and mustang dynos dont pick up those smaller forces that when tuning a car, you will want to pick up for driveability issues. not just in tuning for WOT and max power results.

heres the low down on the setup and why i chose this route:

Why is a loading dyno (Dyno Dynamics) better than an inertia dyno (dynojet)? - Loading dynos are better than inertia dynos for a number of reasons.

***IMPORTANT FEATURE****
A) Steady State Tuning - Steady state tuning is the highlight of the loading dyno. Because the loading dyno uses an electric brake to keep the rollers from accelerating it is able to precisely vary how much load is placed on the cars engine. When the dyno exerts as much load on the engine as the engine is putting out, the rollers will stop accelerating and hold a constant speed. Because the engine is not accelerating we call this a steady state. During this time the dyno is measuring the load between the brake and the car and outputs a live power number. This is very useful for tuners because it allows them to make changes to each part of the ignition/fuel map and monitor the power gains or losses in real time. With an inertia dyno there is no way to keep the rollers from accelerating and therefore no way to hold a steady state. The engine simply accelerates through the ignition/fuel maps too quickly.

****MAIN SELLING POINT FOR ME*****
B) More precise measurement - Because inertia dynos use a heavy mass to simulate the inertia of the car being tested it is hard to monitor minor changes in power. The large mass of the rollers results in very minor changes in roller speed that inertia dyno sensors have a hard time picking up. If the sensor and computer don't see the change in roller speed the the dyno graph will not show a dip in power. However, a loading dyno uses rollers with very little mass and directly measures power rather than calculating it. Quick drops in power will be picked up by the load sensor and will show on the dyno graph. This is very useful for finding problems and ensuring that your engine is running correctly.

C) Load can be controlled - With an inertia dyno the load exerted on the engine as it accelerates is based on the inertia of the dyno rollers. This inertia is set by the mass of the rollers and is not able to be changed. The inertia of the dyno rollers directly determines how fast the cars engine will accelerate through each gear. Ideally this inertia would be equal to the inertia of the car being tested but this is rarely the case. The inertia is almost always going to be higher or lower than the inertia of the car and as a result the engine accelerates faster or slower than it would on the street. This can have a bearing on how the engine is tuned and how accurate the dyno replicates real life conditions. Because a loading dyno is able to actively alter the load on the rollers it is able to change the rate of acceleration as the operator pleases. Realistic loads for the particular vehicle can be used or loads simulating driving up a hill can be used. This is easily controlled by the dyno operator.

D) Problem Diagnosis - This feature goes back to the ability to control load and do steady state tuning. A loading dyno is able to simulate road conditions in a safe environment while allowing the technician to monitor the car and it's engine. An inertia dyno is unable to accurately simulate all but a few road conditions making it much more difficult to diagnose problems.

overall, i'll be getting tuning done there more than likely as long as they have time with the current drift season coming up....man, wait till you see some of the pics.... Vaughn Gitten Jr's drift alliance car....wrecked. theres some work to be done there before the season picks up.

OK, back to the post. the numbers of this dyno in particular are about 16% (according to Mid Atlantic Motorsports & Dyno Dynamics in Austrailia) lower than dynojet results.

Bear with me as theres alot of info to post...as that dyno has many features i was trying to learn and take advantage of with their time schedule. and man is this thing accurate...you can literally pedal a mountain bike on it, and it picks up each time you pedal.(yes...boredom does set in and the only reason we know because it was done. Ray (operator) kicks out about 1.6HP btw...) inertia dynos are larger so they tend not to pick those small things up on the dyno. my first results were done on dynapacks, if unfamilair with that setup, check here: http://dynapack.com/dynapack.html the results to that was 172.8HP and 176.7TQ

Todays results were 148.6HP base line again. now remember the 16% lower difference. So on a dynojet would read 171.68HP roughly a 1 hp difference.

After a 3 minute switch to the K&N filter, i actually threw down a 152.4HP rating. with the 16% defeceit, 176.78HP. so roughly 5whp is to gain from simply switching to a K&N drop in filter.

39$ for 5 whp. you dont have to be a whiz kid to recognize the HP per $ ratio is 1HP per 8$ roughly

Now heres all the sheets air fuel included:










so now that that part is out of the way, heres some of the pics:

[Samoan Tsunami]

Vaughn Gitten Jr's Drift Alliance S14. Photo shoot on sat, wrecked on sunday out at summit point. this was the car next to the dyno so to say i was kinda freaked out of my car launching off the dyno and face first into a wrecked car is an understatement. nothing happened though, so all was good.

[CoolVanilla]

Uhh hrm...

I'm not discounting your finding at all. Don't get me wrong... but I'm interested to know the percent of error of this particular dyno. I've tried looking on their website, but they apparently don't publish it?

In my experience, even the best chassis dyno company/operators in the world will tell you not to consider any difference over plus/minus 2-3% significant, or even "real". If we look at your baseline, and assume an minimal swing of 3% (min really could be anywhere from 0 to 6%), we're at right around 5hp. In other words, I think you're well within the error of the dyno from run to run.

What might be interesting is to repeat this test and make 2 or 3 back to back tests, then swap in the filter, then average the results. Something like we did here.

Again, please don't misunderstand! I'm not at all picking a fight or anything. Just saying I think given mechanical variance, I'm not comfortable asserting a true 5hp difference can be said to have resulted in the swap, especially given the tests I personally ran that showed no gain whatsoever on average (in fact a loss or a gain was observed if you look from one run to another, with no new changes of any kind made between 'em.)

PS: A human can pump out 1.6hp? Yer telling me that he can pull 880lbs one foot off the ground and get it there in one full second (lookup what one horsepower is if that confuses ya). Pretty impressive! In reality, I dont think the dyno is measuring 1.6; I think you're well within its margin of error and/or resolution.

[IDD]

Was the hood closed or open for your runs?

[CoolVanilla]

Was the hood closed or open for your runs?

[IDD]

Was the hood closed or open for your runs?

Anyone have an answer?

[Samoan Tsunami]

Uhh hrm...

I'm not discounting your finding at all. Don't get me wrong... but I'm interested to know the percent of error of this particular dyno. I've tried looking on their website, but they apparently don't publish it?

In my experience, even the best chassis dyno company/operators in the world will tell you not to consider any difference over plus/minus 2-3% significant, or even "real". If we look at your baseline, and assume an minimal swing of 3% (min really could be anywhere from 0 to 6%), we're at right around 5hp. In other words, I think you're well within the error of the dyno from run to run.

What might be interesting is to repeat this test and make 2 or 3 back to back tests, then swap in the filter, then average the results. Something like we did here.

Again, please don't misunderstand! I'm not at all picking a fight or anything. Just saying I think given mechanical variance, I'm not comfortable asserting a true 5hp difference can be said to have resulted in the swap, especially given the tests I personally ran that showed no gain whatsoever on average (in fact a loss or a gain was observed if you look from one run to another, with no new changes of any kind made between 'em.)

PS: A human can pump out 1.6hp? Yer telling me that he can pull 880lbs one foot off the ground and get it there in one full second (lookup what one horsepower is if that confuses ya). Pretty impressive! In reality, I dont think the dyno is measuring 1.6; I think you're well within its margin of error and/or resolution.

well to start, when a dyno dynamics dyno doesnt have the car on it, you can more or less, let the rollers free roll or set a load rating. however during the dyno, in shootout mode, the load is computer controlled to allow no cheating, fudging, or whatever of the results. the design of this if i remember the explanation correctly is like a giant disc brake more or less.

i;ve already had the car run on a dynojet and dynapack and now dyno dynamics, thats my first and foremost starting point. those priors showed all around 170 WHP. so for a fact i know thats what the car has put out to the wheels on other dynos. i stated the dynapacks results in the begining of the post.

above you asked for percent of error margin, i am not sure if this has it, but heres the brochure thing from their site: http://www.dyno.com.au/dyno/controll...2WD450DSTRPage

some other readings i went through: http://www.enginelogics.com/dynod.html

http://www.redline.lt/magazine/spec-.../article/16/1/

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=95056



heres their forum, or A forum thats used for discussion, http://www.bmepfuelandtuning.com/php...e958538e3ad3f8 you may be able to ask questions there. i think you may have to sign up though...



heres a few more posts to check out in showing the same things on various cars from all the research i did before going out this time about the readings being lower than other dynos:

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=286440

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=88308

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=197929

From past tuning experiences in the j-body world, As long as you are using the same dyno to measure your hp gains from new mods, you will get valid results. hasnt steered me wrong yet.

as for the filter change, 4 runs were done with stock this was the highest of the 4 runs (sheet posted). turn off car, lift hood, change filter while talking about my next match/show coming up, after the switch to the K&N 4 more runs were done no turning off the car and waiting between runs. the 152.4 was the highest done with that change.

i'm literally using the dyno for tuning and registering gains of mods. once the diablo comes out, thats prob where i'll be going. considering they do the tuning for most all of Drift Alliance, the Falken Drift team, and have their own team, and still do many well known SCCA racers tuning there...over the years i trust their work. not really for ALL out comparisons of vehicle vs vehicle since none of us are really dynoing on the same dyno. which in most aspects since we arent using the same dynos, its almost impossible to compare results heads up as such.

granted you may have tested the same style filter a while back which i think i read the post way before today. its a tested ordeal that on the hemis 21hp was gained from a jet module. where as nearly every dyno test thats a before and after on the v6's have shown no gains and many show decent loses of 2-5whp and 8-10tq..... . you used a larger inertia roller if i remember right as well. one thing any dyno operator in the world will also conclude on is that some dynos are more accurate for tuning, others are more accurate for getting numbers, and there are many in between.

i dont feel v8 guys cant really compare many tests with v6 guys. another example is where the hammer HO on a v6 put out higher HP gains than many of the v8 guys have registered stock to intake change comparisons. naturally speaking it would seem the larger engine create more power gains. i know one did do 14whp, it might have been yours if it was the stock 300C.. but i can only show the gains i've gotten just the same. i hope anyone can respect em for what they are.

Hood was closed, but not full latched as the lil clippy wire for the timing reading was under the hood. and to boot, there was NO USE of any fans in the front of the car. during ANY of the runs. granted air flow was missing, i dont drive with the hood up, so the same applied for the dyno.

as for the dyno readings everyone i have talked to, read about, and called have all said the dynodynamics dyno reading will be decently lower than dynojet readings. hence some of the links above back that up. i already knew this far ahead of time. done the research. i can try and find out specifics on monday. either way 148.6 to 152.4 was the noted gain on this style of dyno. it showed a gain here, so with the difference on a dynojet that i've used. i just did the math. like said, the filter makes gains. granted it flows more air, which is at the cost of less filtration over a stock paper filter. it does the job and gets results.

[CoolVanilla]

Thats a lot of reading! I think I gathered that you feel your 5hp is valid. Cool deal! I've never run a V6 so I cant know.

But I think i also saw you say you ran each test four times, and then picked the highest from each set to compare? What were all four numbers for each run? Curious to see what the variance was from run to run.

PS: The Superflow we use makes both inertia and loaded mode available to us, as well as several sub modes within each. Each roller is an independent 400hp eddy current drum, capable of loading down with incredible precision anything even our strongest LXs can throw at it.

PPS: Not sure where you got the idea we showed a 21hp gain with the Jet. To the best of my knowledge our tests never showed any such thing. I do remember it richening things up, which may have been of benefit to some, but beyond that it was worth nuthin.

PPPS: I did read that brochure before posting, and took another look at your link. Still dont see it. Do you?

[Samoan Tsunami]

Thats a lot of reading! I think I gathered that you feel your 5hp is valid. Cool deal! I've never run a V6 so I cant know.

But I think i also saw you say you ran each test four times, and then picked the highest from each set to compare? What were all four numbers for each run? Curious to see what the variance was from run to run.

PS: The Superflow we use makes both inertia and loaded mode available to us, as well as several sub modes within each. Each roller is an independent 400hp eddy current drum, capable of loading down with incredible precision anything even our strongest LXs can throw at it.

PPS: Not sure where you got the idea we showed a 21hp gain with the Jet. To the best of my knowledge our tests never showed any such thing. I do remember it richening things up, which may have been of benefit to some, but beyond that it was worth nuthin.

PPPS: I did read that brochure before posting, and took another look at your link. Still dont see it. Do you?

yeah i been readin over the last few months on this...


how large is each roller drum? thats where the inertia effect i believe most speak of comes into play. the larger the drum, the more of a variable it can be, especially picking up smaller changes.

on the PPS, not you, it was a magazine, somewhere on the floor here. i can post the pages if you want when i get back later tonight or tommorow, sorta rushin.

PPPS, not offhand. like i said if its that much of an issue and its a rush to find it, email dyno dynamics. they can prob tell ya best. until monday i can just tell you exactly what i was told by Ray from mid-atlantic motorsports.

[CoolVanilla]

Oh their huge (see the pics). In fact, the bigger the better; more of the tire is in contact with the roller mimicking a truer to life scenario. Not to mention its considerably safer for a whole host of reasons, not the least of which is the stress on the tire is much more evenly distributed.

Don't really want to get into that with ya though. I'm fairly certain we wont see eye to eye on the mechanics of dyno operation and design. And since we're talking about relative changes here, it doesn't actually matter. Your system was consistent from run to run. So was mine. That's good enough.

Speaking of which, got those other 6 pulls numbers? Lets see 'em!

[Rev.Hammer]

Was the hood closed or open for your runs?

Lord that ghost still haunts me..

[Samoan Tsunami]

Oh their huge (see the pics). In fact, the bigger the better; more of the tire is in contact with the roller mimicking a truer to life scenario. Not to mention its considerably safer for a whole host of reasons, not the least of which is the stress on the tire is much more evenly distributed.

Don't really want to get into that with ya though. I'm fairly certain we wont see eye to eye on the mechanics of dyno operation and design. And since we're talking about relative changes here, it doesn't actually matter. Your system was consistent from run to run. So was mine. That's good enough.

Speaking of which, got those other 6 pulls numbers? Lets see 'em!

yeah i definately dont agree with some of that. granted i come from tuning sport compacts for a good bit, as long as theres sufficient contact surface and it grips well enough, dealing with size and the inertia potential, smaller almost always provides LESS of a variable. quick example, remember, the main reason snow tires are more narrow is to provide a smaller footprint, however more pressure in that smaller area. theres less chance for slip up to a certain degree. bigger is better in some cases, but when it comes to traction and tire contact patch, there is such thing as too much, which then starts to mess with rolling resistance. like said, not really new to dynos or tuning cars.

personally, the setup that dynapacks use is about as accurate of input as you will get. thats what i truly prefer as theres no "tire manipulation" variable. cant manipulate tire pressure, tire temp, etc. the hubs are bolted to the axle where the wheel would go, and beveled shafts are input into the machine. whatever kicks out to the axles are directly input to the machine. lemans uses these types well as indy and F1 at most major races. they dont tune engines to impress, but they tune small precise tweaks on "game day" so to speak

as far as "larger being better" refer to my first post, and the reason i chose to use this style dyno.... REASON "B" to be exact of my reasons. while you may have "both modes" as stated, the larger rollers have been proven to with physics in speaking about kinetic energy to not read measurements as precise, however it "calculates". that can be good or bad, or even-even depending on who you ask. just a thought, that could be the reason many of the V8 dynos done, do not show smaller increases and changes? maybe so, maybe not? i do know the engines of the v8 in just the intake manifold ALONE are not as intricate with different runners (short and long) and then theres a manifold tuning valve... theres many differences between the two...

the dyno dynamics dynos can support up to and well over 1000 whp. many of austrailia's tickford and holden cars are dynoed with em. and many of the drift cars built there with the RB26 clock over 1000whp and those cars are tuned there. i doubt contact patch and traction or slippage is an issue.

as for the printing every single run i did, as you can see, the highest base run printed that many sheets (5 total). 7 more runs, 35 sheets... i'm lucky enough to have been squeze in today after ray moving near 12-14 240SX's and 3 300ZX's out of the shop to get to the dyno in the rear. if you are interested in seeing them, contact mid-atlantic. they can prob email or fax em. i have no need to print every single run, nor do i have any need to lie. i'm not selling a product, not pushing any product, not a vendor, dont have a company for parts. just someone who gets whatever done and tries to help out. and being that i;ve already made plans to dyno after every single mod. if it makes a positive or negative effect, either way i'll post it.



if anyone is interested, heres a compilation post about dyno differences that covers many of the major types of dynos used. http://forums.jdmcentral.net/showthread.php?t=732 theres some good discussion near the bottom of the page as well.

all in all, what it boils down to, is seeing the gains made or lost. and tuning on the same exact dyno. i use em as a tuning tool, not really a braggin rights thing. also when people post dynos, def would be helpful to post what type of dyno used. i know you posted yours, as well as i posted mine, but many on here havent really been specified.

[Samoan Tsunami]

Lord that ghost still haunts me..

honestly, you really shouldnt let it bother you. realistically, how much of a difference would it really make.

it would be like myself worrying that i didnt have a fan or cooling air flow blowing into my radiator.

realistically, when we drive, air flow is flowing underneath the hood at speed. we arent racing nascar style with duct tape closing every seam, and the only air flow either passes to the sides, minimally under the car, or into the opening duct for the radiator. on street cars not really an issue.

i wouldnt let it bug ya, brah...

[CoolVanilla]

quick example, remember, the main reason snow tires are more narrow is to provide a smaller footprint, however more pressure in that smaller area. theres less chance for slip up to a certain degree. bigger is better in some cases, but when it comes to traction and tire contact patch, there is such thing as too much, which then starts to mess with rolling resistance. like said, not really new to dynos or tuning cars.

This is a great example of where I think things go wrong with your explanations. You're very right up until your conclusion of "theres less chance for slip up to a certain degree". This is not at all why a narrow tire is preferable in the snow. A narrow tire will tend to cut thru the snow to get to the pavement, where a larger tire will tend to ride up on the snow. Its got nothing to do with contact patch on the snow as it relates to traction on the snow. Its simply that a narrow tire tends to knife thru the snow. Your basis is sound. But your conclusion is simply wrong.

This summarizes my issue with your assertion the drop in is worth 5hp; again your data is sound but your concluding inappropriately. In the case of the snow tires, there data is out there for me to draw my own conclusion. In this case, you're not giving us the data we need to make my own minds up.

As for publishing all the data... well if you dont want to do that, just call them up and ask what the worst run was for each dataset. We dont need to see the charts (although that'd be cool to see an overlay on the graph). Just post up what they tell ya. We'll trust ya

If you plan to do this often (test various stuff and post results) IMHO folks here are more likely to draw more value from them if you give a complete picture of the results, and allow them to conclude for themselves. You haven't done that here.

[done]

honestly, you really shouldnt let it bother you. realistically, how much of a difference would it really make.

it would be like myself worrying that i didnt have a fan or cooling air flow blowing into my radiator.

realistically, when we drive, air flow is flowing underneath the hood at speed. we arent racing nascar style with duct tape closing every seam, and the only air flow either passes to the sides, minimally under the car, or into the opening duct for the radiator. on street cars not really an issue.

i wouldnt let it bug ya, brah...

The haunting is from the self styled critics who saw a picture of a test with the hood open and could not/would not read the text which stated that all reported tests were done with the hood closed. Many bytes have been killed in discussing this worthless picture.