Feel free to save these.

First one is the horsepower and torque curves, with the dissapointing peak numbers x( It is the shape of the curve is what is important, notice the HP stays flat almost all the way to redline ;) it has to go beyond redline before it drops off. I think this shows the mods are doing something, since there isn't a significant dropoff in actual horsepower until after 7000 rpms.

Still, it would be nice if the torque didn't drop off so much, (if it didn't I'm be making more horsepower) cams are defenitely in the future.



The second one is HP versus air/fuel ratio. It's a bit lower than I would expect, but this makes sense since this is a 4th gear pull, and my car is tuned for 3rd gear. (the car runs leaner in higher gears, due to more load on the engine)

This isn't a problem at all since my car never sees redline in 4th gear. (That is, as Bill reminded me, unless Marie is driving the car. I'll explain later ;) )

add more mods, get more ponies :P

I don't see how the graphs could help you, if those aren't even your real numbers. The Air/Fuel graph could, but there's no way you have 100HP so i just don't see how the graphs help. Maybe i'm missing something, if i am, sorry.

i think he assumes that the dyno is off by the same percentage no matter what the RPM, so he still gets an idea of "when" he makes power, just not how much. the graph should look the same but shifted up a bit on a better dyno.

just remember: all dynos are different. the one at adrenalin (i've been there, it's a really nice shop) is designed for AWD, since it's mainly a Audi and VW shop. i've got lots of pictures and movies from when i was there on 20 april 2002 at an audi meet at http://129.63.64.70:2002/Audi . here's his dyno sheet...

Hey Todd, I looked at my dynos and my horsepower is also perfectly flat from around 6k rpm and up. Is there an easy way to move this power band lower (since my automatic can't take advantage of horsepower in higher rpms)? Should I be advancing my cam gears more?

>add more mods, get more ponies :P


dude hes already the fastest nt on here

either way more mods = more ponies :P

Soldier, that's the plan, always more mods. :) I'll get more power out of that engine, I hope :)

Mishift, SPL_Eclipse answered your question. The ABSOLUTE numbers don't mean anything, but how they relate to eachother over the whole run does. (i.e. the shape of the curve, I'm not getting a huge drop in power right after 6000 rpms)

NER, yes that is more of an AWD specific dyno, you are right. They were a good bunch of guys there, very knowledgable. They told me the dyno is usually %17 lower than a dyno jet, but that it gives very consistant numbers, good for tuning and comparing different modifications.

Marcus, for more low end, the recipe would be to retard your intake cam. If you advance it you will make more top end, retarding it should give you more bottom end. (with retarding the intake cam, the intake valve will open up later, reducing the valve overlap with the exhaust valve which will give you better cylinder filling at low RPMS, but will cause the car not to breathe as well at high rpms)

As for the exhaust, you would want to advance it for more bottom end, retard the exhaust for more top end, but I think moving the exhaust might not be a good idea since that is where the cam angle sensor is.

I think since the exhaust cam has the cam angle sensor, you can't move it around much, if at all, without the computer disagreeing with you. The intake cam doesn't have a sensor on it so there is more room to manuver with it.

Also, the magazine that dynoed the cams for our cars reported every time they touched the exhaust cam they lost HP.

so what are your actual hp #'s and TQ???

Good question, I wish I had an answer for you.

Your guess is as good as mine. However much HP it takes for a car (with driver) weighing 2880 lbs to go 15.413 inthe 1/4 mile on a 45 degree day.

How did you tune your cam gears without being on a dyno???

>Marcus, for more low end, the recipe would be to retard your
>intake cam. If you advance it you will make more top end,
>retarding it should give you more bottom end. (with
>retarding the intake cam, the intake valve will open up
>later, reducing the valve overlap with the exhaust valve
>which will give you better cylinder filling at low RPMS, but
>will cause the car not to breathe as well at high rpms)
>
>As for the exhaust, you would want to advance it for more
>bottom end, retard the exhaust for more top end, but I think
>moving the exhaust might not be a good idea since that is
>where the cam angle sensor is.

Thanks Todd, I never thought that retarding the intake cam might help. I will set the exhaust back to 0 and try that out now (just finished a midterm so I need something to mess around with).

Im kinda lost. So, those are not correct Hp and T #'s, right? I thought stock 2g's base at like 117 at the wheels. Plus you run like mid 15's. Is there any other way to get more accurate hp and t readings?

You're right our cars with a manual are around 117-119 or so at the wheels. The way to get more accurate HP and torque numbers to the wheels would be to dyno on a different machine that would yield more realistic numbers.

Also, to answer the question you asked Stickman, I tuned my cam gears using A. information from the magazine that dynoed the cam gears as reported by DSM_Tuner, B. research and advice from a racing/engine expert, C. deductive reasoning...

and D. I use the drag strip as my dyno. If my times drop and I can count out the weather or launching, then I am doing something right.

DSM_Tuner called up the magazine to get more details, and he reported that the magazine tuners lost power every time they touched the exhaust camshaft. The settings the magazine used (damn which magazine was it? I keep forgetting) to get the dyno numbers they printed were +7 degrees advance on the intake cam, and they left the exhaust cam at 0, but the car did not idle too well at those settings.

Also, I did research on the subject of cam gear tuning (what adjusting the cam gears in different directions would do for your power band), and asked an old experienced racer friend of mine. For the intake cam advancing the cam gives more top end power, retarding it give more bottom end power. I need more top end power so I advanced that intake cam. The information I was able to find out, the advice I was given, and the results from the magazine seem to agree with each other.

And, I was given advice to leave the exhaust cam alone since it has the cam angle sensor on it, and the stock computer would be able to tell the exhaust cam is adjusted differently and MIGHT run in a way which will offset any gain tuning the exhaust cam would normally give (which, byt he way, would be changing the degrees of index inthe opposite direction of the intake cam).

And, once again, the advice I was given AND the results from the magazine that DSM_Tuner was able to find out seem to agree with each other.

Of course, I am assuming that the engine the magazine tested and my engine are similar enough where the same adjustments would yield the same results. I know it has been said every car is different and what works for one might not work for another, but I think that 95% of engines without internal modifications are similar enough where you can assume they operate consistently and identically, so a cam gear setting that helps one engine should help another. I think it is a reasonable assumption, and at the very least that assumption gives you somewhere to start from.

What I did was I advanced the intake cam about as far as I could go and still have a good idle (I could probably go further and still have a decent idle but haven't tried it), took it to the drag strip and the time dropped.

It was the only thing differnt about the car, so it must have done something as I've gotten the same 60' times before, and I've run on cold days before, but never saw 15.4s before.