Rolling Road Day Graphs

[M5pilot]

Hi All,

Rolling road day graphs:

Toby Unna



Steve Kelly (E28 535i)



RIC (E30 320iS ith Carbon Airbox / Alpha N)



Mark Wilson ( E30 318iS with Chip)



Malcolm Webster (E30 320i with 2.7)



Jamie Myles (E28 528i)



David Oakshott (E30 2.7)



Barry Sheward (e30 325i with 42k)



A Billingham (E28 535i)



Karan Punni (E30 with S38 3.6 M5 Engine)




Thanks
Sal

[SCOTT325SE]

Sal, I assume that those are Flywheel(first) graphs and 'at the wheels' (second) graphs yes?

[oakey]

^yup.

Tanks Sal.
Have to do it again soon

[MickyDojoh]

Some nice figures there guys

[daimlerman]

A grand day out!!

[d6dph]

Karan's car is a monster, That's some serious grunt in an E30!

Nice work Sal

[ste]

Some cracking results there.

[e21Jason]

Hi Nice work

I done a quick table to compare engines and benchmark the outputs & trans losses

Jason

Engine BHP F BHP W Loss %Loss BHP/Litre
m30 turbo 295.6 243.6 52 17.6 84.5
m30 194 155.3 38.7 19.9 55.4
s14 2.0l 171.8 142 29.8 17.3 85.9
m42 129.4 105 24.4 18.9 71.9
m20 2.7 178.3 141.3 37 20.8 66.0
M30 2.8 184.8 146.9 37.9 20.5 66.0
m20 2.7 205.7 165.1 40.6 19.7 76.2
M20 2.5 172.7 136.4 36.3 21.0 69.1
M30 3.5 213.7 173 40.7 19.0 61.1
S38 3.6 296.7 244.3 52.4 17.7 82.4

[daimlerman]

What makes the transmission losses vary?

[ShepsEvo3]

What makes the transmission losses vary?

Oooo... don't go there!

[daimlerman]

Hoped to start a debate,not a fight!! I was running ATF in the gearbox but only gained a mid position on losses.The lowest losses are against the highest powered cars...

[ShepsEvo3]

Hoped to start a debate,not a fight!!

Who's fighting? It was a light hearted comment

[ChrisBarns]

The lowest losses are against the highest powered cars...

I'm at work so haven't time to think about this properly but wouldn't that be what you'd expect as losses are expressed as a %. Standard gearbox has same friction in each car but with a more powerful engine loses will be a smaller percentage?

[daimlerman]

Sounds logical....

[e21Jason]

Hi

If you look at the figure 19% is average with a range of 17 to 20% for the losses, and it tends to drop on bigger power cars.

Jason

[Turbo-Brown]

YIKES!

Does this wanna run slightly leaner?!!

[bss325i]

Most pleased with my result and proof that a standard (has made 171bhp on 2 different dyno without the ITG) late low comp M20B25 can make 170bhp!

[Jhonno]

low Karan's torque curve! nice and flat!

[Gunni]

YIKES!

Does this wanna run slightly leaner?!!

This is totally fine, as this is a high strung 2.0, so at WOT at low rpm it´s still not opening the afm at all, the load is minute to say the least.

I´m sure if the duty on the injectors would have been logged it would have shown how little air is going through, or the Voltage from the AFM.

[Demlotcrew]

^ Gunni it doesnt have a air flow meter!

Its mapped wrong at a guess.

Andrew

[Gunni]

^ Gunni it doesnt have a air flow meter!

Its mapped wrong at a guess.

Andrew

It doesn´t matter that much,
normal chips/tuning shows high 15-16´s at very low rpm and then gradually moves to 13.5-12.5ish depending on car at WOT.

You must understand that WOT on a 2.0car that is about 4k away from beeing on cam isn´t a dangerous thing.

This is where engine load and fuel requirement tuning understanding shows.
I would have tried 15s down to 12.5 after it got on cam.

[Demlotcrew]

Not a S14, on wot they show 12-14 all through the rev range.

This 320is is running very lean! I think it might need a few tweaks on the old MAXX

I would have liked a steady 12.3-13.5 as thats what S14s respond to best. (mines is 12.9 )

Andrew

[reggid]

^ Gunni it doesnt have a air flow meter!

Its mapped wrong at a guess.

Andrew

It doesn´t matter that much,
normal chips/tuning shows high 15-16´s at very low rpm and then gradually moves to 13.5-12.5ish depending on car at WOT.

You must understand that WOT on a 2.0car that is about 4k away from beeing on cam isn´t a dangerous thing.

This is where engine load and fuel requirement tuning understanding shows.
I would have tried 15s down to 12.5 after it got on cam.

while agree its not dangerous the torque curve shows issues below 3500rpm (unless it wasn't fully unleashed until 3500rpm).

The most impressive result is oakey's 2.7 the torque below 3.5k matches a 3.6L S38......a standard head and cam will do that and peter off quickly so don't over cam it oakey in the chase for topend.

[Turbo-Brown]

18:1 though?!

It might not be consuming much air down there, but the air that is going in needs fuel going to match the throttle opening!

[drifty325i]

Awesome thanks for posting! whats Karens car run in the 1/4? Thats almost what mine will push at the wheels

[Gunni]

18:1 though?!

It might not be consuming much air down there, but the air that is going in needs fuel going to match the throttle opening!

Why?
The air amount and fuel are so low at a relatively low air temp that when compressed it CAN´T detonate without stupid timing it can´t ping either.
worst comes to worst he´d get a miss fire.

Air flow / Engine size = Load.

When you have a VIPER engine gulping in as much air as this S14B20 can do at max rpm and WOT, the viper engine does not need 12.5:1 afr. As the airflow is relative to engine size.

Throttle POS and manifold pressure isn´t really the actual load points.
Air flow always is though,
That´s why you almost always need a complete remap if you change a cam, intake or exhaust in a MAP/TPS system.
But with a MAF system, you would just have to adjust the now higher optainable flow rates.

As 100kg/min (let´s say 2v on he MAF) will always be the same load to the same engine as it´s size hasn´t changed
Now if you change the engine(cam for instance) the 100kg/min maybe gotten at a lower throttle pos so you still want the same amount of fuel in,
the ecu still looks up 100kg/min at the same rpm and gives the required fuel, same with timing
This is the reason OEM is most often or not always now MAF based.

But I will agree that I would have tuned it richer. basically at the leanest point possible on a dyno without loosing power.

[ShepsEvo3]

18:1 though?!

It might not be consuming much air down there, but the air that is going in needs fuel going to match the throttle opening!

Agree'd. way too lean for WOT, is definately loosing power there with 18:1, should be more like 14.7:1 or less at those RPM's and certainly by 3000 I would say 13.5/13.2:1 for optimum power. All S14's I've mapped so far have "liked" these AFR's, no less on WOT.

[bss325i]

What is WOT?

[exup]

wide open throttle

[bss325i]

Thanks.

[oakey]

The most impressive result is oakey's 2.7 the torque below 3.5k matches a 3.6L S38......a standard head and cam will do that and peter off quickly so don't over cam it oakey in the chase for topend.

Could you explain to me (in idiots terms ) how the characteristics of my engine will change and why with a cam please? ( I've never had it explained to me properly before)