Comptech S/C dyno chart
12-10-2000, 04:58 PM
#41
What other bits and pieces come with the kit?
Fuel pump, airbox, Paxton Novi 1000, brackets, belt, bottom pulley, FPR. What about electronics? Does it control timing? Does it have some form of wastegate?
Fuel pump, airbox, Paxton Novi 1000, brackets, belt, bottom pulley, FPR. What about electronics? Does it control timing? Does it have some form of wastegate?
12-11-2000, 07:49 AM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gardena
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
btw, to clear up some of the confusion, it did lose a little power from 2500-3000rpm over stock.
Its unclear exactly how much power it lost since I cant see a blown up view of the dyno sheet. I'm guessing no more than 5hp or so. Nothing that a Mugen header cant fix.
Regardless of low end power loss, just looking at beyond 6k rpm its amazing. Perhaps too much power to achieve optimal lap times at most race tracks though.
Ben
Its unclear exactly how much power it lost since I cant see a blown up view of the dyno sheet. I'm guessing no more than 5hp or so. Nothing that a Mugen header cant fix.
Regardless of low end power loss, just looking at beyond 6k rpm its amazing. Perhaps too much power to achieve optimal lap times at most race tracks though.
Ben
12-11-2000, 10:18 AM
#46
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ben
As I sit and look at my dyno sheet there no significant power loss with the supercharger. There is maybe and I mean maybe a 2hp difference at approx. 2750 rpm but given the different times and conditions of the runs I can't imaging that it would be statistically significant. I'm sure with repeated runs any difference seen would "come out in the wash."
As I sit and look at my dyno sheet there no significant power loss with the supercharger. There is maybe and I mean maybe a 2hp difference at approx. 2750 rpm but given the different times and conditions of the runs I can't imaging that it would be statistically significant. I'm sure with repeated runs any difference seen would "come out in the wash."
12-11-2000, 04:33 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gardena
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim, your looking at the same dyno sheet that I'm looking at.
I mentioned approx 5hp or so loss between 2500-3000 from my interpretation of the dyno sheet. As for the fact that the runs were 49 hours apart, perhaps there could be a variance that would make this assumption invalid. However, its all an assumption. Judging on how Superchargers work and the parasitic drag factor, it is very possible that it lost a little HP from 2500-3000 as the dyno chart indicates. Its so minimal that its not really a factor, I just thought I'd clear up some of the misconceptions and questions people were asking about low rpm power and possible hp loss.
As for viewing the dyno chart and approximating exactly how much hp was lost, you'll notice that the chart has both hp and torque in increments of 10. Looking at torque in particular its more clear of the loss. You'll notice that at 2800 rpm there was the most loss of torque recorded on the dyno (perhaps more was lost under 2400rpm when they run started, but that would all be speculation). At 2800rpm, looking closely you'll notice that Supercharger run was at 105ft/lbs of torque. The stock run was clearly well over 110ft/lbs of torque here, reading approx 114-115ft/lbs. If you look closely at your dyno print out this will be very clear.
There was a formula to determine torque from HP, I forget the formula but if we were to plug in these numbers for torque we'd see a more exact hp difference at this rpm. However, it can easily be interpreted from the graph that there was a 8-12ft/lbs loss of torque at 2800 rpm (allowing 2ft/lbs margin of error). This 8-12ft/lbs loss is far beyond the inaccuracies of the Technodyne dyno, which I recall is accurate to within a couple hp.
These facts lead me to believe strongly that there was a loss of power at low rpm, specifically at 2800rpm.
This is not a terribly bad thing, as the SC gives more power than any S2000 could ever need or handle (in fact I'm concerned that the car will lose its balanced nature out at the track with such a setup). Regardless, you should be stunned at your results as they are amazing. For such little boost, your putting out monster HP numbers.
Ben
I mentioned approx 5hp or so loss between 2500-3000 from my interpretation of the dyno sheet. As for the fact that the runs were 49 hours apart, perhaps there could be a variance that would make this assumption invalid. However, its all an assumption. Judging on how Superchargers work and the parasitic drag factor, it is very possible that it lost a little HP from 2500-3000 as the dyno chart indicates. Its so minimal that its not really a factor, I just thought I'd clear up some of the misconceptions and questions people were asking about low rpm power and possible hp loss.
As for viewing the dyno chart and approximating exactly how much hp was lost, you'll notice that the chart has both hp and torque in increments of 10. Looking at torque in particular its more clear of the loss. You'll notice that at 2800 rpm there was the most loss of torque recorded on the dyno (perhaps more was lost under 2400rpm when they run started, but that would all be speculation). At 2800rpm, looking closely you'll notice that Supercharger run was at 105ft/lbs of torque. The stock run was clearly well over 110ft/lbs of torque here, reading approx 114-115ft/lbs. If you look closely at your dyno print out this will be very clear.
There was a formula to determine torque from HP, I forget the formula but if we were to plug in these numbers for torque we'd see a more exact hp difference at this rpm. However, it can easily be interpreted from the graph that there was a 8-12ft/lbs loss of torque at 2800 rpm (allowing 2ft/lbs margin of error). This 8-12ft/lbs loss is far beyond the inaccuracies of the Technodyne dyno, which I recall is accurate to within a couple hp.
These facts lead me to believe strongly that there was a loss of power at low rpm, specifically at 2800rpm.
This is not a terribly bad thing, as the SC gives more power than any S2000 could ever need or handle (in fact I'm concerned that the car will lose its balanced nature out at the track with such a setup). Regardless, you should be stunned at your results as they are amazing. For such little boost, your putting out monster HP numbers.
Ben
12-11-2000, 09:50 PM
#48
The only time my S is ever doing 3K is for a fraction of a second in between idle and 5K.
Anyone who drives the S around the 3K mark probably wouldn't be interested in the SC, or even the S for that matter.
Anyone who drives the S around the 3K mark probably wouldn't be interested in the SC, or even the S for that matter.
12-12-2000, 08:15 AM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Completely agree. I could care less whats happening at that low RPM. When I look at the graph I see more torque in all the areas that i'm driving. A 25ft/lb increase below 5k rpms <should> be very noticable, no?
I do agree that this thing will potentially be a handful!
Barry
I do agree that this thing will potentially be a handful!
Barry