correction to Truckster

Submitted: Tuesday, Feb 11, 2003 at 23:55
ThreadID: 3338 Views:2126 Replies:5 FollowUps:7
This Thread has been Archived
Truckster. Your reply to my claim that my 1HZ makes 1000 ft/lbs got me curious. So today I returned to the workshop that tested my engine and queried their figures. They stood by them but I was still doubtful, so I phoned a friend who has a factory turbo'd multi valve 1HD-T (or whatever it is) in his 80 series (the engine has also had some pump and boost mods done) and has recently had the engine tested by some other crowd. His engine is developing 172 hp and 1110 Nm of torque. Therefore my claim of 1356 Nm for my 1HZ is obviously wrong. Now I'm going to have to go through the whole precedure again.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Truckster - Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 11:10

Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 11:10
Thats amazing!

The new V10 VW Touraeg the world's most powerful mass-market diesel, a V10 bi-turbo delivering a massive 750 Nm of torque and 230 kW of power, the Touareg is both luxurious and a full-blooded off-road vehicle.


and

Patrol’s stunning new 4.8 litre petrol engine with Valve Timing Control delivers an awesome 185kW of power and 420 Nm of torque.

and
http://www.marks4wd.com/misc.html
CHEVY 454SS V8
7.5ltr PETROL

190KW@4000 550nm@2400

IHD-T 6cyl
4.1ltr
DIESEL TURBO
115KW@3600
357NM@1800

I want your calculator!!!!!!!!

AnswerID: 12956

Follow Up By: Truckster - Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 11:12

Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 11:12
Also from a mate who is a Yota god


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
latest 1HDT-FTE in 100 is 145kw and 420nm flywheel
1hz is 96kw and 296nm flywheel
1KZ-TE is 100kw and 350nm flywheel....and in prado which is 500kg lighter than a 1hz cruiser
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0
FollowupID: 7585

Follow Up By: Derek - Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 12:03

Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 12:03
Truckster. I find those figures I quoted as amazing too. But I've seen the dyno printout and there is no disputing it. The mob that did the mods and the dyno test are Brisbane Turbo and Tuning Centre at Wooloongabba. They just had an article done on them in issue 49, 2003 yearbook, January of 4wd Monthly. They fiddled with the pump and fitted an adjustable waste gate which they set at 13lbs boost (the car already had a 3" system). Regardless of the figures, the car goes like the clappers. I've followed it on several trips (him laden, me empty) and I can't even get close to him on the ranges let alone keep up. Suzuki Viagra made a posting recently which you were involved with and I think he may be right......dynos are like tyre pressure gauges in that they can become inaccurate! Copya.
0
FollowupID: 7588

Follow Up By: Truckster - Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 12:09

Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 12:09
Not your fault!!!!!! Its the Dyno thats full of crap!

Post that on the 80 list and you will have people pounding yoru door down to buy the car for $100,000's.!!!
0
FollowupID: 7589

Reply By: David - Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 13:56

Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 13:56
"Torque" is turning power ie: it's multiplied by gearing. I suspect they forgot to divide the figure by the Dif ratio... or something along those lines.
The standard nonturbo Nissan TD42 puts out 264Nm@2000rpm. -at the flywheel.
If the torque figures were real everybody would want one, including the truckies............................ and me!
AnswerID: 12967

Follow Up By: Truckster - Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 14:00

Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 14:00
correct.

also another one


http://www.macktrucks.com.au/trucks/index.html

Mack truck... 8.3ltr motor...... designed for torque.

250 hp at 2,200 rpm with peak torque of 1,085 Nm (800 lbs ft) at 1,300 rpm

300 hp at 2,200 rpm with peak torque of 1,288 Nm (950 lbs ft) at 1,300 rpm
0
FollowupID: 7593

Reply By: tod - Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 14:13

Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003 at 14:13
Derek

From those figures you stated off the dyno something appears to be incorrect. I don't doubt that's what the print out reads but something appears to have gone a miss somewhere. That is a lot of torque for one of those engines. Ring another reputable dyno mob and query the figures with them. Like a doctor get a second opinion.
AnswerID: 12970

Reply By: desert - Thursday, Feb 13, 2003 at 16:32

Thursday, Feb 13, 2003 at 16:32
Derek, don't confuse dyno chassis readings with engine flywheel readings, that's apples compared to bananas. Also, dyno's vary in their readouts. Some are "tractive Newtons", others are Newtons and others Newton metres. Then you have to factor in comparisons of vehicles that have the chassis readings (at the wheels) not taking into account, wheel and tyre sizes and final drive ratio's. The only way to compare two vehicles is to do it on the same dyno at the same day.
AnswerID: 13049

Reply By: Slunnie - Thursday, Feb 13, 2003 at 23:58

Thursday, Feb 13, 2003 at 23:58
Tap, tap, tap!

I will post it again...........

Engine dyno results as used by the factory are not the same as the chassis dynos used by shops. They are not comparable.

The figures you have are more than likely correct as they are measured at the back wheels, and not at the engines flywheel. If you put the VW thing on the dyno it will probably make 100kw and 6000Nm, both figures at the wheels (not the flywheel)

I'm looking right here at the dynamometer graph of power to the road for a TD5 with upgraded chip. The figures read 63kw to the road, with the preupgrade as being 44kw. Now std they produce 101kw at the flywheel, and the upgrade has been calculated at 142kw at the flywheel.

Torque for the upgrade was shown on the dynamometer as being 2500Nm at the wheels, and 1600Nm at the wheels for a non-upgrade. The standard vehicle produces 300Nm of torque at the flywheel, and the upgrade has been calculated as 469Nm.

The figures you see on the dyno at the wheels will always show less power and more torque than the manufacturers figures which are produced from the flywheel. This is due to the losses in the drive train and gearing. The chassis dyno will only give you a set of comparitive figures showing before and after results, and will not give a comparison to the factory figures at all.

With regards to comparing to your mates turbo diesel LC - you can't do it like that. Dyno results change with the weather. Your mates LC was on a different dyno, on a different day and probably in a different gear with different gearing whilst on the dyno - and so will give a set of results that bear absolutely no relevance or compatibility to yours. Don't forget also to change 172hp into Kw.

I wouldn't waste my money and have it done again, but use that as a yardstick for any other tuning or modifications you get done.

Regards
Slunnie
AnswerID: 13081

Follow Up By: Derek - Friday, Feb 14, 2003 at 18:58

Friday, Feb 14, 2003 at 18:58
Slunnie, thanks for your input. I was aware that ambient temperature and other factors could effect the readings of a dyno and that not all dynos will read exactly the same but I did not expect to see such a huge discrepancy. I also knew that hp and torque put out at the flywheel was different to that produced at the wheels. I've been told that a general rule of thumb, is to allow for a 33% loss of power at the wheels compared to the flywheel. By the time I read your posting I had already gone and got a second opinion on my engine. The hp was down a little from 85 to 83 and the torque had dropped from 1000ft/lbs to814. When you compare this to my friends turbo'd and modified cruiser, my naturally constipated 1hz is making the same torque and half the horsepower. This can't be right and as you say, one of the dynos is reading incredible wrong. Anyway the subject has been flogged to death so I'll leave it at that. If you want to add more I'm only to happy to listen. See ya.
0
FollowupID: 7679

Follow Up By: Slunnie - Friday, Feb 14, 2003 at 22:38

Friday, Feb 14, 2003 at 22:38
Thats a big change in torque. Did they do the second test in the same gear as the first?
Slunnie
0
FollowupID: 7693

Follow Up By: Derek - Friday, Feb 14, 2003 at 23:13

Friday, Feb 14, 2003 at 23:13
Slunnie. Yes they did. In fact I got to sit in the passengers seat while the test was done. Awesome!Seeing as this thread is starting to get messy data wise, I'll give you all the figures I have and maybe you'll see why I'm skeptical. I've done it up here at my desk in table form, it's easier to understand then. Here goes.
Jacko's turbo GXL 1st test:- 127 hp (95kw)
572 ft/lbs (775Nm)
After mods and tinkering:- 172 hp (128 Kw)
819 ft/lbs (1110 Nm)
Now for my n/a 1HZ with extractors, pipework, Uni Filter and reco'd injectors and 166,000ks.
Workshop A (June) 85 hp (63 Kw)
1000 ft/lbs (1356 Nm)
Workshop B (today) 83 hp (62 Kw)
814 ft/lbs (1104 Nm)
The second workshop's machine was more modern and the owner spoke quite confidently. I received the data in both a table and graph form. He expected a little more power for what had been done to the engine but was happy with the torque figure. He advised me to get the timing checked and so I went to the injection mob who did the injectors. The owner said he could adjust the pump to give more fuel but he was very much against it but he could easily check the timing and adjust it if necessary. It's booked in for next Wednesday. He also said he could pull the pump off and check the delivery rate etc but that would cost around $400 and he doubted he would find the delivery wrong. So for the moment we're going for a timing check and if it's correct then I'm going to have to live with the lack of power. The only solace I get is my neighbour has just bought a petrol 100 series and estimates he uses 20 litres per 100 kms. I'm getting at least 50% better than that. Have a good week end. Derek.
0
FollowupID: 7697

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)