Throttle Body Coolant Bypass Dyno Test
08-23-2005 | 02:38 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,076
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Car: 1982 Trans Am
Engine: LG4
Transmission: 200C
Axle/Gears: 3:73
Throttle Body Coolant Bypass Dyno Test
Not sure if this has been shown on the boards before, but I thought I'd post it.
Test was done on a 96 LT1.
http://www.ws6.com/mod-8.htm
http://www.ws6.com/mycar.htm
Test was done on a 96 LT1.
http://www.ws6.com/mod-8.htm
http://www.ws6.com/mycar.htm
Last edited by TransAm12sec; 08-23-2005 at 02:47 PM.
08-23-2005 | 02:42 PM
#3
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 7,015
Likes: 1
From: Schererville , IN
Car: 91 GTA, 91 Formula, 89 TTA
Engine: all 225+ RWHP
Transmission: all OD
Axle/Gears: Always the good ones
Interesting.
Now I would like to see it happen on an all aluminum intake setup like we have vs. thermoplastics the LS1 intake is made from.
somehow I am betting the gain will be almost non existant.
later
Jeremy
Now I would like to see it happen on an all aluminum intake setup like we have vs. thermoplastics the LS1 intake is made from.
somehow I am betting the gain will be almost non existant.
later
Jeremy
08-23-2005 | 02:53 PM
#4
Supreme Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,043
Likes: 3
From: San Diego
Car: 1994 Trans Am
Engine: LT1
Transmission: Auto
Axle/Gears: 3.23
3.8Trans Am, the test was on an aluminum LT1 intake, just like our TPI.
Btw, eventhough that site hasn't been updated in years, it is a very informative and thorough site for different mods & dynos. It's one of my bookmarks. He even dynoed an aluminum DS vs. a steel one. Very cool site.
Btw, eventhough that site hasn't been updated in years, it is a very informative and thorough site for different mods & dynos. It's one of my bookmarks. He even dynoed an aluminum DS vs. a steel one. Very cool site.
08-23-2005 | 07:00 PM
#5
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland Ohio
Car: Formula, a big red brick.
Engine: A Ford 351 Windsor... ?
Transmission: Dodge 727
This is really interesting....
http://www.ws6.com/mod-7.htm
What a stark contrast to our board's FAQ : https://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/faq/thirdgen.shtml
http://www.ws6.com/mod-7.htm
Here, the dyno shows a 16.6 horsepower and 14.6 ft/lbs torque difference between the stock fuel pressure (46psi) and 36psi with the LG Motorsports adjustable regulator. Actually, it was still making more power at 35psi than 36psi, but until I can measure my O2 sensors, I did not want to lean it out any further. The average gain here was 13.9 horsepower and 15.4 ft/lbs torque.
Q: What fuel pressure setting will give me the best performance?
A: The stock setting is 42 PSI. Much track testing has showed that any type of increase will greatly benefit both horse power and torque. Here's some dyno testing on a stock 350 motor which substantiates those claims:
42 PSI (stock) 46 PSI 50 PSI
RPM Torq HP Torq/diff HP/diff Torq/diff HP/diff
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2250 237.7 101.8 254.9/17.2 109.2/ 7.4 275.0/37.3 117.8/16.0
2500 241.7 115.1 262.1/20.4 124.8/ 9.7 283.3/41.6 134.9/19.8
2750 241.5 126.5 275.2/33.7 144.1/17.6 297.0/55.5 155.5/29.0
3000 237.1 135.4 278.2/41.1 158.9/23.5 305.5/68.4 174.5/39.1
3250 233.8 144.7 278.9/45.1 172.6/27.9 311.3/77.5 192.6/47.9
3500 241.0 160.6 278.2/37.2 185.4/24.8 309.5/68.5 206.3/45.7
3750 246.6 176.1 283.4/36.8 202.4/26.8 303.3/56.7 216.6/40.5
4000 250.4 190.7 278.3/27.9 212.0/21.3 298.0/47.6 227.0/36.3
4250 251.6 203.6 272.5/20.9 220.5/16.9 289.1/37.5 233.9/30.3
4500 253.5 217.2 257.3/ 4.2 220.5/ 3.3 277.0/23.5 237.3/20.1
4750 245.0 221.6 242.1/-2.9 219.0/-2.6 266.4/21.4 240.9/19.3
5000 227.6 216.7 225.0/-1.4 214.2/-2.5 237.8/10.2 226.4/ 9.7
It shows that by increasing the fuel pressure to 50 PSI, results in maximum torque increase of 58 ft-lbs (along with a much flatter torque curve) and a maximum horse power increase of 19 HP over stock. 46 PSI also provides a noticable increase which should work well for day-to-day street driving. An adjustable fuel pressure regulator (see Chap 5.2) is required to increase the fuel pressure.
A: The stock setting is 42 PSI. Much track testing has showed that any type of increase will greatly benefit both horse power and torque. Here's some dyno testing on a stock 350 motor which substantiates those claims:
42 PSI (stock) 46 PSI 50 PSI
RPM Torq HP Torq/diff HP/diff Torq/diff HP/diff
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2250 237.7 101.8 254.9/17.2 109.2/ 7.4 275.0/37.3 117.8/16.0
2500 241.7 115.1 262.1/20.4 124.8/ 9.7 283.3/41.6 134.9/19.8
2750 241.5 126.5 275.2/33.7 144.1/17.6 297.0/55.5 155.5/29.0
3000 237.1 135.4 278.2/41.1 158.9/23.5 305.5/68.4 174.5/39.1
3250 233.8 144.7 278.9/45.1 172.6/27.9 311.3/77.5 192.6/47.9
3500 241.0 160.6 278.2/37.2 185.4/24.8 309.5/68.5 206.3/45.7
3750 246.6 176.1 283.4/36.8 202.4/26.8 303.3/56.7 216.6/40.5
4000 250.4 190.7 278.3/27.9 212.0/21.3 298.0/47.6 227.0/36.3
4250 251.6 203.6 272.5/20.9 220.5/16.9 289.1/37.5 233.9/30.3
4500 253.5 217.2 257.3/ 4.2 220.5/ 3.3 277.0/23.5 237.3/20.1
4750 245.0 221.6 242.1/-2.9 219.0/-2.6 266.4/21.4 240.9/19.3
5000 227.6 216.7 225.0/-1.4 214.2/-2.5 237.8/10.2 226.4/ 9.7
It shows that by increasing the fuel pressure to 50 PSI, results in maximum torque increase of 58 ft-lbs (along with a much flatter torque curve) and a maximum horse power increase of 19 HP over stock. 46 PSI also provides a noticable increase which should work well for day-to-day street driving. An adjustable fuel pressure regulator (see Chap 5.2) is required to increase the fuel pressure.
08-26-2005 | 01:21 AM
#6
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,627
Likes: 3
From: Houston Area
Car: Faster
Engine: Than
Transmission: You!
You really can't go by any of that at all.
Every motor and condition of it's tune will ALL be different from one another.
The motor that gained power from adding fuel pressure was most likely running lean and needed the extra fuel to achieve maximum power for that combo.
The motor that gained power from decreasing fuel pressure was obviously richer than 13.0:1 AFR at WOT and needed to be leaned out some.
From what I've noticed, on all the bone stock TPI cars that I've worked on, my Wide-band o2 shows that most run in the 12.0 - 12.3:1 range at WOT (which is a little on the rich side), and those motors would have benefited from lowering the fuel pressure.
Just my $.02
Every motor and condition of it's tune will ALL be different from one another.
The motor that gained power from adding fuel pressure was most likely running lean and needed the extra fuel to achieve maximum power for that combo.
The motor that gained power from decreasing fuel pressure was obviously richer than 13.0:1 AFR at WOT and needed to be leaned out some.
From what I've noticed, on all the bone stock TPI cars that I've worked on, my Wide-band o2 shows that most run in the 12.0 - 12.3:1 range at WOT (which is a little on the rich side), and those motors would have benefited from lowering the fuel pressure.
Just my $.02
09-06-2005 | 02:55 AM
#7
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Engine: L98 5.7
It's my understanding, that increasing fuel pressure DOES NOT add anyfuel, the computer will prevent that from happening. It improved fuel atomization and more air gets between the fuel particles. The computer sees the car running rich, and makes the injector pulse shorter, thus adding the same amount of fuel, just in less time.
correct me if im wrong.
correct me if im wrong.
Trending Topics
09-06-2005 | 10:08 AM
#9
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland Ohio
Car: Formula, a big red brick.
Engine: A Ford 351 Windsor... ?
Transmission: Dodge 727
Correct - once in PE the computer ignores the O2, and uses preset lookup tables to determine injector pulse width.
If you aren't into prom burning (and I'm not) the FPR is a good place to turn to in an attempt to dial into that optimal a/f ratio. Controlling both the pulse width and FP would be the optimal, but some of us are still in the stone age...
If you aren't into prom burning (and I'm not) the FPR is a good place to turn to in an attempt to dial into that optimal a/f ratio. Controlling both the pulse width and FP would be the optimal, but some of us are still in the stone age...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
1992 Trans Am
History / Originality
27
05-10-2023 07:19 PM
