768rwhp QMP Formula...LOTS of Info, Methanol vs No Methanol Dyno Results
02-05-2004, 02:19 AM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlestown, Indiana
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
768rwhp QMP Formula...LOTS of Info, Methanol vs No Methanol Dyno Results Had a Dyno Tuning appointment tonight, so I decided that while I was there, might as well put some theories to rest.
NOTE: First of all, I only played with LS1Edit, fuel and Methanol tonight. Did not change the boost settings from the previous dyno runs, but we did bolt on the ET Streets to eliminate the tirespin (well, sort-of...).
Problem Surfaced Tonight
The clutch started slipping badly. Which made it near impossible to make regular dyno pulls. I had to start the pulls at 4000rpm's so the clutch wouldn't slip as badly. Anything lower and it would just slam against the rev-limiter before making full boost.
The best pull came near the end of the night when I turned the boost up to setting "3" (14lbs boost,the same setting as when we made 749rwhp before). However, it did the same thing again, spun the tires. But it still pulled 768rwhp/792rwtq with A/F peaking at 11.0:1 @ 6100 (MUCH safer than the previous 749rwhp pull).
FWIW, we made 14 pulls tonight and using the methanol, never made less than 720rwhp @ 11lbs of boost. The average pull tonight was 730-745rwhp. (For those counting, we now have 126 dyno pulls on the stock engine, and at least 25 of those are over 700rwhp)
I also video taped the gauges and the car during a couple of the pulls. I taped the Boost gauge, Wideband O2, and Fuel Pressure gauges all at the same time.
Fuel pressure held steady at 52-54lbs (kinda hard to see clearly) from beginning to end. In-Car Wideband was actually showing a little leaner than the Dynojet WB. (when the Dyno showed 11.5, the in-car WB showed 11.8) *Both use the same part number WB sensor.
Methanol vs No Methanol:
**The setup; 5 gallons of Turbo Blue (104octane), 5 gallons of C16 (118octane), Straight Methanol. EXACT same tuning as we were using last week.
I really hung my ***** out there for this one. This test was actually the only test we planned on doing tonight, but things were going well, so that's why we kept making pulls and playing with LS1Edit.
Anyway, the very first thing I did was made a pull on 10lbs of boost with methanol, and made 696rwhp/723rwtq with an A/F of 12.2:1 @ 5800.
Next, I held my breath and turned the Methanol Injection OFF. I was actually amazed at what happened to the A/F ratio. So without Methanol, it made 664rwhp/702rwtq with an A/F ratio of 13.8:1 @ 5800...and it was actually even leaner (14.6:1) @ 5100! I can't believe it didn't blow up! Another interesting thing was the fact that the EGT was the same on BOTH pulls...1410 degrees peak. It's amazing what I'm willing to do all in the name of research....okay, maybe "amazing" isn't the right word....how about "dumb"?
FWIW, both of those pulls were made starting from 4000rpm's. We also determined that during a full pull (2500-6000 rpm's, we used less than 4oz of Methanol, half as much as I had originally thought...potent stuff, huh?)
So to sum it up about the Methanol, I would *guess* that it must be worth probably 40-50rwhp or so at this level. Even though it showed a gain of exactly 30rwhp, I would have to assume that "Lean is Mean" and we would have probably made more along the lines of 650rwhp at a safe A/F. Either way, I think I can conclude it definitely wasn't worth 150HP, as some might have thought, but WELL WORTH the investment.
By the end of the night, we were able to SAFELY tune the car to a consistent 740-750rwhp at a nearly perfectly flat (literally) 11.1:1 A/F all the way to 6200.
Other Things We Learned
1. The SPEC Stage 3-I clutch can't handle the 800+rwtq. Stage 5, here we come.
2. We need some fat guys to sit in the hatch next time we dyno.
3. We may be out of turbo! I'm using the small housing T76 (and not the new GTQ series either). We turned up the boost another lb after we pulled 768rwhp, and the HP stayed the same. I calculated the turbo at being able to make 900fwhp, deducted 15% driveline loss, and came up with 765rwhp. So who knows...we may be ready for a custom turbo now!
4. With good tuning, we still haven't found the HP limits of the stock engine. Do you realize that this thing has to be making over 850fwhp?? That's nearly triple the factory HP rating! Cool. Supra who?
5. Methanol appears to affect A/F ratio, but not Exhaust Gas Temps. (maybe some of you already new this, but I didn't)
6. Even ET Streets won't keep the tires planted on the street from a 60mph punch. Even at 11lbs of boost, flooring it in 3rd gear from 60 only changes your direction towards the guardrail.
7. Ran it on the street afterwards from a 4th gear start (where it actually did get traction), and A/F stayed constant and steady at 11.8-11.9:1, even at over 150mph. ...Kids, don't try this at home!
8. This engine belongs in the Smithsonian (Sp?).
Yes, I have dyno sheets. No, I probably won't be able to post them until this weekend. Yes, the video turned out well. No, I probably won't be able to post it until even later. (still learning how our new website works)
NOTE: First of all, I only played with LS1Edit, fuel and Methanol tonight. Did not change the boost settings from the previous dyno runs, but we did bolt on the ET Streets to eliminate the tirespin (well, sort-of...).
Problem Surfaced Tonight
The clutch started slipping badly. Which made it near impossible to make regular dyno pulls. I had to start the pulls at 4000rpm's so the clutch wouldn't slip as badly. Anything lower and it would just slam against the rev-limiter before making full boost.
The best pull came near the end of the night when I turned the boost up to setting "3" (14lbs boost,the same setting as when we made 749rwhp before). However, it did the same thing again, spun the tires. But it still pulled 768rwhp/792rwtq with A/F peaking at 11.0:1 @ 6100 (MUCH safer than the previous 749rwhp pull).
FWIW, we made 14 pulls tonight and using the methanol, never made less than 720rwhp @ 11lbs of boost. The average pull tonight was 730-745rwhp. (For those counting, we now have 126 dyno pulls on the stock engine, and at least 25 of those are over 700rwhp)
I also video taped the gauges and the car during a couple of the pulls. I taped the Boost gauge, Wideband O2, and Fuel Pressure gauges all at the same time.
Fuel pressure held steady at 52-54lbs (kinda hard to see clearly) from beginning to end. In-Car Wideband was actually showing a little leaner than the Dynojet WB. (when the Dyno showed 11.5, the in-car WB showed 11.8) *Both use the same part number WB sensor.
Methanol vs No Methanol:
**The setup; 5 gallons of Turbo Blue (104octane), 5 gallons of C16 (118octane), Straight Methanol. EXACT same tuning as we were using last week.
I really hung my ***** out there for this one. This test was actually the only test we planned on doing tonight, but things were going well, so that's why we kept making pulls and playing with LS1Edit.
Anyway, the very first thing I did was made a pull on 10lbs of boost with methanol, and made 696rwhp/723rwtq with an A/F of 12.2:1 @ 5800.
Next, I held my breath and turned the Methanol Injection OFF. I was actually amazed at what happened to the A/F ratio. So without Methanol, it made 664rwhp/702rwtq with an A/F ratio of 13.8:1 @ 5800...and it was actually even leaner (14.6:1) @ 5100! I can't believe it didn't blow up! Another interesting thing was the fact that the EGT was the same on BOTH pulls...1410 degrees peak. It's amazing what I'm willing to do all in the name of research....okay, maybe "amazing" isn't the right word....how about "dumb"?
FWIW, both of those pulls were made starting from 4000rpm's. We also determined that during a full pull (2500-6000 rpm's, we used less than 4oz of Methanol, half as much as I had originally thought...potent stuff, huh?)
So to sum it up about the Methanol, I would *guess* that it must be worth probably 40-50rwhp or so at this level. Even though it showed a gain of exactly 30rwhp, I would have to assume that "Lean is Mean" and we would have probably made more along the lines of 650rwhp at a safe A/F. Either way, I think I can conclude it definitely wasn't worth 150HP, as some might have thought, but WELL WORTH the investment.
By the end of the night, we were able to SAFELY tune the car to a consistent 740-750rwhp at a nearly perfectly flat (literally) 11.1:1 A/F all the way to 6200.
Other Things We Learned
1. The SPEC Stage 3-I clutch can't handle the 800+rwtq. Stage 5, here we come.
2. We need some fat guys to sit in the hatch next time we dyno.
3. We may be out of turbo! I'm using the small housing T76 (and not the new GTQ series either). We turned up the boost another lb after we pulled 768rwhp, and the HP stayed the same. I calculated the turbo at being able to make 900fwhp, deducted 15% driveline loss, and came up with 765rwhp. So who knows...we may be ready for a custom turbo now!
4. With good tuning, we still haven't found the HP limits of the stock engine. Do you realize that this thing has to be making over 850fwhp?? That's nearly triple the factory HP rating! Cool. Supra who?
5. Methanol appears to affect A/F ratio, but not Exhaust Gas Temps. (maybe some of you already new this, but I didn't)
6. Even ET Streets won't keep the tires planted on the street from a 60mph punch. Even at 11lbs of boost, flooring it in 3rd gear from 60 only changes your direction towards the guardrail.
7. Ran it on the street afterwards from a 4th gear start (where it actually did get traction), and A/F stayed constant and steady at 11.8-11.9:1, even at over 150mph. ...Kids, don't try this at home!
8. This engine belongs in the Smithsonian (Sp?).
Yes, I have dyno sheets. No, I probably won't be able to post them until this weekend. Yes, the video turned out well. No, I probably won't be able to post it until even later. (still learning how our new website works)
02-05-2004, 04:29 AM
#4
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: So. Cal
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amazing and thanks for all the research at your own risk. I was one who wanted to see what that stock engine had, but now I think it should be retired and framed. It's earned it.
I'm glad to hear your experiences on the street with this as well. It seems that the turbo's torque is way to much to handle on the street, or you need more tire.
Keep up the great work.
I'm glad to hear your experiences on the street with this as well. It seems that the turbo's torque is way to much to handle on the street, or you need more tire.
Keep up the great work.
02-05-2004, 04:53 AM
#5
Damn incredible Rob!!!!! I REALLY appreciate you dynoing with/without methanol. I'm surprised it didn't blow when it got so lean. If you want to do any more "what if" pulls, I'd like to see what you could get off 93 octane and the alky/methanol setup. That is closer to what most people will be running I imagine. That way you could show the full spectrum of performance.....street car to race car. Also, maybe a 93 octane vs 93 with alky. That would certainly show people how valuable the alky kit is and increase sales of it. Just a thought.......all your work is really appreciated....next time, set your ***** in the trunk. They HAVE to be big enuff to help out 
02-05-2004, 06:10 AM
#6
I cant imagine even thinking about those ET streets hooking in this cold weather.
dont think id have the balss to try it, especially at 150 in this weather.
hope no one trys that at home (or street)
150 was floaty enough for me in ideal conditions.
Rob your SMC (thats the brand right) alki kit, can you get that with the progressive controller?
i am eager to try it but i got to get traction first.
dont think id have the balss to try it, especially at 150 in this weather.
hope no one trys that at home (or street)
150 was floaty enough for me in ideal conditions.
Rob your SMC (thats the brand right) alki kit, can you get that with the progressive controller?
i am eager to try it but i got to get traction first.
Trending Topics
02-05-2004, 07:53 AM
#8
TECH Fanatic
Wow! 
My guess is for that 13.8:1 pull if you had loaded the engine at at a lower RPM
This is pretty amazing, huge testament to the strength of these engines. Its all in the tuning!
My guess is for that 13.8:1 pull if you had loaded the engine at at a lower RPM
This is pretty amazing, huge testament to the strength of these engines. Its all in the tuning!
I have one.
02-05-2004, 10:36 AM
#16
TECH Resident
iTrader: (48)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Michigan, the land of cold
Posts: 927
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, that's some serious numbers...
When this motor lets loose making that kind of power, it's going to be ugly. But it will have been in the name of science.
When this motor lets loose making that kind of power, it's going to be ugly. But it will have been in the name of science.
02-05-2004, 11:02 AM
#19
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Downers Grove,IL
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pretty damn good numbers! I feel sorry for those stock brittle pistons. They are really hanging in there! 
All you have to do is activate the alky nozzle for 15 secs into a container and measure the volume. For example 8oz in 15 secs is a 15GPH nozzle and will safley support around 75FLWHP at a 4.5-1 A-F ratio. Does not mean it will MAKE 75hp, just that it could support it.That is pretty inline with your RWHP results.
Most of these kits come with a 15gph nozzle. IMO you could probably use at 50% more flow with even better results.
I am pretty amazed at that power with only 14psi boost no matter what fuels you are using.
You are not slipping any Nitromethane in that mix are you?
Steve
All you have to do is activate the alky nozzle for 15 secs into a container and measure the volume. For example 8oz in 15 secs is a 15GPH nozzle and will safley support around 75FLWHP at a 4.5-1 A-F ratio. Does not mean it will MAKE 75hp, just that it could support it.That is pretty inline with your RWHP results.
Most of these kits come with a 15gph nozzle. IMO you could probably use at 50% more flow with even better results.
I am pretty amazed at that power with only 14psi boost no matter what fuels you are using.
You are not slipping any Nitromethane in that mix are you?
Steve
02-05-2004, 11:07 AM
#20
Thanks for posting the info Rob.
I'm glad you turned it down before turning the methanol off, or we'd have one melted engine to talk about
But the methanol does seem to do it's job as a fueling suppliment. And take this as you will, but the 150 i refered to was at the 750rwhp level. Seems feasible, not confirmed but definately not unheard of.
On the clutch, if you don't mind a very on-off style, i know what will hold.
Ram 402 plate, Mcleod rev-loc2 disc, and a ram flywheel. It's brutal, but damn it don't slip.
Good info
I'm glad you turned it down before turning the methanol off, or we'd have one melted engine to talk about
But the methanol does seem to do it's job as a fueling suppliment. And take this as you will, but the 150 i refered to was at the 750rwhp level. Seems feasible, not confirmed but definately not unheard of.
On the clutch, if you don't mind a very on-off style, i know what will hold.
Ram 402 plate, Mcleod rev-loc2 disc, and a ram flywheel. It's brutal, but damn it don't slip.Good info