Defined Autoworks 523whp 35r!!

[NoDOHC]

Originally Posted by GtoRX7

Yeah when tuning a turbo engine, I do not use the dyno wideband. The internal dampening is too slow for quick decisions if things get out of hand. AFR for a turbo rotary strictly depends on how much generated heat is entering the engine. For example, I see ALOT of people running a turbine housing that is 1 inch away from the intake manifold with no heat shield at all! Hmmmm blown engine anyone?? But typically a nice safe tune will be in the 11.1-11.2 range. In a controlled environment or on a very well insulated/ well cooled turbo rotary setup, 12.0- 12.5 can be done. But that tune is not safe in my opinion in the real world at the track.

Now with that said, do not get too hung up on a 13.3 afr number. Yes n/a two rotors seem to enjoy 12.8-13.4 in the testing I have done as well. But remember not each rotor is burning EXACTLY the same as the other. And we typically are using only one wideband. So if you ever get into n/a 3 rotors, trying to tune for 13.3 might actually hurt power. Simply the variance and heat difference from the front of the engine all the way to the rear can cause this. When I tune N/a piston engines like the Honda b16 and b18, they actually made the best power at 14.0 afr. So dont cling too hard on values, and always let the dyno do most of the talking.

My hat is off to you, sir!

Very well written reply - I couldn't agree more that test data trumps theory anyday, rules of thumb will only get a baseline, the dyno is required for peak power.

I was told that rotaries liked 12:1 AFR for peak power when I decided to throw a Haltech ECU in my car, I tuned to 12:1 rather than following my experience on piston engines because I didn't expect it to port across. Instead, I found that I gave up 40 WHp by tuning to 12:1, relative to 13.3 (where I would have tuned it if left to my own devices).

I was also told that ignition timing should be 26 degrees, I found peak power (+20WHp at 38 degrees - which is a good baseline number for a <10:1 engine). Thus I found the piston engine knowledge that I had acquired has ported over very nicely to rotaries.

I completely agree that chamber swirl has great effects on fuel distribution and therefore desired AFR for peak power (hence the tumble head design on a DOHC 4-valve cylinder requiring a leaner AFR).

I was mostly curious for my own information, as I have little to no experience with gasoline-fuelled forced induction engines, but I have pretty good experience with normally aspirated gasoline engines. I work with turbocharged diesel and Natural gas engines every day, so I am always curious how the parallels carry across.

My experience has led me to conclude that a higher compression ratio tends to make better torque and require slightly leaner AFRs while accepting less timing advance. I am always trying to obtain information that can help me apply these trends to rotaries. I am relatively new to rotaries as compared to my piston engine experience.

Don't give out information that will hurt your livelihood, but you have earned the respect of one amature rotary builder with your above reply.

[TitaniumTT]

Speaking of fuel swirl and distribution....

Over the winter.... last winter that is I made 2 changes to the engine setup.

One were the coils. I went with a "different" inductive coil.
The second was the injectors. I went from some "Marren American Style" (basically propane injectors) sized 750/1000 to some Paul Yaw ID 725/2000. I intend to throw my old LS1 coils back on as well a a bunch of other's to test the ignition system and various coils. It will also be interesting to compare this years dyno's to last. The distribution will be much more even across the chamber with the new injectors. I'd be curious to see if it leads to more torque and the ability to run slightly leaner as well.

Eventually I'll get the thing together and on the dyno for these tests.

[FDwarrior]

Went back to the dyno one more time on pump gas to see what slightly higher boost would effect. Still under 20psi. About 18.8psi peak going to 16 psi redline. Definitely stretching the fuel system to the upper limits. 535rwhp / 406rwtq. The methanol system is almost finished now, so that will be the next very soon!

[David Jerome]

Not trying to start anything, but it is funny to read some of these reactions over dyno numbers. Take it to the track, 540 rwhp fd will trap in the 130s in the 1/4, if it does that then the numbers are believable. It is just hard for me to believe you are making 520+rwhp on 14-15psi when every other setup is making 425-450 on this exact setup.

Ill make you the same offer I made TitaniumTT, take it to another dyno and I will pay for your pulls as long as you post the honest results.

Once again, not trying to start anything or discredit anyones work whatsoever. When you see hundreds of examples of a setup all within a 5% variance of power at X psi, you kinda have to question the 1 or 2 setups that come out with 20% more power

Please dont take this as me downing anyone, I love to see improvements with the rotary but I am realistic. I have a customer trapping 127mph on the stock twins with 370rwhp and weight reduction, 540 at the wheels should easily hit 130mph in the 1/4. Ill pay for your dragstrip passes or for you to dyno on another dyno if you are willing to accept?

David
RotaryRebuildStore.com

[RotorDad]

Interesting offer. Are you asking him to try another dyno other than a dynapack or just a a different location to validate his times? 540hp in a 2900 lb car should run in the area of 10.2 at 133 mph. Assuming that your customers car only weighed 2400 lbs with 370 hp should show a 10.8 at 125 mph. I also am not trying to start anything, but you are here asking for proof right. Well you listed an unknown customer car, with no real info other than 370 hp & weight reduction with some trap speed. I hate to say it but you haven't really made a good argument & no hard info was provided on your customers car. Now I may be wrong this is just my opinion. BTW there are other factors involved other than Hp & weight when at the track, which I'm positive you already know.

[David Jerome]

Originally Posted by RotorDad

Interesting offer. Are you asking him to try another dyno other than a dynapack or just a a different location to validate his times? 540hp in a 2900 lb car should run in the area of 10.2 at 133 mph. Assuming that your customers car only weighed 2400 lbs with 370 hp should show a 10.8 at 125 mph. I also am not trying to start anything, but you are here asking for proof right. Well you listed an unknown customer car, with no real info other than 370 hp & weight reduction with some trap speed. I hate to say it but you haven't really made a good argument & no hard info was provided on your customers car. Now I may be wrong this is just my opinion. BTW there are other factors involved other than Hp & weight when at the track, which I'm positive you already know.

Trap speeds are trap speeds unless you are making 1000hp and litterally spinning down the track.

Customer is on the other forum, Im not trying to take credit for his car or his accomplishments. All I did was rebuild his block. Car weighs 2560 without driver, made 368rwhp, FD, non-sequential, 3" exhaust, enough fuel, slicks, stock 5 speed trans, 4.10 gears, 20psi on stock twins. Not leaving on 2step just revving and going so would be similar to the above car. The car I am speaking of went 11.1 at 127 and has gone 11.0s at 126.

What do I have to prove? When someone comes on a forum claiming near 100+ rwhp more than the other 100 setups documented at a certain boost level I think it is up to them to prove the numbers or expect few to believe it.

I figured people would reacte the way you did, so let me clarify. I WANT TO BE PROVEN WRONG. Just highly doubt I will.

Ill pay for him to run on a dyno dynamics dyno run by a reputable shop or pay for him to run at the dragstrip. Even throw in an extra $50.00 to cover gas or whatever else. I would love to believe we can make 523rwhp with a responsive small turbo at 14-15psi on these cars but just dont see it happening.

[RotorDad]

Are you questioning the power achieved on the 35r or are you questioning the amount of boosted claimed to get the numbers in his claim? I understand that you have questions to the claims & I see nothing wrong it.

[David Jerome]

Originally Posted by RotorDad

Are you questioning the power achieved on the 35r or are you questioning the amount of boosted claimed to get the numbers in his claim? I understand that you have questions to the claims & I see nothing wrong it.

As posted on rx7club these turbos can make 500rwhp, just not at 14-15lbs. Enzo Tunings brother made around 501rwhp in his car and trapped 131mph at over 20psi.

There was another guy from another country claiming similar numbers as in this thread and went and trapped around 120mph and no one really believed his claims.

Once again, I hope I am proven wrong.

[Libor]

Originally Posted by David Jerome

As posted on rx7club these turbos can make 500rwhp, just not at 14-15lbs. Enzo Tunings brother made around 501rwhp in his car and trapped 131mph at over 20psi.

With T3 frame GT35R. As you know, this GT35R compressor is mated with T4 P-trim turbine, big difference. Also this is bridgeport vs. stockport. And last posted numbers were done with 18.8 PSI tapering down to 16 PSI.

I don´t see problem here. Just well sorted combination...

[TitaniumTT]

I've been wanting to take David up on his offer, but I changed a few things over the winter and have yet to get back on the dyno this year to finalize everything. That will hopefully be happening on Friday, then when I get back, get on a local dyno.... actually.... David, where are you located and do you have a dyno nearby? I might actually be passing damn close to where you are

[David Jerome]

Originally Posted by TitaniumTT

I've been wanting to take David up on his offer, but I changed a few things over the winter and have yet to get back on the dyno this year to finalize everything. That will hopefully be happening on Friday, then when I get back, get on a local dyno.... actually.... David, where are you located and do you have a dyno nearby? I might actually be passing damn close to where you are

Im in Knoxville, TN and we have 3-4 dynos here in town. Stop by and I will treat you to a nice dinner also. I could talk rotaries all day every day.

[TitaniumTT]

Originally Posted by David Jerome

Im in Knoxville, TN and we have 3-4 dynos here in town. Stop by and I will treat you to a nice dinner also. I could talk rotaries all day every day.

Sweet! You're on. I plan on being at Deals Gap on or about 12/18. So I'll plan on heading that way that Monday. Definately cool of you David. thanks much.

-Brian

[David Jerome]

Originally Posted by TitaniumTT

Sweet! You're on. I plan on being at Deals Gap on or about 12/18. So I'll plan on heading that way that Monday. Definately cool of you David. thanks much.

-Brian

As of now that date looks like it will work. When it gets closer I will talk to the dyno owner and get it setup.

[RotorDad]

Well getting another dyno reading seems like it will be the way to go. Gauging power by a trap speed will not give you the answers you are looking for. 14-15 psi may seem low, but I don't really have any experience with a 35r on a rotary. As I said above there is too many other factors which will result in different outcomes. Also the FD you spoke of ran those times at around 2700 lbs, because listing the car with out the driver weight is useless. The car didn't drive it self down the track, an average person I would think to be 140-200 lbs. Another thing to think about which may not make much of a difference, but this is in a 240SX not FD. I just think to prove the the claims another dyno run would be the best route to take.

[sk8world]

Originally Posted by RotorDad

Well getting another dyno reading seems like it will be the way to go. Gauging power by a trap speed will not give you the answers you are looking for. 14-15 psi may seem low, but I don't really have any experience with a 35r on a rotary. As I said above there is too many other factors which will result in different outcomes. Also the FD you spoke of ran those times at around 2700 lbs, because listing the car with out the driver weight is useless. The car didn't drive it self down the track, an average person I would think to be 140-200 lbs. Another thing to think about which may not make much of a difference, but this is in a 240SX not FD. I just think to prove the the claims another dyno run would be the best route to take.

I am with David on this one as well. You CAN run your car down the 1/4 and shift it regular on a shitty 60 foot and your trap speed will be your best. The car should trap in the 128-130 then it makes 500rwhp area. My best 60 has been on a 2.1 60 foot!!! As far as boost goes I would imagine him being closer to 20 to hit that number if not even a tad more.

Anything is possible but I never trust dyno numbers. Its kinda like going to the track, you usually leave with a slower time than you came to run. Same goes on the dyno.

Most dyno's can and are manipulated. You want a happy customer.

BUT in the end all that really matters is YOU are happy with your car. Just got to watch out claiming a certain number requires more than a dyno sheet now a days.