Notices
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results Discuss vendor and member dyno tuning techniques, results and graphs.

763whp/595tq STOCK ECU, SpeedDensity, E85 by TTP!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 09:47 AM
  #286  
Chele's Avatar
Evolving Member
15 Year Member
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
From: Cape Coral, Florida
I know there is alot of favoritism/nutswingage/bandwagon jumpers on this site. I try to ignore it. I just wonder what happened to taking it to the track and fighting it out? Let's get all these shat talkers out in their cars and start running each other. (preferably at the same track at the same time)
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 09:48 AM
  #287  
SloRice's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 0
From: West Chester, OH
I'm down...let's go to the track! But TTP makes 100whp more than I do, so I should get the hit and some car lengths right....
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 09:49 AM
  #288  
norcalSRTrida's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
From: pleasanton, ca
Originally Posted by Celica2EVO
Maybe the new thing should be no correction factor? If its ONLY a tuning tool, then why **** with the correction factors?

Correction factor is what is making these numbers so outlandish. Also, Nicks car is FULL weight with a roll bar and safety equipment on 18" wheels.

So how about from now on, TTP DOESNT use correction factors and then their numbers might correlate with others?


i concur, for comparison's sake and even playing field.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 09:50 AM
  #289  
Celica2EVO's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (58)
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,417
Likes: 0
From: Van Buren, OH
lol, guess we were both thinking the same thing! haha

Its fine to give your customers the sheet with correction factor to show off to their budies, or to compare it to older sheets/set-ups.

But for the sake of the community and other vendors, use UNCORRECTED and im willing to bet you wont get ridiculed so bad for the numbers you put out.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 09:50 AM
  #290  
Mellon Racing's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Originally Posted by TTP Engineering
For the same reason that BR claimed a E.T. Record stock ECU and that Mellon claimed the MPH record and it went uncontested for months is the same reason we get the witch hunt.

POLITICS.

Mellon did not get crap because he uses a BR engine. You have to really take a close look at all these usernames and the politics behind them. Most of them use a part or engine from BR which gives them forum immunity from the witch hunters.

Since we do not use ANY parts from them, we get the worst of it.
I don't know about that scott, I get contested quite a bit with regards to DLL numbers, I'm not immune because I run BR parts. If people think something is fishy, they'll call me out in a heartbeat as they should.


Originally Posted by TTP Engineering
WCF in the heat of summer can read higher than uncorrected MD, but lower than DJ.

WCF in the winter will read lower than an uncorrected MD.

Uncorrected for this car is 708-713whp.
I don't understand how this answers my earlier questions.



Originally Posted by norcalSRTrida
im copy/pasting my post from DB's new thread into here because it fits, and i have to beg a question...



look at the results here people.

both dyno'd w/in 10hp (w/ TTP's uncorrected #'s, not his 763), and both ET'd w/in .1, and trapped very similarly to eachother...within 4mph

that is a direct comparison from TTP's dyno to DB's dyno.


with that said, can we all say that TTP's MD isnt as far off as previously stated, and is because of which factors he uses (corrected vs uncorrected)?

you can't compare mph without comparing race weight.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 09:51 AM
  #291  
Celica2EVO's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (58)
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,417
Likes: 0
From: Van Buren, OH
And Im game for the track! Bad tranny and all, let me know when and where! lol
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 09:53 AM
  #292  
SloRice's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 0
From: West Chester, OH
Originally Posted by norcalSRTrida
DB just had a 705hp car on his dyno and guess what? it runs through the 1/4 at 10.0@147

compared to

TTP's 715hp UNCORRECTED w/ 10.1@143 (w/ bogging and 1st time out to the track w/ the setup)




TTP, for the sake of this community, stick w/ uncorrected.

TTP's car has the stock final drive. The car DB just posted making 705hp had the 3.73 final drive when it ran 147. Its now has a 4.11 final drive.....I think that 147MPH is going to go up a bit.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 10:01 AM
  #293  
TTP Engineering's Avatar
Thread Starter
Account Disabled
iTrader: (465)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 8,824
Likes: 2
From: Central FL
Originally Posted by Mellon Tuning
I don't know about that scott, I get contested quite a bit with regards to DLL numbers, I'm not immune because I run BR parts. If people think something is fishy, they'll call me out in a heartbeat as they should.
You get contested because the Vendors with real $65,000-$125,000.00 dynamometers do not want to be discounted by a free program which has proven to be flawed like when a stock turbo MR at 18psi can make 400whp+ on pump.

That is taking about others cars, not yours.

When it comes to your car, we do not see any contests by the witch hunters.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 10:02 AM
  #294  
norcalSRTrida's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
From: pleasanton, ca
Originally Posted by SloRice
TTP's car has the stock final drive. The car DB just posted making 705hp had the 3.73 final drive when it ran 147. Its now has a 4.11 final drive.....I think that 147MPH is going to go up a bit.
and who's to say TTP's car wont go through the traps a few mph faster once he irons out his driver mod at the track?


im not taking any sides.
im just noting that hp #'s and et/trap comparisons between those 2 cars are Very similar once we look at TTP's car w/ uncorrected #s.


TTP's et's and traps make more sense now after seeing them in uncorrected form and comparing it to a car of similar weight and power.

nothing more, nothing less.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 10:08 AM
  #295  
TTP Engineering's Avatar
Thread Starter
Account Disabled
iTrader: (465)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 8,824
Likes: 2
From: Central FL
Originally Posted by norcalSRTrida
and who's to say TTP's car wont go through the traps a few mph faster once he irons out his driver mod at the track?


im not taking any sides.
im just noting that hp #'s and et/trap comparisons between those 2 cars are Very similar once we look at TTP's car w/ uncorrected #s.


TTP's et's and traps make more sense now after seeing them in uncorrected form and comparing it to a car of similar weight and power.

nothing more, nothing less.
Better yet. Maybe just let Ryu take a crack at it. The TaeKwonDoe kid weighs about 40lbs less than me as it stands and I am rusty.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 10:24 AM
  #296  
batty200's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,203
Likes: 5
It doesnt matter where it started. You think every single horse in existence make 1hp? Well technically it does but they arent all the same. Also since that initial fudge we have developed everything around that to calculate and compare things using a standard. So DJ hp is the standard by which all are judged. When the #'s make sense using the reference for a control then we are able to fairly compare the #'s. A car that does xxxwhp on a DJ then does a certain trap speed/weight then conforms to the specs and can be compared to other cars using the same calculations. Who cares if we call it a mulepower or a bird power. 1 ft was the random benchmark chosen to describe distance because it was the size of some kings foot. From there we make calculations and comparisons. Now if someone else comes around with a new "foot" it will cause lots of issues.

Originally Posted by SloRice
batty200 - feel free to read this article before you start making claims that Dynojet numbers are the end-all, be-all.

http://www.hotrod.com/thehistoryof/1..._creation.html




Dynojet's read flywheel horsepower, not wheel horsepower. Right there in black and white straight from the inventor of the Dynojet Dynamometer.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 10:26 AM
  #297  
shunderwunder's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (41)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 911
Likes: 0
From: Alpharetta GA
Originally Posted by TTP Engineering
Better yet. Maybe just let Ryu take a crack at it. The TaeKwonDoe kid weighs about 40lbs less than me as it stands and I am rusty.
^ Thats another good point. The track times were not with a "ringer" driver
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 10:53 AM
  #298  
Mellon Racing's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Originally Posted by TTP Engineering

When it comes to your car, we do not see any contests by the witch hunters.
I have some theory on why that is
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 10:54 AM
  #299  
R/TErnie's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (32)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,380
Likes: 6
From: WAR EAGLE!
Originally Posted by gsrboi80
This is your formula no tricks ok. Again its math can't really fudge it

MPH= the cube root of (HP/WEIGHT) x 234
MPH= (HP/weight)^.333)*234
GSRBOI,
How did you come up with MPH is cube root of HP/Weight times the constant 234?

Please... derive your equations from worldwide accepted constants and equations.

You have not shown me anything related to physics yet. You solved a middle school level mathematics equation.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2009 | 11:39 AM
  #300  
batty200's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,203
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by R/TErnie
GSRBOI,
How did you come up with MPH is cube root of HP/Weight times the constant 234?

Please... derive your equations from worldwide accepted constants and equations.

You have not shown me anything related to physics yet. You solved a middle school level mathematics equation.
In order to setup those equations requires a lot more math than anyone on this site could do in any appreciable amount of time but you can simply search online and see any # of thousands of websites that will tell you this is the formula. Just as you would be unable to produe a proof for the F=MA formula in any way doesnt mean it is not right.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:38 PM.