Defined Autoworks 523whp 35r!!

[Rotary no Densetsu]

Hell yeah man, this thing is so badass.

[Force13b]

Sounds awesome! Bad ass build right there.

[NoDOHC]

Is the 523 Hp Whp or corrected to flywheel Hp by a conversion ratio? [I saw the Torque (flywheel) on the bottom]

Do you have a dyno plot that shows the AFR? I am curious how lean you went.

It would appear from the power curve that you were lean of 12:1. If not, that is an impressive plot indeed.

[FDwarrior]

Its wheel horse power. We made sure on the dynapak the everything was like it should be. We were not running lean at all. I am running two denso pumps in the tank. We had a wide band on the car, when we were tunning. The fuel was holding in there, and appears to have more. I am going to try to get it back on the dyno before winter.

[GtoRx7]

Originally Posted by NoDOHC

Is the 523 Hp Whp or corrected to flywheel Hp by a conversion ratio? [I saw the Torque (flywheel) on the bottom]

Do you have a dyno plot that shows the AFR? I am curious how lean you went.

It would appear from the power curve that you were lean of 12:1. If not, that is an impressive plot indeed.

Correct it is Wheel horsepower. Dyna packs read actual wheel torque, which in this case was 1,578 ft-lbs. But of course that isnt easily translated, so you select to view "flywheel torque". But its not actual flywheel torque of course.

[RICE RACING]

ultimately ou cannot say anything until you see the sheet with the TCF listed as 1.00 (which is not on the screens provided).

I.E. Like this >



I can take his word but this sheet will silence any doubters

p.s. lots of shops put in different TCF values (which are not shown on other screens) to guess flywheel HP or to correct for other types of dyno standards that return higher numbers.

[GtoRx7]

We are going back to the dyno monday, so I will be sure to save the TCF values, and boost charts. But as a side note, if there is a TCF value entered in the "flywheel power" and "power" will not be the same number. The flywheel power will be higher the exact percentage the user entered.

[Ian]

Impressive. Time for me to upgrade my old T04B60-1 Turbo.

Stupid question. My car does not make that backfiring popping noise. Only did that when I changed it to ignition cut. Is that ignition cut? (Ok I am stupid should read instead of just clicking the video link)

I run fuel cut. I always thought that ignition cut was bad.

Either way always impressed to see big numbers. For some reason the majority of us only make around 400rwhp. I hit 409rwhp about 7 years ago on a dynojet. i had to up the boost to 18psi to make 400rwhp on a mustang dyno.

Have fun with that beast.....

[NoDOHC]

I wish you would post AFR on the graph (or are you not logging it to the dyno?)

I am curious what more experienced Turbo engine tuners run, as a lot of people I talk to say nothing lean of 11:1 and I think that is leaving a lot of power on the table.

Peak power (for pump gas) is 13.3:1 (0.9 lambda). There is not much gain to be had lean of 13.0:1. As far as I know, this holds true for any chamber pressure - it is definately true for naturally aspirated applications.

Your VE must be relatively high if you are running 11:1 AFR.

[FDwarrior]

Originally Posted by NoDOHC

I wish you would post AFR on the graph (or are you not logging it to the dyno?)

I am curious what more experienced Turbo engine tuners run, as a lot of people I talk to say nothing lean of 11:1 and I think that is leaving a lot of power on the table.

Peak power (for pump gas) is 13.3:1 (0.9 lambda). There is not much gain to be had lean of 13.0:1. As far as I know, this holds true for any chamber pressure - it is definately true for naturally aspirated applications.

Your VE must be relatively high if you are running 11:1 AFR.

Honestly I should let Logan respond, but I would say he is about as experienced as it gets. He currently has the highest horsepower from a 2 rotor n/a using a street port. He also just made 421, with allot more left from an n/a 3 rotor using a street port and semi-p port. Rally I would not let any one else touch my car. I would sell my car before having to go some where else if those were my only two options. Im just talking from my experience as a customer, along with what I have seen come out of there shop. I know for a fact there is no other n/a 3 rotor that even comes close to his. Logan's semi-p port is almost touching documented full p-port numbers. I would not be concerned with experience.

[GtoRx7]

Originally Posted by NoDOHC

I wish you would post AFR on the graph (or are you not logging it to the dyno?)

I am curious what more experienced Turbo engine tuners run, as a lot of people I talk to say nothing lean of 11:1 and I think that is leaving a lot of power on the table.

Peak power (for pump gas) is 13.3:1 (0.9 lambda). There is not much gain to be had lean of 13.0:1. As far as I know, this holds true for any chamber pressure - it is definately true for naturally aspirated applications.

Your VE must be relatively high if you are running 11:1 AFR.

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.

[TitaniumTT]

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.

So are you suggesting that actual real world testing trump rumors and little kids on the internet!!! Say it isn't so!!!

I agree that 11:1 is safe... it's about as "SAFE" as I'm willing to go on a SP and I would actually go a little leaner on HBP just becuase of the overlap. I look for 11.7-12.0 on my personal setup but I have more faith in my injectors, ECU and coils than most of the others out on the mkt

I've got everything related to Exhaust or Intake ceramic coated and a good bit of airflow through the engine bay. Even after repeated dyno abuse most of the intake is cool to the touch. So I am a very big believer in what you're saying about heat. EGT's are also key to monitor as is EMAP..... I'd be VERY curious to what this turbo is generating for EMAP at given boost levels. You're not logging that by chance are you?

[TitaniumTT]

I run about .82L (12:1) I must not be very experienced or know what the hell I'm talking about at all.... I mean when people are making 437 RWHP with Meth @ 22psi on a GT42R.... I mean, how can I compare right?!?!?!?!?

In all seriousness, this are the things that I like to see. Convinces me even more that I'll be able to break the HP/Torque that I want to make with a very similar turbo.

Nice numbers.... Love the setup....great job

[FDwarrior]

Originally Posted by TitaniumTT

I run about .82L (12:1) I must not be very experienced or know what the hell I'm talking about at all.... I mean when people are making 437 RWHP with Meth @ 22psi on a GT42R.... I mean, how can I compare right?!?!?!?!?

In all seriousness, this are the things that I like to see. Convinces me even more that I'll be able to break the HP/Torque that I want to make with a very similar turbo.

Nice numbers.... Love the setup....great job

Thanks, and I agree with what you are saying. I really think the problem is that the U.S. rotary tunning market is very lack luster over-all. Most of the "experienced" and refined rotary tunners of the U.S. market don't have much to show. I see most people take rumor as fact, which takes credit away from shops that produce documented results. Im mainly talking about things I have seen on r-club since I have been on there. Mostly things in the 3 rotor realm, which is notorious for bench racing, and theorizing without proven results. As some one who spends hard earned money of things I don't want an engine built from rumor of what works. There is much more to be had over all in every aspect of the rotary engine. I guess the biggest difference between my engine and some others is mine is built to go race, not be a novelty to a group of enthusiast. I know there are people and shops out there pushing the limits, and making the necessary small detail research.

[TitaniumTT]

Originally Posted by FDwarrior

Honestly I should let Logan respond, but I would say he is about as experienced as it gets. He currently has the highest horsepower from a 2 rotor n/a using a street port. He also just made 421, with allot more left from an n/a 3 rotor using a street port and semi-p port. Rally I would not let any one else touch my car. I would sell my car before having to go some where else if those were my only two options. Im just talking from my experience as a customer, along with what I have seen come out of there shop. I know for a fact there is no other n/a 3 rotor that even comes close to his. Logan's semi-p port is almost touching documented full p-port numbers. I would not be concerned with experience.

I don't think he's concerned with Logan's experience, I think he more interested in the experience he has and what it's lead him to believe.... if that makes sense... it does in my caffine hieghtened state

Basically there are a bunch of tools on the evil forum who won't run in the 11's under boost, add meth as a safety factor, retard the ignition as a safety factor and end up with blown engines becuase they don't know what the hell they're doing..... I mean really... 22psi out of a GT42R on a HBP and the most he could make was 437 something ponies.....

Originally Posted by FDwarrior

Thanks, and I agree with what you are saying. I really think the problem is that the U.S. rotary tunning market is very lack luster over-all. Most of the "experienced" and refined rotary tunners of the U.S. market don't have much to show. I see most people take rumor as fact, which takes credit away from shops that produce documented results. Im mainly talking about things I have seen on r-club since I have been on there. Mostly things in the 3 rotor realm, which is notorious for bench racing, and theorizing without proven results. As some one who spends hard earned money of things I don't want an engine built from rumor of what works. There is much more to be had over all in every aspect of the rotary engine. I guess the biggest difference between my engine and some others is mine is built to go race, not be a novelty to a group of enthusiast. I know there are people and shops out there pushing the limits, and making the necessary small detail research.

I agree, most of the people out there that are on the cutting edge aren't posting on the forums. I can understand it, this is their livelihood... they're not going to give away the secrets that they fought so hard to find. That's what gives them thier edge and keeps people coming to them. Its the enthusiasts or people that think they are that will constantly post up thier findings. The problem is there are a select few that actually know WTF they're doing when building a engine, tuning an engine, etc etc while the bulk of them are keyboard mechanics and theorists that can't see past thier mistakes. So, if each group posts an equal amount, there will be a tremendous amount of shit out there..... this is my view of 7club, BDC, HC etc etc etc.... While the membership here isn't nearly as great in numbers, I feel that the quality of people posting here is much higher...... Just my $.02