Harry Flatters Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 I do think people get a bit too hung up on BHP/TORQUE figures produced by these outfits. For me the most important thing is that I know the car is mapped optimally for the build of my engine and the fuel that I'm going to use. Yes, I was muchly impressed by the supposed 263bhp that my engine made after the last mapping session at Track 'n Road but at the end of the day it's whether you are satisfied with the way the car drives and how tractible etc the entire setup feels. All I know is that it pulled away smoothly without stalling and when I nailed the throttle I thought my pants were on fire 😳 😬. Job done - thanks Steve G *thumbup*. *arrowright*Harry Flatters *arrowright* AKA Steve Mell - Surrey AO and Su77on Se7ener Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Day Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 Steve, you couldn't have said it better . That's why I would recommend Steve & Steve at Track 'n Road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thinfourth Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 A rolling road is merely a tool it is the guy who uses the tool that matters The happy handle made me do it here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 To be useful the calibration of a RR has to remain constant. R & T seem unable to understand this. K2RUM - The car of two halveswith a hole in the engine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grubbster Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 Does that mean you are back on the road Steve? Great news if that is the case Roadsport build photo's here Le Mans 2004 photo's here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 Arnie, i am not quite sure how to read your answer?? Where is this inconsistancy that youu assume that R&T cannot sustain? R500 Mango Madness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Flatters Posted July 30, 2006 Author Share Posted July 30, 2006 @Arnie - what is your beef (T&R is not owned by SBD or QED 😬)? You have only been there once and Steve G is the first to acknowledge that there was a discrepancy between their current RR equipment and the old one. Since the new kit was commissioned and set up I am unaware of any calibration issues. Like I said if the car does what you want it to do after the mapping session then what does it matter what some indicative figure actually says? *arrowright*Harry Flatters *arrowright* AKA Steve Mell - Surrey AO and Su77on Se7ener Edited by - Harry Flatters on 10 Mar 2009 15:55:21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 Here Here Steve. Why are you not working on your bl**dy car????????? I am working on mine, wiring all over the place. R500 Mango Madness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Flatters Posted July 30, 2006 Author Share Posted July 30, 2006 You want wiring - I got an entire car looms worth in a box in my garage 😬. Anyway - having a break - paint is stripped and I'm sick of cleaning up all the bits so I'm sitting here wacthing WTCC live 😬 *arrowright*Harry Flatters *arrowright* AKA Steve Mell - Surrey AO and Su77on Se7ener Edited by - Harry Flatters on 10 Mar 2009 15:57:33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grubbster Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 ☹️Steve, thought it would be unlikely. Hope it'll be finished soon and that the insurance is dealing with it properly. Roadsport build photo's here Le Mans 2004 photo's here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 Peter, To determine the effect and value of modifications to an engine, you should be able to return to the same set of rollers over a long period of time, knowing the calibration is the same as it was previously. At the time yours, Dave E's and my cars were tested, the software calculating the curve plot from the distributed values had been changed each time, and still clearly did not work. Do you really believe your engine was (give or take 6hp) as powerful as Dave's Hart? When I took my car there, on the run down test, the clutch would not remain disengaged due to a seal issue. Now I think you will concur that my engine creates maximum power above 6000 rpm say. So if the clutch causes compression braking to occur on the run down, once the road speed is below a corresponding engine speed of 6000rpm (in actual fact about 4000rpm) this re-engagement of the engine should have no effect on the maximum differentiation between wheel hp and losses (this being gross hp). With max power at 8600rpm (ish) the greatest difference between the power and loss curves, across the sample data, should occur at this value on the speed axis. Guess what. This was not the point on the plot where the gap was largest. Steve and Steve seemed unable to undertstand the math behind this, and why the rollers compare power over a range against losses over a range to calculate gross hp values. Therefore the figures are meaningless, which explains why with a 49bhp disadvantage to the Dura at the 'Fastest Caterham in the World.' the gap was not rather bigger. K2RUM - The car of two halveswith a hole in the engine Edited by - EFA on 30 Jul 2006 22:43:39 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss_Tony Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 For me the most important thing about getting a car/engine on a dyno/rolling road is to get it mapped correctly so it does not damage itself and drives nicely which Steve does a superb job of! I have seen a few dodgy dyno's where they have damaged various things. This is why I will only go to Steve now! Arnie My theory on your cars power figure and your clutch issue at that time would make your power figure higher than it actually is 😳 James Su77on Se7ens Edited by - James on 30 Jul 2006 23:05:59 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 I agree James, which is exactly my point. K2RUM - The car of two halveswith a hole in the engine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 I also think Emerald do a great job and at a great price *thumbup* . Their rollers use the smae hardware and software as Steve G I understand Most important for me is knowing that the lambda readings across the rev range are OK, then maximising power across the range by altering cams, timing etc and lastly drivebility on part throttle . if the rollers are not reading correctly Arnie - why did Dave E get almost the same readings at Road and race as he did at Emerald and HT ?. And why does Dave E do times much much faster than you with his modest 278 bhp (or whatever it was ) - following your theory on Danny duratec power vs times ........ maybe "area under the curve" and chassis / diff setup plays a part Arn' 🤔 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannylt Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Emerald most certainly do not have the same rolling road hardware as R&T, though some of the software is similar. Emerald is a old Sun system, whereas R&T is of an TAT's own intertial design (though including a brake for load site mapping). Arnie, I can see why it might be annoying that the calibration changes, but I can hardly blame them when they're simply making is more accurate. They have plenty of serious clients who are persuaded of it's accuracy vs OEM equipment! And I don't think it's fair to slag people off without a chance to reply for themselves, there are two sides to everything, etc. etc. Danny (happy client of both Emerald and R&T!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Ahhhh I stand corrected PS Danny - could you mail me your address please , I have the FCITW plaque for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 At this rate Arnie will have to build his own rolling road which will no doubt show his car producing 300bhp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannylt Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Right... or he could go along to Emerald... or he could just get a duratec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 James, the other odd thing IIRC, is that when the clutch crept back in, the loads plot reduced in magnitude. Hence why it might decrease the power reading if it is sampling this data. Dave J - The gross power is the max differentiation between load and wheel hp at the quoted engine speed. It has nothing to do with area under the curve, though I do suspect this is how R&T's software is written such that the results are influenced by thing going on at 4000rpm. K2RUM - The car of two halveswith a hole in the engine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CageyH Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Obviously, the most important thing about a rolling road is the discussion afterwards... My car is more powerful than yours THe rolling road I used is more accurate than the one you used For me, as long as it is set up, to make it driveable on the public roiad, that is all that counts. I am off to field and track to see if I can have the first 350 BHP 1.8K series engined car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now