Totuus puljusta nimeltä MP perfomance.

[Vigge]

Tulipahan sitten sotkettua näpit suht syvälle yhteen väittelyyn jonka kohteena oli Mp Performancin DP dynotulokset orkkis softalla. Jok tap, tässä pari plottia ja perusteet muutoksille.



Kysyin about kymmenkertaa, että miksi seos laihenee ylärekisterissä uudella DP:llä. Enemmän tehoa, laihempi seos tietää tietääkseni hyvää mm. pakolämmöille. Ensimmäinen vastaus kuului:
"Your correct the car may run to lean but what your looking at is how does adding the downpipe affect the a/f ratio compared to stock. In regards to how does the downpipe affects the a/f ratio it does not change it. "

Öööh olenko sokea vai miksi mää nään että seos on laihempi uudella DP:llä välillä 5000-6000?

Ahtopainekäyrä ennen ja jälkeen toimitettiin myös pyynnöstä



Näytteenottotaajuus on niin huono ettei tuo kerro "piiki" todellista korkeutta. Suurin arvo on kolmas plotattu piste, joten mikä on mahdollisuus että se osuisi juuri suurimman ahtopaineen kohdalle. Kysyin Tästä piikistä ja minulle kerrottiin.

"I call the spike a safe increase in boost pressure. Remember I also have the graphs for air/fuel ratio and ignition timing. Trionic adapted during the boost spike by adding more fuel. So more air and fuel gives the torque increase that can be seen in the dyno chart."

Kyselin noita sytkä käyriä mutta niitä ei kuulema tarvitse esittää, miksiköhän?

Avauduin hieman lisää aiheesta ahtopiikki (mun kommentit sitaateissa)

"But what does the spike do in favour of the driver?"

Simple, increase power as the dyno grach shows, did you not see the dyno graph?

"This is odd behaivour."
More boost = increae in HP....yeah this is odd. How on earth is this odd?


"Lets see the ingition timing, since you seem to have it?"
Would be interesting to see, but why?!?! The dyno graph shows an increace in both torque and hp over the entire graph...if there was a dip in either under the stock numbers I would agree that this would be necessary, but in this case why? Your making more hp and torque over the entire graph...who cares what the ignition timing is.

"Secondly what about the difference in high rpm A/F? No adaption there, why?"
So long as the A/f ratio is between 12 and 14 who cares? What are you looking to prove? Looking at the graph, at high RPM the stock pretty much matches with the downpipe.


What are you trying to disprove solid data....you asked for solid data in other posts to prove HP gains with HW mods only. Here you go, you got it and now your trying to disprove actual data.....think about Vigge, you're not doing much for you credability here.

Hiillostin vähän lisää ja sitten menikin jo vastapuolelta vellit ja jauhot sekaisin.

"ok, this is quite easy to answer. A lean mixture is an A/F ratio > 14.7:1 and a rich mixture is < 14:1...agree? I mean 14.7:1 is stoich, therefore above is lean and below is rich. OK so we are square with that, right, I mean how can you argue with it, its fact...not theory, fact.

Ok so now let have a look at the MP A/F ratio graph so we're all on the same page:
Now lets look at the ratio between 5000 and 6000 as you suggested. Oh wait, whats this? the entire time the a/f ratio is below 14.7 and for most of it below 13. Right....I mean that what the graph shows a plan as day....I mean does the graph look differently to those living in California than the rest of the world? OK so I think we're square there...5000-6000, a/f running below stoich and low and behold running rich....remember what we said anything below stoich(14.7:1) is rich by definition. Ok so what was your question or point....oh yeah, the MP car shows a lean a/f mixture...we'll lets go back and look again...hmmmm...below 14.7 rich, above lean....this graph so below 14.7, therefore its running rich....ok, so we've just proven your statement as false.

Now I'm going out on a limb here and anticipating what you'll say next....'well it running leaner than the stock run'...well a better way to state this is that its running LESS RICH than the stock....the way you say it make it out like the car is running lean. No for the 100 million dollar question, does this 'less rich' mixture have a negative effect on the hp and torque curve.....LET GO BACK TO THE GRAPHS:


damn, well would you look at that....between 5000-6000 the run with the downpipe was making more torque and more HP than the stock run that was running MORE RICH. Did this answer your question? I mean its as plain as day....that is unless we out here in CA read graphs different than the rest of the world.

But hell just to humor you, lets use your logic while looking at between 3000 and 4500....in this instance the DP graph show MORE RICH than the stock run...so what do you say here, SAAB got it wrong when they programmed the stock ECU? Damn, thats a pretty bold statement!!


...I'm literally dying to read your come back to this.

Suosittelen vakavasti harkitsemaan ko. putkan ammattitaitoa näissä hommissa. Onneksi he eivät modaa softaa ja tarjoa niitä asiakkaillensa.

[V-M]

Siis? Koitin lukea tuon useamman kerran enkä päässyt kärryille ongelman laadusta? (juu tiedän minä tyhmä).

Jotenkin kuitenkin kai se että eivät osanneet sanoa miksi seos laihenee?

Niin no kai se laihenee kun kaasut pääsee kuumempana ulos puhaltimesta kun dp ei ahista (pienenpi vastapaine) ja lamdahan näkee tuon muutoksen ja koittaa kompensoida (jos kerkiää) tuota muutosta josta tuo teho piikkikin voi johtua? Niin asiasta en mitään ymmärrä mutta jos tämä tyhmä ajatus kirvottaisi tietäjän kertomaan

Yritin tiirata tuota 5-6t laihenemistakin tuosta kuvasta mutta enpä tuosta sitä havainnut (sokea juu).

V-M

[dimebak]

Mitä itse muistan kouluajalta, että optimaaliseen bensan palamiseen päästään, kun ilma/bensa-suhde on 14,7:1 eli tarvitaan 14,7 kertaa enemmän ilmaa bensamäärään nähden. Ja tuossa näyttäis menevän kauas tuosta optimaalisesta arvosta.

Ja toinen mikä pisti silmään oli, minkä Viggekin kirjoitti, että ahtopainekäyrän näytteenottoväli on uskomattoman pitkä. Tarkempi olisi paikallaan näyte/100rpm korkeintaan, mieluiten 10 näytettä/100rpm (1000rpm olisi siis 100 näytettä = tarkka käyrä). Tällä saataisiin paljon tarkempi käyrä ja siitä olis piikki kohdat paikallistaa.

[V-M]

Korjaan itse itseäni... Siis kyllähän tuon tietty erottaa että se seos muuttuu. Mutta että se muuttuu molemmissa tapauksissa ennen ja jälkeen muutoksen eli siihen tuskin voi korjausta odottaakkaan dp vaihdolla. Sanoin asian aijemmin hieman huonosti.

Mutta eihän tuo vaarallisella alueella ole sittenkään, lämpökuorma kasvaa kyllä?

Totta. Tuo näytteen otto ei riitä analysointiin, ehkä myynti tarkoitukseen korkeintaan

Ainakin itsellä kun meni reilusti rikkaalle tuolla yli 5000rpm niin vääntö lähti laskemaan reilusti, kun painetta laskettiin niin parani reilusti. (harmi kun jäi ottamatta nuo rikkaalla dynotut käyrät.

V-M

[Mertmi]

Mitä itse muistan kouluajalta, että optimaaliseen bensan palamiseen päästään, kun ilma/bensa-suhde on 14,7:1 eli tarvitaan 14,7 kertaa enemmän ilmaa bensamäärään nähden. Ja tuossa näyttäis menevän kauas tuosta optimaalisesta arvosta.

Kyllä kyllä optimipalaminen ja pienet päästöt, koska ilmaa on riittävästi kaiken bensan polttamiseen. Parhaasta tehosta taasen sanoo ainakin Bosch Fuel Injection & Engine Management (Charles O. Brobst) kirjan mukaan paras teho saadaan bensasta kumminkin selvästi rikkaammalla seoksella. kirja esittää että maksimiteho saadaan 12,6 suhteella. Se on lambda arvona 0.86. Käytännössä maksimikiihdytyksessä seos on jossakin lambda 1 ja 0.86 välimaastossa. (Tuo 0.86 eli 12,6 suhteen raja on piirrety tonne graafiin muuten punaisella viivalla.)

[jarska]

FMI:n seosmittarin mukana tulleessa vihkosessa puhuttiin parhaan tehon saatavan 0.90 lamdalla mutta tuo 0.86 lienee tarkka arvo. Kumma että ko. kaveri sanoo "laihemman seoksen tekevän hyvää mm pakolämmöille". Eikös viri/kilpamoottorit yleensä säädetä hiemän rikkaalle paremman tehon mutta eteenkin paremman jäähdytyksen vuoksi...

[ASTech]

Korjatkaas vielä minuakin: Mielestäni ko. A/F kartat vastaavat käytännössä toisiaan. Parasta suorituskykyä ajatellen seos on liian laihalla suunnilleen koko kierrosalueen.

Optimaalisen palamisen kannalta seos on rikkaalla 4000 kierroksen jälkeen, mikä on mielestäni hyvä asia. Ainut joka siitä ei niin välitä on katti ja rahapussi.

Lisäksi käppyröiden mukaan kierrättäminen yli 5500:n lienee turhaa.

Alle 12,5:1 vaikutus alkaa olla nopeasti heikentävä. Eli liika bensakaan ei ole hyväksi tehojen kannalta ja lisäksi se voi edistää myös moottorin kulumista. Ylimääräinen bensa voi pestä öljyä pois sylinterin seinämistä.

[öljysormi]

eikös ahdetulle paras seos ole A/F 11,5? nimen omaan viritetylle.

[Vigge]

eikös ahdetulle paras seos ole A/F 11,5? nimen omaan viritetylle.

Kunhan se pyörii siinä 12 pinnassa niin ei ainakaan mene metsää. Toki kuinka rikas seos tarvitaan riippuu aika paljon käytetyistä palikoista ja ulosottotehosta.
Yleisesti voidaan kuitenki todeta että turbokoneessa optimaalisella A/F:llä ja WOT ei ole mitään tekemistä keskenään, ellei sitten välttämättä halua sulattaa paikkoja.

[Vigge]

Ei voi kuin hattua nostaa Ollin sinnikkyydelle puolustaa näkökantaansa 'tavallisena kuluttajana' . En mä vaan olisi. Siis jaksanut.

Musti

Dodiin juttu jatkuu, tässä oma yhteenveto aiheesta. Väittely siis koski T7 autoja ja HW osien muutosta ilman softan tukea. Alkuperäinen threadi on sitten täynnä BS:ää joten sen lukeminen ei varmaan ole kovin mielekästä touhua.

Hi,

I personally feel that now is the right time to finally try to sum up the
whole "monster" thread: "about custom HW part". Firstly, I know that barely any of you have read the entire thread, due to the length of the discussion and the amount of BS. I can't say I'm proud for all of my post, but I honestly feel that every action has a reaction, in this case an outcome.

Secondly I would like to offer my thanks to all the writers in that thread, mainly to Drew in Houston, and the guys from MP performance. Without our comments and data, writing this post would just be based on my assumptions, which we all hate after all.

I think it is fear to say that we have four cars that are more or less
important to this discussion, Drews 9-3 SE ( rated 205bhp ), MP advertisement ncar ( 9-3, rated to 185 bhp), Philip's viggen ( rated to 230 bhp ) and Adrian's viggen ( rated to 230bhp ). Among these cars I will be also quoting some other cars, but their roles are to bring only support to my point of view. I think it is logical to go trough the car one by one, so I will follow that path.

Drew's car:
Original HW dyno sheet can be found here:
http://www.saabnet.com/tsn/bb/performan ... ?bID=87500
Measured output according to dyno: 224.5 Whp peak(with 12% loss = 250hp)
From Drew we got the following information about this run:
"The dyno is at a Porshe race shop, it is a DynoJet and it is calibrated"

I my self find it very strange that a Porsche racing shop do dyno runs in
third gear? Maybe Drew can fill us in over this issue. To my understanding all the major players who deal with Saabs use fourth gear. Anyhow my friend dynoed his 9-3 aero ( same engine as the SE in the states ) to 215Whp in third gear, but like said before non of us (would be me and the bunch of my friends) believed that the result was correct. The only reason why my friend's car was dynoed in third gear was the fact that they did not have enough tie downs to secure the car to the rollers, in other words it just pealed out in fourth. This dyno differs form the dynojet, run takes about a minute. Here is a link to a video where my car is dynoed at the same shop. Look at the length of the run at that shop http://viggen93.mine.nu/dyno/dyno.wmv Even though the name Porsche is mixed in for respect, one can only wonder what their real know how around saabs is? I my self find it hard to give any credit what so ever for these results. Maybe Drew wondered also once upon time "specify that I'm running on a DynoJet setup. I wonder if the inaccuracies you've described have anything to do with the extra difficulties associated with measuring an AWD car?"

Then we have the results for JR Filter and JT Full 3" Exhaust
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-6/7 ... filter.jpg
231 Whp, gain over peak 6.5whp. What else do we know? Wheels where changed
from 16" to 17" between the runs. We also know that a stock T7 can will vary at least 7 whp between runs. Adrian provided the following results (206,211, 213), link to his post
http://www.saabnet.com/tsn/bb/performan ... ?bID=87657
The deviation can be explained in many ways: dynos repetability, T7 adaptions and so on. I had less deviation than Adrian in peak hp, but there surely are "big" gaps between the two runs at certain points.
http://viggen93.mine.nu/dyno/ennen.jpg (sorry, you can see the power curve
that well, but torque will give you the same result). If we look more closely, Drew did not provide us with a torque curves from his car, so we need to calculate. By looking at the sheet
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-6/7 ... filter.jpg a
rough calculations will give us the following result, torque does drop 30 ft- lbs between 47 and 49 mph, while with the stock HW this does not happen. Also with stock HW the car does produce more power to about 4200rpm. After this Drew added a big custom IC to his car. Dyno sheet was not provided, but the results according to Drew are: but my last run was 236 HP at the wheels ( comment can be found here
http://www.saabnet.com/tsn/bb/performan ... ?bID=84940 )

What do we got, a T7 car with the following specs by Drew:
"DP/sportcat, 3" full exhaust, big intercooler, turbo inlet pipe, open cone air filter. 2001 9-3 2.0 HOT, no problems, good A/F. No software yet. Stock 1 bar boost."

with stock HW parts the run was 224.5 Whp peak and with the all the mods 236, a gain in peak equal to 11.5whp. We, or at least I don't have the latest sheet so comparison over the rpm range cant be done.
Conclusions:
- Adrian provided facts that his T7 had the variation of 7Whp (3 runs made).
- This porche shop dynoed the car in 3. gear
- wheel size was changed from 16" to 17" between the runs.
- Speed was taken from roller?, tire size and deformation under run will affect result big time
Gain in dyno = 11.5whp about 5%, when proved deviation in a dynojet is over 3% ((Arians results). It surely can be more, also different tires do affect results.

Other results, quarter mile is reliable.
Form dragtimes, we get 14.687s and 95,720mph (The mods are listed, 3" exhaust w/DP, and open cone filter). Before with stock HW time of 14.950 at 94.96 mph. For time we get deviation of 0,263s. Here are four consecutive pulls for a 9-3 saab owned my a Swedish guy.
Car, time, reaction, jump start)
3351 15,83 0,68 0
3351 15,92 0,80 0
3351 16,08 0,69 0
3351 16,09 0,85 0
Same car same day, variation in time 0,26s, which equals Drews spot on. So
nothing more than normal deviation here. Oh wait, Drew said his car ran
14.6/97mph, but he does not have the slip. Even with this we have the
deviation of only 0.35s.

Drew commented his gains "I don't know what your experience with drag racing is, and I'm surely not a professional by any means, but an almost 3/10ths reduction in 1/4 mile time is a lot--especially considering I was running heavier wheels" I would rather call this "common cause variation".

Time on the strip is dependant on how you drive, while trap speed is clear
indicator of power, recongnized by many racers. For Drew's stock we have
94,96mph and with mods 95,720mph. Deviation is 0.36mph. Of course the wild car entry of low 97 would raise the deviation to about 2mph.
Man lost his best slip ever, so this can't be entered for the record.

Case viggen, almost same mods as Drew ( Custom IC, JT exhaust, JT DP, race cat, gas flowed head ) Dyno run results from Hirsch performance can be found here: http://viggen93.mine.nu/viggen/stock.jpg
As one can see the torque curve clearly indicates miss behaviour in T7. Yes more peak power and torque was gained, but who cares since you don't drive your car with peak values to begin with.
Power curve raises just as smooth as Drews, but the torque curve "behind" it is a nightmare. Maybe Drew can calculate his, since he was keen enough to point out that "Do you remember that HP=torque*rpm/5252? Wouldn't a massive torque spike translate directly into a massive HP spike too?"
But lets leave Drew torque curve out of this since we (I) don't have it.

Case MP performance:
Results same quality as Drews, no indications of the gear, since results posted in RPM instead of mph like drew's. Results point out that it was done in the same
gear? Maybe the Porsche guys dynoed this car also? If they did, read above. Results can be found here
http://mpperformance.com/images/CatDynoCompare.jpg
175.2 for stock and 188.85 with the MP DP
Gain 13.65 whp in peak. Again the dynojet and T7 combination is proven to give
at least 7 Whp of deviation.
With this gain we got a boost spike
(http://mpperformance.com/Data/BoostCompare.jpg)
Note that the logger sampling rate is too low, the highest value is the third logged value. Sampling rate that equals about 700rpm is a way too low. For instance, we know that before the max boost value data point is about 135kPa and the next (max in this case) 155kPa. What is the possibility that the highest values on that plot will equal to the peak value of the spike? If you ask me, I will say relatively low.

We also got Airmass sheet by Eric
http://mpperformance.com/Data/MAF.jpg
Adrian commented "That's only roughly 17.2 lbs/min airflow. Very low for "188 wheel horsepower" ... more like 188 *crank* horsepower. It is far more likely the dyno was poorly calibrated." His whole post can be found here
http://www.saabnet.com/tsn/bb/performan ... ?bID=87657
We also have leaner ( more rich for some of us ) A/F in high rpm.
More power and leaner A/F cant be good for EGT nor the knock safety margin? But like the guy(s) from MP wrote
"Your making more hp and torque over the entire graph…who cares what the
ignition timing is."
I think the MP man just said it all, what their point of view to engine tuning is. In other words, they don't care what will happen inside a
customer's car as long as it produces more hp, real nice, real nice.

Even though I my self am proven by Drew to be "But maybe you can still learn something that might be worthwhile to you personally and also to anyone who is subjected to your useless and non-objective bantering, that lesson you need to learn is this: You're not a T7 expert, you're an end user, and because of that you're not qualifed to make generalized statements about the complex inner-workings of T7"

I refuse to take back any of my word what consider the basic function of T7,until somebody comes up to me and says "hey this is how T7 really works, I have data to show you". I admit that I have gone to lengths in this conversation that I'm not really proud of, but feel it was a funny and necessary road that had to be walked. My original post on the topic "about custom HW parts" was meant to be provocative and to raise real conversations about this issue.

I promised you an outcome and here it is.
If I was a guy who was just getting into T7 tuning, I would buy a stage I since it will give you more hp gain than all the HW parts will ever do, plus you will more likely have a car that will run fine, no T7 complications and smooth power. Note that stage I, is not the best of choices due to engine load, but Money/HP gain/performance/smoothes ratio is good. I cant say Drew's way is incorrect "add all the HW parts before" a suitable SW, but way take the extra risk. Many tuners offer relatively cheap SW upgrades between stage levels.

And finally for those who read this far, some of the stuff that I wrote above are based on my personal opinions, so be careful in what you trust. Facts are un tampered and posted like they where originally laid out, though..

And for Drew, no hard feelings, this is just meaning less internet talk;)

With best regards

Vigge,

[se93tbo]

Mä voin henk.koht. vielä vahvistaa että ahdin ja pakosarja käy tosi kuumana orkkissoftalla ja vaihdetulla DP:lla ja turbolla. Eli softaa kannattaa aina muokata kun muuttaa auton kokoonpanoa.

***CHECK ENGINE***

[patse]

Mä voin henk.koht. vielä vahvistaa että ahdin ja pakosarja käy tosi kuumana orkkissoftalla ja vaihdetulla DP:lla ja turbolla. Eli softaa kannattaa aina muokata kun muuttaa auton kokoonpanoa.
***CHECK ENGINE***

Saakos udella minkälainen kokoonpano on kysessä, lähinnä turbo
Ja, ja ja olikos 9³ jubilee mallissa vaikona tuo viriboxi (170hv)