The title have your attention?
So no template because I'm not here for analysis, just discussion.

I tuned for the first time on a dyno I ended up making all this power and torque with 25 psi 272 s 9 to 1 compression.

.20 + bore, stock stroke on a gt35r variant on pump gas at 8 degrees of timing and 6500 RPM rev limit.

max power was made at 6000 that's the answer to -- {why that rev limit?}

My question is does this make sence?
I looked at the records on the site for Dyno slips and people making similar horsepower to me are making significantly lower torque...

What variables?

Are the cams helping me being degreed to " true timing ". ?

Thanks just looking to here from those who are more experienced.

Is this a 2.3? Seems like an awful lot of torque for that boost level on a 2.0. For reference mine made 530ft*lbs at the flywheel on 33-34psi.

bastarddsm said:

Is this a 2.3? Seems like an awful lot of torque for that boost level on a 2.0. For reference mine made 530ft*lbs at the flywheel on 33-34psi.

Click to expand...

No 2.0
Yeah so you see my skepticism....

That's a stupid short powerband. You need to rev higher. There is no reason not to rev even a stock 4g to 8,000 rpms.

Who tuned the car and put a rev limit 1,000 rpms lower than stock?

how does it feel when you drive it? have you seen many other dyno results from this same dyno when used to calibrate other vehicles?

How was the dyno set up? That seems like a very generous dyno. What's link estimating and is it close to that number? I know that it's not super accurate. Anyways nice job that's gobs of power

smbgsx said:

how does it feel when you drive it? have you seen many other dyno results from this same dyno when used to calibrate other vehicles?

Click to expand...

it scares the sweet baby Jesus out of me..

I took my girl in it.. See already felt it at 275whp which is what i measured at baseline.
And she almost puked around the 3rd wot pull on the street.

Havent seen another dyno.
But others in the local car/dsm community have no comments, actually recommended.

We did spend sometime calibrating
And imputing the gear ratios to the system. Comparing dyno vs link data to synchronise.

brian9397gsx said:

How was the dyno set up? That seems like a very generous dyno. What's link estimating and is it close to that number? I know that it's not super accurate. Anyways nice job that's gobs of power

Click to expand...

I kinda feel like it may be genorouse...
I dont know any better..

Link says 1000hp...
So lets ignore link this is with imputing data into the HP tab collected with speed.
Thabks..



The least likely is i made more power.
And shows low lining up with torque.

But when i had a oem gst. With 16g
and at 28psi i only made 334whp ..

Soooo. Againg are my cams really helping me?

Since physics tells us awd are lesser efficient at conserving power.

If your really curious, and you have access to another dyno, maybe grab some numbers from a different one to compare. Or go to a strip and see what kind of times you can lay down. I'd think if you know the weight of your car and your 1/4 mile time. You could calculate HP. Then calculate torque using you RPM as an input. Cuz Torque= HP x 5252/RPM
If memory serves me correctly. That's a lot of work tho . But it would get you in the ballpark, and considering how much higher your torque output is when compared to other dsm's you may be able to confirm it or call BS.

Well I decided to try and make more sense of this and I think I have it all solved and figure it out I cut out my RPMs at 6.5k to take advantage of the max torque curve.

and everyone else with higher horsepower is revving a lot higher which would explain the unproportional ratios that they have compared to mine,
meaning had I continued to make Power past my RPM range I too would have had similar numbers to others .

and using a bit of physics and conversions I was able to prove the relationship and thus one can apply that to other members Dyno graphs.

So in theory had it not been for my injectors. And rpm limit
I could have possibly made a lot more horsepower..

But......trq matters more.
So why keep reving...

Anywho thanks all.
This was more of a parameter issue than anything else.

You hit full boost around 5,000 rpms. If you shift out of 1st at 6500 rpms you’ll land in 2nd gear under 4,000 rpms. See the problem?

I made 565awhp and 524awtq in 2010. 2.0L, hks 272s, cyclone intake, 56mm hx40@38psi, etc. My slip should be in the records here.

Dont know what your trying to say with the math homework. revving higher wouldn't effect your PEAK torque. Yeah, torque output would fall as revs go up, but HP would likely continue to climb until engine breathing falls off.
Torque is a byproduct of engine efficiency. (How well the engine displaces air) your torque curve shape overall won't change. you can change your pressure ratio (ie: boost pressure) and the numbers may go up or down, but the shape of the curve will likely remain the same. Peak torque= best engine breathing. Biggest gulps of air and lighting off the largest amounts of fuel make the highest pressure on the piston. Which in turn creates the highest twisting force on the crankshaft. As you rev higher the valves are open for a shorter amount of time, able to let in less air and fuel, but you are lighting off those little "breaths" more often, doing more work per time. Which is essentially what HP is a measure of.
Rev out higher and see what happens, torque will fall, but HP may climb, and as someone else said, when you shift, if your reving out higher, RPM may fall right into the meat of the torque curve on the upshift, which will allow you to run better ET's then if you are dropping to 4000 rpm where you're only making 200ft lb.