dsm-onster
DSM Wiseman
- 8,592
- 130
- Jul 11, 2004
-
Bloxom,
Virginia
2nd: He mentioned the lower honeycomb has been removed
7th: Probably: Running a 95 ecu in a 97+ vehicle requires you to invert the CAS
As for his lb/min vs hp, I believe you are saying his airflow numbers are too high for the power he's putting down? If so I was under the impression that 1 lb/min was ~ 10 crank hp & not whp. If this is the case, his lb/min seems about right if you figure somewhere between 15-20% drivetrain loss.
HAHA! I totally spaced on some of the thread. Having the honeycombs removed would certainly make the hertz curve off. And I didn't think about the 1995 into the 1997 issue.
As I mentioned, there's no way he's loosing so much hp in drivetrainloss. As I mentioned, should it take more than 30 hp to actually turn the drive train? after that, any more loss is heat from frictional forces. Where does that 30+ kilowatts of heat go? That's an aweful lot of excess heat.
I'm saying that the drivetrain loss percentage goes down significantly as the hp goes up. It doesn't take but so much power to overcome the frictional (heat causing) forces and the inertia of the drivetrain. Why would 100 more hp cause 15-20 more hp loss in friction. There's no reason for the frictional forces to change any more than the rotational inertia of the system.
There's some reason why his hp is low for his lb/min airflow, IMHO. Somethign is really a miss to me.
Hmmm, if his maf is hacked, then there would be adjustments to almost all the airflow sliders. It certainly would NOT meter like stock starting at only 800hertz as the MAF comp window indicates. HAHA, this would make his logged lbs/min airflow number lower than it actually is. ??? I don't know how much compesation a mildly hacked 2g maf needs, though so maybe I'm blowing smoke about the maf compensation.

) so if you want to meet up and talk DSMLink, shoot me a PM 