S-Type / S type R Supercharged V8 ( X200 ) 1999 - 2008 2001 - 2009
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Disappointing results after performance upgrades-S Type R

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #2  
Old 10-11-2010, 01:25 PM
Mafioso's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Carrollton TX
Posts: 1,080
Received 43 Likes on 35 Posts
Default

Did you do a baseline prior?
 
  #3  
Old 10-11-2010, 01:53 PM
mycaptainchris's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Melbourne Beach Florida
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

How does it feel when you drive it? That's the point isn't it?
 
  #4  
Old 10-11-2010, 02:25 PM
vance580's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,445
Received 217 Likes on 129 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Alchris
Hi all,

Don't know if this is the correct section but seems a good place to start.

I recently had an ECU remap, modified supercharger pulley, replacement rear boxes and new air filter fitted to my 2007 STR by a well known Jaguar performance specialist, not some back street, fly-by-night tuner. The claimed bhp increase for the pulley was 20 bhp, the ECU remap 25 bhp and a more modest increase from the other bits and pieces. Unfortunately on the day of fitting the rolling road was broken so dyno run couldn't be completed.

However, today I had my car tested on their rolling road and was very disappointed by the results. The rolling road is made by Dyno Dynamics and the best and worst results were 413.6 hp and 399.3 hp at the flywheel. Given the standard car is supposed to produce 395-400 hp you may understand my disappointment. It was explained to me that the Jaguar figures are optimistic and in reality the 4.2 supercharged engines typically produce 360-370 bhp, so the mods have done what is claimed. That didn't sound right to me.

Is this correct or have I wasted my money? Maybe there is something wrong with my car? Was the rolling road faulty?

I'm not an engineer, mechanic or expert so would appreciate your thoughts.

Thanks.
I'm a little confused they dynoed your STR at the flywheel. They didnt dyno your wheel hp?? If that is wheel hp then that should be right cause their claim of 360-370 whp is actually a little high. If you are getting 413 hp to the wheels I would be happy as a clam. The only way you really could tell if you got anything was to of done a baseline like Mafioso said cause there are alot of factors that go into your dyno run that it will never match someone elses. ie elevation, temp, car mechanics ie how new is your filters, plugs etc. No 2 cars are gonna go one right after another and lay exact dyno graphs no matter how exactly similar the cars are.
 
  #5  
Old 10-11-2010, 02:37 PM
Mafioso's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Carrollton TX
Posts: 1,080
Received 43 Likes on 35 Posts
Default

take for example mine. look at my Mafioso's Thread! I have my baseline numbers there.

Without a baseline there is no way to know what the modifications did.

Perhaps you got a monday or a friday car?

Without knowing before only the after it puts you in this position.

Did they give you a print out? if you can post it up we can analyse that help out.
 

Last edited by Mafioso; 10-11-2010 at 02:40 PM.
  #6  
Old 10-11-2010, 03:27 PM
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Damon /Houston, Texas
Posts: 7,254
Received 2,191 Likes on 1,357 Posts
Default

FIRST I use a dyno dynamics when I do wheel hp numbers and it gives wheel hp and is VERY conservative (many say realistic) thats why its called the "heart breaker" too. Number are just that, without a graph of before and after you dont know if your car was even producing the numbers that are stock before. Theres too much that affects power output and numbers can be changed by a dyno operator to read higher or lower by changing evironmental conditions etc.....Personally I wouldnt spend any money on anything but AVOS's twinscrew kit. Yes its alot of moeny. yes itll be a huge smile every time you touch the gas pedal. Yes it have me even thinking about selling my Jag and getting a newer sc car just so I could do this swap,
 
  #7  
Old 10-11-2010, 03:46 PM
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Perth Ontario Canada
Posts: 11,058
Received 2,263 Likes on 1,845 Posts
Default

Your dyno numbers are rear wheel horsepower. Jaguar's numbers (like all OEMs) are at the flywheel. Big difference. I think you did very well with the numbers quoted.
 
  #8  
Old 10-11-2010, 04:37 PM
JagV8's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 26,767
Received 4,531 Likes on 3,941 Posts
Default

Something seems a bit wrong here. They can measure rwhp but I don't see how they can measure flywheel hp. So, either those are rwhp (but they seem too big) or they've estimated flywheel hp. If the latter, what were the rwhp figures?
 
  #9  
Old 10-11-2010, 04:50 PM
bfsgross's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 5,084
Received 431 Likes on 389 Posts
Default

Alchris, I bet you my left hi-flo cat that you're reading the dyno sheet incorrectly and now have 413 hp at the rear wheels. Stock 07 STR's develop 400 hp at the crank; 350 hp at the wheels. Congratulations! You just gained 63 hp fella. Now pop on hi-flo cats, x-pipe, and 2 1/2" pipe down the pipe line and you'll earn another 25 hp for a total of 475 crank hp or 438 hp at the wheels.
 
  #10  
Old 10-11-2010, 05:05 PM
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Damon /Houston, Texas
Posts: 7,254
Received 2,191 Likes on 1,357 Posts
Default

63 rwhp is almost like adding a blower to a normally aspirated car. Does it feel like that? Cause 63 rwhp is a very noticable differance
 
  #11  
Old 10-11-2010, 05:46 PM
Enthusiast's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,409
Received 19 Likes on 15 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BRUTAL
63 rwhp is almost like adding a blower to a normally aspirated car. Does it feel like that? Cause 63 rwhp is a very noticable differance
Agreed. No way he got a 63 rwhp increase. That would be like a 100 increase at the crank...
 
  #12  
Old 10-11-2010, 06:53 PM
bfsgross's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 5,084
Received 431 Likes on 389 Posts
Default

Ok, perhaps not 63 hp at the wheels, but let's agree on one thing; a smaller pulley, exhaust, and ECU mod should have allowed the motor to gain nearly 50 hp? So alchris, how does she run?
 
  #13  
Old 10-11-2010, 07:43 PM
vance580's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,445
Received 217 Likes on 129 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bfsgross
Ok, perhaps not 63 hp at the wheels, but let's agree on one thing; a smaller pulley, exhaust, and ECU mod should have allowed the motor to gain nearly 50 hp? So alchris, how does she run?
Might not run to good he titled the post disappointing results. I'm not really a numbers guy. I could care less how much hp I have as long as I can feel it I'm good and as long as it throws me back in my seat and makes me go holy $&!* then I'm good. I do get curious about what it will run at the track. I just found out there is a dyno right down the road from me might call and if its not too much just run down there and get a baseline just for S's and G's.
 
  #14  
Old 10-11-2010, 09:36 PM
Mafioso's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Carrollton TX
Posts: 1,080
Received 43 Likes on 35 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bfsgross
Alchris, I bet you my left hi-flo cat that you're reading the dyno sheet incorrectly and now have 413 hp at the rear wheels. Stock 07 STR's develop 400 hp at the crank; 350 hp at the wheels. Congratulations! You just gained 63 hp fella. Now pop on hi-flo cats, x-pipe, and 2 1/2" pipe down the pipe line and you'll earn another 25 hp for a total of 475 crank hp or 438 hp at the wheels.
Idk about the 50hp that's only about 11% loss through the drivetrain. I know for a fact our drive trains are not that efficient you have drag from the contact patch from the 275-35-18's. You have friction from the wheel bearings brake pads dragging. Drag in the rear diff gear mesh not to mention the gear oil. The rotating mass of the drive shaft, wheels. Oh then there is the tranny. So more likely 15-20% is a more accurate number forget perfect world scenarios we have gravity to deal with.

20% of 400 is only 320whp.
 
  #15  
Old 10-12-2010, 01:39 AM
alexsneesby's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Seattle
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jagv8
Something seems a bit wrong here. They can measure rwhp but I don't see how they can measure flywheel hp. So, either those are rwhp (but they seem too big) or they've estimated flywheel hp. If the latter, what were the rwhp figures?
I'm pretty sure they can measure flywheel hp ratings. I very well could be mistaken though.

I heard that after they've given it the berries they let it run down (not using the brakes to slow the wheels to a stop) and this calculates the mechanical drag. Then with a whizzy math formula they can determine the flywheel hp.
 
  #16  
Old 10-12-2010, 02:50 AM
JagV8's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 26,767
Received 4,531 Likes on 3,941 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by alexsneesby
I'm pretty sure they can measure flywheel hp ratings. I very well could be mistaken though.

I heard that after they've given it the berries they let it run down (not using the brakes to slow the wheels to a stop) and this calculates the mechanical drag. Then with a whizzy math formula they can determine the flywheel hp.
That's my point: they can't measure it. They can estimate it. It's a fairly loose (crappy) estimate when you do.
 
  #17  
Old 10-12-2010, 07:29 AM
The Chris X's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 2,475
Received 128 Likes on 122 Posts
Default

So does it freaking go faster or not???

We need more details from the OP.....
 
  #18  
Old 10-12-2010, 08:43 AM
bfsgross's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 5,084
Received 431 Likes on 389 Posts
Default

Hey boys, let's go back to the beginning of this thread when we briefly discussed disparing dynos, conditions, even the skill of their operators. Let's go back even further to Riski's and others 340+ RWH dyno-runs performed on their bone stock STR's. I can understand 50 hp lost to drivetrain parasites, but not 70+hp. In earlier threads discussing STR factory and aftermarket dyno results, we agreed that an otherwise bone-stock STR puts nearly 340 hp to the wheels. Now an overly conservative dyno-run which may have been flawed from the git-go, clocks in an STR at 317 RWH? 317 RWH won't produce the road performance clocked on a stock STR. I believe Alchris needs to either check his car for issues, i.e was DSC disengaged? Was adaptive learning cleared? Fresh fuel and air filter? Does he have an x-pipe, 2 1/2" pipe, and delete stock resonator? Perform another dyno-run on another dyno or under different conditions. A properly tuned STR with an exhaust, pulley, and ECU mod should gain 50+ hp or at least 375+ RWH.
 
  #19  
Old 10-12-2010, 02:29 PM
ChrisSTR's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NY, NY
Posts: 295
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Hey BFS have you dyno'd or track tested your STR yet?? Come on BRO!!

(Check your PM's)
 
  #20  
Old 10-12-2010, 03:55 PM
bdelgros's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 47
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

To the OP, how much did this mod cost you. Can someone please list all the possible mods I can do to my STR?

Pulley
Intake
Header
Exhaust

what about torque converter?
 


Quick Reply: Disappointing results after performance upgrades-S Type R



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:31 PM.