98 Jag Sovereign dyno results
#1
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Seven Hills, Sydney, Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The following users liked this post:
Cambo (03-25-2014)
#4
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Crossroads of America
Posts: 19,539
Received 13,030 Likes
on
6,507 Posts
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Cheers,
Don
#5
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So you start with 216.25 KW (290 BHP) and end up with 162.6 KW (218 BHP) ??? I must be getting something wrong here, because the way I am reading this is, that after your modification you end up with 25% roughly, less power than you start with ? Assuming ( and that's always a dangerous thing ) this is rear wheel BHP not flywheel, then how much power does the gearbox ,diff and drive shafts actually rob ? Please don't get me wrong, I am not trying to put you down or demean your work, I am just confused... can you please explain. Thanks in advance, Andy
#6
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Welcome to the forum John.
You should stop by our new members area & introduce yourself New Member Area - Intro a MUST - Jaguar Forums - Jaguar Enthusiasts Forum
In answer to Andrews question, the dyno definitely shows power at the rear wheels.
218rwhp is about right for a 16 year old car that supposedly had 290hp at the flywheel from the factory.
Losses of about 20% could be expected through the drivetrain, maybe more, maybe less.
When it was brand new it might have done 230hp at the wheels or so.
You should stop by our new members area & introduce yourself New Member Area - Intro a MUST - Jaguar Forums - Jaguar Enthusiasts Forum
In answer to Andrews question, the dyno definitely shows power at the rear wheels.
218rwhp is about right for a 16 year old car that supposedly had 290hp at the flywheel from the factory.
Losses of about 20% could be expected through the drivetrain, maybe more, maybe less.
When it was brand new it might have done 230hp at the wheels or so.
Last edited by Cambo; 03-25-2014 at 01:15 AM.
The following 2 users liked this post by Cambo:
andrew lowe (03-25-2014),
Norri (03-25-2014)
#7
Trending Topics
#8
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
potentially you could modify the maf sensor and bypass air around the hotwire, so esentially
letting in unmetered air, ie leaning it out...the computer can only adapt to a change it sees via the hotwire in the maf......
just my theory....2cents
unless this motor uses a map sensor, which i don't know about
letting in unmetered air, ie leaning it out...the computer can only adapt to a change it sees via the hotwire in the maf......
just my theory....2cents
unless this motor uses a map sensor, which i don't know about
#9
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Crossroads of America
Posts: 19,539
Received 13,030 Likes
on
6,507 Posts
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
You don't have to modify the MAFS to allow unmetered air into the intake: just open a joint anywhere in the intake plumbing after the MAFS. But if I'm not mistaken, an air-fuel mixture of 13 (parts air) to 1 (part fuel) is _richer_ than the standard Lambda 14.7:1 mixture the ECM adaptive fuel metering wants to maintain. Since the ratio of air-to-fuel is lower, the ratio of fuel-to-air is higher.
#10
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
In answer to Andrews question, the dyno definitely shows power at the rear wheels.
218rwhp is about right for a 16 year old car that supposedly had 290hp at the flywheel from the factory.
Losses of about 20% could be expected through the drivetrain, maybe more, maybe less.
When it was brand new it might have done 230hp at the wheels or so.
218rwhp is about right for a 16 year old car that supposedly had 290hp at the flywheel from the factory.
Losses of about 20% could be expected through the drivetrain, maybe more, maybe less.
When it was brand new it might have done 230hp at the wheels or so.
At least they've put up actual power figures, not like a lot of people here who take the rear wheel figure and then add on a percentage they feel comfortable with, sometimes up to 20%, to come up with a BHP figure
To the OP, you really haven't told us anything... do you have a website or a pic of anything? I would love a new intake pipe and a few extra ponies.
Plus you're one of the few tuners I've seen in this part of the world
#11
#12
The following users liked this post:
andrew lowe (03-25-2014)
#13
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Crossroads of America
Posts: 19,539
Received 13,030 Likes
on
6,507 Posts
#14
#15
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Seven Hills, Sydney, Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Donb you got it. It is a 4 litre quad cam V8 with 230,000ks, which we have owned for five years. Since we did a major service to it and now tuned it, the motor is so smooth.
As far as AFR's go, turbo cars AFR"s should be around 12 to 1 under load and 13 to 1 for normally aspirated. Most cars from factory run way too rich. We also use Apexi Super AFC's to trim AFR's if the car has an air flow meter.
As far as the power goes, I think it is about right, in fact very good. To compare I had a Lexus LS400 4 litre quad cam V8, which stock standard only made 108rwkw, we added a very quiet high flow exhaust with large straight through custom made mufflers, trimmed AFR's with S AFC, modified intake and it made 150rwkw. The Jag almost made this standard.
As far as AFR's go, turbo cars AFR"s should be around 12 to 1 under load and 13 to 1 for normally aspirated. Most cars from factory run way too rich. We also use Apexi Super AFC's to trim AFR's if the car has an air flow meter.
As far as the power goes, I think it is about right, in fact very good. To compare I had a Lexus LS400 4 litre quad cam V8, which stock standard only made 108rwkw, we added a very quiet high flow exhaust with large straight through custom made mufflers, trimmed AFR's with S AFC, modified intake and it made 150rwkw. The Jag almost made this standard.
#16
#17
#18
#19
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Sounds about right. My XJR was 276kw from quoted figures, but was dyno'd a couple of years back at 240rwkw. You'll always see a lower figure on a dyno than the manufacturer claims
At least they've put up actual power figures, not like a lot of people here who take the rear wheel figure and then add on a percentage they feel comfortable with, sometimes up to 20%, to come up with a BHP figure
To the OP, you really haven't told us anything... do you have a website or a pic of anything? I would love a new intake pipe and a few extra ponies.
Plus you're one of the few tuners I've seen in this part of the world
At least they've put up actual power figures, not like a lot of people here who take the rear wheel figure and then add on a percentage they feel comfortable with, sometimes up to 20%, to come up with a BHP figure
To the OP, you really haven't told us anything... do you have a website or a pic of anything? I would love a new intake pipe and a few extra ponies.
Plus you're one of the few tuners I've seen in this part of the world
#20
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
It was also a hub dyno, not a rolling road. I would expect slightly lower readings from a rolling road because of the tyres and momentum etc, but also the dyno I used has been known to read a little high... but that's not really of concern to me, what's more important is that it's consistent, and I could compare with a lot of other cars that have been on the same dyno, and also I can compare if I ever do any mods, as the car is completely stock.
FWIW I've had my car on a rolling road, it was measured at 250hp lol...
FWIW I've had my car on a rolling road, it was measured at 250hp lol...
The following users liked this post:
andrew lowe (03-26-2014)