Fortuitously, Mac is here documenting successes and failures alike. And not playing the "I am the best around" game that so many come to the club to play. This is an interesting period in time, as finally people are actually doing their own work and research...where before, very few were. As a result, we are all able to see the time and resources necessary to build power in these particular engines. There would be much more success if not for the infighting...but that I suspect is human nature. I have watched the general consensus go from "we need more air to make power" to " we dont have enough rail pressure" to "we cant seem to get enough fuel" and so on. Its curious that in the 10 years these engines have been available that we have made so little progress. Most of it in the last 24 months. I think if we were more helpful to each other(and that does not mean divulging ones work), we would have gone much further by now. Hopefully, that will begin to happen...because it would be nice to see more successes and more friendly competition.
The issue I have is the BS.
EG claiming nearly 300hp on stock CR engine. It simply WILL NOT do it.
Then Mac posts like this:
I dont have doubts about the dyno results. Nice figure!
Here in romania there was a scandal 1 month ago about dyno numbers..very disappointed in how it turned out. Now dyno was recalibrated and shows realistic numbers.
430hp measured gave 387 on another dyno ..that says a lot ..
Data is shared, but not believed. Even by you.
So we stop sharing data.. As our findings are not respected / believed.
As Dragos says in some respects is true.
Dynos are not 100% accurate . but a good tool to measure performance gains. Especially if you run 200Hp and then change some parts and run 240Hp on the same dyno again then you have gained roughly 40Hp...no magical trickery. It may be 37 or 43 hp actual gain, but as a rough figure it's good to know.
Dyno figures are not everything. Then again neither are 1/4 mile times.
Terminal speeds are a better indication of a cars power , or measured acceleration times between two speeds. Eg 100-200kph on GPS or using VCDS logs on flat roads.
as many cars especially FWD are traction limited. Where as no matter how bad the start you are usually within 1 or 2 MPH each run at the top end.
And for example tuner A car runs 12.3 1/4 mile
Tuner B runs 12.1 1/4 mile.
Every one thinks Tuner B is better? But what you don't tell from the times is that tuner A is nearly smoke free with good protection limiters for egt and injection parameters .
Where as tune B is very smokey, with egt over 950c and crazy injection windows.
I'm happy with our dyno as independent, one of the most accurate in the country, and also I have used it on my other car and it's accurate to within a few BHP.
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showpost.php?p=5266914&postcount=27
Even on that thread people were questioning the dyno. What is there to gain by lying?
I like friendly competition within tuning industries . It drives new technology.
For example Darkside Arosa is great piece of work to find the limits of the engine.
Macs project is promising as long as he finds a good tuner.
I'm sure he will.