Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,661
From: LA (lower Alabama)
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Originally Posted by Don2
How did you get 8.984 DCR? When I use Kelley's program, it gives my 9.89 DCR. Am I doing something wrong?
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,661
From: LA (lower Alabama)
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Originally Posted by Don2
How did you get 8.984 DCR? When I use Kelley's program, it gives my 9.89 DCR. Am I doing something wrong?
Banned
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,518
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Originally Posted by Don2
The cam is a 230/236 with 108deg centerline and 112 deg ls. 2deg advance.
Cam card specs : IVO: 5deg btdc, IVC: 45 deg abdc, EVO: 52 bbdc, and EVC: 4 deg atdc.
Cam card specs : IVO: 5deg btdc, IVC: 45 deg abdc, EVO: 52 bbdc, and EVC: 4 deg atdc.
Just some help there
Bret
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 488
From: Schaumburg, IL
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Ok I actually got mine set right for the cam we're using and Static is 9.57:1--About where I wanted it. Dynamic is 7.07:1...I'm guessing this should be good for 20PSI and spinnig all the way up to 8K RPM. Atleast that's where the cam will make peak HP.
Chris
Cam specs out at 257/252 @ .050 .683/.683 Lift with 1.6 Rockers on 115 LSA and 111 ICL.
Just a little cam
Chris
Cam specs out at 257/252 @ .050 .683/.683 Lift with 1.6 Rockers on 115 LSA and 111 ICL.
Just a little cam
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 375
From: Glen Burnie, MD
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Originally Posted by SStrokerAce
John, the only thing to look out for on a SR motor is the lifters and springs and how they are going to work together. Racerdude is lucky to try out the Schubeck lifters on his motor but most guys look at a $1000 set of lifters and tell you that you are nuts! Once you bust a roller bearing on a lifter you will be one pissed of ****.
Bret
Last edited by MadMaxz28; Dec 2, 2004 at 10:41 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 752
From: Double Oak TX
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Originally Posted by 1racerdude
Denny,
I get 12.04586 static and 9.069288 dynamic.
Man,you'r ready to fly--- Clear the runway.
I used the brown one too,you must have entered something wrong,play with it and get used to it and start with the intake closing calc first,not where it opens.
I get 12.04586 static and 9.069288 dynamic.
Man,you'r ready to fly--- Clear the runway.
I used the brown one too,you must have entered something wrong,play with it and get used to it and start with the intake closing calc first,not where it opens.
Took the stock program and tuned it for drivability getting the trim and other things all squared away first. On the dyno we used a Tech II to check for knock retard and tuned the AF using the wideband so it was between 12.8 and 13.1. (which the motor liked best using a 160 water temp as the baseline reference)
Being we saw no retard using the stock program, I added another degree to see if it wanted more. The car picked up slightly showing no retard at all. Another degree and it still didn't show any retard, but didn't improve the hp so I backed it down a degree.
Sure wasn't hard to tune is all I'll say if that's the cutting edge.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 371
From: Earth, Socal
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Sorry I never got back to you about your DD2k file, but I was having a bit of computer problems... I did try to open it once everything was fixed, but it looks like we are running different versions of DD2k, so I cant even open the file to look at it..
Sorry man!
Sorry man!
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,661
From: LA (lower Alabama)
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Originally Posted by Denny McLain
The funny thing is this is supposed to be the max compression you can safely run based upon what I'm hearing and the motor likes 100% stock timing plus a degree.
Took the stock program and tuned it for drivability getting the trim and other things all squared away first. On the dyno we used a Tech II to check for knock retard and tuned the AF using the wideband so it was between 12.8 and 13.1. (which the motor liked best using a 160 water temp as the baseline reference)
Being we saw no retard using the stock program, I added another degree to see if it wanted more. The car picked up slightly showing no retard at all. Another degree and it still didn't show any retard, but didn't improve the hp so I backed it down a degree.
Sure wasn't hard to tune is all I'll say if that's the cutting edge.
Took the stock program and tuned it for drivability getting the trim and other things all squared away first. On the dyno we used a Tech II to check for knock retard and tuned the AF using the wideband so it was between 12.8 and 13.1. (which the motor liked best using a 160 water temp as the baseline reference)
Being we saw no retard using the stock program, I added another degree to see if it wanted more. The car picked up slightly showing no retard at all. Another degree and it still didn't show any retard, but didn't improve the hp so I backed it down a degree.
Sure wasn't hard to tune is all I'll say if that's the cutting edge.
Thats what I had said in one of my earler posts that-- I believe you can run 9.5 dcr on pump gas on the street ---- and be good to go as long as you have GOOD COOLING.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 752
From: Double Oak TX
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Originally Posted by 1racerdude
Denny,
Thats what I had said in one of my earler posts that-- I believe you can run 9.5 dcr on pump gas on the street ---- and be good to go as long as you have GOOD COOLING.
Thats what I had said in one of my earler posts that-- I believe you can run 9.5 dcr on pump gas on the street ---- and be good to go as long as you have GOOD COOLING.
Based upon my current setup and one that I had that honestly was running 13.3 to 1 static, I would be every bit in agreement. This thing literally drives like stock and instead of pulling out timing, you can actually run a couple of degrees more with no issues.
However as per your comment, I do have a high flow HD electric pump, BeCool radiator, water wetter, no coolent, 160 thermo and underbody panel for better cooling.
You guys got it all over me when it comes to the hard core math and engineering aspects, but I' ve got a ton of dyno sheets, cam cards and flow sheets sitting around.
The difference between wisdom and intelligence is experience. Good ol street smarts and experience goes a long ways.
Appreciate everyones insights rounding out and adding to my knowledge base. Thanks Guys!
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,661
From: LA (lower Alabama)
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Well you have all the right stuff for cooling.If you run into issues contact Evens cooling and do their water pump trick and their coolant. you should run some water solubble oil in there to stop corrosion and rust.
Good luck dude.
Good luck dude.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 752
From: Double Oak TX
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Originally Posted by 1racerdude
Well you have all the right stuff for cooling.If you run into issues contact Evens cooling and do their water pump trick and their coolant. you should run some water solubble oil in there to stop corrosion and rust.
Good luck dude.
Good luck dude.
West South Central Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
I prefer DynoSim over DD2000. 
Although when I was using DD2000, I was able to simulate several of my friends' motors to where they were very close to how they dyno'd.
Although when I was using DD2000, I was able to simulate several of my friends' motors to where they were very close to how they dyno'd.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 324
From: South Carolina
Re: Desktop Dyno 2000.. How Accurate? Realistic #s?
Originally Posted by Don2
Do you guys think I am in trouble with my setup?
3.75" stroke, 6" rod
4.030" bore, 16cc dish pistons. .009" piston to deck clearance
.026" head gasket with 4.100 bore
The heads are Stage II CMS aluminum LT-1 with I think a 56-57 cc chamber.
The cam is a 230/236 with 108deg centerline and 112 deg ls. 2deg advance.
Cam card specs : IVO: 5deg btdc, IVC: 45 deg abdc, EVO: 52 bbdc, and EVC: 4 deg atdc.
I am getting 10.858 SCR with a .035 squish, which seems reasonable, but the DCR is 9.80
3.75" stroke, 6" rod
4.030" bore, 16cc dish pistons. .009" piston to deck clearance
.026" head gasket with 4.100 bore
The heads are Stage II CMS aluminum LT-1 with I think a 56-57 cc chamber.
The cam is a 230/236 with 108deg centerline and 112 deg ls. 2deg advance.
Cam card specs : IVO: 5deg btdc, IVC: 45 deg abdc, EVO: 52 bbdc, and EVC: 4 deg atdc.
I am getting 10.858 SCR with a .035 squish, which seems reasonable, but the DCR is 9.80
Hmmm Sounds like the motor I just built but I used AFR 195's and 230/244 112LS (CC 306). I put 414RWHP/412RWTQ but I think there is more (6-10HP) with a bit more tuning