So..... all in, i should shut up and be happy?
If my sums are correct then with your corrected g/s readings your pushing closer to 300bhp than 280bhp so yea I'd be happy!
Last edited:
If my sums are correct then with your corrected g/s readings your pushing closer to 300bhp than 280bhp so yea I'd be happy!
How can you work all that out?
If my sums are correct then with your corrected g/s readings your pushing closer to 300bhp than 280bhp so yea I'd be happy!
So the actual point of a rolling road is ......... shame diesels don't spit the same information to the log files
How can you work all that out?
Two ways I've been told of, both by peeps on here and a few well known garages, and these are quite simpley g/s figure + 60 = rough bhp or other way is g/s figure * 1.3 = rough bhp.
Have to say that these only give rough figures so could go either way but folks I've spoken to who have used these methods before find they are not a million miles out.
So the actual point of a rolling road is ......... shame diesels don't spit the same information to the log files
Rolling Roads give accurate results (with the exception of the dyno lottery) these are only rough figures.....
So just like a rolling road then
Nice one cheers hehe
There is not real way to get perfect results I need to get my Lamba Changed as i think its effecting my performance..
If my sums are correct then with your corrected g/s readings your pushing closer to 300bhp than 280bhp so yea I'd be happy!
pah... i dont like that calculation but like you say it gives a rough figure
those corrected values are from the (supposedly) good log i ran about 6 weeks ago.
I remember coming in late one friday evening thinking i had spyware on the pc due to a problem i'd been having. So, convinced i was having an issue off i went - 9 hours and NO spyware later I realised i'd been chasing something that was simply an unwanted bug in firefox that was fixed by an update
I don't know if the same goes with cars and the often spurious data they churn out but i am sure sometimes you get lost in what you've found as opposed to what you were actually looking for. Is this what happens when you realise youcan't make more power from you have so you go looking for where you think you've lost it?
I don't know if the same goes with cars and the often spurious data they churn out but i am sure sometimes you get lost in what you've found as opposed to what you were actually looking for. Is this what happens when you realise youcan't make more power from you have so you go looking for where you think you've lost it?
My guess*......
At 4200 rpm 191.7% 203% 187.2%
It wants to meet a load of 191.7% but it knows it's running leaner than it wants to, so it's tweaking the requested load to 203% to compensate. It doesn't meet that tweaked load, only managing 187.2% because it doesnt deliver the extra air it thinks it needs because that would mean going outside the boost parameters....?
*John'll be along with the real answer soon.
I'm not absolutaely certain how actual load is calculated, but I guess maf is the greatest proportion of it, but it takes boost, air and water temp, into account, so a slightly dodgy maf reading should jsut give a bit more boost and airflow to bring the caclulated actual load back into line.
My guess*......
At 4200 rpm 191.7% 203% 187.2%
It wants to meet a load of 191.7% but it knows it's running leaner than it wants to, so it's tweaking the requested load to 203% to compensate. It doesn't meet that tweaked load, only managing 187.2% because it doesnt deliver the extra air it thinks it needs because that would mean going outside the boost parameters....?
*John'll be along with the real answer soon.
This sounds very feasible in theory
Sorry John, are you saying it should tweak boost so requested, corrected and actual should be the same or are you saying that the MAF would cause the shortfall in actual figures?
So, can we add a bit of fuelling with Unisettings to compensate for your Maf tube, then have a go at getting some power out of your wmi?
Similar threads
