Virtual Dyno Room

[EBR]

I had to find where the makes were and add a new folder, then I copied a XML file from one of the other makes and edited that in my new folder. I found the folders here:

C:\Users\Eiríkur B. Rúnarsson\AppData\Roaming\Virtual Dyno\Cars

[EBR]

I think I like the excel file better :/

[EspenW]

Both work very well, but Virtual Dyno smooths the results more than the VDR does. That is not a problem if you have datalogging with high sample rate, but Vagcom on the B4s is only around 3 samples per second, so peak results (max torque, max power) will be somewhat lower than with a higher sample rate.

[Billman]

Anyone want to post results with Engine data?

[A80Avant]

small comparison that i just did: VDR vs my excel file.

4th gear
1770Kg or 3902lbs including driver

GT3076R 0.82AR

my excel:

501hp (crank) @ 6180rpm
353.6whp @ 6180rpm

620Nm (crank) @ 4580rpm
457ftlbs (crank) @ 4580rpm

Mustang virtual dyno:

410whp @ 6180rpm
386wtq @ 4585rpm

i see the difference being that i have different additions on losses, and my whp calculation does not have the air and rolling drag. If i add those i get 434whp instead of 410 that mustang gives. I usually add to that about 15% of drivetrain losses to come up with a crank hp.

also changing the correction factor on the VDR to 6 from 12, i get:

413whp and 379wtq

all data for this comparison was taken by the perfomance box rather than a vems log.

[A80Avant]

a bit more proper comparison..

3d gear 3076R 0.82ar 2bar overboost and 1.85 at 7000rpm.


3d gear 3076R, 0.63AR, billet wheel, ported head, 1.4-1.45bar run till 5500rpm



roads were roughly similar in whether they were downhill/uphill and weight should be within 10-20kg difference at most.

What is interesting is that the torque figure is the same and if on the new run i had kept on going, i could have matched the 0.82ar power roughly!

What a difference a ported head can make...

[A80Avant]

put the 2 together with a small correction on the tyre size.

[Billman]

very interesting finds. It would be nice to bring the IATs in game to see if with similar IAT they look the same as now but the results will be pretty close. So the question that now rises would be: Was the old engine that bad or is the ported head that good?

[A80Avant]

Well good question. However at the time I can assume that of the car was able to get close to 490-500hp, compression should be ok then. These logs for the 0.82 were done last year immediately after getting the garrett on.

Iats should also be close at least up to the 5500mark

sent using Android

[EspenW]

Looks good! Have you compared with VEMS data from the same runs?
You got 10hz resolution on the Performance box, so that is quite good, much better than the 3hz from Vagcom.
How low can you go on the smoothing factor before the graph becomes too spiky?

Note: the program only corrects for air drag, not rolling resistance. A hub dyno won't have rolling resistance from tires, but all rolling roads will.

[Billman]

Here is one from mine with 1.3 overboost and tapering to 1.2-1.25 up top. The log was made to check for trigger errors but i used it to see what is what :-p
Fuelling adaptation is made...

[Ross]

Bearing in mind my data collection method was taking 30 reference points from Dmitri's log taken during mapping, and calculating the time/rev from it, which is a bit inaccurate. But I think you get the idea:

3rd Gear, 4375lbs (4-up and full tank), Mustang corr.



I guess this is a 'teaser'

[A80Avant]

The comparison was done from the vems log. Not the performance box, as I wanted something completely comparable. My Excel gives different numbers but I would compare a performance box log vs performance box log rather against a vems log

sent using Android

[A80Avant]

that looks pretty good Ross,
if we do a perfomance box run, i bet then we will have more information to go by and better chances to be a bit more accurate!

[A80Avant]

Looks good! Have you compared with VEMS data from the same runs?
You got 10hz resolution on the Performance box, so that is quite good, much better than the 3hz from Vagcom.
How low can you go on the smoothing factor before the graph becomes too spiky?

Note: the program only corrects for air drag, not rolling resistance. A hub dyno won't have rolling resistance from tires, but all rolling roads will.

Yes, its vems data from runs done in different days obviously as the previous setup was there a year ago.

they are not PB related, but it seems that the PB logs give pretty much identical results as far as i can test and put the info in.

if the program doesnt measure rolling resistance then why did my results change once i put in the correct tyre size??