| milling. I'm sure it has a bit of an effect on the power output, however, I wouldn't be inclined to think that it is responsible for turbo response. Given that a dynojet is an inertial device, and the 224X is lighter than the 248X by a good bit, (and these dyno runs were on a 224X), it is actually impeding the spoolup characteristics of my Z. I can clearly see the laggier response in the spoolup as noted in the boost controller's pressure graph with the car on the dyno vs. on the street. One of the things I will be doing is the same day I return to get my final numbers, I'm going to skip over to the other dynoshop just down the road that has the 248X (the heavier slug) and make a few power pulls there to see the difference. I will expect to see even better spoolup and power down low as a result. Because the crank is lighter, it is allowing the engine to rev out a little quicker, and it isn't putting the same amount of load on the system, which will affect the spoolup negatively when looking at it on a dyno, especially when using the lighter drum on the 224X. It would be nice to take the car to a dynapak and perform some brake-load testing - that would completely eliminate inertial effects and give a clearer picture as to the performance as it will not see the difference in the lower mass of my internals. But, we do the best we can with what is available to us...
[ ashspecz.com ]
[ agpowers@bellsouth.net ] Enthusiasts soon understand each other. --W. Irving.
Are you an enthusiast? If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor.
Albert Einstein
|
14:21:03 03/15/06
