That's what we do, and pay for extra VHT... Is the track perse, doesn't have good fundaments

 

How long do his plugs last?!?!!!!????

 

Thanks webcarconnection! It was definitely a satisfying day. About 20 runs, 3 different drivers, every single run below 10 seconds.

I think the car has about 2500 miles now and it's still on the original plugs Ken.

 

Good to know this plataform can handle that kind of "abuse"

 

Great work guys and congrats!

 

Thanks Sambo!

Here's another vid of one of the other runs from the day.

 

138mph

 

OK...it's been a week since he last took the car to the track, but yesterday he was at the track testing his new GTR, so he had a friend drive the Porsche and let him take a few runs down the track.

Low and behold...more 9's. Talk about consistency!!

 

Tom, what dyno were these runs done on and do you happen to have a graph you could share?

Congrats on the numbers! Surprised the PDK is holding up as well as it is that's awesome.

 

Thanks!! It's pretty exciting to see the car produce the same results so consistently. The trap speed was 2mph slower this time...but we're guessing that's because the guy who was driving this time is about 50lbs heavier then the owner, and it was about 10 degrees hotter outside.

I posted a dyno graph back on page 2 of this thread. The car was tuned on our in-house DynoJet. When we initially started testing the 997.2 platform, we first did a lot of baseline runs on a local Mustang dyno to establish a delta between our results and what people would commonly see on a Mustang so that the results could be somewhat compared to other cars. On average, we were only seeing somewhere around 10-15 whp more on our DynoJet. That's why you'll notice the runs on the dyno sheet are considerably higher. First, they were from one of our "all out" testing runs. For the finished product, we backed the power down to about 670 on our dyno...which is why I reported the numbers above.

 

RWD or AWD Dynojet?

In terms of the Mustang dyno reading that close to the in-house Dynojet I can tell you that the Mustang you used to use simply wasn't calibrated for that car so it read higher. When you set the car up for a Mustang dyno you'd:

1) Put it on the scales, get the weight of the car
2) VERY important for a load bearing dyno such as a Mustang: record a parasitic loss file for that car.

Without these two parameters set for the car Mustang numbers really won't make much sense if used online to compare to other Mustang numbers out there.

To record the parasitic loss file is really easy. Set the Mustang software into parasitic loss record mode, accelerate to just above 160mph and then set the car into neutral and let it coast down on its own to a full stop. That ends the recording and you've now got a properly calibrated Mustang for the car you're dynoing with.

Having said all that, Dynojets are great for online comparisons of cars from different dyno shops, across different ambients, continents etc. They aren't load bearing and can't measure parasitic losses. They can vary up/down 20-25whp from one shop to another so as comparison tools they're great. For tuning though I'd take a load bearing dyno such as a Mustang over a Dynojet any day

Dzenno@PTF

 

Thanks Dzenno. Trust me...we have been using both DynoJet and Mustang dynos for years. We have used both types also back when tuning the RS6 and RS4 race cars for Audi. Both have their advantages, which is why we do baselines on each one. Both were set up 100% properly in this case by our engineer, who knows how to calculate the parasitic loss, weighed the car, and properly calibrated both machines before using them. We're no fly-by-night operation...when we do something, we either do it right or we don't do it all. (as you can see from the result)

 

Tom -

I hope my post didn't come across in the wrong way. I certainly wasn't implying anything in terms of Champion's practices. It was simply to share some facts on dyno numbers when it comes to running the car on a Mustang vs Dynojet while trying to get a better understanding of the power numbers mentioned above.

Track numbers and reliability/longevity are where its at anyways and what matters most at the end of the day is that cars we all get a chance to tune run strong, reliable and consistent tunes. Record numbers certainly can't hurt and as we all know chasing them is tons of fun!

Cheers -

Dzenno@PTF

 

Not at all my friend.

You're absolutely right though. At the end of the day there's two schools of thought when it comes to dyno numbers. There are those who simply want the bragging rights, or the numbers to show off. And then there are those (like us and you) who use the dyno for that is was designed....as a tool to measure the delta in performance before and after a change to the car.

Because the weather in Florida is a lot more volatile then most places, we tend to rely a little more heavily on the dyno during the tuning process then most other tuners I think. The sense I get is that a lot of tuners (like Cobb, correct me if I'm wrong) do the majority of their tuning adjustments based on datalogs sent in by users during on-road driving. Unfortunately for us, we're cursed with REALLY hot weather most of the year, and terribly crowded highways which make it more practical to use the dyno at first. The last thing we want to do is take a sketchy tune out on the highway on a 100 degree day and risk damaging the engine until we know the fundamentals of the tune are working safely on the dyno. Then we'll do the road test portion.

 

Yes and no. We use our dyno's non stop for testing. We gather data record pressures, temperatures etc and make calibrations. Then they go on the AP's and then we touch them up on the street through logs. Most of our tuner's use a dyno, so most get dyno tuned, but not all.

Hope that helps. Great numbers Tom and all involved

-Mitch