Big Slice of Reality Pie., 2056 D-jet Dyno run |
|
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG.
This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way. Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners. |
|
Big Slice of Reality Pie., 2056 D-jet Dyno run |
Olympic 914 |
May 6 2021, 08:25 AM
Post
#1
|
Group: Members Posts: 1,699 Joined: 7-July 11 From: Pittsburgh PA Member No.: 13,287 Region Association: North East States |
Just got back from having the teener run on a Dyno.
Good and not as good as I expected. Was hoping for at least 100 Hp, didn't make it. This run was on a Mustang Dyno, allegedly a Dynojet Dyno reads from 12~15% higher. First the good. Runs were extremely consistent. the three runs printed pretty much right on top of each other. Torque was way up there above 95 tq from 3000 to 4500. with no real dips. HP numbers were very consistent with a nice smooth line from 2000 to over 4500 Now the bad Max HP was only read at 88 Hp and max torque was 100. If I add the 12-15% it comes to 100 Hp. But it is what it is. Build is 2056 D-jet, Heads by HAM RS+, 8.6 comp. Raby 9590 cam, SS HEs with Triad muffler. I Have adjusted the MPS to what seems to run best for this car. This car runs great and I just wanted to know what it was putting out, Not really planning to try to tune it for more power. Reliability is the key. and I am so far happy with that. Dyno sheet added (Date/time is wrong, 5/06/21 8:35am) |
Tom_T |
May 6 2021, 12:27 PM
Post
#2
|
TMI.... Group: Members Posts: 8,320 Joined: 19-March 09 From: Orange, CA Member No.: 10,181 Region Association: Southern California |
PS & slightly OT - of note on that p914 performance chart in my post above - people forget how well a stock 1970-72 1.7L performed vs. a stock 75-76 GC 2.0L as shown in the chart I posted above.
When I got my `73 "914S" 2.0 back in 1975 - I'd also test driven new 75 & 76 2L cars at dealers (100% financing on longer terms was about the same monthly payment as the used 80% with 20% down on my 3 year old car back then). My "Butt Dyno" was definitely off with the later GC cars - and IIRC the California Cat Converter equipped 75-76 GC 2L cars were actually less HP due to the added smog tuning - down to only 78-80 HP, which they had to disclose with a loose specs sheet that they stuck into the dealer sales brochures (I have one somewhere in my deep-old storage boxes). I'd also considered a few 71 7 72 1.7s back then, and I & my butt-dyno felt that they performed as good as or slightly better than the new 75-76 GC 2.0 cars, so I didn't see the extra cost as worth it, but the 73-74 2.0s were worth it - even back then. From Dave Cheek's 1976 Owners Manual: . So folks with the 70-72 1.7s should really think about that before moaning about their 914/4's performance vs. late 2L cars - because they were in fact & butt-dyno felt about the same even when new for California's smog control burdened 914s, in part due to a bit less weight 70-72 without the BUBs & door impact bars, etc. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif) Tom /////// |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 27th September 2024 - 10:10 AM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |