Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[88dx]

formula for gayness = this thread

You mean your posting in it, or was there something else?

this

[bigdaddyvtec]

formula for gayness = this thread

You mean your posting in it, or was there something else?

My vote is for Widehomos craigslist add here

[imburne]

oh shit page 7 widebody self gay porn.

beware. 

[Joseph Davis]

oh shit page 7 widebody self gay porn.

beware. 

Elijah wouldn't mind so much if his tits weren't so goddamn small.

[sfa22r]

I feel I could still kick Jeremy's ass. 

[rawr]

Did someone say gay porn?

[crxvtec91]

This post is win!

[widebody93]

You still want this fucking speed gear nig?

[arsenio]

[Vagitarian]

panduhhh

[junkyard racer]

that poor kid.

[nock]

Hmmm.  A local car made 800 WHP on a Dynojet.

As far as I know it was a 1.8 liter LSV.

IIRC peak power was somewhere around 9500 RPM.

My math shows a bmep of 590.2.

Granted, this was on race gas, and I am making lots of ASSumptions.

What are the accepted limits for different octane ratings?

again these are all just numbers, when i ran the math:
800 x 5252 / 9500 = 442 ftlbs
150.8 x 442 / 109 = 611.5 psi bmep

not near bisi's bullshit but close, the biggest problem here is the dynojet, and that he was running unknow octane racegas. the best KLimep (knock limited indicated mean effective pressure) indacator for fuel is "performance number"  its not really used anymore as alot of shit has changed since WWII.

but here is the short version:
back in the 1930's avgas was measured the same way autogas was by just ON and then how much TEL was added 100/0.5 is 100ON+0.5cc per gallon. then WWII, shit hit the fan and airplains had to fly faster, stronger, longer (kinda like all the gay porn and ghetto booty on this thread) nobody really knew whut the fuck tetra-ethel-lead was, or what it meant to performance, or even what amount said engine was rated with. the pilots would refuse any fuel that did not have the highest numbers (because they didnt want to make it though the battle and fall out of the sky on the way home because of engine failure) ground crews would mark the trucks with what ever they thought the pilots wanted to see, Rick P. was in charge of it all, chaos reigned, at this point the british were getting pissed (for some reason they were the biggest war time supplier of TEL) alot of TEL was blowing out the back of cargo plains because the pilots didnt know how much he needed. the brits and americans came up with the performance number system. they took iso-octane and gave it a arbitrary value of 100 and heptane a value of 0 and said we will rate all engines with iso-octane (on 100 octane) not only not only did it change all the other systems but it made a lean/rich rating, 115/145 or, 115/115, or what ever. with this system the engine was rated at 100 MON (lean motoring octane) so if you had 100/115 gas you could run 100% the rated power lean or 115% rated power rich. the performance number was not the octane number of the fuel and had nothing to do with how much TEL was in it, it was just an indacator of how that engine would run with it. so now all engines had a rating based on iso-octane and so did all fuels, everybody was happy, Budweiser fell from the sky and Hitler shot him self, fagot.



what dose this mean for us?
well, for the most part nothing...
this was just the last time that octane ratings had somthing to do with hp


today octane has nothing to do with the hp rating of any engine or even the output of a CFR engine. i dont claim to really know anything about this mostly because of how fucked up and complicated it's become. RON has only to do with what percentage of iso-octane(100MON) and heptane(0MON) to make the CFR engine run at the same klimep (compression ratio in most cases) as the fuel being tested. MON is measured as the difference in output of 100MON fuel and the test fuel at 900rpm in an engine, but they use a CFR engine. today no engine hp is rated with 100MON fuel so none of these numbers mean anything in YOUR engine. all you can say is that if racerX makes X hp on 92 pump (88 MON) with a lean mixture, then racer Y same motor same conditions exactly running VP C12 (108 MON) may be able to increase boost/CR/timing and get 20% more power on a lean mixture. in practice this is much different because MON is not a preformance number, you dont run lean, the CFR engine is not the same as your engine, the CFR engine is never boosted, the volatility of the fuel, the charge preparation, the difference in bore size, the jacket tempature, the temp and humidity, intercooler on and on and on...

so you get the idea, the last time an octane number meant something to an engine was WWII.

[idontknowhutthefuckimtalkingabout]---------------------------------------------------------------
so MON is a measure of resistance to detonation...
and RON is a way to compare the fuel to iso-octane...
for some stupid fucking reason they average the two (RON+MON)/2=PUMP
WTF!
[/idontknowhutthefuckimtalkingabout]--------------------------------------------------------------
 


for reference:
VP C12------                                             (108)        race gas is rated in MON only
methanol---115 to 119 (R+M)/2) (133RON) (105MON) "volatile"
pump gas---92            (R+M)/2) (97RON)   (88MON)

in all of my fucking around i can tell you that octane seriously changes what compression ratios you can run in naturally aspirated engines. in a boosted engine manifold pressure changes the inlet air density and so the effective compression ratio. so you get the picture, at some point the bmep just isnt going to get any higher without more octane. and from my limited understanding of water injection (i have never used it), you can replace 100% of the rich fuel by weight. so if you made a run at 10.5:1 AFR that did not detonate, then you could make another run at ~13.5:1 AFR with the additional fuel of the previous run replaced by the water/meth and thus take advantage of the no longer unnecessarily rich mixture. this means you can have better power, more timing, lower EGT (mostly from more timing) and still not detonate. nowhere dose it say more octane. thats because the fuel is still the fuel you started with, nothing has really changed that. ^^if you read the horseshit above^^ all you can do with water injection is change a 100/115 fuel to a 115/115 fuel, its still 115 you just changed how its burnt, not its octane.



and, as if this were not confusing enough, the chart above (probably the only meaningful thing ever published on the subject) was credited, to Barber, by Taylor. however, this chart can not be found in any of Barbers published works, so the conditions under witch the data was collected can never be known.
fuck


[talkingoutofmyassagain]----------------------------------------------------------
so ratting wise, since all MON ratings are lean, (14.7:1) you could say that 88 MON (pump gas) running lean with water injection, would have an equivalent KLimep to say... 92 MON running lean without water injection, but not really because again MON is not a preformance number and adding additional fuel or water at this point would only reduce bmep and thus HP.
[/talkingoutofmyassagain]-----------------------------------------------------------

so today you more or less have a rating for the fuel and a rating for the engine, in hp. bmep can be derived from hp and so you can make comparisons to different motors and the types of fuel they run based on it. KLimep is a number that dosnt get changed very easily, there are people who have devoted there entire lives to making that number bigger for certain fuels and engines most of THOSE PEOPLE have worked on THESE ENGINES

[bench racing]

wiston cup engine, racegas  92MON--104RON--98(R+M)/2 "98 PUMP"
~850 x 5252 / 9000 = 496 ftlbs
150.8 x 496 / 358 = 208 psi bmep

un-supercharged F1 offy (4.11 liters) methanol see above:
402 x 5252 / 6000 = 352 ftlbs
150.8 x 352 / 255 = 208 psi bmep

prostock engine, race gas 108MON (i think) 118MON (says wiki)
1350 x 5252 / 9500 = 746 ftlbs
150.8 x 746 / 500 = 224 psi bemp
hp for these motors REALLY can not be known for sure, but people i've read/talkto say if your making less than 1350 hp dont even bother. with most of them turning over 10000 now i think this is close.

infact you can run the numbers on any naturally aspirated engine and you'll never get much more than 200 psi on just gas.

now lets run some numbers on bisi new level 9.779 small block running on 91(R+M)/2 (pump gas of coarse):
2527 x 5252 / 8500 = 1562 ftlbs
150.8 x 1562 / 350 = 673 psi bmep

thats right "a 2500hp pump gas 350... I AM LIVEN THE MUTHR FUCKIN DREEEEEAMMM ! ! ! ! ! nothin can stop me now"

to say that everything this nigerian guido mother fucker sells is a "limited time offer" would be a monumental understatement...

go dump some pump gas in a 10.5 outlaw and see how far down the track you get... bisi... fagot

[/bench racing]

on the dynojet thing:

this is the conversion i use,
DJHP = bhp x 1.30 x ((happiness / 100) + 1)

were:
DJHP- is hp in dynojet land (were bisi is the president)
bhp- is brake horsepower at the crank in the real world (were shit still matters)
1.30- is the "new math" for hp
happiness- is the relative mood of the operator on that particular day

(usually there is somthing like a humidity constant or drive train loss in this spot, but this is dynojet land and we let people correct whut ever the fuck they want, and dont save the corrections with that run file. the number is a % thats based on relative mood of the operator, so is it sunny, rainy, did i buy some shit from the guy, did i do his wife in the pooper, did he do my wife in the pooper, all manner of things can change this number)


so thats right, a 230% increase,  ok mabye thats a little out there, but dynojet numbers are generally 30% higher across the board, and because dynojet knows more about horsepower then everybody else, they dont see a reason to explain why there numbers are so high, just like bisi wont explain why his numbers are so high, or how much he had to smoke to get so high. and dont forget the drive-train loss, witch is not linear, so if you made the run at 9500 your drive loss would be much higher then a run at 6500 depending on how the operator (feels) decided to correct for it. i have read about allot of cars that will get 300hp on one dyno, then get rated on a dynojet with all the correction turned off !!!, and for no good reason at all, get 380hp! the numbers are that far off.

this is a good thread on it
http://www.msprotege.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123629978
and original factory pro article that made me decide not to buy a dynojet, ever
http://www.factorypro.com/dyno/true1.html

dynojets are so bad, many people dont quote them at all, or if they do they quote it in DJHP just because theres 30% right of the top and no way to know for sure what the other corrections were in the run.

lots of dyno makers pull this same shit, land and sea has "environments" were basically anything can happen (even water buffalo power) but the files are not corrected like a dynojet. they even come with an environment called dynojet.env if thats not an inducation of how screwed up things really are, i dont know what is. almost every other dyno that im familiar with "SAVES THE ACTUAL CRANKSHAFT OR DRIVE ROLL TORQUE, UNCORRECTED" except dynojet. moral of this story, dont fucking buy a dynojet, if for no other reason then no one will believe your numbers at all.

[Joseph Davis]

and, as if this were not confusing enough, the chart above (probably the only meaningful thing ever published on the subject) was credited, to Barber, by Taylor. however, this chart can not be found in any of Barbers published works, so the conditions under witch the data was collected can never be known.

That's a recurring theme with Taylor, try to check up on half of his bibliography and you find references that don't mean what he says the do.  And yet it's considered a primary source, just because Ricardo tutored him at some point which he drums up in the book's dedication.  Academia + politics = disservice.

moral of this story, dont fucking buy a dynojet, if for no other reason then no one will believe your numbers at all.

Dynojets are one of the two dynos I know off off the top of my head that you can't skew the calibration of, they read what they read.  Unless you edit .drf manually.  THat's actually why I'd like to see Bisi take his car to a Dynojet... can't cheat it, and they read a little "high" so he gets to have his feel-good numbers without working for them.

[92CXyD]

thanks for the info. nock.

I think we should have some kind of thread involving this type of info (and only this info  ) in the F.I  and stickied for future quick reference.  ;D

This is the kind of tech I love to read. :yes:

[snm95ls]

Hmmm.  A local car made 800 WHP on a Dynojet.

As far as I know it was a 1.8 liter LSV.

IIRC peak power was somewhere around 9500 RPM.

My math shows a bmep of 590.2.

Granted, this was on race gas, and I am making lots of ASSumptions.

What are the accepted limits for different octane ratings?

again these are all just numbers, when i ran the math:
800 x 5252 / 9500 = 442 ftlbs
150.8 x 442 / 109 = 611.5 psi bmep

not near bisi's bullshit but close, the biggest problem here is the dynojet, and that he was running unknow octane racegas. the best KLimep (knock limited indicated mean effective pressure) indacator for fuel is "performance number"  its not really used anymore as alot of shit has changed since WWII.

The car trapped 155 and the best ET was 9.85, FWIW.


Great info though.  I will have to read through it again when I have time to digest it.  I ended up spending several hours over the course of the weekend reading up on various things.

[nock]

oops i guess i should have waited until i was a little more awake to post that. the point i was coming to with all that bullshit was that you can run what whatever fucking bmep you want (unless your n/a, pumping loss will get you and not make much more than 200 psi) but you'll pay the price for it both thermally and mechanically.

what im getting at is, we are all ASS holes and at some point we all have to make some ASSumptions. like say "for drag racing, 300 psi bmep is the absolute limit of pump gas (88MON)" thats basicaly a 930hp small block 350 at 7000 rpm !!!!
or a 370hp 2.0l at 8000 rpm. like i said, its different for every motor but not that different.

so the last engine that had some real numbers (by real, i mean the people that ran them are no longer afraid to quote them) was the unlimited offy, runnig about 488 psi bmep on methanol (105MON). so you could say with some degree of certainty that an engine running 488 psi bmep on C12 (108MON) and round about the same displacement (2.6l) would be "reliable". reliable enough to do a good amount of street rapping anyway. for drag racing it would be a brick shit house that your children's children could drive. so running 611psi on say ~108MON, wellllll... to start its a dynojet that reads high so youd have to take away from that 800whp, then youd have to find out the drive loss (if the 800hp number is true whp and not corrected) and add to it, then make some more assumptions about the rotating mass and add significantly to the number again, then do the SAE for the conditions. and then you'll have a number that while hardly accurate, is closer to your crank hp. easily 50 to 100+800 hp it may very well be possible, but you would be leaning on that dynamite pretty hard.

as for the Taylor, yes hes a fag, but his book is more or less complete and easier to read than Ricardo. Ricardo, miller, along with two or three others did all the work. every other Dr Fuck Head Phd. just regurgitates what ever these guys said and says its "published work" and then calls it a day...fagots

Dynojets are one of the two dynos I know off off the top of my head that you can't skew the calibration of, they read what they read.  Unless you edit .drf manually.  THat's actually why I'd like to see Bisi take his car to a Dynojet... can't cheat it, and they read a little "high" so he gets to have his feel-good numbers without working for them.

as for the dynojet, i respectfully disagree, the corrections are not saved with the run, and the true output horsepower is lost forever. the drums are pretty much the smallest you can buy for an inertia dyno and most of them dont have eddy curent absorbers. the ones that do, they just use it like a bandaid for not having a big enough roller. its not a good idea to make any decisions based on a number that came from anything other than an engine dyno. the errors, whether from the operator, or the software, or the test itself (tranny size/oil, engine size/oil, tire size/weight) are just to big to ignore, and dynojets errors are the biggest. and because they read high, no meaningful comparisons about bmep can be made.

besides we all know bisi is going to run race gas anyway... fagot

[Joseph Davis]

.drf save the corrections, or else I wouldn't be able to load the saved ones I have up in WinPEP 7 and have them be the same as dyno day.  On everything else Dynojet, I agree, and can tell you some horror stories about their eddy brake buck hitch failure dynos.  If you ever meet one of their salesmen... you won't be surprised.  I'd rather have a world full of bullshitting Bisi's.

[sewell94]

There are many many ways to trick a dynojunk dyno.   One of the easiest is to put the weather station in the engine bay right next to the headers.   Putting in the wrong tire size, shit like that.

[snm95ls]

There are many many ways to trick a dynojunk dyno.   One of the easiest is to put the weather station in the engine bay right next to the headers.   Putting in the wrong tire size, shit like that.

Hmmmm.  I don't think I have ever seen that parameter changed at one of the local shops.

[crttaz]

There are many many ways to trick a dynojunk dyno.   One of the easiest is to put the weather station in the engine bay right next to the headers.   Putting in the wrong tire size, shit like that.

Bisi uses a Dynapack, even easier to trick it. He stated he uses the suggested default setting, I believe he said it was 1000 rpms every 2 seconds.

15% driveline loss on a Dynojet, 118 whp = 135 chp
20% driveline loss on a Mustang, 121 whp = 145 chp

+10 chp from a cam change on a D15, about right.

[sewell94]

Jd this is where you missed out at Pri, one of the principles of a major racing fuel company, spent about an hr with us and actaully explained how the testing is done, and how it actually relates to what we are doing.  Its basically very close to what Nock said, but with more variables. It was really nice to have someone that was really in the know reaffirm what i've always read/thought.  The funniest was that he gave us a number, and he said that if anyone ever used a number higher than that for octane rating to basically tell them they were an idiot and to laugh at them.

We then seen him working on a 20yr old girl at a bar later that same night, so i have faith in what the guy says (he was 55-60 yrs old)  ;D

[crttaz]

I was NOT at PRI....or the bar.

I hope to not be sick next year and make it to IMIS, supposed to be bigger next year, first year was a hit!

[nock]

in WWII America/Briton would rate the german fuel to, some were given rattings as high as 250/270    i have no idea how much fucking octane that would be. same point, there is no real way to relate hp and octane because of the way things are done now. but how ever much fucking octane is in 250/270 you could call it pretty much a "det proof" fuel. i wonder if VP C23 ratted at "MON120+" is the same thing.

[nock]

started playing with graphcalc again last night and made this:


100hp red--------------100*5252/x*150.8/97=y
200hp green-----------200*5252/x*150.8/97=y 
300hp blue-------------300*5252/x*150.8/97=y
400hp yellow----------400*5252/x*150.8/97=y 
500hp blue/green-----500*5252/x*150.8/97=y 
600hp purple----------600*5252/x*150.8/97=y 
700hp black------------700*5252/x*150.8/97=y 

each vertical line is 1000rpm, and each horizontal line is 100 psi BMEP. so X is RPM, Y is BMEP, and each curve is another hundred horsepower on a 1.6 liter.

[widebody93]

SRSYLY who the fuck is this NOCK that has so mathmatical skills that had JD stunnded



RELVELATE and Post your picture you fucked up nigger

[Joseph Davis]

Alas, poor RHMT.  The only site that tolerates you, kind sir.

[widebody93]

oh shit page 7 widebody self gay porn.

beware. 

Elijah wouldn't mind so much if his tits weren't so goddamn small.

Is not gay porn but a picture of my abs and what Brian only see's in rags that he dreams of.......ELIJA you of all nogs know I'm not gay as a fisted your mother 8 weeks ago

[widebody93]

Alas, poor RHMT.  The only site that tolerates you, kind sir.

CALL ME AGAIN YOU NIG NOG since I'm not in churxh or your not on speaker phone LOL

[Joseph Davis]

Alas, poor RHMT.  The only site that tolerates you, kind sir.

CALL ME AGAIN YOU NIG NOG since I'm not in churxh or your not on speaker phone LOL

Why, so you can tell me you need to call and talk to one of your cop friends again?  You don't remember the uncomfortable silence on my end as I pondered who you were about to snitch on now?

[bigdaddyvtec]

oh shit page 7 widebody self gay porn.

beware. 

Elijah wouldn't mind so much if his tits weren't so goddamn small.

Is not gay porn but a picture of my abs and what Brian only see's in rags that he dreams of.......ELIJA you of all nogs know I'm not gay as a fisted your mother 8 weeks ago

The only dream I have of you is you deading yourself and finally not fagging up rHMT with queer ass pictures of your homosexual craigslist personals, or H series failure