free hit
counters
Jack - The Lotus Forums Jump to content

Jack

Full Forum Member (FFM)
  • Content Count

    399
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Jack last won the day on November 18

Jack had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

339 Excellent

1 Follower

About Jack

  • Rank
    LOTUS

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

More Info

  • Name
    Jack
  • Car
    2008 2-Eleven, 2015 V6 CupR
  • Location
    Spring Mountain Motorsports Ranch, NV
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

4,746 profile views
  1. Jack

    Filter oil engine

    TRD ... PTR43-00082 performance oil filter insert
  2. Brakes having a "vibration/juddering" doesn't sound like a heat issue but rather a brake bedding issue --- uneven pad material transfer, sometimes referred to as "pad smear" will rear it's ugly head as the brakes get HOT. From the experts: "The all-important transfer layer: ........ the objective of the bed-in process is to deposit an even layer of brake pad material, or transfer layer , on the rubbing surface of the rotor disc. Note the emphasis on the word even, as uneven pad deposits on the rotor face are the number one, and almost exclusive cause of brake judder or vibration. Let's say that again, just so there is no misunderstanding. Uneven pad deposits on the rotor face are the number one, and almost exclusive cause of brake judder or vibration. It only takes a small amount of thickness variation, or TV, in the transfer layer (we're only talking a few ten thousandths of an inch here) to initiate brake vibration. While the impact of an uneven transfer layer is almost imperceptible at first, as the pad starts riding the high and low spots, more and more TV will be naturally generated until the vibration is much more evident. With prolonged exposure, the high spots can become hot spots and can actually change the metallurgy of the rotor in those areas, creating “hard” spots in the rotor face that are virtually impossible to remove.
  3. Jack

    Canyon Red Exige V6 Cup

    Yes. You can select either TPS (throttle position sensor) or PPS (pedal position sensor) channels off of OBD to serve as the Throttle bar. As for the "brake bar" on my videos, you would need to add a brake pressure sensor which I have as part of my Bosch Motorsport ABS. One could probably get info relating to brake application by using the "brake switch" channel off of the OBD, but it's not the same as brake pressure. Thanks to Lotus Motorsport working with AiM in Italy, AiM was able to create a CupR specific driver for the AiM logger, which opened up some 111 channels of info from the car's ECU. FYI: Just happen to have these photos of the ECU channels that were available back in 2014 when using the Evora driver from AiM.
  4. Jack

    Canyon Red Exige V6 Cup

    Arun, I'm sure you will enjoy the Solo2 even more as you explore more of its features. One suggestion, you might want to consider creating your own sectors for the track map. As you can see, the AiM software will auto-select sectors based upon G's and any noted bursts of acceleration. The result, at times, is to have numerous short straight sectors (Green) on your analysis and numerous corners (Blue and Red), some of which you may prefer to link together. Also, use that other port on the Solo2 to hook up a SmartyCam HD You can create a template for the video showing whatever data the Solo logs on your video that you would like to see with no need to do any post-production work .... one example below showing lap info as well as much data relating to engine performance. Second photo illustrates a video template showing less data when using a Solo back in 2014, when a less comprehensive AiM driver was available...I believe I was using AiM's driver for an Evora.
  5. Jack

    Exige picture & video thread

    Faster than a "stationary" plane.
  6. Not a V6 Exige but....... rebound adjustor at bottom of shock assembly.....low speed and high speed bump adjusted by the two knobs on canister.
  7. Jack

    Converting whp to Bhp

    Having the carbon intake will not lower IATs (intake air temperature) in a meaningful way. Putting a smaller pulley on will only increase your IATs. The alleged benefit of the larger TVS1900 unit is that to produce the same boost as stock, the TVS 1900 will be spinning slower thereby producing less heat, so IATs will be lower. If you spin the TVS1900 faster, it will add more heat to intake chargeproduce more heat. The Lotus ECU adjusts timing (retards it) as IATs go up, in an effort to reduce the chance of detonation and harm to the engine. Given you high ambient temps, you really need to consider a water-air intercooler, aka charge cooling. What I was saying about the "carbon-fibre" intake tube is .... the rough interior will prevent the car's MAF from getting a laminar air flow. This will then possibly mess up your A/F ratios in a negative way.
  8. Jack

    Converting whp to Bhp

    Be wary of the carbon fibre intake tubes.....it can make A/F readings wacky sometimes and even too lean. While a carbon intake tube looks sexy, the outside is very smooth but the inside is quite rough creating a turbulent vs laminar air flow, which can affect the MAF sensor readings sent to the ECU. In turn, those readings will affect short and long-term fuel trims.
  9. Jack

    Converting whp to Bhp

    Hussain, do you have a better/different copy of your dyno run w/o that MIN/MAX/AVG overlay.... I'd like to make sure I'm reading your A/F numbers accurately, as they correspond to RPM's. If I am making it out correctly, it sure looks like you are running very lean......"lean is mean" until it's not. Also, too lean (before it does catastrophic engine damage) could impact power numbers.
  10. Jack

    Converting whp to Bhp

    Many people believe that Mustang dynos read lower than DynoJet units -- comparing RWHP numbers measured on different dynos (even the same style of dyno) and under different conditions (ambient temps, humidity, etc) is like comparing apples to oranges. As as also been mentioned, the operator of the dyno can manipulate the numbers, typically to show greater gains from their product. As far as drivetrain loss to calculate BHP, 12-15% would probably get you close with a Lotus (it's a pretty efficient layout). All wheel drive vehicles will show a greater drivetrain loss, more like 20-25%. All of the numbers re: drivetrain loss you've heard are just guestimates. A good explanation and I believe a good read of the Mustang vs DynoJet approach to measuring RWHP: DynoJets are inertia dynos, and have been around for years, much longer than any type of load cell dyno. Inertia dyno's work on the principle of the acceleration of a known mass over time. Their rollers are the known mass. Weighing in at over 2500lbs or so. Your car gets strapped down to the machine, and the dyno collects it's data. It is able to calculate horsepower by measuring the acceleration in rpm of the rollers in regards to RPM. This is why gearing can affect the dyno results, more on that in a bit. Now that the dyno has recorded the horsepower curve, it can take the integral of that curve and get the torque curve. Since the dyno’s power calculations are based on the acceleration of mass over time in regards to RPM, gearing is very important. Since a vehicle with a lower gear ratio can accelerate the mass to a higher speed using less engine RPM, it will show a higher horsepower number than a car with a higher gear ratio. If a car is able to accelerate the dyno’s rollers from 200rpm (roller) to 300rpm (roller)in 1500rpm (engine), then the dyno is going to record more power than a car that did that in 2000rpm (engine). Now we go to Mustang dyno’s and other loaded dyno’s. Our Mustang MD-1100SE dyno’s rollers weigh 2560lbs. That is the actual mass of the rollers, much like the DynoJet. That’s about where all the similarities end. When we get a car on our dyno, we enter two constants for the dyno’s algorithms. One being the vehicle weight, the other being what’s called “Horsepower At 50mph”. This is a number that represents how much horsepower it takes for the vehicle to push the air to maintain 50mph. This is used as the aerodynamic force. Mustang dyno’s are also equipped with a eddy currant load cell. Think of a magnetic brake from a freight train. This magnetic brake can apply enough resistance to stall a big rig. Off one side of the eddy currant load cell, there is a cantilever with a 5volt reference load sensor (strain gage). As the rollers are spinning this load sensor is measuring the actual torque being applied. So as the rollers spin, the load sensor is measuring the force being applied, sending that information to the dyno computer, taking into account the two constants entered earlier, computing the amount of resistance needed to be applied to the rollers to load the car so that the force of the rollers resistance is as close to the force the car sees on the street. The dyno is then able to calculate the total force being applied to the rollers in torque, and then taking the derivative of that torque curve to arrive at the horsepower curve. Since torque is an actual force of nature, like gravity and electricity, it can be directly measured. Horsepower is an idea that was thought up by man, and cannot be directly measured, only calculated. I like to state it like this. . . I start by asking how much your car weighs, lets say 3500lbs. Now you take your car and you make a make a WOT rip in your tallest non overdrive gear, how much mass is your engine working against? 3500lbs right? Now you strap your car on a DynoJet and you make a WOT in the same gear, how much mass is your engine working against? 2500lbs right? Now you strap your car on a Mustang dyno, how much mass is your engineworking against? 2500lbs. Plus the resistance being applied by the eddy current generator. We’ve seen anywhere for 470lbs of resistance to over 700lbs of resistance as measured in PAU force in the data logs. So which one is more accurate? Well they their both accurate. If a DynoJet dyno says you made 460rwhp, then you made 460rwhp. If a Mustang dyno says you made 460rwhp, you also made 460rwhp. Now which one of those numbers best represents what your car is doing when its on the street. That’s a different question. The most important thing to remember is that a dyno is a testing tool. If the numbers keep increasing, then you’re doing the right thing. We try to look over at NET gain, instead of Peak HP numbers. A 30rwhp increase is a 30rwhp increase regardless of what dyno it is on. Now I can address how to calculate the difference between one type of dyno and another. Simply put, you can’t. Because Mustang dyno’s have so many more variables, it’s not a simple percentage difference. We’ve had cars that made 422rwhp on our Dyno, two days later make 458rwhp on a DynoJet the next day. We’ve also had cars that made 550rwhp on our dyno, make 650+rwhp on a DynoJet a few days later at another shops Dyno Day. For instance, my 2002 Z28 with a forged internal LS6 Heads/Cam/Intake, makes 460rwhp on our dyno. I thought that was a little low, since I’ve had cam only LS6 Z06 vettes make 450rwhp. So I overlaid the dyno graphs. Guess what, the PAU force for my car was almost 200lbs more than the C5Z06 that made 450rwhp with cam only. So I entered the weight and horsepower at 50 number for a C5Z06 and did another horsepower rip with my car. The only reason I did that was to compare Apples to Apples. This time my car made 490rwhp, no other changes. Now I don’t go around saying my car made 490rwhp, I say what it actually did with the correct information entered into the computer. It made 460rwhp. Now if I ever get a chance to take it on a DynoJet (which I plan to in the spring), I have no doubts it’ll be over 500rwhp. I know this based on airflow and fuel consumption on the data logs. But since we’re asked this question constantly we're fairly conservative, and hence tell our customers that the difference is closer to 6-7%, but as you make more power, and the more your car weighs, the difference increases as well. You must remember, Dyno's regardless of the type are tuning tools, and are in no means meant to tell people how fast their car is. Now which one is more "real world" is a totally different question. I like to explain it like this..... If you drive your car in a situation in which you have no mass and you're in a vacuum, so basically if you do intergalactic racing in space, use a DynoJet. If your car sees gravity, and has an aerodynamic coefficient, and you race on a planet called Earth, then use a Mustang Dyno
  11. Jack

    3-Eleven Picture & Video Thread

    Had a chance to run with this baby at Spring Mountain....the 3-Eleven looks much so much better in the flesh than in photos. This was the Race model w/o the roll cage--460BHP/Xtrac. The owner was having a race team try to do some setup work at the track as best they could to try to improve its handling characteristics. While the 3-11 was fast in a straight line, the owner's lap times were much slower (several seconds) than mine in my 2-11. When driven by a pro-driver (current Pirelli World Challenge TC Class Champion), the car was able to do slightly better lap times. The car needs a lot of work as it was delivered to the owner from the dealer. But it .... LOOKS MARVELOUS on track! 😜
  12. Get those changed out ASAP!
  13. My CupR without driver and 9 gallons of fuel ...... 2187 lb/994 kg ...... 😎

×