AP Est. TQ and HP: How accurate and is it WHP?

[TalkToTheFiST]

So i went for a drive to check numbers, had the tune installed for a full day now and maybe done 60 miles or so joyriding. I wanted to see what the AP said my power numbers were as i didn't have them on yesterday, curious how accurate these are supposed to be. It was between 92 and 94 degrees for the drive so not the best for power.

I also wanted to ask about corrections on the display. It always shows 0.00 for cyl 1 and 4 but below there are smaller numbers, which represent the number of corrections? Here's a photo of the display when i was parked at home at the end of the drive. Also as is shown, is a peak intake temp of 147 high for this ambient temp? Charge was peaked at 122, i assume both of these were at stop lights after the engine was fully warm and so they were getting more engine bay air. While driving intake temp was usually 10 or 15 over ambient.

 

[Hypergram]

So i went for a drive to check numbers, had the tune installed for a full day now and maybe done 60 miles or so joyriding. I wanted to see what the AP said my power numbers were as i didn't have them on yesterday, curious how accurate these are supposed to be. It was between 92 and 94 degrees for the drive so not the best for power.

I also wanted to ask about corrections on the display. It always shows 0.00 for cyl 1 and 4 but below there are smaller numbers, which represent the number of corrections? Here's a photo of the display when i was parked at home at the end of the drive. Also as is shown, is a peak intake temp of 147 high for this ambient temp? Charge was peaked at 122, i assume both of these were at stop lights after the engine was fully warm and so they were getting more engine bay air. While driving intake temp was usually 10 or 15 over ambient.

View attachment 22843

The smaller numbers at the bottom are the highs and lows of that particular stat. So my boost pressure might say -11/20 psi. For the cylinders, positive numbers are good. Negative are bad. When stopped, it will say 0.00, but when moving it might fluctuate. I can see that it has on yours since it says 6.00 as the max. Not sure about your intake temps, but your charge air temps are what matter so I wouldn't worry about the intake temps unless they are stupidly high. Also, I have no clue how accurate the hp and torque numbers are. Some say they're good, some not so much. They only way is to dyno and compare I guess.

 

[TalkToTheFiST]

The smaller numbers at the bottom are the highs and lows of that particular stat. So my boost pressure might say -11/20 psi. For the cylinders, positive numbers are good. Negative are bad. When stopped, it will say 0.00, but when moving it might fluctuate. I can see that it has on yours since it says 6.00 as the max. Not sure about your intake temps, but your charge air temps are what matter so I wouldn't worry about the intake temps unless they are stupidly high. Also, I have no clue how accurate the hp and torque numbers are. Some say they're good, some not so much. They only way is to dyno and compare I guess.

Heya Hyper. So i noticed that 6.00 too but is that the positive side? Meaning anything in the negative side is on the left, and the positive on the right? Also i was assuming about the charge temps but i should ask to be sure, charge temps are the air going into or coming from the turbo? And if they stay relatively low that means the FMIC is doing it's job right?

If im correct here it would explain why that number is higher standing still as there's no air to cool the FMIC.

 

[Hypergram]

Heya Hyper. So i noticed that 6.00 too but is that the positive side? Meaning anything in the negative side is on the left, and the positive on the right? Also i was assuming about the charge temps but i should ask to be sure, charge temps are the air going into or coming from the turbo? And if they stay relatively low that means the FMIC is doing it's job right?

If im correct here it would explain why that number is higher standing still as there's no air to cool the FMIC.

You are correct. As long as the number is not negative, you should be good. Intake temps are going into the turbo. Charge temps are coming from the intercooler into the engine. It is the last step for the air before it is used for combustion; yes, if they are low your IC is doing its job right. Yeah, since you are stationary your IC is working harder since the car isn't moving/no flowing air.

 

[TalkToTheFiST]

You are correct. As long as the number is not negative, you should be good. Intake temps are going into the turbo. Charge temps are coming from the intercooler into the engine. It is the last step for the air before it is used for combustion; yes, if they are low your IC is doing its job right. Yeah, since you are stationary your IC is working harder since the car isn't moving/no flowing air.

I appreciate the explanation. Would it be true that the bigger FMIC also increases turbo lag slightly, since more volume must be pressurized before it gets to the block?

 

[Spork1569]

I appreciate the explanation. Would it be true that the bigger FMIC also increases turbo lag slightly, since more volume must be pressurized before it gets to the block?

Our tiny turbo spools so quickly that lag is basically non-existant. I had no noticeable difference when the IC was upgraded it spooled just as fast.

 

[Hypergram]

I appreciate the explanation. Would it be true that the bigger FMIC also increases turbo lag slightly, since more volume must be pressurized before it gets to the block?

I don't think so, and even if it did it would be so minimal that it wouldn't even make a difference. The air is moving so fast that it really doesn't matter the pressure. The temp (which the FMIC changes) does. If it did make a difference, to fix that, you would need better Intercooler piping in theory, but that is proven to make no difference with the stock turbo. If you have a big turbo, bigger pipes would matter more, but that's just because there is so much more air to fit through smaller pipes.

 

[HBEcoBeaST]

The whp is probably pretty close within 10% if you're doing an actual pull. Just jamming around town the number isn't as accurate. It's simply calculating horsepower based on what the motor is doing based on math and estimation.

What tune are you running? Stage 1 from most tuners 190-200hp and 220ft+ lbs of toque at the wheels is pretty good considering stock it's like 180whp and 190ft lbs of torque. e30 you should be seeing closer to 200whp and 260-280ft lbs of toque.

At the end of the day, vdynos and dynos are just numbers. You should be focused on how well your motor is running and overall powerband. Peak numbers are pretty useless of the street IMO besides bragging rights.

 

[RubenZZZ]

I appreciate the explanation. Would it be true that the bigger FMIC also increases turbo lag slightly, since more volume must be pressurized before it gets to the block?

How do you like the Cobb Stage 1 tune vs. stock and vs. that race chip?

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

 

[TalkToTheFiST]

The whp is probably pretty close within 10% if you're doing an actual pull. Just jamming around town the number isn't as accurate. It's simply calculating horsepower based on what the motor is doing based on math and estimation.

What tune are you running? Stage 1 from most tuners 190-200hp and 220ft+ lbs of toque at the wheels is pretty good considering stock it's like 180whp and 190ft lbs of torque. e30 you should be seeing closer to 200whp and 260-280ft lbs of toque.

At the end of the day, vdynos and dynos are just numbers. You should be focused on how well your motor is running and overall powerband. Peak numbers are pretty useless of the street IMO besides bragging rights.

I agree actually that peak isn't super important, i have always thought (inexperienced as i am) that people should be doing averages, not peak numbers. If you for example took the HP or tq every 500rpms starting at maybe 2000, added them and divided by the number of adds, that tells you the real "speed" of what the engine produces. Why does nobody do that anyway?

Last week i was discussing some of this with my 15yo, i was telling him you can actually get a reduction in peak power but still have a faster car if the curve increases sooner and holds flatter. Anyway im running a stage 1 right now, i assume it's COBB OTS, it's one that came on my AP.

How do you like the Cobb Stage 1 tune vs. stock and vs. that race chip?

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

I'd say maybe the COBB is better a little in 3rd and on, a bigger margin better in 1st and 2nd. Considering ford limited 1 n 2 down to 18.9 PSI i've heard, the Racechip must have been only adding like 1-2 PSI, while the COBB is going to at least 21.5 and is supposed to have a +/-3 adjustment to reach tq demands. At least that's what i can feel with tq, with HP it's harder to tell bc i didn't get to really time the chip accurately.

FWIW i just went on a quick 15min ride to test out a stage 2 93 tune. No negative adjustments, charge temps were only about 5-10 degrees over ambient. Peak tq jumped from stage 1, i got just over 250 just now according to the AP. But it was also about 10 degrees cooler than earlier today so that could have added some power.

Im thinking about ordering my e30 tune tomorrow, supposed to be a 48h< turnaround so maybe i can get that going early this week.

 

[TyphoonFiST]

With the stock snail....its pretty close. But when you upgrade the Turbo...the only true reading comes from a Data log interpretation or a Dyno Run.

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Clint Beastwood]

I finally tried mine out this morning:
I didn't really do any solid "pulls", just left the gauge on while driving around getting breakfast and whatnot.
What are the ideal circumstances for a solid "pull"?
Ambient temp ~78f
Fuel - plain 91, no extra ethanol
Current modifications:
- Stock intake (got tired of the 2j)
- Whoosh cerakote crossover
- MBRP exhaust with custom resonator
- Whoosh hotside pipe.
- Whoosh V2 Intercooler

I never did the est. power gauge thingy with the 2j installed, but the car does feel slower in the midrange/top end with the stock intake, like its hard to breathe on the top end.

Dizzy Stage 2 canned tune (no refinements)
Torque peak 258.5 ft.lbs
HP peak 178.7 (seems kinda low for the torque numbers?)

I do still get lots of wheelspin in first and second if I go hard, if I am driving around in third and rapidly transition on throttle it'll sometimes spin a bit there too. The car really does seem to run out of breath up top, but at low speed (i.e. the beginning of third, to about 4k rpm) it feels like a champ.

 

[TalkToTheFiST]

I finally tried mine out this morning:
I didn't really do any solid "pulls", just left the gauge on while driving around getting breakfast and whatnot.
What are the ideal circumstances for a solid "pull"?
Ambient temp ~78f
Fuel - plain 91, no extra ethanol
Current modifications:
- Stock intake (got tired of the 2j)
- Whoosh cerakote crossover
- MBRP exhaust with custom resonator
- Whoosh hotside pipe.
- Whoosh V2 Intercooler

I never did the est. power gauge thingy with the 2j installed, but the car does feel slower in the midrange/top end with the stock intake, like its hard to breathe on the top end.

Dizzy Stage 2 canned tune (no refinements)
Torque peak 258.5 ft.lbs
HP peak 178.7 (seems kinda low for the torque numbers?)

I do still get lots of wheelspin in first and second if I go hard, if I am driving around in third and rapidly transition on throttle it'll sometimes spin a bit there too. The car really does seem to run out of breath up top, but at low speed (i.e. the beginning of third, to about 4k rpm) it feels like a champ.

Well this doesn't help at all lol. The reason, last night when i took a short trip to the store, the V dyno told me it peaked at around 270tq if i remember, HP listed 205. But all i have is a K&N CAI and i was using a stage 2 COBB 91 tune (i assume a free one).

The reason i was trying a 91 was i read an older thread here that said it's believed their 91 tunes are more "aggressive" than their 93, however that works. OK just found it, HERE's the thread, 2nd comment Quisp mentions it.

When i did the pulls last night it was down to about 82 degrees out. I can't imagine your dizzy tune produces less power than these COBB ones. Not sure what to think of all this.

 

[Clint Beastwood]

Well this doesn't help at all lol. The reason, last night when i took a short trip to the store, the V dyno told me it peaked at around 270tq if i remember, HP listed 205. But all i have is a K&N CAI and i was using a stage 2 COBB 91 tune (i assume a free one).

The reason i was trying a 91 was i read an older thread here that said it's believed their 91 tune is more "aggressive" than their 93, however that works. OK just found it, HERE's the thread, 2nd comment Quisp mentions it.

When i did the pulls last night it was down to about 82 degrees out. I can't imagine your dizzy tune produces less power than these COBB ones. Not sure what to think of all this.

It's really not that odd for CA summer gas (its actually a different formulation) to dyno way low - I'm overdue for tightening all the boost hoses again too

I'll have to try again after throwing some E85 in the tank and resetting the ECU learning.
It really does feel like the stock intake is strangling it, I wish I'd thought to do the hp/tq estimator thingy before taking off my 2j intake. It felt much stronger in the mid/top with the 2j on board.

 

[HBEcoBeaST]

I feel my ITG intake helped my top end power. For the FiST I look at the Dyno or vdyno as a tuning tool. It's more about useable power than peak numbers.

I've dynoed my vehicle and read 223hp and 302 ft lbs of torque vdyno has read 229hp lol. I know that isn't right. My more consistent pulls on a different Dyno were around 210hp and 270ft lbs. With just an E30 tune and intake that sounds more likely.

I care more about my 3000-5000rpm range as that's where this car sees most spirited driving. Bouncing off the Rev limiter just reminds you how slow the stock turbo really is

 

[Se7eN]

There are many variables that can make it read incorrectly. Even changing the tires from the factory size. Mine reads anywhere from 20 to 25whp less then what it poops out on the dyno. Also the fact that adding aftermarket turbo makes it also read irregularly. Take it with a grain of salt and use it to basically just see the gains after a tune but not an actual number.

 

[Se7eN]

I finally tried mine out this morning:
I didn't really do any solid "pulls", just left the gauge on while driving around

Dizzy Stage 2 canned tune (no refinements)
Torque peak 258.5 ft.lbs
HP peak 178.7 (seems kinda low for the torque numbers?)

Like on a Dyno and while doing Logs, on the stock snail it would be anywhere from 2000 to 2400 rpms to get on it and maybe till 6,000?rpm. Sincerely you can make a bit more power but the shift point is actually around 5,500rpms for usable power band while running through the gears. Also usually just do a 3rd gear pull and make sure there aren't any cops around.

Stock turbo will pull peak TQ at under 3000RPMS

 

[TalkToTheFiST]

I care more about my 3000-5000rpm range as that's where this car sees most spirited driving. Bouncing off the Rev limiter just reminds you how slow the stock turbo really is

I was thinking about this lately. Two things really, one i have to wait longer for the power if it comes on later and i don't tend to drive at 4500 on a regular basis, and, also how if you have a car that comes on late in the RPMs, you are ultimately creating more piston travel and i would assume more wear.

I was leaning toward Dizzy for my e30 since i decided to get the tune but this morning i decided Stratified was the better choice. The power is, as you elude to, in a more usable range of RPMs and i chose a linear throttle setup to avoid the touchiness some people complain about.

So now i wait for the floppy disc in the mail 😎

 

[Spork1569]

I was thinking about this lately. Two things really, one i have to wait longer for the power if it comes on later and i don't tend to drive at 4500 on a regular basis, and, also how if you have a car that comes on late in the RPMs, you are ultimately creating more piston travel and i would assume more wear.

I was leaning toward Dizzy for my e30 since i decided to get the tune but this morning i decided Stratified was the better choice. The power is, as you elude to, in a more usable range of RPMs and i chose a linear throttle setup to avoid the touchiness some people complain about.

So now i wait for the floppy disc in the mail 😎

The touchiness is still there despite linear throttle mapping, Mines a 91 octane tune and I can feel the difference between it and my Dizzy tune big time.

I think it's just the way they tune, similar to the Cobb OTS maps in feel but more aggressive.

 

[Clint Beastwood]

I was thinking about this lately. Two things really, one i have to wait longer for the power if it comes on later and i don't tend to drive at 4500 on a regular basis, and, also how if you have a car that comes on late in the RPMs, you are ultimately creating more piston travel and i would assume more wear.

I was leaning toward Dizzy for my e30 since i decided to get the tune but this morning i decided Stratified was the better choice. The power is, as you elude to, in a more usable range of RPMs and i chose a linear throttle setup to avoid the touchiness some people complain about.

So now i wait for the floppy disc in the mail 😎

They should send you a thingy to fill out via email