I'd take those pwer and torque numbers with a huge mountain of salt.

jds

 

Yes, lots of salt... And on the page they say Note: Turbo rotary engine... And whats up with that spread...

Anyway an update, the titanium lugs are on the car and now the focus is finishing the pullies I am working on with titanium hardware; we are finishing the prototype and should have that by Sept 15th... Then a week of testing and a production run for mid October...

 

u could be jsut a mistake, however at the top of that page it says NOTE: Rotary TURBO engines....

 

So when are you starting production of your Ti wheels cortc? :D

 

Well the titanium lug bolts are ready for production, after I discuss with Omicron they will be made available... The first ten sets will be available at a discount (cost) via a group buy and only to forum members...

 

well, make that 9 after I get mine... :D

 

i would love to have some titanium pulleys hope they are finished soon so i can stop salivating. lol

 

The pulleys will be aluminum, the nuts and bolts and the crank hub will be titanium...

 

well aluminum i sclose enough for government work and idea on how colse you are to finishing them?

 

I should have the prototype set within a couple of weeks... Then some dyno runs of a stock RX8 the weekend I get them in... Install, then some more dyno runs and will post results...

This should all be completed by Sept 30th, at that point I will figure out pricing for a production run, a brand name, square away with Omicron and make them available for an October availability...

They wiil be available in three flavors, pulleys only, pulleys and titanium nuts and bolts and pulleys, ti nuts and bolts and ti crank hub...

The first ten-twenty sets will come with special group-buy pricing, for forum members only...

This is basically a labor of love as alot of time and resources have been spent on this project....

 

Have you had the car at the dealer since then and are there any warranty issues?

 

Can anyone explain to me what a sonic damper does for the engine. From what I understand of it, it seems to be some voodoo magic. I guess I don't understand it.

 

Cortc,

Sign me up. I would definitely be interested in pulleys. I will keep up with this thread. Let us know how it goes.

 

anybody go for the UR pullies yet?

 

i think i am going to order them on monday from hopup racing. i will let you know how they turn out.

 

Just to save you the trouble, 0% under drive will show a 0% gain in horsepower on a dyno, as rotational inertia should NOT be measure on a dyno. Also the reduction in rotational inertia from switching to lighter pullies is VERY small because of there small diameter, the change would be practically unnoticable. Whereas something liek a flywheel would make a huge difference in the cars acceleration (which still should not show on a dyno). I would also look into titaniums compatability and friction properties with the front main seal before you go making a ti front hub. Also i think the TI hardware is silly, and just adds $$,.. is 1 ounce weight savings worth the cost of TI hardware?

 

I have not published my results yet as we are not done testing, but you are very wrong... I have seen hp gains on the dyno from 6-8hp depending on configuration... And the TI hub is completely compatible...



Posts like yours quoting results based on no factual testing at all are silly...

 

Tell me how a dyno is going to measure a horsepower gain of something that makes no horsepower? If the dyno is done right you wont see anything from an ultra lightweight flywheel either. On a mustang dyno you definatly wouldnt,.. same for a dynojet unless you fuged it and dynoed it in first or second gear (on a dynojet) where the engines acceleration rate is great enough for all the power loss from spinning up the flywheel etc to show up, in which case both results would be less than if you had done it right in 5th gear in the first place.

How is something that adds no power to the motor going to show up on a device which measures power?

No underdrive= no reduction in load on the motor unless its accelerating fast enough for the rotatonal inertia to matter, which wouldnt be an accurate dyno.

I have no grounds on the TI thing except that usually TI isnt a usually good choice for anything that encounters friction, bearing journals and such are almost allways ferrous.

I am , however positive that pullies with no underdrive will show zero gain on a mustang dyno, and zero to near zero gain on a dynojet, unless you screwed up the dynojet run and dynoed in too low of a gear,.. its called physics.

 

Well looks like we have another coach expert here! If you have it all figured out then go somewhere else and apply your highly scientific methodology and insults... In the meantime I am positive that my results are 100% accurate and that a dyno will always show hp that is freed up due to reduced parasitic loses even if it's due to reduced rotational mass...

Maybe this is too simple for your superior mind and testing methods to quantify…

And as far as physics go, I believe my qualifications and those of the others who have worked on this with me including a PHD in Physics; hold a little more weight (no pun intended) than yours...

Now go away little 86rx7 shut your trap and get an education; my patience for uneducated rhetoric like yours is wearing very thin...

Oh, and learn how to spell; it is pulleys not pullies...

 

I will gaurentee you there is absolutly no way for reducing the rotational inertia the motor has to spin up to show on a mustang dyno, or any other kind of brake dyno. It may show if large enough on a dynojet. Pullies do not have a large enough diameter to be much of a load at the slow rate the motor accelerates in 5th gear on a dynojet so they shouldt show up. I didnt say it wont make a difference in chassis acceleration... But you cant dyno something the dyno isnt made to measure,.. infact one of the reasons you dyno in a 1:1 gear is too lessen the error caused by rotational inertia on a dynojet, this is why the car will spit out less hp on a dynojet when dynoed in first then forth. In first the acceleration rate is enough to get error from the motor/flywheels rotational inertia.

A mustang dyno stops the motor from accelerating with a brake at increasing rpm points to get the torque produced at that rpm. Tell me where rotational inertia factors in there?

 

Do you even know why cars are rated in net hp now instead of gross hp?

 

Wow, you really have this figured out so why do you want me to teach you... Once again go get an education, and after you have actually designed built and tested anything yourself on any car come back and then your guarantees will have a little more weight to them...

 

Yes, obiously you dont because that has no relation what so ever to this discussion

"Simply put, the gross rating system was a measurement of an engine’s power, at the flywheel, taken without any restrictions on the engine’s ability to perform. Engines were set up on a dyno and the measurements were taken with no air cleaners in place, no alternator or other engine-driven accessories, and very often with tubular headers. Mufflers? No way! That changed in ’72, partly in an effort to “under rate” a car’s performance capability and mollify the insurance industry, and partly to give a fairer “real world” estimate of what kind of power buyers could expect from their car. Net horsepower ratings were taken with all the crank-driven accessories in place, a functioning air cleaner, and factory exhaust manifolds"

http://moparmusclemagazine.com/roadtests/37426/

Rotational inertia doesnt matter with net crank HP ratings because they are all done on brake dynos. An object with Rotatonal inertia only takes power when your ACCELERATING the object. Brake dynos STOP THE ENGINE FROM ACCELERATING to measure torque and thus get rpm therefore rotational inertia is not a factor.

 

If you know what rotational inertia is, you know its is IMPOSSIBLE for a brake dyno to measure any gain from reducing/ increasing it.

Also, depending on how fast a car can spin the rollers up on an inertial dyno in forth gear (as i said before lower gears magnify the HP lost from rotational inertia, which is why you dyno in a high gear) you will see little to no gain from a lightweight flywheel, which is a huge decrease in rotational inertia, your simply not accelerating the rotating mass fast enough for it to matter. I refuse to believe that a couple pounds off a pully with a radius of less then 3 inches is going to show up at all even on a inertial dyno, unless the car was very high horsepower, the rollers on the dyno were to light for the car, or the car was dynoed in a lower gear.

You need to understand that the power loss increases the faster you accelerate the rotating mass, this is a function of the DEFINITION of rotational inertia. So on a brake (mustang) dyno where you arent accelerating the motor, you will se no interference from it. and on a dynojet where the acceleration is slow (on purpose, or else rotational inertia screws up your data) you will see little to no effect, especially from a pully which actually has very little rotational inertia compared to the whole. You may see a gain in acceleration in first and second gear on the street however, but again i wouldnt expect to much from soemthing with such a small radius.

 

"If we measured the power output of an engine first with light flywheel and then again with the standard part on an engine dyno, no change in power will be seen to occur. At first it appears that the light flywheel has done nothing and was a total waste of cash. This is not the case. A dyno that shows max power at constant revs does not demonstrate what happens to an engine's power output in real life situations - like acceleration"

http://www.uucmotorwerks.com/flywhee...heel_works.htm

"This thread was discussed there just a couple weeks ago. The first is from a good, experienced driver with a CSP '95 M3. This was discussed in detail not long ago. Lightening the flywheel cannot result in increased steady state horsepower as measured by a dyno. After all, the flywheel is not an energy creating device. However since a flywheel does absorb and store some of the energy generated by the engine during acceleration, a lighter flywheel does result in increased transient state energy delivered to the rear wheel, and some therefore measurable acceleration improvement.

It would be possible to calculate these gains. However to do so one would have to know the inertia of both the stock and lightened flywheels, not their weights. Flywheel weight alone is not a good measure of the effectiveness of a modified flywheel. Indeed it would theoretically be possible to have a heavier than stock flywheel which nonetheless had lower inertia (although I can't imagine why...). "

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache...eel+dyno&hl=en

"Finally, a flywheel will not show much of a gain in horsepower on a dyno because it doesn't increase fuel or air and can't increase horsepower. Remember, you're not actually improving your car's power, just how quickly it can get to that power. An inertial dyno will show gains by the engine reaching a predetermined rpm sooner with a lightened flywheel. "


http://www.nissanperformancemag.com/march03/ask_sarah/


Someone needs to brush up on high school physics.