• Welcome to The Truck Stop! We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.

    Your truck knowledge is missing!
    • Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
    • We have tons of knowledge here for your diesel truck!
    • Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
    • NO ADS! The site is fully functional and ad free!
    CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

    Problems registering? Click here to contact us!

    Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!

Dyno results and discussion

I'm partial to the DS4 where you can have a variable timing and fueling options to test out very quickly leading up to the dyno or on the dyno. Already have a DB2 6.5 dyno of ATT (large housing) and GM3, with regular ATT housing dyno planned.
 
Wish I had seen this thread earlier. Got invited to a Cummins Dyno Day in June out here in AZ and plan to put the Little Green Truck on the rollers. With the exception of higher fuel pressure, FTB, and marine nozzles the engine is mostly stock. Should be a pretty decent comparison compared to factory. Though I'm debating putting a VGT on before than so...
 
Maybe we should just let 6.5L do the testing and then get some honest numbers,since we got a good base truck, and a real dyno not a butt dyno. Also the manual IP takes away any tuning anomalies. This way all things being equal there are no advantages for the tuning with a mechanical pump. We can look at torque curves with a consistent base.

And 6.5l has been straight up honest, what better a person. I will personal pay for the ATT run this time so how about the HX Knock off run?
 
6.5 L has the best test base truck so far, consistent truck tested with gm 3, large A-Team Turbo soon the normal A-Team Turbo and hopefully if someone steps up a HX knock off of some flavor. That is a pretty good test bed. The manual IP leaves out any tuning anomalies along with the same dyno on all of the runs. NOW we have torque and horsepower curves for the turbos on the same truck with the same drive-line.

I think that making comparisons is based on consistent data, with repeatable test parameters. SO, I think that 6.5l's truck would make an honest test truck. Free of a lot of the variables that would be present in some other test trucks.;)

JUST my honest opinion of things.

War Wagon's manual truck would be another good test truck, Manual IP first. Then test the electronic IP after the manual IP to show the torque and horse power curve variables of the different Injector pumps (manual versus electronic).

After all we are after honest data, right?
 
Well you could call it a very poor choice of phrase, but no matter how many times you highlight or underline it, it sounded biased.

Not knowing the scope of intended testing would make it difficult to pass that judgement. Since this is the dyno thread and nominations for dyno time, you can at least infer that honest dyno values would be involved and not just a butt dyno. Although sometimes the butt dyno can be more useful, and where the suggested extended testing for towing and mileage comparisons is above and beyond dyno numbers.
 
buddy said:
Well you could call it a very poor choice of phrase, but no matter how many times you highlight or underline it, it sounded biased.

Not knowing the scope of intended testing would make it difficult to pass that judgement. Since this is the dyno thread and nominations for dyno time, you can at least infer that honest dyno values would be involved and not just a butt dyno. Although sometimes the butt dyno can be more useful, and where the suggested extended testing for towing and mileage comparisons is above and beyond dyno numbers.
Click to expand...


I agree, but, no pun intended, in the past I and others have been chastised for butt dyno results and asked to produce dyno numbers. So it can't be one thing one day and another when it is convenient for someone. So lets get the dyno numbers, and some qualitative data from REAL life testing and make some comparisons.

We go back and forth between real life testing and dyno. Both have their place. For those that only believe the dyno numbers they get theirs; we get horse power and torque curves to make some type of comparison based on a know set of events. EVERY truck will be different (quote from littleboy) and that is a correct statement.

So if we stop mixing data get a number starting point we can progress. Heard numbers last night from someone that said they were told they will have 400 hp at what rpm (I don't know) by a tune injectors exhaust and a new part, I won't mention or quote who that was from, (possible but hard to fathom that) and keep it from melting down. This is with a gM 8 turbo as well. SO we can all throw around inferred numbers lets get some starting point and set the inferred horse power and tourque numbers in the hall of shame.

We have lost a lot of good people lately for posturing and difference of opinion. It is getting like someplace else over here. :mad2:

DENNIS
 
But someone offered to do both, with all three turbos on the same truck, and it was discouraged, which did not make sense.

Most consternation in any forum, online or in person, comes from airing personal issues or feelings, emotional rather than professional content.

Knowing how WW's truck runs and his configuration I think more meaningful data can be extracted and knowledged gain from the testing. Technically a cherry optimizer with a manual tranny that we know puts up good numbers might be the best for a turbo shootout, comparing turbo performance only. But taking an average, aged 6.2 with a hurdle we already know about, and comparing options available is some good information for the whole community. Both testing has its merits depening on the goals, simply because two trucks don't perform the same. So test data on one truck means little until there is a good sample set to compare it to, as it could be an anomaly.
 
I agree with ww's nomination. The more that gets tested the better so we will know just what parts work well with each other and which don't.
 
buddy said:
Tom no offense, I just didn't understand so I have asked for clarifications and made some responses in red. :hihi: forgive me I am a little slow at times and rather than get into a pissing match which this isn't. So everyone knows: you have helped with a project that I have going and that I thank you for that (still not right yet, and I think it is mechanical (think being the key word). SO here goes

Original post.

But someone (WHO) offered to do both (do both what ?) , with all three turbos on the same truck, and it (what or whom) was discouraged (from doing what) , which did not make sense. (I don't understand this)

Most consternation in any forum, online or in person, comes from airing personal issues or feelings, emotional rather than professional content. (a given in forums: especially when people are hell bent on getting what they want by tenacity alone)

Knowing how WW's truck (which one, I agree with the manual IP in this context) runs and his configuration I think more meaningful data (what data, and how is this data more meaningful) can be extracted and knowledged gain from the testing. Technically (suspicious use of the word technically LOL) a cherry optimizer (who's truck and how is "cherry optimizer" a key point) with a manual tranny that we know puts (how do we know) up good numbers might ("would in my opinion") be the best for a turbo shootout, comparing turbo performance only (and we are trying to do what else at this point of data collection on the turbos?).

But taking an average, aged 6.2 with a hurdle we already know about (what hurdle, and who's vehicle) , and comparing options available (what options, and on a mechanical or electronic ip truck, because there is no other electronic IP truck with numbers that is an aged 6.2) is some good information for the whole community. Both testing has its merits depening on the goals (who's objective or what goals are envisioned at this point other than a turbo comparison?), simply because two trucks don't perform the same (all ready stated and agreed to). So test data on one truck means little until there is a good sample set (and testing both manual trucks does not get us further to a sample set?) to compare it to (with what), as it (what) (and what) could be an anomaly (There has to be a first truck and in "my opinion" think the electronic IP is not the way to do this; with the tuning variable. The tuning variable creates an anomaly in the data.).
Click to expand...

I think that 6.5l truck is a good start for the turbo test on a truck with known data as I stated before.

War Wagon would be good for the turbo shoot out as well, the only caveat is, a manual IP pump so that we can get data on two trucks that are manual IP one with automatic transmission and one with manual trans.

Doing a electronic pump does not compare anything yet because there are no recent dyno numbers for an electronic IP truck with all three turbos on it or two turbos for that matter, that I know of. So lets get some data without the electronic IP tuning anomaly (because that is a very big variable). We have a consistent dyno platform.

To much all over the place data has a tendency to get confusing especially when you compare two things that are not even close to each other (manual, electronic IP). After there are two trucks with the same electronic IP configuration, we can do the same test of the turbos. I have volunteered to pay out of my pocket for the next ATT test with 6.5l. The only thing left to do is get the hx clone of some flavor and send it to 6.5L and pay for the dyno run. Not that difficult.

As far as War Wagons truck I will also help defray the cost of the ATT turbo dyno, but wont pay for the gm 3 or the hx clone. So money is up on my part to help sort this out. Lets stop complaining about how things are done and get something done with what we have instead of changing up in middle of collecting this data. If there is no money being put forth on to further this endeavor this discussion should just end. I have volunteered and put my money up to help get this going.

Dennis
 
I guess you missed something Slim, you chimed in about getting honest data right after nominations to run dyno on WarWagons proposed comparisons.

I'm all for letting the process of this thread run its intended course, and getting all types of data from as many sources possible.
 
Good morning gentlemen.....WW truck's was discussed many times here over coffee when this fund was first coming into being. We say yea, and are partial to the DB2 pump also, which is not a surprise for us. Warwagon has been posting up alot of road test data and we would like to see another fresh combo on the dyno.

Will stay out of the above discussion over honesty and phrasing. We rolled again last weekend, gained 15hp with TCC lock up, calibrated tachometer, charge pressure turned up one full turn (pump started pissing fuel everywhere, so we are sure we had air ....LOL), re-routed WMI system and adjusted our timing (by ear...LOL). We have been very busy here, when we get a chance, will post up the video and dyno sheet.

Have a great run WW, important to have fun.....pedal to the metal !!!!!!!!:thumbsup:
 
By the way Dennis, once I start getting paychecks in (just turned in my time sheet), I will be making more money than I know what to do with so don't worry about covering the dyno run with the regular ATT. You were nice enough to let me run both housings so I am really not that worried about it.
 
So who is sending 6.5l an hx clone? and who is sending War Wagon the hx clone? I agree with Turbonator that the db2 mechanical pump is the truck to test. That is my vote as well.
 
6.5L said:
By the way Dennis, once I start getting paychecks in (just turned in my time sheet), I will be making more money than I know what to do with so don't worry about covering the dyno run with the regular ATT. You were nice enough to let me run both housings so I am really not that worried about it.
Click to expand...


It is my pleasure to have been able to work with you and your father. When you want or if you u want larger pre cups let me know.
 
So far we have 4 yeas from the original 10 donators. I think we need to have at least 5 (50%) to move ahead. perhap Buddy or Slim would care to anti up and thereby have a vote
 
Yeah, I do want the larger pre-cups. I just don't know when I would put them in. I would for sure wait until after I dyno with the regular ATT housing. I am trying not to touch anything on the motor or tweak the injection pump in anyway so I can see where the differences went just between the turbo's instead of having another variable to account for. I have been pretty dang busy with work lately so haven't been able to get into our shop and tear the old motor down to rob the pre-cups out of it. Although I do know for sure one of the heads, I think the passenger side, has a major crack in it visible on the outside. Not sure how far it goes. I am working Mon-Fri this week but next week I transfer to Tuesdays-Saturdays, so I will have Sunday and Mondays off and will try to get in next Monday and tear the heads down and check the condition of the old pre-cups and see what we can do. Thanks Dennis!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top