K & N Dyno Sheet for Jim G to Analyize
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Joined
·
254 Posts
I have been considering the same purchase,
am looking forward to JimG's reply.
am looking forward to JimG's reply.
Joined
·
4,101 Posts
Matjow: This is a credible dyno chart for several reasons:
- It was run under moderate ambient conditions, as evidenced by the correction factor of 1.01 (only a 1% correction factor to get to "standard" conditions)
- It was run on the K&N dyno, whch has a history of lower power readings than say the Magnacharger dyno
- It was for some reason run in 2nd gear (not sure why), which would depress the absolute values for torque and power reported for reasons explained in my book
- It was corrected to "SAE" versus "STD", and SAE, again for reasons described in my book, is the more conservative reporting standard, and typically gives results 4 to 5% lower than STD (STD used by most aftermarket dynos)
- The test was done on a vehicle with 3900 miles on its odomeer, which is well after normal break-in, so gives "normal" results.
Here is some interpretation:
The 12.75 hp best gain claimed occurs near peak torque, which is credible in both magnitude of the improvement (about 4%) and the rpm (before the engine starts to run out of air for other reasons).
The fact that the gain at PEAK power / rpm is lower, only perhaps 10 hp looking at it visually on screen, tells me that the engine has a different "cork" to the air flow somewhere else. On a stock LS2, that is probably the stock exhaust system.
Note that the order of magnitude gain of only 10 hp at peak means that the vehicle will only be quicker in 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile by a very small amount. My modeling software says as much as 0.15 second reduction in 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile, BUT one of our Austin members has installed this K&N kit and got about half of that improvement in G-Tech measured runs. However, he admits that he was running in known unsyemmetrical conditions for the 2-way runs, in a location I do not recommend, and I cannot really accept his results are "controlled runs" under the circumstances. It is also possible that like so many other products, the K&N seems to work a bit better for its manufacturer than for other testers.
On a dollar / hp basis, this is good value: about $400 / 10 hp = $40 / hp, which is the very low end of the cost scale in the rarified world of automobile performance!
Furthermore, remember that you get a larger kick, almost 13 hp, at 4700 rpm, where it is actuaslly more useful to an SSR driver (we rarely go racing unless we really like to do things thehard way!).
My overall conlusion: This is a good value from a supplier with a credible record of reporting realistic gains.
Jim G
- It was run under moderate ambient conditions, as evidenced by the correction factor of 1.01 (only a 1% correction factor to get to "standard" conditions)
- It was run on the K&N dyno, whch has a history of lower power readings than say the Magnacharger dyno
- It was for some reason run in 2nd gear (not sure why), which would depress the absolute values for torque and power reported for reasons explained in my book
- It was corrected to "SAE" versus "STD", and SAE, again for reasons described in my book, is the more conservative reporting standard, and typically gives results 4 to 5% lower than STD (STD used by most aftermarket dynos)
- The test was done on a vehicle with 3900 miles on its odomeer, which is well after normal break-in, so gives "normal" results.
Here is some interpretation:
The 12.75 hp best gain claimed occurs near peak torque, which is credible in both magnitude of the improvement (about 4%) and the rpm (before the engine starts to run out of air for other reasons).
The fact that the gain at PEAK power / rpm is lower, only perhaps 10 hp looking at it visually on screen, tells me that the engine has a different "cork" to the air flow somewhere else. On a stock LS2, that is probably the stock exhaust system.
Note that the order of magnitude gain of only 10 hp at peak means that the vehicle will only be quicker in 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile by a very small amount. My modeling software says as much as 0.15 second reduction in 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile, BUT one of our Austin members has installed this K&N kit and got about half of that improvement in G-Tech measured runs. However, he admits that he was running in known unsyemmetrical conditions for the 2-way runs, in a location I do not recommend, and I cannot really accept his results are "controlled runs" under the circumstances. It is also possible that like so many other products, the K&N seems to work a bit better for its manufacturer than for other testers.
On a dollar / hp basis, this is good value: about $400 / 10 hp = $40 / hp, which is the very low end of the cost scale in the rarified world of automobile performance!
Furthermore, remember that you get a larger kick, almost 13 hp, at 4700 rpm, where it is actuaslly more useful to an SSR driver (we rarely go racing unless we really like to do things thehard way!).
My overall conlusion: This is a good value from a supplier with a credible record of reporting realistic gains.
Jim G
Joined
·
4,101 Posts
Sorry, I was tired and forgot. I remember now why they did the dyno test in 2nd gear: On the automatic, third gear hits the speed limiter (set by the factory because of the tires being rated to only 130 mph), so they have to hold the transmission in 2nd gear in order to get to the engine rev limiter.
Jim G
Jim G
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!