He got a two week timeout for some stuff he posted on a members page.
He will be back in one week.
standalone ECU for yamaha nytro all years
- Thread starter Vi-PEC Powersports
- Start date
He got a two week timeout for some stuff he posted on a members page.
He will be back in one week.
V
numbers from our eddy current mustang 500 awd.....look at the dyno chart: does it look close to 165 disclosed hp(rzr 900)? funny stock run is spot on at 88 hp, exactly the hp polaris says. Now, the clutching coming with the turbo kit is off completely at sea level, so with the right clutching can be a few more horses but that is it. when done with mapping on the standalone ecu, i will post a video and a dyno chart.
the one thing amazing me is just a peak 98 hp,then falling on its face completely(less hp than stock).....stock ecu backing timing on boost like crazy(kinda on failsafe).
can we ALL keep it clean now?
Last edited:
Never mind that,lets see the dyno report saying the MCX 270 Nytro is only making 217 hp.
0
a car on your dyno means nothing about nytro standalone ecu or that it will work in the mountains without needing a laptop and you doubleing behind me to make it work right.... and i second the show us the 217hp mcx
Last edited:
glad to see precision's ban was lifted. nobody else can piss off so many people quite that fast...
and sure, im on the bandwagon. you just threw one of the most reputable turbo kit builders under the bus. you better have some REAL good proof as to why their kits are not what they say they are.
MCX has 1000x the reputation you do in this market, dont shoot yourself in the foot so fast this time around.
and sure, im on the bandwagon. you just threw one of the most reputable turbo kit builders under the bus. you better have some REAL good proof as to why their kits are not what they say they are.
MCX has 1000x the reputation you do in this market, dont shoot yourself in the foot so fast this time around.
I have altso been told this by other dyno tuners.
V
not trying to piss nobody, simply exposing facts with real dyno testing. the hp disclosure on that kit from McX come from A DYNO you know. i never stated they are not a solid company building great kits, simply exposing our dyno testing againts theirs, from a neutral position.
Boyko, McX clutching sent with this kits is totally off and cost them probably 25 hp on the dyno(at my elevation 400ft) but nothing more than that. again craftmanship on the kit is superb.
V
V
being in the powersports industry for 3 years now and testing lots of kits, hp numbers from many turbo kit vendors are thrown at us without any serious testing protocole in regards to hp disclosure(dyno standards testing like in the automotive industry) and therefore way off.i feel numbers are more based on the physics equation of hp/lbs of boost then anything else.All automotive manufacturers use a standard procedure to test and divulgate hp and they ALL use engine dyno at a certain ambient temp,and all are throwing STEADY hp numbers and no PEAK hp numbers. POWERSPORTS turbo kits from most of all are of a great craftmanship, well put together but suffers from the electronic they use.
V
there won't be no more post from me in this thread.I am being stalk by a super moderator and it is going completely out of control and no matter what, he will reply with stupidities and win all the time being protected from his co-moderators.(crossing my fingers not being Ban again having freely express how i feel about this guy!!!)
Wish you ALL an excellent and exciting winter and lots of fun with your toys!!! hope i will meet several of you fellows in west yellowstone where we will be conducting most of our mountain mapping development for Push Turbo(Push is one of the manufacturer using our ECU on all of his kits this year).
Wish you ALL an excellent and exciting winter and lots of fun with your toys!!! hope i will meet several of you fellows in west yellowstone where we will be conducting most of our mountain mapping development for Push Turbo(Push is one of the manufacturer using our ECU on all of his kits this year).
i guess i have receive enough emails to build the PnP ecu for nytro and show up outwest with it.....we are anyway going this year for our distributor in alberta,will be a lot of fun hope, seen a lot of magnificient videos of enourmous deep powder/chutes playground....can't imagine bigger chutes than the 1800ft vertical stuff in cooke city......!! can't wait!
I have ridden Cooke City a lot.......your fooling yourself if you think it compares to Revy,Golden or Whistler. 1800 Vert is decent, but each of those other destinations offer 3,000+ plus Vert on the pipe for 2 mins plus. That would be a great test for any fuel box :face-icon-small-win
RS
I have ridden Cooke City a lot.......your fooling yourself if you think it compares to Revy,Golden or Whistler. 1800 Vert is decent, but each of those other destinations offer 3,000+ plus Vert on the pipe for 2 mins plus. That would be a great test for any fuel box :face-icon-small-win
RS
J
well i hope that they work out for push, from what i have heard they run pretty good on the nytros
Z
You can make a dyno say anything you want. Nearly all the data you see is "corrected" horsepower. Used right "corrected" is trying to correct for differences in temp, altitude etc. Used wrong it is just the BS factor times actual results equals what the dyno operator wants to see on the page. The best dyno is the comparison dyno. Running on the hill against the competition. MCX "compares" strongly to everything on the market. Chris Brown told me(MCX 240 kit at the time) my 240 destroys so called 280-300HP kits.
I really do not agree, dyno is å great tool.
agreed.. I think a lot of people don't like dyno's because there have been many that have had wild claims about hp readings from a dyno that did not correlate to actual performance, especially with people using inertial dyno's and not steady state water break or eddy current (or similar) professional dyno's.
A dyno is just a tool. It is great for creating base maps for engines, and for testing engines under worse case conditions (sustained max load, heat soaked engine, etc).
I agree with greg gns. REALITY CHECK
It is my sincere desire to inform, not criticize anyone in particular, in the use of dynomometers and the numbers that come from them. It seems to be that who ever has the highest horsepower number on paper wins. In reality that couldn't be further from the truth. Dyno numbers are realitive. What I mean by that is the numbers only have real meaning to the shop and the operator doing the testing. Because of the wide range of testing parameters, for example, acceleration test versus steady state test, the rate of acceleration, RPM range of the test, length of time of the test, how quickly the throttle is applied and removed along with the state of tune, engine misfires and torque spikes all greatly effect the numbers on paper. Only the dyno operator knows how to compare all the results as he should be using similar technique's in his testing if he intends to compare any results. That's to say nothing about the calibration of the dyno and the inherent repeatability of the dyno itself. Dyno manufacturer's will have a + or - range of accuracy generally 1% or 2%. If your testing a 5HP engine the margine of error is minimal, but if your testing high HP engines that number may be sizable. 2% of 1000 HP is 20 HP. Add all of the above testing parameters to that and the numbers can be quite different than what I would call the engines actual HP. Manufacturer's generally use what we call "SAE Corrected Power". These are specific parameters and techniques to test by. Most dyno facilities are using "Standard Corrected Power". Why? Because the numbers are higher with those testing parameters. For that reason we choose not to publish specific dyno test results and refer power levels instead
It is my sincere desire to inform, not criticize anyone in particular, in the use of dynomometers and the numbers that come from them. It seems to be that who ever has the highest horsepower number on paper wins. In reality that couldn't be further from the truth. Dyno numbers are realitive. What I mean by that is the numbers only have real meaning to the shop and the operator doing the testing. Because of the wide range of testing parameters, for example, acceleration test versus steady state test, the rate of acceleration, RPM range of the test, length of time of the test, how quickly the throttle is applied and removed along with the state of tune, engine misfires and torque spikes all greatly effect the numbers on paper. Only the dyno operator knows how to compare all the results as he should be using similar technique's in his testing if he intends to compare any results. That's to say nothing about the calibration of the dyno and the inherent repeatability of the dyno itself. Dyno manufacturer's will have a + or - range of accuracy generally 1% or 2%. If your testing a 5HP engine the margine of error is minimal, but if your testing high HP engines that number may be sizable. 2% of 1000 HP is 20 HP. Add all of the above testing parameters to that and the numbers can be quite different than what I would call the engines actual HP. Manufacturer's generally use what we call "SAE Corrected Power". These are specific parameters and techniques to test by. Most dyno facilities are using "Standard Corrected Power". Why? Because the numbers are higher with those testing parameters. For that reason we choose not to publish specific dyno test results and refer power levels instead
Similar threads
