I'm recently back from a very interesting trip to the dyno and want to share some normalized exhaust performance data with competitors using Kent engines. more than adequate power for the foreseeable remains untapped in the Kent waiting for those willing to invest a little independent thought and work (many of yesterday's answers are now out-of-date). to that end the post will start as a "quiz" to hopefully get the thinking processes started with the answer to be posted at a later date........ the attached photo shows 10 of the 11 1.500" OD collector/tailpipe assemblies tested in Portland using the same engine (set-up to make top end power and quite a bit better than your average mule) using the same set of my one piece equal length stainless primaries equipped with integral EGT ports on the same dyno on the same day. it's an interesting collection of characters (at least one missed the photo shoot due to "shyness"): three have been to the RunOffs (one twice); one was used to set fast lap of the 2013 National Championship race at Road America and win the 2014 June Sprints; and finally another was used to first make 120HPc compliantly back in 2004 using 3.189" OD forged pistons, 20wt synthetic oil, NGK BP8ES's, .......(all good stuff whose time has long since passed) ! going north, the hardware used at the 2013 RunOffs (none was sent to Laguna) was expected/forecast to finish third from the bottom so clearly I was upbeat getting ready for the test keeping in mind the dyno's opinion is the only one that really matters.
your job Mr. Phelps is to pick the winner and correctly rank order the other ten......... checking with the engine simulation software firms is probably a waste of time; not enough of the things critical to Kent performance are currently modeled adequately! Three different engine simulation firms were recently surveyed (4th quarter 2014) to get an understanding of where the technology is; two firms with potentially affordable solutions and a third high end offering in the neighborhood of $28,000/seat/year!! All three firms were provided a picture of a number of collector/tailpipe assemblies and asked if their software could determine which was best and rank order the others ALL other things being equal. Two of the firms replied their code didn’t currently have the capability (one said the first iteration of the capability was in the process of being developed); the third after several further questions acknowledged that what was needed was not one of their simulation's current strengths and “some” development might be required to get "reliable results"……………………………………
Art
artesmith@earthlink.net
your job Mr. Phelps is to pick the winner and correctly rank order the other ten......... checking with the engine simulation software firms is probably a waste of time; not enough of the things critical to Kent performance are currently modeled adequately! Three different engine simulation firms were recently surveyed (4th quarter 2014) to get an understanding of where the technology is; two firms with potentially affordable solutions and a third high end offering in the neighborhood of $28,000/seat/year!! All three firms were provided a picture of a number of collector/tailpipe assemblies and asked if their software could determine which was best and rank order the others ALL other things being equal. Two of the firms replied their code didn’t currently have the capability (one said the first iteration of the capability was in the process of being developed); the third after several further questions acknowledged that what was needed was not one of their simulation's current strengths and “some” development might be required to get "reliable results"……………………………………
Art
artesmith@earthlink.net
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire