[v1p3r]

Man, your thread is a very tempting advert for a used S-Cross!

Originally Posted by d3mon

These Harmonixx guys use 1.15x SAE correction factor even for turbo engines, which is not valid. SAE correction factor is only really valid for NA engines. After all, the 1-1.5PSI drop in NA engines is significant (14.7PSI to 13.xx PSI), but for a turbo engine like yours with ~30PSI of boost (for an intake manifold pressure of 40+PSI), the 1 PSI drop in atmospheric pressure is almost noise. All of their turbo dynos are vastly overrated due to this factor, even in stock form. Your true output is roughly 175-180HP / 380NM without the correction, which is still a great result.

SAE J1349 is a pretty standard equation that is used across many countries. I don't see why there should be any confusion on the %, or rather ratio. From my experience, SAE themselves discourage a CF of over 7% for any atmospheric conditions. Of course, there are boundary conditions to 1349 - I don't think it works over 45 C for instance, since it was made for the US. There are bunch of other standard CFs from automaking countries - JIS, DIN, ISO - but since the Americans have the vast share of the popular internet, and aftermarket automotive industries, SAE specs are the most commonly used.

15%, however, is the SAE's old and gold standard for crank power vs wheel power. Are you sure that isn't the number being applied here? Personally, I think using a 30 year old measure for newer, more efficient engines is a bit much, but that's America for you.

To understand what a dyno is reading, I would compare the BSFC to the dynod hp, while metering fuel consumption as well as lambda values. This would give a more realistic indicator of the actual goings on. This, by the way, is how OEMs dyno engines.

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

IAT wouldn't affect NA cars much but it will affect the turbo charged ones.

Where did you get this nugget from?

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

Dynapack Dyno at Arka Motorsports is the other best dyno in South India and they also use SAE correction.

I don't understand this 'best' claim. Is there some sort of dyno comparison going around? Dynos are meant to be benchmarking tools, and I have rarely seen a 'best' or even 'better' claim going around. Also, the Germans use a DIN standard, and Japanese - from Nismo to HKS - use JIS corrected dynos, not SAE. There is no 'better', merely the right tool for the job.

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

Anyways our major objective was to compare the gains and the dynojet dyno at Harmonixx was giving consistent results in every run.

Nice! This is the true use of a dyno - baseline / benchmarks followed by testing for gains. Anything else is futile, and for this, the dyno has to be consistent.

[Dr.Naren]

Dyno graph of Stage 3 S-Cross 1.6 tuned by Wolf Moto

The car was put on Dynojet dyno at Harmonixx Tuning



190 HP / 421 NM at wheels
202 HP / 438 NM at crank

Comparison with bone stock car



I made 71 HP more than stock. Peak torque is up only by 67 NM, but it is holding 300+ NM for longer revv band which helped me to get 200+ HP .

[saurabh_v8]

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

Dyno graph of Stage 3 S-Cross 1.6 tuned by Wolf Moto

The car was put on Dynojet dyno at Harmonixx Tuning

Attachment 2193104

190 HP / 421 NM at wheels
202 HP / 438 NM at crank

Comparison with bone stock car

Attachment 2193105

I made 71 HP more than stock. Peak torque is up only by 67 NM, but it is holding 300+ NM for longer revv band which helped me to get 200+ HP .

Pardon My Question, may be I haven't understood the discussion correctly.

May I please know how is that a stock car claiming 120ps on official spec sheets generates 130ps or bhp at the dyno. shouldn't it more like 80-90 bhp

[Dr.Naren]

Originally Posted by saurabh_v8

May I please know how is that a stock car claiming 120ps on official spec sheets generates 130ps or bhp at the dyno. shouldn't it more like 80-90 bhp

There are many cases where Dyno shows more power than manufacturer claimed figures. 80-90 HP is way too less and no FWD cars will have so much loss at wheels.

Celtic tuning UK also got 133 HP at crank for a stock 1.6



Anyways dyno is for comparing the gains, the numbers will vary in different dynos. But it's completely normal for dynos to show more than manufacturer claimed numbers, there are plenty of examples in VAG and BMW cars too

[RGK]

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

Anyways dyno is for comparing the gains, the numbers will vary in different dynos. But it's completely normal for dynos to show more than manufacturer claimed numbers, there are plenty of examples in VAG and BMW cars too

I do not drive S Cross, but one thing is you are one of the reliable "Ettas" for S Cross (with mods & upgrades) in the auto arena .

[KKapadia]

That’s a tastefully modified car. You ve definitely gone all guns to extract the last possible HP from that 1.6. It’s a remarkable feat and you ve proved it by driving your car a fair bit. 180-190 or over 200bhp doesn’t really matter. It’s the smile on your face and the satisfaction that you get every time you drive your car with you knowing that it’s better than the rest. It ain’t a sports car we are talking about anyways. Enjoy the drive. I would recommend the hardware upgrade at the earliest to avoid undue stress on the components.

[Dr.Naren]

Originally Posted by KKapadia

That’s a tastefully modified car. You ve definitely gone all guns to extract the last possible HP from that 1.6.

Thanks

Actually the engine has got more potential if I upgrade the injectors and fuel pump along with a hybrid turbo.

I would recommend the hardware upgrade at the earliest to avoid undue stress on the components.

I guess only the clutch should be upgraded for the current setup. Everything else is sorted

[M35]

Excellent thread! How is the stage 3 holding up on your car? My Yeti is on Stage 1+ by Rajiv (WolfMoto) and thinking of an upgrade. What would you recommend, stage 2 with downpipe or stage 3? Stage 3 puts the CR177 turbo in with other mods to put out 220 HP and 420 Nm!

[Dr.Naren]

Originally Posted by M35

Excellent thread! How is the stage 3 holding up on your car? My Yeti is on Stage 1+ by Rajiv (WolfMoto) and thinking of an upgrade. What would you recommend, stage 2 with downpipe or stage 3? Stage 3 puts the CR177 turbo in with other mods to put out 220 HP and 420 Nm!

Hi, the car is doing good. I have driven close to 60k km on stage 3 tune. I recommend stage 3 if you drive mostly on highways. Stage 2 is not slow and it's more than sufficient for city driving and cruising on highways .

[M35]

Originally Posted by Dr.Naren

Hi, the car is doing good. I have driven close to 60k km on stage 3 tune. I recommend stage 3 if you drive mostly on highways. Stage 2 is not slow and it's more than sufficient for city driving and cruising on highways .

Yes, mostly driven on highways. They claim that their Stage-2 map puts out 190 hp with Garret intercooler + downpipe (Against 220 hp with Stage 3). It's a three day work against 12-14 days for the stage 3.

[Dr.Naren]

Originally Posted by M35

Yes, mostly driven on highways. They claim that their Stage-2 map puts out 190 hp with Garret intercooler + downpipe (Against 220 hp with Stage 3). It's a three day work against 12-14 days for the stage 3.

12-14 days for Stage 3 ? It should be done in 2 days if parts are available.

[raajj354]

I've a S-Cross 1.6 Delta that I'm upgrading with ARC rear suspension to replace the Stock.I'm doing it at ICD tuning, Adyar. Thay were also talking about TOT remaps, but I'm hearing here that Wolf Moto is better? I do not want to do HW upgrade just for the tuning, so what is the best to go for? Conditions: 90% City drive - 40 kms per day (with 15 kms on Chennai bypass where I rev) and occasional long drives with family twice a year.