Just wait til you get it tuned!!

Looks good.. you have an email..

What's the best way to go about getting her tuned after I get the intakes on? I'm still somewhat new to moding cars. I thought you generally had to do a fair amount of mods before you needed to worry about having it tuned?
I was at the track all day running 13.4's consistently. I think I had one run that was a 13.5 due a miss shift. But I'd love to see what I do after the intake and a tune!

Tuning isn't available yet since the car is so new..

You will see gains right away after you install the intakes. It will take a little while before you max out the gains as the ECU adjusts to the new bits.

A tune will always help, even if you are completely stock, there is power to be made from a simple tune.

Have you looked at the rest of the stillen bits? One of the forum members, Semtex, is already making over 300RWHP (on a DynoDynamics) with the intakes and the stillen exhaust. Thats without the headers too.

Well... you can always have a custom tune done. Why would you have to wait for a custom tune??

There are no tools yet to do the tuning with. Tuners like UpRev are developing their Osiris for the 370Z... Its not that you can't get custom tuned, its that there isnt any software to do it with yet.

Yea with all the great things I'm seeing from stillen I'm thinking I'll most likely go all stillen as I continue to work on my car.

I'm just going after my intake right now and holding out on exhaust headers and high flow cat till sometime after I move back to Texas this summer! As for now an intake in this car is enough for me out here in NC. Not much to compete with. I still haven't even seen another 370 in my area since they came out. There is a nice white GTR out here tho! We were running each other Friday night. Talk about an awesome race to watch! I took him on the 60 ft but he just raped me after that! Made for a great show to watch tho!

I'm really looking forward to seeing what I'll be able to do in another year or so!

i have the G3's too, do you know a better way to have them get air flow?

Page 1 and 2, mostly page 2!
370Z performance parts Dyno Thrash! > 370z.com > 370z.com - Magazine

dad honestly I read that earlier and I think their results are crap. They didn't want their tune to look so pointless making 5hp....

Not to mention another car (KillerBee) done at the same facility, same dyno shows gains of 40whp with the HFCs and CBE.. posted on their own forum?

Somethings not right..

KillerBee's journal - 2009 - 370Z Z34 - 370z.com

exactly....don't believe everything you hear...question things logically.

Precisely! My post is nothing but FYI, for everyone and anyone. I in no way, am disputing the product , nor it's results! I think it's fair and honest to say that 7 out of 10 will buy and install it.

Guys, discussion on this "Dyno Thrash" here -> http://www.the370z.com/engine-drivet...arts-dyno.html

And it seems that at least one person is suggesting that those of us who have posted larger gains are "inflating" our numbers on the basis of this article. :shakes head:

The difference is conservative dyno testing and reporting vs cherry picking dyno runs for internet forum bragging rights. We are 370z.com, not Technosquare and we reported the results that were obtained in an objective way that others should be able to obtain. The gains are real and significant. The results are professional and should be repeatable, not cherry picked results done by someone who is trying to gain notice on a forum or look good on Utube. We went into the test methodology in detail in the article.

Anyone who is experiance with dyno testing and tuning know that if you try, you can produce runs that make significantly more power if you condition the car to make such a run. We strive for finding what a car will actualy do most of the time.

First, please do not take my post as argumentative or confrontational. Just trying to gather information regarding your testing methods. I read your article and it was interesting, but it did leave me with a few questions.

You mentioned that you had a very strict process which you repeated for every single test however you didn't really specify a few things that are kind of important.

1) You mentioned in your article that you made sure your tests were all run at the same water temperature. What was that temperature?

2) Did you have a Consult II or III scan tool hooked up to the car during the tests?

3) How many runs did you do for each product that you tested? Did you just install the part and then run it once? Or did you install the product and run it multiple times until the car stopped producing more power?

4) I couldn't really see from your pictures but was there a fan blowing on the front of the car during your tests? In your pictures I could not see one and just wanted to confirm.

Again, I am not trying to be confrontational but these were just some of the questions that I had after reading the article.

Thank you very much!

1 more, was the ecu reset after the install of the part or taken out and driving for the ecu to adjust?

I'll answer the questions the best that I can,

I don't remember exactly what the temperture was, I think it was just under 100c or when the fans kick off which is also useful to equalize the electrical load. The water temp was monitored with a scan tool and yes the dyno fan was run at all times. As mentioned the car was run many times with each part installed to normalize it and the runs we counted were not cherry picked but ones taken after the power levels stabilized after several runs, usualy after about 4-5 pulls. The ECU was not reset but the car was run for several minutes to trip the short term and some of the long term trims. Normaly the short term trims start making adjustments imediatly and the long term trim will set after several minutes. Please note that the trims will not have a large effect on wide open throttle open loop operation like is seen on a dyno although they will affect transients and part throttle operation, the part a driver feels. As noted in the test, the air fuel ratios were continuosly monitored just to make sure that other factors like MAF turbulance were not skewing test results.

I was a Nissan engineer for 18 years before they moved to the deep south and I have been involved with the development of Nismo parts. I also have been activily involved with the Tuning industry for the last 22 years as an automotive engineer so I strive to be careful.

Man, I just thankful that there is an aftermarket, and that there are enthusiasts. So far, I like everything Technosquare does.

I didnt read Killerbee's numbers but Technosquare's dyno can display the data in two ways. It can attempt to correct the power to "Dynojet" numbers with an intenternal correction factor or it can use its own lesser reading native corrections.

At 370Z.com we stick with the conservative native output because reporting the higher numbers isnt true representation of a real standard. I think Killerbees results are the higher "Dynojet" corrected numbers.

There is no right or wrong, but going off the native numbers is the way I prefer to report things.

ahhh the OTHER setting, of course...next time I run my car im going to run the other setting...gonna make those Veyron owning sissys cry.

Its not a setting its a mathamatical correction. I don't understand why you seem to take personal offence to others dyno results.

Nobody's taking personal offense at others' dyno results. They're taking personal offense at being called braggards and liars for the honest testing they've done.

Not knowing the best way to sort and report data is not lying. Its just presenting the best posible picture.

No, that's wrong.

Representing the best possible picture would be if he were intentionally employing tactics he knew would manipulate the data in favor of larger numbers. If you want to claim we're all ignorant of proper testing methodology and our results are randomly inaccurate, that's fine. So far they're all randomly inaccurate in roughly the same direction though. 'Painting the best possible picture' is an entirely different thing.

:wtf2: I bet if all you guys were to meet in person, none of this would be happening. Instead, you would all probably be discussing the details and generally having a great time because you are all enthusiasts!

To make this debate more constructive, what were your testing methods?

Either that, or we'd start an impromptu demolition derby battle to the death and destroy a few Z's in the process :stirthepot:

You know exactly what the testing methods are, basically none. They're randomly inaccurate. Go to dyno shop, take a few pulls. Get more mods, go back to same dyno shop, take a few pulls. Repeat. We know they'll have random inaccuracy, but that's a completely different thing than fabricating the results or trying to ignore bad numbers and/or post ones that are known to be wrongly high.

The fact that the randomly-inaccurate dyno results of multiple members in different states are showing results in the ballpark of each other validates the general idea here, which is that it's not crazy to believe 30+ rwhp from a full exhaust on this car.

Your testing methods, while obviously more self-consistent, aren't going to be perfect either. They may be more accurate than random dyno shots, but there are always uncontrolled variables.

This quote is from the 'other' thread. I'm trying to abide by the efforts at thread consolidation here. ;)
I think I understand what you're saying, smartbomb, and it's a valid point. There's a difference between deliberate fabrication of numbers vs. 'cherry-picking' the highest ones. That's why I try to show all runs.

This is the most recent Dyno Dynamics run that I have posted (after installing the Stillen headers):
http://www.the370z.com/members/semte...209hpandaf.jpg

You can see how close all three runs are.

Here's the most recent DynoJet run I have posted (done on same day as above):
http://www.the370z.com/members/semte...09balanced.jpg

Again, you can see the consistency. So in your opinion, is there any inflating of numbers going on here? I suppose technically one could accuse me of cherry-picking because I list the highest of both sets in my signature below. But it's not like I'm taking dynos where I've got three runs with +/- 10whp deltas between each run and only publishing the highest one. And for the record, I don't have sheets from other Dyno Dynamics and DynoJet dynos that I'm suppressing because they came in with lower numbers. I've spent enough coin on dyno sessions as it is! :rolleyes:

I agree with you 100%, through careful conditioning of the vehicle you can cut down on the variabilty quite a bit. Some of the controlable things I have found are variance due to oil and coolent temp of powertrain, +- 3 hp. Heat bloom transients in the engine compartment +-6 hp(amazing isnt it?), electrical load due to fans +- 1 hp.

In my experiance there is also usualy a random variance of +-2-5 hp (depending on the car) for factors that are not easy to control or explane. This makes the testing quite imperfect. I also feel that SAE correction is imperfect, espcialy when heat is combined with extreme humidity.

In my opinion dynojets have better repeatabilty than load dynos (I suspect that the elertical resistance changes in the coils with heat on eddy current and oil properties like viscosity with temp change on hydralic loaded dynos. Dynojets run "shallower" into the high load cells on the maps and don't accurately represent what loads an engine really sees, one reason why they are not optimal for tuning.

I feel that dynojets are the most repeatable but the least accurate for this reason if you know what I mean.

So I think its important to try to be as accurate as posible but as you said, no results are going to be perfect. By being careful you can eliminate more than half of the variabilty which is significant.

Your results are pretty consistant, I am wondering why the output for the dynojet chart is so noisy with a smoothing factor of 3. Thats what I usualy uses to make it not look so jagged.

What I see is common, (especialy on the SR20 forum) is to do lame stuff like not use SAE correction, then test on a cold day then brag about the numbers while saying that corrected numbers are not real power. I have also seen dishonist shops maunaly screw with the correction and or smoothing numbers to show exagerated power numbers after their tuning or installation of their parts. A common method is to baseline with a high smoothing factor then dyno after tuning with a factor of one which produces higher numbers.

In my case, I did all the parts installs myself and then drove to a shop just to use their dyno, so the shop had no real interest in manipulating my figures.

Back on the subject of the article in question, to fork us off on a different path...

The most interesting tidbit I saw in your results was the gain from leaving the bumper off. A few weeks back in colder weather I did some IAT testing driving around Houston with the Stillen Gen3, which you can see here: http://www.the370z.com/intake-exhaus...eed-stock.html

Overall I was pretty impressed with it's ability to draw cold air, although it wasn't a perfect match for the air the car's exterior temp sensor was reading. Then again in that colder weather, there wasn't as much heat soak going on in the radiator area either.

I could be convinced that some ports like the Mine's ones might help us get fresh air into the Stillen intakes, and it might be worth it. I'd be a little worried about them rolling at slow speeds in heavy rain and wind though (or especially washing the car). I wonder if someone could fab plugs for the Mine's ports so they could be stopped up in heavy rain or when washing. Either that or perhaps someone else will have a new design idea along similar lines.

I just PM'ed Kyle at Stillen and the interesting thing he told me was that they found no difference when they tested with the bumper on and off.

Out of curiosity, we took the bumper off, saw a huge gain that repeated, then put the bumper back on and it went back to where it was before.

Technosquare's dyno has a huge fan the blows hard on the front of the car, not exactly road air flow but pretty darned close.

I was thinking one further, heat shields in back of the filters and vents in the front with a snap in cover or some sort of lovers for rain. I fabricated something like that for my Z32 Turbo but I don't have rain covers but I don't drive that car in the rain either.

The Stillen intake kills the JWT dual pop, thats for sure, if the bumper is off.

It will be interesting to see what happens when others experiment with this.

Another possible advantage of bumper openings direct into the filters of the Stillen Gen 3 intake is the fact more air volume might make it in, especially when you consider the ram air effect.

With regards to the water, perhaps the bumper inlets could be at the same height as the intake (like Mine's), but more inboard, not in front of the intakes. This would allow (given enough space behind the bumper) for a U shaped pipe with a drain at the bottom to connect from the inlet to the intake filter. That way water would only make it through the first half of the U, and not be able to move up (at least not a significant amount) the second half.

The ram air effect is highly overrated. Simply having a good, cool source of air that isnt full of heatsoak from the engine bay is fine.

Without testing it is hard to know what the airflow behind the plastic bumper looks like, meaning it might be harder for the intake to draw air from where it sits than if it had a more direct source, such as the U tube I suggested. It would be worth trying, for sure, the problem would be closing holes in the bumper if it didn't work too well.

But, based on the Technosquare testing we're discussing, it sounds like they repeatedly saw improvements with the bumper off, and a reduction in power when the bumper went back on, so one would think that the intake is having some difficulty drawing air behind the bumper. That is what I meant by ram air, not that it would be much denser (in Aerospace, the ram air effects are generally negligible until about Mach 0.6), but it would make it easier for the intake to breath.

I definitely don't disagree that, even with the Stillen long-tube kit, that it may have issues still getting the optimal cold air. But I think you have to draw a line somewhere, and that line is the safety threshold as far as hydro locking the motor in a rainy situation...

Yeah we're not yet closing in on Mach 0.6 :)

Ram Air is mostly bunk on cars, all it really means is a definite cold air source. As for the filter/hole placement, the Stillen Gen3 filters are near the center when installed. I actually think the Mine's holes, where they're at in the photos, wouldn't be directly over the filters anyways, they'd probably be hitting the pipe just behind each filter.

wstar, my point exactly, we don't go fast enough for ram air to matter.

Interesting point on the Mine's holes, as I had not imagined the Gen3 intakes would be closer to the center. Perhaps that is the solution already, meaning without water hitting the filter directly, and maybe being even a bit safer and moving the wholes down a little sop the air filter would reside above the openings, would mitigate any chance of water getting in.