IN Feb of 2005 we dynoed the Catcher ( same as smarty but a reprogrammed ECM instead ) and got the following results with an auto truck:


Dodgezilla and Mach 1 265 HP
Add Catcher 331 HP
Add Ez take away Catcher 330 HP

Both the Catcher and EZ had a peak gain of 65.

Later went back and added M4's. The HP was 400 and 401 for the EZ and Catcher respectively.

The M1 VS the M4 were on different days. Both days resulted in 65 HP gains with different injectors using the Catcher.

Don~


edit - all runs were on the same dynojet.

 

Ok. Cool. Now what was the increase under the curve? I'm betting that that right there will seperate the two.

 

NO ruffling at all. Quad is 100% right. I'm certain Bob and Marco would agree.

The biggest difference I noted between the two (EZ and Catcher) was the ability to translate off-boost fuel into power instead of smoke.

Flooring the fuel pedal on the EZ would billow the smoke, and the turbo would spool, but slowly.

Under the same conditions, the Catcher would also make a lot of smoke, but the duration of the smoke was much shorter, and the time it took for the turbo to light was drastically reduced.

With Smarty, you can flash in SWs #s 3 or 5 to get more EZ-like pedal response, but still have the better spoolup of the Catcher.

Since I normally live in thin air (though not at the moment), smoke control is a huge priority for me, and Smarty makes smoke control a little easier because the turbo comes on sooner.


jmo

 

In Houston, TX. About 100 ft elevation. On an 80 degF day. 100% relative humidity (hey, it's Houston). Uncorrected.

Altitude correction factors should differ greatly for naturally aspirated and turbocharged engines. For our industrial engines, we derate naturally aspirated engines as follows (sea level rating = 100%, and we hold this 100% rating up to 1500 ft elevation, so there's actually some reserve below 1500 ft)

Elevation---Rating

0_________100%
1000______100%
2000______97.5%
3000______93.5%
4000______89.5%
5000______85.5%
6000______81.5%

Now, on the turbocharged engines, we can "match" the turbos to the installation elevation to hold sea level ratings to 6000 ft elevation (and beyond on some engines).

Therefore, if someone is using an incorrect correction factor, dyno results can be pretty meaningless.

Rusty

 

Rusty,

I agree. Skip the CF on the turbodiesels for the most part.

Cummins has many mining engines that stay up to power at 8000 ft.

 

Speaking for myself, I've given up on Dynos. I'm going to start looking at 1/4 times. It's cheaper and a whole lot more fun.

I originally posted the dyno information for those interested to see what a Smarty does on a bone stock truck. Maybe it would have done better had there been a boost elbow or wastegate blocker installed. I don't recall ever seeing that information in any of the Smarty threads nor have I seen Marco or Bob mention it. I can't get into the TDR threads, so if it was mentioned there I wouldn't know.

Maybe well see a boost elbow or the like in the Smarty Box from now on, along with the candy bar?

I've been running around with my truck set back to stock for a couple of day with the TST on. I'm back running the Smarty again on #5. For what Smarty does or doesn't do, it still a nice box. I've heard the Big HP guys will lose HP on the Dyno, but what they never mention is weather they lose time through the 1/4. I remember someone telling me he gained another 20 ft in a pull using the Smarty.

I think once Marco finishes the 3rd Gen. units, maybe he'll have time to put together some new files for us to try? Something in the way of a TST/MAD meeting of the minds?

 

Except for that whole output shaft thing...........

 

That weak link is going to be taken care of in May!

 

I don't know what the CF for a turbo'd diesel should be, but there sure needs to be one. I can personally testify that there's power differences between the altitude I live at, 4200 ft, Vegas at 2000 ft, and sealevel. There's also differences at ambient temps of, say, 60* and 105*.