Dyno: 

    Mustang AWD Chassis Dyno @ Matrix Engineering (Portland, OR).

    Conditions according to weather station @ dyno: 45 deg F, ~29.9in Hg, rel humidity ~80%. 

    All HP & Torque measurements are actual & not corrected values!  

    Est SAE correction factor (per SAE J1349) = 0.952

            (Conditions on 4/5/03 in downtown PDX per NWS: alt 100ft, 45 F ambient, 39 F dew point, 29.9 in Hg)

Vehicle (1971 Datsun 510 w/ fresh VG30E)

    Engine: '88 Nissan 300ZX w/ stock bore, stroke, compression, & valve train.  Rebuilt w/ <500 total miles.

    Intake: 200SX plenum w/ short K&N cone air-filter / stock 200SX manifolds

    Exhaust:  1 7/8" down-pipes to collector behind transmission, 2.5" mandrel tubing to 2.5" Sebring straight-thru silencer.

    ECU/Ignition: stock 200SX & 300ZX - varies.  See detail for individual run.

    Fuel: Chevron 92 oct (specific grav = 0.75) w/ 15% Toluene added for detonation protection.  

    Lubricants: Engine: Castrol GTX 10W-30.  Trans: Redline MTL (75W).  Diff: Redline 75W-90.

    Drivetrain: 200SX transmission, 510 drive-shaft, 3.7:1 Subaru R160 LSD, stock 1/2-shafts.

    Wheels/Tires: 15" AR Spyder wheels, Kuhmo Estca 712 195/50 R15, 34psi.

Notes:

Fuel:

1 gal of Ace brand toluene was added to 6 gals of 92 oct to suppress detonation while performing timing experiments on dyno w/ new engine.  For a given timing settings, I expected a net loss of 1-2% due to poorer atomization of toluene and resultant mixture lean-out (albeit slight).  AFR during runs was noted to be ~13:1, but no baseline AFR was available so this hypothesis cannot be validated.  Again, the primary reason for adding toluene was simply to remove any possibility for detonation.

Engine Temp:

Coolant & oil were both at operating temp before first run.  Engine was off & cooling for 5-10mins between each block of runs.

Dyno Calibration - Why I'll never go back to Matrix Engineering in Portland, Oregon.

Dyno operators at Matrix Engineering did not appear to be concerned about getting dyno calibration exact (wheel/engine rpm ratio).  The operators were relying on the tach and/or speedo (back calculated from known rpm/mph ratios) in the vehicles for calibration.  Considering how many factory tachs/speedos are grossly mis-calibrated, it's likely that many of Matrix Engineering's customers leave with skewed data.  I brought along an external inductive tach (Fluke 88 w/ rpm pickup) for calibration but it wasn't behaving very well.  When asked if I could directly input the engine:wheel rpm ratio they said I couldn't.  If this is a limitation of the Mustang brand dyno, then it sucks.  If it's a limitation of Matrix Engineering, they suck.  Anyway, I sat in the car and helped the dyno operator calibrate the dyno with the Fluke meter and I think we got within 2%.  If the wheel/engine speed calibration was off, the torque & hp calculations could be skewed (eg: higher/lower torque/hp).  Normally, I'd say using these numbers for anything other than run-to-run comparisons would not be warranted.  However, since the hp & torque numbers achieved are inline with previous stock VG30 runs (see http://www.datsuns.com/tech/datsundyno.htm), it's likely the calibration for my runs was indeed within 2%.  I have good reason to suspect that the other vehicles in our group and the group before us (Toyota MR2 club) did not have an accurate engine/wheel rpm ratio.  Many people complained of getting results that were significantly lower (60hp) than expected. 

Other complaints...?  They won't allow you to run your own car on the dyno, you can only sit in the passenger seat.  The ramps that Matrix used to get the cars up onto the dyno were not secured to the floor.  One of them slipped out and nearly caused my car to fall 2ft off the dyno.  Sure it was a $45 dyno deal, but I'd rather pay $80 at Dan Judy Automotive in Salem OR, run the car myself & get data I can trust.

Last bitch, the dyno operators were unable to tell me when they'd last calibrated the load cells in the dyno.  This isn't as big of a deal as the rpm issue, but it does tell you a little about the quality of their operation.

Note on Runs 3-5:

These runs were with the 300ZX ECU & MAF plugged into the SX harness.  This combination was first tested in the parking lot before the dyno event.  Although the ECU would idle the engine & worked great @ part throttle, it would shut-down above 4k rpm.  The cause has not been determined It's likely that either the MAF or the ECU were

The Runs:

Run 1 & 2: 200SX ECU & MAF, shorter K&N cone style filter, & 23 deg idle ignition advance setting (hp/torque plot, lambda plot)

Run 3,4,5: 300ZX ECU & MAF, long K&N cone  filter, & 23 deg idle ignition advance setting - see note above. (hp/torque plot, lambda plot)

Run 6: 200SX ECU & MAF, shorter K&N cone style filter, & 17 deg idle ignition advance setting (hp/torque plot, lambda plot)

Interpretation:

Best run: 135hp @ 5000rpm & 164 ft/lbs @ 3750rpm.

These values are right inline with previous VG30 runs.  However, these numbers are uncorrected and need to be reduced ~5% due to the 45 deg air on 4/5/03.  The corrected (per SAE J1349) values are actually:

Best run raw corrected to SAE standard atmospheric conditions: 128hp @ 5000rpm & 159 ft/lbs @ 3750 rpm.

These numbers are somewhat lower than most of the VG30s I've seen, but given the fact that the engine is barely broken in, it's possible that I'm losing a couple hp there.  Also, per the discussion above, the addition of toluene to the fuel is likely to reduce the total power output, especially on such a cold day.

Other Cars that Ran:

A carbureted VG30 (ala www.VG30.com): ~125hp @ 5500rpm & 120 ft/lbs @ ~4500rpm. (dyno sheet not avail).  

Initially this may sound like enough information to settle the carb'd vs. EFI'd pissing matches that have been on-going for years.  However I question the calibration of the dyno (and the operators running it) so the gap between carb'd & EFI'd may not be as great.  I still feel confident that an EFI'd VG would outperform any equally prepared carb'd VG any day by at least 5%.  This is even more clear considering that this carb'd VG had performance cams, headers, & a highly tuned carb.  However, the AFR plots showed that the engine was actually running close ~11:1 which is rich enough to actually reduce the power output.  Based on my experience, I'd expect a 3-5% increase in power if the mixture was leaned out 1.5-2 or so.