12/07/2004 11:20:34 Rob Bell Brilliant day - thanks to everyone who made it such fun! :D The theme for me was fuelling - as some of us had lost power thanks to too much fuel, whilst other lost power for having too little fuel. It was amazing to watch the power figures come off the dyno as Chris Davies adjust Dave's adjustable FSE fuel pressure regulator 3/4 turn to up the power from 172 to 182 bhp!!! :cool: Wow! Have posted all the peak power results below (in no particular order, G-Force power at the wheels/corrected power at the wheels): [b]Rob Bell[/b] 136.2/126.5 96 [i]MGF 1.8MPi. Enclosed K&N Filter, 52mm TB, MS exhaust, 3.3bar FPR, de-burred inlet and exhaust manifold[/i] [b]Steve Ratledge[/b] 170.8/158.7 [i]MGF 1.8MPi. Enclosed K&N filter, 52mm TB, RaceSpeed 140 head. Deflashed and matched inlet manifold, Janspeed 4-2-1 exhaust manifold & Milltek SuperSports exhaust.[/i] [b]Phil Brindley[/b] 168.0/156.1 [i]97 MGF VVC. K&N 57i air filter. 52mm TB. MS Daytona exhaust.[/i] [b]Andy (SF) Phillips[/b] 153.4/142.5 [i]96 MGF 1.8MPi. ITG Maxogen airfilter. VVC inlet penum/manifold. MikeSatur stage1 head. Phoenix exhaust.[/i] [b]Steve White[/b] 171.3/159.1 [i]03 MGTF 160. ITG Maxogen airfilter. Janspeed 4-2-1 exhaust manifold. Janspeed sports cat. Janspeed exhaust.[/i] [b]MG Deano[/b] 153.2/142.3 [i]03 MGTF 135. 3.2 bar FPR - and a new airfreshener.[/i] [b]Paul Nothard[/b] 184.3/171.2 [i]99 MGF VVC. K&N 57i airfilter. 52mm TB. 3.3 bar FPR. Sabre ported cylinder head. Janspeed 4-2-1 exhaust manifold.[/i] [b]Sunstorm[/b] 127.2/118.2 [i]ZR120. Pipercross airfilter. 52mm Throttle body. [/i] [b]PorKa200ls[/b] 151.3/140.6 [i]Rover 218 Mpi. Pipercross airfilter. 52mm TB. Piper fast road cams (BP270s?) timed with Vernier pulleys. Cat back Piper exhaust.[/i] [b]Dave Livingstone[/b] 187.2/173.9 [i]98 MGF VVC. ITG Maxogen airfilter. 52mm TB. FSE FPR. DVA fully ported cylinder head. Matched inlet and exhaust manifolds. Phoenix exhaust.[/i] [b]Jago[/b] 191.2/177.6 [i]Montego 2.0 Turbo 8v.[/i] [b]James[/b] 215.7/200.4 [i]ZS180. ITG Maxogen airfilter. TD Performance chip set. Scorpion cat-back exhaust system.[/i]

12/07/2004 13:36:32 Dave As Rob has posted, in terms of performance modifications my 1998 MGF VVC has: ITG Maxogen air filter system 52mm Throttle Body Phoenix sports exhaust Fully ported cylinder head (Dave Andrews work). When the head was ported I was advised by Tech-speed motorsport to fit an FSE adjusable fuel pressure regulator in case the engine was running lean. I ordered one for the MGF, which I presume is set up for a standard car and it was fitted. The car made peak power of 172bhp (flywheel) and 134 (wheels) on Emerald's (Dave Walker's) rolling road. At the time, I couldn't get the fuelling checked as Dave Walker was just moving from into his new premises at Thetford, Norfolk. It's taken me a while to get the fuelling checked. Our first day at G-Force in Aylesbury ended up with a power spike knocking out their Lambda sensor just before my run! So this second day was an ideal opportuntiy The results showed that the engine was running lean at the top end of the rev range. So, the FSE was duly tweaked and the results were astonishing :eek: I'm afraid I am having trouble with the scanned graphs and spreadsheets to show you the detail of the results. They are all too big to post here and I don't have any decent graphics software to sort this out (any suggestions for freeware anyone?) However, the general gist is that the headline figures went up from: [size=2] [list] [*]187.8 bhp @ 6100 to 198.6 bhp @ 5900 - power at the flywheel [*]137 bhp @ 6600rpm to 145.0 bhp @ 6450 rpm - power at the wheels [*]158 ft/lbs @ 6100 to 165ft/lb @ 5900 rpm - torque at the flywheel [*]665 lbs @ 6600 to 675 lb @ 5900 rpm - tractive effort at the wheels [/list]The improvements were not just in the peak figures, but all along the curves. I wish I could post them up to show you :o Note that the flywheel figures are skewed because G-Force's rolling road software doesn't have a good estimate of transmission losses for an MGF and overcompensates i.e. the flywheel figures are too high. Nevertheless, you can see the massive improvements just from 2/3 of a turn on the screw of the FSE :D [/size]

12/07/2004 13:54:34 phil_b Hi Guys, What a great day on saturday, thanks to those involved in getting it organised. I am very chuffed with my figures as listed above. One question though, do the torque figures also need adjusting and if so by how much (approx)? Dave, re freeware for image editing, try a google search for The Gimp. I promise that the results are for a very powerful imaging tool and not for a dodgy bloke in a leather mask. ;) Cheers Phil

12/07/2004 16:06:47 Rob Bell Torque ought to be adjusted by the same conversion factor Phil = 0.929 The reason for the disparity between G-Force's figure and the figure that is closer to reality is because G-Force has yet to properly calibrate their RR for MGs. The conversion factor that they are using at present is derived for Porsches -- and clearly these cars have great transmission/ tyre losses that our dear MGs ;) Usually it is not possible to correlate two rolling roads in this way - but the power and torque figures measured at the road between Dave Walker's set up in Thetford and G-Force's system in Aylesbury are staggeringly similar - ie within 1-2bhp throughout the rev range. I've also checked previous runs with my car and G-force: with this correction factor, the G-Force figure is spot on the money for my car as well as Dave's, so I am reasonably confident that we're in the right ball park here. Therefore Phil, you are seeing a genuine 156bhp - which really is pretty close to that magic 160 barrier... :D Hopefully Dave'll be able to upload some of his graphs shortly :)

12/07/2004 16:20:40 phil_b Nice one Rob, thanks. Yup, very happy with 156 (.1, can't forget the .1).....now what next to reach that ellusive 160 :naughty:

12/07/2004 16:48:27 Rob Bell [QUOTE=phil_b]Nice one Rob, thanks. Yup, very happy with 156 (.1, can't forget the .1).....now what next to reach that ellusive 160 :naughty:[/QUOTE] Those remaining 3.9 GeeGees are probably going to be the most elusive Phil - but a decent exhaust manifold (4-2-1) and enclosed airfilter (if nothing else, the engine will perform better on the RR without engine bay heat soak) will see you get pretty close... And thereafter? It's the great 180bhp you'll be looking at, as you might just as well make your aquataince with one Dave Andrews esq. ;)

12/07/2004 16:48:36 Dave Many thanks to Rob scaling the images for me. Now I can show you the results of adjusting the fueling on the FSE. Here are three scanned graphs from the day (apologies for black and white - in each case the higher curve is the result after increasing fueling). This first graph shows the bhp and tractive effort measured at the wheels: [img]http://www.mgs-on-track.com//images/uploads/scan0007.gif[/img] This is the bhp and torque at the flywheel (transmission loss estimate flawed - multiply figures by 0.929 for a more accurate measure. [img]http://www.mgs-on-track.com//images/uploads/scan0008.gif[/img] Finally here is the flywheel bhp against the fuelling (lamda readings) [img]http://www.mgs-on-track.com//images/uploads/scan0006.gif[/img]

12/07/2004 20:28:56 phil_b [QUOTE=Rob Bell]It's the great 180bhp you'll be looking at, as you might just as well make your aquataince with one Dave Andrews esq. ;)[/QUOTE] After the very good run put in by Paul's car I think I might get aquainted with that little fella and his Dremmel :lol: Hopefully if sCamelot finally pay me the £19m from this weeks rollover, I'll be getting aquainted with the nice chaps at Turbo Technics!! Aaah we all need dreams :D

12/07/2004 21:37:44 Paul Nothard (First posting! Ooooo! :) ) Echoed on the Technical BBS, but thanks to the peeps doing the organising. It's a rolling road that I will most probably go back to. Personally very happy for the results that most peeps got - good or bad - it really cuts the b*ll and shows what's actually happening with the engines.... which can only be a good thing. Highlights... has to be Dave and his FPR tweaking. Gone down in BBS history there methinks!!! :D Have to put a shameful plug in for Roger at Sabre Heads. I think he's done a great job with my engine. Shame I can't get a direct comparison with the legend that is DVA but at the very least I think Roger has proven that there is an alternative. All I need now is an exhaust and an ITG ... and possibly a variable FPR... oh, and a few hundred quid. :( This darkside m'larky fair creeps up on you doesn't it!!! ;) P.

12/07/2004 21:39:17 Paul Nothard Just a thought... should we / could we collate all the graphs and host them? I have a decent amount of web space... and I'll be scanning and publishing mine in the near future. Nothing fancy, but an area that others could link to if need be. P.

13/07/2004 09:27:15 Neil Great to see you all had a good time. It's a shame G-Force is a bit too far away for a rolling road for me. Anyway using the 'Bell' factor on my previous run at G-Force I get 159.8bhp which isn't too bad for a stock VVC. See [url="http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/mgfvvc/flywheel.jpg"]http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/mgfvvc/flywheel.jpg[/url] For your information Phil the main difference is an enclosed K&N in old 820 airbox and a cat bypass pipe. The power has been down on my VVC recently but I traced that back to a dirty air cone and hole in the exhaust manifold.

13/07/2004 16:33:37 phil_b [QUOTE=Neil]Anyway using the 'Bell' factor on my previous run at G-Force I get 159.8bhp which isn't too bad for a stock VVC. See [url="http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/mgfvvc/flywheel.jpg"]http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/mgfvvc/flywheel.jpg[/url] For your information Phil the main difference is an enclosed K&N in old 820 airbox and a cat bypass pipe.[/QUOTE] OOO, so close to the magic 160...I was trying to get a 820 airbox before the day but have been let down. Should be on there for the next one though. Doubt I would get the de-cat pipe, don't want to be that loud ;) Will be watching with interest regarding various peoples 4-2-1 manifold setups to see if the question of flexi longevity has been answered and if so I will defo be looking at one of these too. [QUOTE=Paul Nothard]Just a thought... should we / could we collate all the graphs and host them? [/QUOTE]I think this is a great idea, and would love to host them on the fpower.co.uk site, not had much interesting content on there other than meets/runs so far...could easily setup a gallery with all the graphs etc and then do a write up and link into them etc.

13/07/2004 16:42:49 Dave [QUOTE=Paul Nothard]Just a thought... should we / could we collate all the graphs and host them? I have a decent amount of web space... and I'll be scanning and publishing mine in the near future. Nothing fancy, but an area that others could link to if need be. P.[/QUOTE] If someone can gather all the data and produce something then the MGoT website seems a good place ;) If none of us have the time to do it or the data to work with, then we can set up a 'portal' page here that points to everyone's individual results scattered around various sites. :)

14/07/2004 13:13:18 Rob Bell [QUOTE=Paul Nothard]Just a thought... should we / could we collate all the graphs and host them? I have a decent amount of web space... and I'll be scanning and publishing mine in the near future. Nothing fancy, but an area that others could link to if need be. P.[/QUOTE] Very good idea Paul! I have a fist full of images that I'll up load to the Gallery - and I promised to do a write up for the site too - but a collation of all the power curves is a very good idea :D