Engine Masters Dyno

11/22/2021

Since YouTube has copyright issues with me commenting on the Engine Masters episode, here is the link for the video. Password is UTP.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8cn7g1

7 Comments

Douglas James

11/25/2021 12:28:27 pm

Good episode. Glad your products get recognized. Disagree with their results though. The Vrp plates and porting made a dramatic difference in my truck. much more torque
Than the dyno numbers show. And a truck accelerating spends more time in the torque range of each gear. This ain’t a light weight dart.

Mitchell Smith

1/5/2022 05:38:22 pm

I can't get this video to load on any of my devices, it just acts like it's loading for eternity, so you may answer this question in the video. Please consider posting this on your youtube channel so I can view it.

Were the intake runners fully opened up on the keg you sent them? Because in your prior tech post on 1/26/2020 you claim that the kegger can "easily" match the flow of 290cfm ported heads when modified.

If that were the case, then the ported manifold you sent them would have easily maxed out the stock heads they were using (which are in the 210cfm range), and there would have been no more gains to be had. However, when they put on the rpm air gap, they picked up like 40 horsepower and a fair bit of torque as well, clearly indicating that the head had more to give than the intake was capable of supplying.

In fact, given that the stock heads flow around 210cfm, not only is it impossible that the modified kegger was flowing 290cfm...but it must have actually been flowing LESS than 210, else there wouldn't have been power on the table with an intake manifold swap (other than the roughly 10 hp gain you typically see swapping over to a carb on the dyno).

I am currently in the process of building a magnum and have your kegger flow package sitting in the garage. However, after viewing these results, I'm heavily weighing ditching that plan for the air gap (well, the Hughes version since I want to stay EFI).

I very much look forward to your response about this. Thanks!

Doug

7/20/2022 05:32:03 pm

The password is not working. Also, does the video answer Mr Smith's questions?

Marty link

7/21/2022 04:13:52 pm

Yes, the password still works. You will need to create an account with MotorTrend if you cannot view it. The manifold was a small stage 1 on the episode.

Doug

7/21/2022 05:48:23 pm

Thanks. Saw the EM episode, was trying to access the video above that you posted on Daily Motion. The password UTP didn't work for me. But, I will keep messing with it. Wouldn't be the first time the error was me and not the computer

Mitch

7/22/2022 10:35:55 am

Nope, the video on dailymotion just continues to say it's password protected.

Mitch

7/27/2022 02:45:08 pm

Alright, the video is now working (for me at least). Here are a few thoughts I had. For other readers, there is a guy on youtube who has been doing some testing with a fully ported kegger against an air gap manifold on the dyno with his dakota RT, as well as using a flow bench. He name is Thomas Beyer, and his results are quite interesting to compare against the engine masters results. It's not apples to apples because thomas is on a chassis dyno and EM uses an engine dyno, but it's still interesting.

Engine Masters:
With a stock bottom end, stock heads, 212/218 duration camshaft, stage 1 kegger, and big TB, they made 337hp/414lb-ft on their best kegger run.

Swapping to a carb and the air gap manifold they made a best of 361hp/423lb-ft with no carb spacers. They tested two spacers and made a little more power and a little less torque. Also, the RPM at peak torque between the keg and air gap was only 100 apart (3700 for keg, 3800 for air gap), while the peak hp was actually 100 rpm lower on the air gap (4900 vs 5000 for keg). So what this shows is that compared to a mildly modified kegger, the air gap is just better everywhere at WOT. There is a tiny fraction of an advantage to the keg under 3500rpm, but we are talking less than 10lb-ft.

The main issue is that WOT dyno testing isn't very informative for part-throttle performance and driveability. Many people have reported that switching to an air gap manifold made their truck feel more gutless in the lower RPM range, which does make sense given the runner length disparity.

Now let's talk about Thomas's testing. Thomas has a Dakota RT also in stock displacement, but with 10.3 to 1 compression (makes very little difference in power) a 216/224 cam (so very slightly more aggressive than the EM engine), and ported stock iron heads.

With a "slightly modified) kegger he made 270hp to the tire (roughly 337 crank) and a 317tq (roughly 394 crank). This puts thomas's numbers very close to that of the EM run (without the big TB). Important to note though that there's a lot of potential for error here since we are relying on a calculator to translate wheel to crank hp/tq for comparison.

After hogging out his kegger to the maximum it could possibly be ported, he went to 357hp (converted to crank) and 418tq (converted to crank), so similar torque numbers to the best EM kegger run, but with about 20 more HP. This would make sense given that full porting would have a tendency for airflow improvement.

Then he swapped the shorty header for 1.75" longtubes and made 376hp (crank) and 424tq (crank). So not much of a torque gain, but again an airflow improvement and thus a higher peak in the upper rpm range without losing anything down low.

He then swapped to an injected air gap manifold. He had some testing issues on dyno day, so you can't see the curve, and he only got to make 1 pass, and it made 375 (crank) so no difference between it and the fully ported kegger (he doesn't report torque). This would also correspond with the EM results given that the air gap maxed out with that cam and heads at 365hp.

So the takeaway from these findings in my mind is that a fully ported kegger CAN keep up with an air gap for peak power on a stock displacement engine with a tiny camshaft. If the intake isn't the restriction under such circumstances, then I see no reason to run an air gap at all, as having the longer runners of the keg is nice and kegs are cheap/free instead of costing $700+.

As of now I still plan on running a fully ported kegger and mildly ported heads on my 408. Thought people might appreciate this data comparison.

Tech Blog

Engine Masters Dyno

Leave a Reply.

Marty Fletcher

Archives

Categories