Home
Back to Tech Articles
Back to Dyno Results

GSP vs. JRB Round 2
Two almost identical modified 2.5's

In 2000 Jim Butterworth and I both rebuilt our S14 engines. Since we were on parallel paths our engines ended up almost identical. The only distinct difference is that Jim went with a TMS Stage III cylinder head. I opted for a Don Fields Stage II head, which retains the stock 37 mm inlet and 32 mm exhaust valves (as opposed to the 38 mm and 33 mm units on the TMS Stage III). It is also possible that Jim's compression ratio is lower that my 11.4:1, but this is unclear.

Jim and I both dyno'd our cars (on different days) at Dynospot Racing. However, Jim's figures were somewhat disappointing. We expected that Jim's engine, by virtue of its larger valve sizes and more aggressive porting, might come out below my engine in the lower part of the rev range, but that it would surpass my engine in the upper range. However, the dyno curves showed Jim's engine to be substantially below my engine over the majority of the rev range, just barely equaling my engine at the peak horsepower rpm.
( Click here for a look at these early results). Whisky, Tango, Fox-trot? - Jim and I were quite perplexed.

In retrospect only two explanations have been found for Jim's disappointing first dyno run. First, Jim found out that his in-tank fuel pump had not been operational. However, it is unclear whether a bad in-tank pump can cause a reduction in power on a dyno. Some experienced folks feel probably not. But second, Jim was in the car during the initial dyno runs. At that time he was somewhat new to the area of performance driving, and he had never been on a dyno. By his own admission it is possible that he did not fully depress the accelerator pedal during the runs. This would easily explain the low curves he obtained.

In Winter 2002 Jim and I had a chance to dyno our cars again. This time at Eurosport Accessories in Anaheim, CA (much closer to our homes). Eurosport has one of the big Dynojets, mounted in the ground. Vikan Kazanjian strapped the cars in and performed the runs. This time Jim's engine performed much better. In fact the are under the curves is slightly higher for Jim's engine vs. mine. The peak RWHP is about identical. But, interestingly, Jim's engine still starts to fall off sooner than mine. This is still not what you would expect from a big valve head. Jim's engine also showed more torque in the mid-range, which is also not what you would expect from bigger valves. But the two cars were dyno'd practically back to back, so the results are what they are.


Dyno chart - Jim Butterworth and GSP

As Jim and I continue to develop our engines we will have plenty more opportunities for dyno comparisons. Stay tuned!

Home
Back to Tech Articles
Back to Dyno Results