Nano

Stock production engine as sold. Two fuel tanks on the track and couple runs on the dyno. Absolutely no optimizations made!

Enjoy!

EdwardN

iTrader: (1)

Results are pretty ammezing. Congratulations!!
Just one thing came to my mind-I just looked dyno results on X-dyne web site and every run start there from 7500 RPM and yours is start at 20K. Why is that?
Does X-dyno have one of your engine to test?
Edward

Rick Hohwart

Apparently the dyno operator was unaware of any "standard" so that is just the way he tested it. I will have them check the X-dyno site and replicate what exists in their database for more accurate comparisons throughout the rev range.

Nitrodyne does not have an engine yet but will get one so that it can be added to the database.

bighurt98

iTrader: (11)

From most other dyno tests they have done, the have used 30% O'Donnell.

They used 33% Peak Spasdett nitro. Trying to compare dyno runs between different motor is not consistent. The results will be higher for the CRF.

Like that matters, this stock engine dynos as good as most modified engines!

Foodie

Well, they also use different Exhausts, and as you say fuel! These dyno tests cannot be used for anything!

You cannot even compare the power between each engine, because the different engines got different pipes and plugs etc...

Plz, use the same exhaust, and same plug, and same fuel, so its only the engine you change when you test these engines!

Rick Hohwart

It is not all about the engine. It is the entire package that matters. To be fair, you really should find the combination that works best for each engine, and test it with that combination.

Maybe this is the type of database customers would prefer? Engines could be tested using the manufacturer's suggested pipes, plugs, and fuel type (same nitro percentage).

Testing all engines with the same pipe, plug, and fuel doesn't tell you which engine is best - only which engine is best with that pipe, plug, and fuel.

Additionally, the CRF engine was designed new from the ground up. The pipes (4 choices) have been designed to work in conjuntion with the engine. For best performance, CRF pipes must be used.

Corse-R

Interesting, but at least for me... some data is missing or not shown.

Data about VE (Volumetric Efficiency) and BSFC (Brake Specific Fuel Compsumption) is available? not only is a matter of HP/Torque at X rpms. Looks good, but for me some vital data is missing, are the data that shows how good transforms every gram of fuel into moving energy (on few words: how really good is).

Probably another pull from 7500 rpms could be more graphical and show the real performance of the engine rather than peak values. Maybe a normalized fuel, like 30% O'Donnell, could help too.

rmdhawaii

iTrader: (4)

Going through the Diablo CRF manual, it says to break in the engine with 40% nitro. Post break-in recommendation is 15% - 40% Nitro.

With respect to Dyno tests, what I would like to see are several sets of results; one with the manufacturer's recommended pipe, plug and fuel - and a few using different types of plugs, pipes and fuel. Unfortunately, no one has that type of budget, so we have to make due with whatever results we can get.

I do not agree however, that the CRF pipes must be used for best performance. I believe that the CRF pipes will guaranteed a certain level of performance (see chart below), but I'm sure that their are a few pipes out there that will match or outperform the CRF pipes based on operating conditions.

PEK6275 CRF 12 - Tuned Pipe Set - High Torque
PEK6276 CRF 12 - Tuned Pipe Set - Torque/Speed
PEK6277 CRF 12 - Tuned Pipe Set - High Speed
PEK6278 CRF 12 - Manifold - High Torque
PEK6279 CRF 12 - Manifold - Torque/Speed
PEK6280 CRF 12 - Manifold - High Speed
PEK6281 CRF 12 - Tuned Pipe - High Torque
PEK6282 CRF 12 - Tuned Pipe - Torque/Speed
PEK6283 CRF 12 - Tuned Pipe - High Speed

Manufacturer's are always going to recommend their plugs and pipes. That's just the way it works. Does anyone expect otherwise?

Bottom line: Field testing the engine is what counts the most. What you see here is just a baseline for comparison. Everyone's requirements are different and not everyone runs under the same operating conditions. Simple as that.

Rick! PM me on who has this engine in stock! I can't find one online.

gfd2726

Impressive result! Especially from a bone stock engine.

Nano

As Rick wrote, we aren't aware of any standards with testing.
Nitrodyne will get an engine to test.

As for the pipes, plugs and fuel used, since when is there a standard??? a manufacturer designs such parts for his own engines, if they work well with others then even better... As long as they are made according to the rules (roar, efra legal and so on) why shouldn't they be used?
All these parts are race legal and homologated, it's not out of the rules parts to give higher numbers, it's stuff you can buy and go race with.

Obviously other fuels, plugs and pipes will work. But ours have been optimized for our engines. We have tested most of what is on the market today so we know where we are at.

Keep in mind that we are only using a 6mm crankshaft and that the porting is made with stability and reliability in mind. This engine is far from being at the limits of it's design.

We reach almost 50'000rpm on each dyno run and we have had engines higher than that and never broke a single part while performing such tests.

Until now the CRF engine has always used less fuel than other engines, we are talking about 30-40% more run-time. Because of the new liner/piston and angled shaft designs the engine runs cooler and needs less oil/fuel to work, meaning you can run it leaner resulting in less fuel consumption.

Our goal is to bring new designs in the field, not following the trail...

Nano

Either you read wrong or it's written wrong. The engine will work fine with any good fuel with 15% to 40% nitro. You don't need to use 40% nitro.

The results with 16% nitro are only slightly different. In Europe we have to use 16% nitro.

rmdhawaii

iTrader: (4)

YES! YES! YES!

Now I just need to get my hands on the engine...

rmdhawaii

iTrader: (4)

Then it must be written wrong...

http://www.peakmotors.com/peak/downl...k_rev_inst.pdf

Nano

If I am reading the same sentence as you, it says "up to 40%" so that means you can use anything up to 40% but it doesn't have to be 40%.

EdwardN

iTrader: (1)

Hi Nano.
First of all your result is inpressive at list or me because you guys made motor from ground up and put a lot innovations. My both thumb up for you.
I do respect you guys a lot for what you did and it doesn't metter if engine will be the best or not, but you guys did it! Track will show is engine will be fast and relaible and this will be chalange.
As for dyno run, there is no standarts for it, but still it is important how long engine takes to get to 20K and then go for power.
As just for exsample-we have bas timing in ours set ups induction 35-62, 124 transfer and 165 exhaust and it is pretty much around these numbers in industry. If anybody wiil try to go for let's say following numbers 30-75 on induction, 140 on transfer and 190 on exhaust then you know what is going to happened with dyno results? pretty much I can predict at list 1.3 HP and 30oz of torq, but it will take forever to get there and it will be motors for tether cars and control line speed air planes but will not work on RC cars. I am not saying this is what on your motor, i try to explane why the dyno run is important start from idle, please don't get me wrong. You results are very imortant to me (I am talking about my self only).
As far as 50 K in RPM, this is not a big deal-more adavanced timing done more RPM you can get it, but they they will never accure on track any way-on the track max RPM on the fastes motors I read were 42K, I read 43.5 as well but there was no speed and more RPM goes up-slower cars were.
Anyway, I looking forward to see dyno results from xdyno and ones they published their results then we can talk further.
Edward