You might also ask if they have a page that shows the A/F ratio.

The air and fuel flow have been collected....... there just isn’t a column displaying it on either of those two pages you posted.

will do

The "data pack" allows them to give you all the data and a wyndyn viewer in a exe file you can install on your computer. At the very least they can export each run to a CVS file so you can put all the data into a spread sheet.

you guys are probably right about the "water out" on a 901. My dyno is a SF powermark and the water out is from the brake and engine temp is from the cooling tower.


Joe

Having the coolant temp labeled as “water out” with WinDyn is just probably left over from pre-WinDyn days, when it was absolutely referring to coolant temp.

When we changed the system here from the MS-DOS format to WinDyn, there are already preconfigured pages and screens you can use if you like.
The headings on the temperatures and pressures page used the same terminology as the old DOS format....... so “WatOut” for engine coolant temp.

I rearranged the channel order to something we liked better, and never bothered to rename that column.
I see some guys with newer systems are calling it something like “CoolOu”....... which is probably the default terminology from SF now.

After looking at a data sheet, I have come to the conclusion the i have CRS syndrome. These are the default names on my powermark.

The first all out custom built drag race 8.0 inch converter I was involved with was from Art Carr, it slowed the 1968 hemi GTX down right at .3 ET and 3 to 4 MPH in the 1/4 mile from the stock 11.0 inch street Hemi converter, his was a real piece of chit
We, I, took it back 4 times for him to fix it(it had broke on the second run the first time we got it ) and I think he finally swap another one of his customers 069J B&M converter with us That picked the car up around .4 ET and didn't lose much MPH from the stock OEM 11 inch Street Hemi converter
I've had other horrible race converters from companies like Art Carr, GER and some other I won't add onto this now.
My main message is a good converter is absolutely needed for the car to 60 Ft. and MPH well

For this ? I was going to start a new Thread, but this all goes together , If you have a Carb that is square [barrels the same size] and it is jetted CORRECT front & rear ,it should not matter power valve or not, The question is, Should the A & B fuel flow be the same on the dyno, I see a lot that have WAY different amounts. seems like if the carb is set up properly they would be the same When I tune a carb I disconnect the rear & tune the front with a wide band & then hook up the rear & tune the rear

It’s one of those “in a perfect world” scenarios.......that yes, front and rear fuel flow on a square bore carb with equal sized venturi on all 4 barrels would be equal.

But many times it isn’t all that practical...... especially on something that gets driven on the street.

Often times after you get the primary side really dialed in for low speed and part throttle operation..... having the same jet/air bleed combo on the secondaries leaves the wot a/f ratio not where it should be, and/or not making the best power.
So, the secondary side ends up getting the final adjustments for wot operation....... and you’ll often end up with different fuel flow on the two ends.

If all the circuits are operating correctly...... you should be able to end up with a situation where there isn’t a big discrepancy between front and rear.

Keep in mind, not all carbs are “square”.
There are many carbs out there with different sized venturi between the primary and secondary........ and those would rarely see equal fuel flow from both ends(why would they?).

Thanks D wayne , I found when I was still running a carb, jetting down the pri jet to get the cruise light throttle AFR good & then increase the PVR size to get the WOT AFR on the primary where I want it works great, Thanks again for the GREAT info that you so freely give out. This imbalance of fuel volume could also look like a bad fuel distribution intake manifold.

From my experience, that's a bit too much carb at that hp level based on 900+ hp cars/trucks running 1150's and bigger......are there skirted banjos in it and how big if so....

Thanks for all the help on this, sorry it took so long to get back to Y'all, I forgot about this thread,,,,, OOOOOOOPSSS
We put a known good converter out of his Trans AM that is much looser in the Camaro just for testing, also took the carb that has the ventures that can be changed OFF & put the Smaller venturi 900cfm carb on it & on the 1st pass it went 10.45 @ 129 DA was 1700ft, pulled the air filter assembly off & it went 10.35 @ 132 then we went home. after looking at the Datalog we now can order a custom torque converter,,, Thanks again EVERYONE .

What does the car weigh?

This is what it did before we made all the Changes
10.8 @ 124, 3600 lb race weight -100 da

I was more interested to see what it weighs now that it’s going faster.

If it’s still around 3600lbs, 132mph shows 635hp on the Moroso chart.

Thats pretty close to the uncorrected dyno numbers.........and in this case, is also about 90% of the corrected numbers, so that formula seems to work out reasonably well for this combo.

Yes it is still 3600 lbs, I forgot to mention , we also put a vacuum pump on it, pulling about 4in IIRC , also this has all been done with a full 3.5 exhaust & Tail pipes

The performance of the car improved enough so that the dyno power numbers at least make some sense now.

If you have faith in the dyno numbers, and the car doesn’t run like it should....... you know where not to spend the time and effort trying to get it sorted out.

You said the car now has a data logger...... what does the a/f ratio look like going down the track?

it was in the low 12's , the 60ft was 1.547,,,,, still leaving soft IMO
330 4.304
1/8 6.637 @105.32
1/4 10.35 @ 132.56

Yes.......60’ is still a bit soft for that ET.
Should be close to a tenth better....... but you made some nice gains for sure

Thanks for the input Dwayne