[F500] 493 - 494 dyno curves

[Jay Novak]

Remember that these tests were conducted with stock sled pipes, not
pipes designed for our cars.  Here are a couple of points:

1.  These were stock sled pipes 1998 on the 494 & 2002 on the 493.  I am
sure that pipe technology has grown a bit in that time period.  Look at
how much flatter the 493 torque cuve is compared to the 494 particularly
be low 6000 rpm.

2.  Aaen pipe on F500s run at 8000+ rpm.  I am sure the HP is better up
there or they would be running at 7750 where the stock 494 make peak HP.

Let's quite worrying about this issue & support the inclusion of the 493
for Nationals in 2005.  We CAN still make this happen.

LETTERS to the Board of Directors & Comp Board are still effective.
Mine went out last Friday along with a copy of the dyno curves.

Thanks ... Jay Novak
NovaRace Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: dogill80 at charter.net [mailto:dogill80 at charter.net] 
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2004 10:56 AM
To: f500 at f500.org
Subject: Re: [F500] 493 - 494 dyno curves

Chuck,

I cannot agree that a 5.8% difference in horsepower on the top end is
"remarkably similar" and I predicate my judgment on the "remarkably
similar"
horsepower figures of the AMW and Rotax, Kawasaki and AMW, and Chapparal
and
Kawasaki.  If Helio (Castro Neves), Mark (Martin), Ron (Fellows), or
Kimi
(Raikonnen) believed they had that much horsepower advantage over their
competitors, they'd soil their knickers every time they strapped in.

I realize the caliber of competition at our levels is quite simplified,
several orders of magnitude lower in economic input, and less pivotal in
our
daily lives.  However, if we are going to compete, we need to try to do
this
one ( as opposed to the AMW vs. Kawasaki and Rotax vs. AMW) a bit
better.
If applying 38mm Mikuni's to the 493 effectively evens the power output,
I
will get on the 493 bandwagon but, first, I need some assurance that
this
new motor will not instantly obsolesce the existing engine
configuration.

dg


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "McAbee, Chuck" <Chuck_McAbee at csx.com>
To: <f500 at f500.org>
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 9:57 PM
Subject: RE: [F500] 493 - 494 dyno curves


> Jay -
>
> One question....Was the 493 run with it's stock 40mm Mikuni's or with
38's?
>
> The 494 is stock with the 38mm Mikuni's.
>
>
> I agree the data shows the engines to be remarkably similar.
>
>
> Chuck McAbee
> SEDIV #16
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jay Novak [mailto:jnovak6 at wideopenwest.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 22:49
> To: f500 at f500.org
> Subject: [F500] 493 - 494 dyno curves
>
>
> OK guys, I have been trying to get dyno data from Rotax for a couple
of
> weeks.  I just got it last Monday by fax.  I finished putting together
a
> graph comparing the data of the torque & hp of PRODUCTION STOCK 493 &
> non Rave 494.  The data that I received was in metric units, Nm torque
> (Newton-meters) & engine rpm (also had Kw, fuel flow etc).  The faxes
> were Rotax data sheets.  I copied the data to Excel, converted the
> metric torque data to ft-lbs & then calculated the SAE hp.  Take a
look
> at graph at the link below & I think you will see that we have two
very
> similar engines.  I put lots of notes on the graph defining some of
the
> variations in the 2 engines.  I think that they are amazingly close
> above 6000 RPM for being totally different designs. (Reed vs. rotary
> valve).  It is pretty clear to me that the performance will be VERY
> similar in the cars.  Remember these 2 curves represent the engine's
> performance with production exhaust systems & not your typical Aaen
pipe
> setup.  It seems to me that with our Aaen pipe setup we have been
right
> at 8000 rpm in any case, so the HP on the race track might even be
> closer.
>
> I hope that this helps to clear up some issues for many of us.
>
>
> http://www.f500.org/rotax/
>
>
> Thanks ... Jay Novak
> NovaRace Inc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> F500 mailing list - F500 at f500.org
> To unsubscribe or change options please visit:
> http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500
> *** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! ***
>
>