"the solid occured before the dotted one - we did several more both in V and IV as well as some programmed runs" That's what I thought. It's a heat problem. I'd guss that as the engine warmed up, the computer pulled the timing back more to keep it from knocking. "the bumps are caused by the tires slipping on the dyno, i.e. traction problems" Not likely. If the tires slip, the indicated hp bumps down because the power is not getting to the dyno. I've seen that many times. Your graph bumps up, the only way that can happen is if the tires were slipping everywhere except the bumps or the engine was actually making more power momentarily....and I think it was. I'm pretty sure it wants more octane. "As a general rule of thumb, I don't put much stock in dyno numbers. Dyno tuning has it's place in an environment where you establish a baseline and make changes, then do another run to see if you improved or not. But trying to compare Car A run on Dyno B in City C to Car D on Dyno E in City F is just so much crap. My opinion anyway." Probably true. Back when I was still playing motorcycles, I went to a few dyno shootouts and was never really surprised by the numbers. But it's never a good idea to take any number as gospil.
"The red indicates where peak TQ occured, the blue one indicates where peak TQ is supposed to have occured. ALong with the mission ponies up top, it seems that the engine is missing poke down low also." Octane. The engine is most prone to knocking at low rpm so that is where the timing is most likely to be most redarded by an angry knock sensor. The dot graph which was run second when the engine was hot is much worse down low. That is the only explanasion that fits. If Ferrari change the exhaust for noise, it would probably help the bottom end. The only ways I know to shift the torque peak up is more duration in the cam or bigger ports in the heads and manifold, both of which increase high rpm hp. i pretty sure it's octane.
OK, lets put the dissapointing dyno resuts and all the stories why they could be wrong aside for the moment, doesn't FNA have some explaining to do why the quoted SHP dropped from 425 to 409 and weight went up from 2822 to 3000? Has anyone spoke to a dealer as to what happened? I am no lawyer, but isn't this false advertising? I am sure the 360CS is a great car as is but its starting to sound less attractive compared to a std 360 doesn't it?
First time poster here....... Ive done quite a few dyno tests (non Ferrari's unfortunately), but on the Dynojet 248 I use, a stock (to the best of my knowledge) F355 laid down 297 SAE whp. So, pretty darn close to the 300
Goodness gracious. Regardless of power numbers, that is far and away the sweetest sounding engine I have ever heard.
here is an update - I have now gone through all runs - the only numbers I am comfortable with at the time beeing are the torque measurements - all the runs show a variation of less than 5% 233.2 ft-lbs measured (max.) at the rear wheel for my CS 275 ft-lbs is claimed by Ferrari at the flywheel this results in a 15% driveline loss - torque is also the number measured directly by the dyno - we have to give Ferrari one here – spot on or? HP is calculated by the dyno using torque at a given RPM – RPM is measured (picked-up) at the ignition signal or optical (we used both at different times) - the max. torque numbers did show significant variance in RPM clustered around 5K what if that signal is off? And how would I find such an error in my data?
I agree the torque numbers are spot on but the HP numbers do not add up! It just does not make sense...Ferrari went to 11.2 :1 ratio, polished the heads, new exhaust etc and they didn't get the HP they were looking for?? Regarding weight: 3100 lbs for the Stradale, well one could see where the weight savings was been made (seats, brakes, carbon doors, etc)... I wonder what the weight of the standard 03/04 360 Modena truly is?? Can anyone check to see what the weight is listed as in the US manuel? Has anyone put their 360 Modena on the scales?? Even if Ferrari now says the HP is 409 HP instead of 425 HP in the mags. then the car should dyno at 350 HP!!
EDIT - The F355 laid down 279 SAE whp on the Dynojet. See attached. Ignore the 205 whp run below it...that was a 3.0L Maxima dyno plot. Until about 4000, the Maxima is actually ahead, then its no contest
This borders on thread hijack, but if you like torque, this should do! 2.2 liter engine run stopped at 4400 rpm just when it was getting interesting
The numbers are out of line with what was advertized,know doubt about that. But when you did the runs,you had not even 2k miles on the car. This could be a contributing factor as others have stated. But..(I hate to say this)..having driven many Ferrari's, It seems to me that the power outputs between cars do vary. Some 355's i've driven feel like i could get out and walk faster,were as others really feel strong. This with approx same milage between the cars(usually between 35-40k). maybe there is inconsitansies with the factory programing of the ecus..or just some ecu's are better then others I really don't know. It may be possiable that you got an under performing car due to a problem with the ecu programing(hence the bumps in the graph). G.M., Ford, are also bad for this. Maybe put a few more miles on the car and take it back for another run and then see the results. If nothing changes,maybe you could take all the testing info to your dealer and show them the results of the tests. They could possiably help you by reflashing the computer, or informing FNA about the lack of advertized power. There could be legal cause for them to find and fix the problem at no cost to you. Just my 2 cents...worth what you paid for it. Tom
"233.2 ft-lbs measured (max.) at the rear wheel for my CS 275 ft-lbs is claimed by Ferrari at the flywheel this results in a 15% driveline loss - torque is also the number measured directly by the dyno - we have to give Ferrari one here spot on or?" The problem is that the torque peak is 1000 rpm higher than it should be and also falls off faster than it should. Hp= torque x rpm/5252, so if the you need the right torque and it needs to be at the right rpm. That is way you have a miss match, the torque curve is the wrong shape.
Stradales will never put out "on the road" horsepower on a dyno, mainly because the cats sit directly under the airbox and on a stationary car will super-heat the airflow to roasting temperatures, reducing hp and pulling back the timing. This is a problem with all 360s. The main purpose of the Challenge grill is to keep the air moving through the engine compartment and preventing this from occurring. The dyno figures don't bother me at all. My main concern is the owners manual stating the car has 409hp. Does anybody know for a fact that the initial batch of Stradales were held up for noise regulations? If they were modified to pass regulation then they would still have the original owner's manual stating 425hp, wouldn't they? Is the 409hp figure a typo (very common in Ferrari manuals), or is 409hp correct, and the true rating of the US spec Stradale? Thomas, what is the build date on your car? I thought it would be an '03 model. Can you shed any more light on this?
your theory about the air temperature is not correct - the air flow through the intake is such that the temperature drops pretty much to the outside one as soon RPMs start to build - think about a stream of cold air that has no time to pick-up heat - this would be also a design problem that could be fixed easily no my model is a 2004 - one of the first ones to arrive - I am unfortunately not at home to get you the build date
you reflect my thinking exactly - why blueprint an engine and not have some gain - I am not sure what one would expect I guess in the end that the 360 engine is maxed out! and therefore all the work only ensures that a CS engine is always in the top category regarding hp production tolerances (assumed 5%) of all 360 engines - this is actually fine by me I did not expect 350 hp because fo the missing RAM effect and the 92 gas - I had hoped to see around 330 RWhp, i.e. an increase over the Modena note that the 400hp (flywheel) to 3x0hp (rear wheel) difference is also present with the Modena as well as the difference between the marketing claim (400hp (marketing) and 395hp SAE (US owner's manual)). For me that is simply what standard is applied or enforced in which country; not such a big deal as for others in this thread.
Sorry to be a pain guys, But can somebody explain in simple terms what this all means. Sorry to be a thicko but this technical stuff has gone way over my head. Many thanks Wazza ( Dumb CS owner)
