Kubs

I am hoping to build an engine for my C4 over the next year(s) but I have to meet a certain HP limit (NASA TTA). I want to build something with the best power curve but I dont want to make too much HP (usually not an issue). I have done lots of research on cams and such and want to try some things out in a simulator to see if what I learned has any truth and I can actually build what I want. Anyone know of a good dyno simulator where I can give head flow data and cam specs and end up with an estimated crank HP? Im hoping not to spend too much (free would be nice) but I also want it to be accurate so I dont waste money on parts I cant use.

RC000E

Dynomation

Kubs

That seems a little too much money. I was hoping I could get something for < $50. Is that asking too much? Are cheaper ones not accurate?

RC000E

There is desktop dyno, but having used both I'll tell you that desktop dyno is garbage by comparison. I couldn't get an accurate modeling on desktop dyno versus known built setups. Not even close.

I think dynomation is worth the investment....it's barrels of fun.

SuperL98

Engine Analyzer Pro is what I use, but it's $400+

If you get all your information ready, you can use the program for 10 day's free, as a demo.

Just work fast

http://performancetrends.com/Engine_...r_Pro_v3.3.htm

"Engine Analyzer Pro (Windows 98/Me/XP/2000/NT/Vista)
A demo version of our most detailed and accurate engine simulation, the Engine Analyzer Pro v3.5 for Windows 98, Me, XP, 2000, NT and Vista. Program runs with all features for 10 days."

Kubs

Sounds like Ill have to save up.

Where can I find desktop dyno? I gues the final numbers dont really have to be all that acurate, I want to mess with things like cam timing and duration and see what changes it does to the graph/power curve.

USAsOnlyWay

CompCams released the dynomation software in their CamAnalyzer software however, you can only use CompCams in your combo and I think it is quite ... optimistic.

There are places you can search on the internet that probably have DD or EA.

I've used the older version of EA before, it was nice, but I could never get the combo to match my car. DD for some reason was nuts on (though for RW not engine numbers... weird) DD, you are really limited in what you can do in terms of playing with things, maybe Dynomation got better...

I could run a simple engine for you in DD if you just want a simple sim.

7LitreC5

I use engine Analyzer Plus.

glenB

Another vote for Performance Trends, one of the first, of two, to go public with an engine sim program.

They have lesser versions that don't have all the features but work as well.

Kubs

I downloaded the CompCams analyzer and it seemed to give way high HP and changing things on the cam selection seemed to give a different result every time. I had to pick one of their grinds instead of inputting my own. It sounds like Ill have to save for one of the ones mentioned to get to play with what I want to.

USAsOnlyWay

Yeah, the CompCams one is really high. They make hitting 500+ look REALLY easy.

John-F

Appreciate any feedback. Based on this thread and others on the web, I still have a few questions:

1) EAP has a Knock Index calculation. Is there something equivalent in D5? Seems very useful and surprised if D5 does not have some type of equivalent.

2) Several comments that EAP is more difficult to use mainly because it requires many input parameters. Does EAP use more parameters than D5 and is a more accurate model, or does D5 have more “standard” defaults and is easier to use if many parameters do not need changing?

3) D-5 advertises wave action simulation that is not mentioned in EAP. Is this capability inherent in EAP or is it a discriminator?

4) My impression is that the D-5 output seems more user friendly and could serve a learning tool much more easily than EAP. Is this correct?

5) With both, are there databases available that contain standard engine configurations and standard parts available, that can be further customized. For example, is it possible to specify a stock LS3 engine, and then add specific items such as a model xxx Corsa exhaust system or a specific CAM?

6) Any other differences, such as accuracy?

7) Both are advertised to require a PC with windows. Any experience running on a Mac with Parallels or Fusion to emulate the PC environment?