Engine Dyno Software

jacksoni · Post by **jacksoni** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:35 pm

Does anybody have any experience with any of the available engine modeling softwares? Dynomation, Engine Analyser/EA Pro, Dynosim or others. Which is best? Or is it garbage out no matter the input? Do you think they can give a starting point, particularly if the combination is unusual, or are they totally a waste of money.

bill jones · Post by **bill jones** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:42 am

-Larry Meaux at maxracesoftware.com used to have a neat little program called "Pipemax" and he probably has something else that I'm not aware of.
-The only problem I saw with it was it was limited on small bore sizes so you couldn't do small bore engines.
--------------------------------------------
-I have used Dynomation, the Engine Analyser, Allan Lockheeds "Engine Expert" and they all make you know ALL the details of your engine.
-I never liked what Dynomation and EA suggested for camshafts where they usually always want a lobe spread that is way too wide, and I haven't found one yet that understands or is able to help you get your engine right for high altitude or printout "uncorrected dyno numbers" vs seal level numbers.
-The Dynomation has been really helpful in gettting my one 360 sprint engine to where it has been able win multiple times against ANY high dollar big name engine so I am somewhat partial towards it.
-------------------------------------------
-I was instrumental in getting Allan Lockheed to build his program and I was involved with Allan in the original development of the "Engine Expert" but I think it's old DOS design is pretty antiquated as it was the very first program to become available to the public back in 1987.
-It originally sold for $200 and that was a GOOD deal at the time but he got greedy and bumped the price up to $495 so that really shut the little guys out.
---------------------------------------------
-I've used the cheapy "Desktop dynos" and I personally don't care for'm much.
-I think the level you are at in your engine building has a lot to do with what you get out of the programs, and the price sort of reflects the intensity that you need to have.
-I probably have $2000 worth of programs and I always tend to use the "Dynomation" just because I have more time and experience with it that has done ME good.
-------------------------------------
-One other thing is most of the engines I've simulated have all been 2 valves per cylinder so I don't know how any of these programs work with 3, 4 or 5 valve per cylinder heads.

Rick360 · Post by **Rick360** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:54 am

A few years ago I looked at several dyno programs. Many aren't worth the plastic they are made with. I finally went with RSA's Engine Pro Software by Pat Hale (Qtr Jr) and have been very happy with it.

Some programs try to calculate the intake and exhaust cycles of an engine with pressures, temps and flow. While this sounds like a great way to do it, it just doesn't work in reality. Maybe small parts of the system but not as a whole. There are too many variables to model an engine cycle in this way without having a NASA budget.

The thing I like about RSA's Engine Pro is that it is based on thousands of real all-out race engines dyno tests. All of this data was analyzed for the variables that were most important to the combination and formulas were devised to properly model the engine. It probably has fewer required variables than most to give HP & TQ curves. It then gives recommendations for many things in the engine that it doesn't let you input. It is for building engines to these recommendations for all-out racing, not street engines.

There are some things in this program that I didn't understand until later "why" it gave the answer it did. Valve size and the discharge coef. effect on HP is built in this program. I have been using it but didn't understand until Darin Morgan explained it on this site. Engine Pro had been doing it for me, I just didn't realize it.

It has been very close predicting HP and TQ on the engines I have modeled and later dynoed.

There obviously are many things that only a good engine builder will know about and a real dyno is by-far the best. Software is another tool to use and thats all. I still have a lot of questions for all of the great engine builders on this site. Their experience is far better than programs. RaceMax (Larry Meaux) has some interesting software too that I hope to try soon. If he can package his racing knowledge into software, I'll buy it.

Rick

ozrace · Post by **ozrace** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 5:23 am

I have spent a lot on various software over the years, and I think Bill's conclusions are pretty much spot on.
Dynomation is a very useful program, but not for cam design - as Bill says, it will always respond to wider lobe centres in an unrealistic way. It could have been better if Curtis had continued to refine it, but he moved on to other things some time ago. I believe a Windows version is coming soon (from Audie Thomas I think).
I have never used Dynomation to try to predict Horsepower, only to look for trends and areas of potential improvement - especially in regards to Induction and Exhaust tracts.
I think there may also be an update and Windows version of Engine Expert soon. The DOS version is pretty limited.
Pipemax is excellent.
I also don't care for most the other Dyno programs.

Post by **maxracesoftware** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:01 pm

-Larry Meaux at maxracesoftware.com used to have a neat little program called "Pipemax" and he probably has something else that I'm not aware of.

i originally wrote PipeMax in 1985 as DOS program
then updated PipeMax in 1995 with new Dyno data
then another update in 2000 with just addition of using Mouse
still a DOS program.

in 1985 it was pretty good
in 1995 it was OK
but now with Engines becoming more efficient
its not accurate on Hi-HP ProStock or Comp engines enough !

as long as your average Exhaust Temperatures are 1250 deg F or hotter
PipeMax will do a pretty good job

so now, i wouldn't really recommend it .

working on major Window's version with graphics
will model 2-4-5 valve heads
should be finished Spring 2005

SWR · Post by **SWR** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 6:18 am

bill jones wrote: -I have used Dynomation, the Engine Analyser, Allan Lockheeds "Engine Expert" and they all make you know ALL the details of your engine.
-I never liked what Dynomation and EA suggested for camshafts where they usually always want a lobe spread that is way too wide

The EA Pro has VERY mild camshaft settings... an EA Pro "inverted solid roller"-profile is actually close to being a real-life mild OHC direct-acting cam profile.

I was instrumental in getting Allan Lockheed to build his program and I was involved with Allan in the original development of the "Engine Expert" but I think it's old DOS design is pretty antiquated as it was the very first program to become available to the public back in 1987.
-It originally sold for $200 and that was a GOOD deal at the time but he got greedy and bumped the price up to $495 so that really shut the little guys out.

Is the Engine Expert still available..? Just can't find it online...

-One other thing is most of the engines I've simulated have all been 2 valves per cylinder so I don't know how any of these programs work with 3, 4 or 5 valve per cylinder heads.

Not too bad on 4- and 5-valvers,shows fairly accurate trends but has problems with port velocities and hp...seen a port that flowed well at 400ft/s peak vs a similar flowing head (but at 600 ft/s peak...smaller cross-section at one point) show slightly more hp on the 400 ft/s port in the EA Pro, when the 600ft/s port demolished it in real life,by basically having more power everywhere. The target port velocities in the EA Pro must be wrong,as it always predicts higher hp on bigger ports than actual real engines need.

Talking of that;what mean (and/or peak) intake and exhaust velocities have you guys found to work well?