What is the best/most complete "engine builder" software? 
Looks like $$ well invested.
TIA! :thumbsup:
Looks like $$ well invested.
TIA! :thumbsup:
*Best* Engine Build Software?
The Old Reliable
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Joined
·
1,018 Posts
What is the best/most complete "engine builder" software?
Looks like $$ well invested.
TIA! :thumbsup:
Looks like $$ well invested.
TIA! :thumbsup:
Alan Lockheads program.What is the best/most complete "engine builder" software?
Looks like $$ well invested.
TIA! :thumbsup:
Most of Alan's program has been incorporated into the Audie Tech program. I still have the old DOS version that I bought in 1993. It has a lot of good features (balance, valve closing points based on stroke, max rpm ) not usually found on other programs.
Pipemax is very good for the money. It takes some insight that might be difficult for the beginner but is a very good cost effective tool. For the beginner some of the Performance Trends programs may be more user friendly.
Don Terrill is having the sale starting 9/28/2010 for the Engine pro, Quarter pro, etc that was offered last year for $99. Best my memory serves me it was written by Patrick Hale. It's ok but I like Pipemax better, just my personal choice. If interested in Engine pro and the others you can find the info on Speedtalk.
I have Dynomation 5, Engine Pro and had Engine Analyzer Pro (quit working when I loaded Engine Pro).
They have all been all fairly close (10-15 HP difference), but I think I prefer EA, just because there are less assumptions made (ie more user inputs). The only downside to that is if you don't know all the information
After a running a few combo's through the program (EA) and across an actual dyno to "calibrate" some of the inputs and how they affect things in real life, I feel pretty good about getting within 1-2% of actual on a combo I have accurate information on, or can physically measure/inspect the components myself that will be used for the build.
They have all been all fairly close (10-15 HP difference), but I think I prefer EA, just because there are less assumptions made (ie more user inputs). The only downside to that is if you don't know all the information
After a running a few combo's through the program (EA) and across an actual dyno to "calibrate" some of the inputs and how they affect things in real life, I feel pretty good about getting within 1-2% of actual on a combo I have accurate information on, or can physically measure/inspect the components myself that will be used for the build.
I got suckered into that $99 sale and I was disappointed with what I got. All the bonus programs are all things found free on the internet. The Engine Pro is pretty much useless, the dyno graph starts at 4500 RPM's. They only cam figure you can input is duration @50 and what type of cam.
I wish I bought Desktop Dyno.:yes:
I was sucked into the same crap, above. I went back to my DynoSim Pro and Desktop Drag.
Here is Quatrejrs return policy.
"We sell books, software and other products that can be easily digested and/or duplicated. Because of this, REFUNDS WILL NOT BE GIVEN FOR ANY REASON. We are not a Library. Defective items will be replaced though. Be aware, if you file a chargeback with your credit card company you will automatically be added to the negative customer database ChargeTrack(tm) used by credit card companies and merchants, which may effect your ability to make purchases or get credit in the future. Also, we reserve the right to file credit card fraud charges in your state -- most states treat this like check fraud and may result in jail time."
"We sell books, software and other products that can be easily digested and/or duplicated. Because of this, REFUNDS WILL NOT BE GIVEN FOR ANY REASON. We are not a Library. Defective items will be replaced though. Be aware, if you file a chargeback with your credit card company you will automatically be added to the negative customer database ChargeTrack(tm) used by credit card companies and merchants, which may effect your ability to make purchases or get credit in the future. Also, we reserve the right to file credit card fraud charges in your state -- most states treat this like check fraud and may result in jail time."
Joined
·
2,256 Posts
I have Dynomation 5, Engine Pro and had Engine Analyzer Pro (quit working when I loaded Engine Pro).
They have all been all fairly close (10-15 HP difference), but I think I prefer EA, just because there are less assumptions made (ie more user inputs). The only downside to that is if you don't know all the information
After a running a few combo's through the program (EA) and across an actual dyno to "calibrate" some of the inputs and how they affect things in real life, I feel pretty good about getting within 1-2% of actual on a combo I have accurate information on, or can physically measure/inspect the components myself that will be used for the build.
I'm on the same page as Jason. The DM5 is a nice program and gets real close with minimal inputs, however the EA 3.5 got within 10hp of my actual dyno results. It takes more inputs, so the better the input......the better the prediction. JI=JO. One major difference I've noticed between the 2 programs is the camshaft trends/predictions.
20 years ago.QUARTERjr was a great product for it's time. Even though it was DOS based. But other than a upgrade to a Windows version, it hasn't improved.
And like was said before. All the little extra programs can be found for FREE on the Net. Boost Compression, Carburetor Sizing, Compression Ratio etc..etc..
And like was said before. All the little extra programs can be found for FREE on the Net. Boost Compression, Carburetor Sizing, Compression Ratio etc..etc..
Joined
·
2,256 Posts
My a$$ still burns from that deal.
One big difference between desktop dyno and engine analyzer is what durations and intake exhaust splits they show as best. on a 13:5 engine with brodix bb2 xtra heads the ddyno wants a 20 degree split while ea shows the best numbers with a single pattern cam...
Joined
·
875 Posts
I like Engine Analyzer Pro.
I am also disappointed in that $99 deal.. all pretty simple and out dated programs that I will never use as I have better stuff for free on the net. It was a $99 throw away.
I am also disappointed in that $99 deal.. all pretty simple and out dated programs that I will never use as I have better stuff for free on the net. It was a $99 throw away.
I also use dynomation.I have Dynomation 5, Engine Pro and had Engine Analyzer Pro (quit working when I loaded Engine Pro).
They have all been all fairly close (10-15 HP difference), but I think I prefer EA, just because there are less assumptions made (ie more user inputs). The only downside to that is if you don't know all the information
After a running a few combo's through the program (EA) and across an actual dyno to "calibrate" some of the inputs and how they affect things in real life, I feel pretty good about getting within 1-2% of actual on a combo I have accurate information on, or can physically measure/inspect the components myself that will be used for the build.
X2. That $99 crap is a joke. I got much better results from Desk Top Dyno 2000. I used every input I could ( head flow #s, exact cam timing, ect) and the ACTUAL dyno results were dam close to what Desk Top Dyno predicted. DTD was about 30 hp friendly and 10 ft lbs friendly but it accurately predicted the rpms where the peaks would occur.
DTD costed me $19.
I also purchased EA from Performance Trends. That program was 1000 rpms off on the actual dyno results. Could not figure out why and they couldnt either so I dumped that one and they did give a refund.
Joined
·
641 Posts
Ive got several software dyno programs and Ive often compared results, between desk top dyno , and several other programs
comparing each other software result and engine dyno results
http://www.proracingsim.com/desktopdyno.htm
is by far the easiest to use and reasonably accurate for a basic quick bargain basement program at predicting peak hp and rpm levels
ENGINE ANALYZER PRO 3.9 is much more detailed and accurate, but it requires a ton of good accurate info, before it will even give a reasonably close guess
http://www.auto-ware.com/software/eap/eap.htm
if you don,t know all the cam, head flow, cpr , runner size,vacuum readings, header config etc, I don,t expect ea-pro to give good results, but with it its more accurate
comparing each other software result and engine dyno results
http://www.proracingsim.com/desktopdyno.htm
is by far the easiest to use and reasonably accurate for a basic quick bargain basement program at predicting peak hp and rpm levels
ENGINE ANALYZER PRO 3.9 is much more detailed and accurate, but it requires a ton of good accurate info, before it will even give a reasonably close guess
http://www.auto-ware.com/software/eap/eap.htm
if you don,t know all the cam, head flow, cpr , runner size,vacuum readings, header config etc, I don,t expect ea-pro to give good results, but with it its more accurate
needs another 100 grand does he? I don't think he will find 1000 suckers this year.
People bitched and he said "deleted".
**** him.
**** him and the quarterhorse he rode in on.
yeah me too. In fact just now I almost changed my ST sig to something like "1/4pro software sux and DT can kiss my a$$ " but I don't ever post over there hardly so it wouldn't matter
Joined
·
151 Posts
Good question. I have used the old DOS Engine Jr some years ago. I found that it was pretty accurate. It helpt me to back of like 20 degr intake duration, as my car would run faster when I put in the nbrs from Engine Jr in Quarter Jr.
Anyone that have a opinion of Comp Cams program? Yes i know, it's only for CC-cams but anyway. (But it's free...)
Brgds
Burt
Anyone that have a opinion of Comp Cams program? Yes i know, it's only for CC-cams but anyway. (But it's free...)
Brgds
Burt
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
