Today's Dynojet #'s vs. setups from the past

[CO AVANT]

First 2 graphs are today. Fully built 2008cc, 3651 cams, T25 Gt2871R .64, revo 550 file. 104oct. 25psi tapering to 22psi (turbo can spike higher than gtrs on my setup on same settings)

3rd is on fully built 1984cc, 3651 cams, gtrs, revo 440 file, 104oct, 23psi-22psi

4th is stock 1.8T (1784cc) engine with gtrs, 104oct, 23-22psi

5th is Stock 1.8 with K04 on 112oct, revo, 24psi

The #'s from the superflow dyno will be in on Monday to compare.

Temps in the dynojet room today were ~80deg F. Car makes tons more power when it's 40deg out
MacAuto Dynojet elevation is just under 6000ft

#'s varied a tad from what Greg said because I was just thinking off the top of my head on the drive home when I talked to him and forgot exact #'s. I have no doubts I would put down 380+whp uncorrected on a mustang dyno at sea level in OPTIMAL conditions. When I ran down there a couple months ago my car had never run worse (totally different than on the street down there). 100+ degree in room temps. 80+deg IATs, sucking in exhaust fumes, car hiccuping and misfiring. My IAT's today were in the 25-35deg C range. Timing and fuel on at 12:5:1 MUCH BETTER!

[dougyfresh]

Great Job!

Congrats.

This looks great. I knew it would come out like this.

[dirtybrd]

Really nice #'s Jordan!! Are you happy with them? 400AWHP is just around the bend for someone, who's it gonna be?

[mike-2ptzero]

Nice numbers Jordan, I expected you would be right around 340-350 "actual" whp. If you ever decided to come down let me know, I will line up some time on a local Dynojet that is now one of my dealers.


IDRC is next month and Fontana will be having full weekend Street Legals in Nov/Dec.

[Maverick]

very impressive numbers.
so your motor is fully broken in ?

[F16HTON]

Nice numbers Jordan, I expected you would be right around 340-350whp uncorrected. If you ever decided to come down let me know, I will line up some time on a local Dynojet that is now one of my dealers.


IDRC is next month and Fontana will be having full weekend Street Legals in Nov/Dec.

fixed

[mike-2ptzero]

fixed

LOL, I didn't know we had to put "uncorrected" after the actual whp a car makes now. I mean come on, does anyone really drive a car that makes "corrected" numbers?

Ok I corrected my first reply. Happy now?

[F16HTON]

If it is good enough for the Society of Automotive Engineers...

[mike-2ptzero]

Maybe its just me, but isn't the point of getting on a dyno is to find out how much the car actual makes at that time or how much actual whp it has gained from the last time?

[DenverNoob]

The debate over corrected vs uncorrected will always be here. Fact of the matter is in some circumstances, corrected numbers are a good means for comparison. Until one lives at high elevation, they really don't understand that. Motors that qualify for a valid correction factor, imo, are those fi cars whos setups can/will actually move more air at sea-level then at altitude. NA cars certainly qualify, as do FI cars with, say, a bt setup like mine or jordans. Why you ask? Even ill be the first to admit that my k04 turbo could not move one gram more air here vs sea-level vs the top of mount everest. It was just too small. In that case...corrected #s are silly. A bigger turbo like mine, or jordans, however, WILL and is capable of moving more air. Thus a correction factor, while not finite (and neither is anything but a true engine dyno, btw) is a good GUIDE as to what a comparable setup would make at sea level. Correction factors are supported in these cases by a number of automotive sanctioning bodies...but at the end of the day, anything that comes off of a chasis dyno is just a guide, nothing more. Please comment on the #s and quit quibbling over this stupid bs. Its impressive, end of story. Besides...I was there...it was fun! Let's no lose sight that in the end, we all do this because of the enjoyment it brings.

[mike-2ptzero]

The debate over corrected vs uncorrected will always be here. Fact of the matter is in some circumstances, corrected numbers are a good means for comparison. Until one lives at high elevation, they really don't understand that. Motors that qualify for a valid correction factor, imo, are those fi cars whos setups can/will actually move more air at sea-level then at altitude. NA cars certainly qualify, as do FI cars with, say, a bt setup like mine or jordans. Why you ask? Even ill be the first to admit that my k04 turbo could not move one gram more air here vs sea-level vs the top of mount everest. It was just too small. In that case...corrected #s are silly. A bigger turbo like mine, or jordans, however, WILL and is capable of moving more air. Thus a correction factor, while not finite (and neither is anything but a true engine dyno, btw) is a good GUIDE as to what a comparable setup would make at sea level. Correction factors are supported in these cases by a number of automotive sanctioning bodies...but at the end of the day, anything that comes off of a chasis dyno is just a guide, nothing more. Please comment on the #s and quit quibbling over this stupid bs. Its impressive, end of story. Besides...I was there...it was fun! Let's no lose sight that in the end, we all do this because of the enjoyment it brings.

What boost level did you run at on the dyno? I know you most likely have way more head room since the extended tip turbos have a sweet spot that is at a much higher boost level then the garrett turbos. This is why they have a better effiency at higher PR levels. Hope to see more dyno's from you pushing much higher boost levels in the future.

[CO AVANT]

Ted's software still needs a bunch more tweaking being a new file and all. I expect him to make tons more power in the future. I just hope it doesn't become faster than mine, sorry Ted

I am happy with my car and the power it delivers be it corrected or uncorrected #'s. The graph shows what gains were made over previous setups and how power comes on much better in the lower rpms, which I feel is very impressive. There is room to improve the timing/fuel in lower rpms to get even quicker spool, but that will take time and a software remap. There is not much else I can say. I dyno at ~6000ft. It is what it is. Peace.

[mike-2ptzero]

Ted's software still needs a bunch more tweaking being a new file and all. I expect him to make tons more power in the future. I just hope it doesn't become faster than mine, sorry Ted

I am happy with my car and the power it delivers be it corrected or uncorrected #'s. The graph shows what gains were made over previous setups which I feel are very impressive. There is not much else I can say. I dyno at ~6000ft. It is what it is. Peace.

70.65 uncorrected whp gain since last time. Thats a good amount of power right there.

[DenverNoob]

What boost level did you run at on the dyno? I know you most likely have way more head room since the extended tip turbos have a sweet spot that is at a much higher boost level then the garrett turbos. This is why they have a better effiency at higher PR levels. Hope to see more dyno's from you pushing much higher boost levels in the future.

I ran at 22psi...pretty much the same as Jordan mentioned above...my software needs quite a bit of work It was installed on thurs...and needs a bit of tweaking for sure...its a completely custom file and needs to be worked out...overall I was actually really happy with my results given that I had all of 6 total hours of development into the new file when i hopped on the dyno.

As far as turbo sweet-spot goes...the s256 doesnt really "light up" until 25ish PSI...so some work to be done there as well.

I will post existing #s when the charts arrive. Lots of work to be done but a great day overall. One thing that became dreadfully apparent...my intercoolers are toast. Good thing winter is just around the corner!

[mike-2ptzero]

I ran at 22psi...pretty much the same as Jordan mentioned above...my software needs quite a bit of work It was installed on thurs...and needs a bit of tweaking for sure...its a completely custom file and needs to be worked out...overall I was actually really happy with my results given that I had all of 6 total hours of development into the new file when i hopped on the dyno.

As far as turbo sweet-spot goes...the s256 doesnt really "light up" until 25ish PSI...so some work to be done there as well.

I will post existing #s when the charts arrive. Lots of work to be done but a great day overall. One thing that became dreadfully apparent...my intercoolers are toast. Good thing winter is just around the corner!

Yeah it doesn't really come to life till 25psi, but they really like 30+psi. The 300's really like to run at 40+psi.

Friends of mine run their S372's at 50psi.


To give you a good idea.



So at 6000 ft pushing 22psi your really looking at a 2.9 Pressure Ratio. At 30psi you would be around 3.6 PR. Even at that boost level you still have some head room left while the GT2871r will be way out of its effiency map.


This is exactly one of the reasons I want to try out the HTA35r because plenty of people are seeing really good numbers when pushing 40-44psi with them and the standard GT35r just doesn't do well at those boost levels. We are also looking at the HTA30 for another car. But this all depends on if/when we become a FP dealer.

[DenverNoob]

That is precisely the reason we picked this turbo...up here in no-mans-land,it was the perfect choice for my build and daily drivability.

[mtbrider]

nice

[Don Supreme]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

HTA 35R huh?

Like this:

[dirtybrd]

Boing!

[mike-2ptzero]

yes like that and like the one that my friend has been running for some time in his EVO8 which is the car I ran 11.3 at 124 mph pushing 23psi in the USCC.

[Don Supreme]

It runs nicely on my car... me likey....

[B6Lovin]

Boing!

ditto

does spurt of the moment apply now chris?

[CO AVANT]

70.65 uncorrected whp gain since last time. Thats a good amount of power right there.

I always knew that a full T25 2871R setup would yield much better power and quicker ramping up over the more choked up elim setup. There is no disputing results when they are conducted like I did it.

[CO AVANT]

I should have overlayed PTwiggins APR 3+ setup on 104oct/file with stock 1.8T engine. We dyno'd on the same day a couple years ago (run file 009 on graph for me). He ran 328whp, 321wtq sae corrected (stock apr3+ on 104). With my 2.0L and 2871R I made 91whp and 76wtq more corrected (120chp). Even that right there is a big jump from your stock apr3+ setup on race gas.

[dougyfresh]

I should have overlayed PTwiggins APR 3+ setup on 104oct/file with stock 1.8T engine. We dyno'd on the same day a couple years ago (run file 009 on graph for me). He ran 328whp, 321wtq sae corrected (stock apr3+ on 104). With my 2.0L and 2871R I made 91whp and 76wtq more corrected (120chp). Even that right there is a big jump from your stock apr3+ setup on race gas.

We will get that comparison when my car and Greg's are done.

APR 3+ with APR software on a 1.8L -vs- 2.0L with 2871R and 3651s on a custom tune

[Don Supreme]

Good work Jordan -- Hope you are happy with the power. It seems to be holding together for you nicely..