Firstly Ignore the actual numbers, just note the difference. This is just for a comparison. I used Virtual Dyno Room and guessed on the vehicle weight and I'm not sure the road was perfectly flat. However both logs where taken on the exact same portion of road going the same direction with similar weather conditions.

First log (base) is an evo 8 with Downpipe back exhaust (testpipe), EBC, AMS LICP, GSC S1 cams, evo 9 DV, walbro 255 FP, and a K&N cone filter replacing the air box. 93 octane no meth no nitrous.

After (comparison) I added the evo 9 turbo, ebay o2 housing, and FP 18psi WG actuator. Nothing else changed between datalogs other than less boost (load) with the 9 due to quickly adjusting the EBC because with the new WG actuator it was spiking WAY high.



As you can see the 9 starts spooling a little faster and its actually running less boost but making more power as seen in the graph above. TPS goes 100% at 2000rpm for both runs and both end at 7900rpm. No tuning changes were made. I had to turn the ebc way down from the previous setting because I now have a higher pressure wastegate actuator and I didn't bother to get it running exactly the same boost as before because that would have been time consuming and I wanted to make sure not to run more boost because then I wouldn't know if any gains were from the extra boost or not.


I'm Excited to head back to the track and see what she can do. It should make even more power once I up the boost some more and tune.

I ran a 12.3 @ 113 with it running exactly as shown in the log under the heading "Evo 8 Turbo" (Base power level) this past Friday so hopefully I'll squeeze into the 11's after adjusting the boost up some more and doing some tuning!!

 

Those VDR dynos are WAY off. You pasted the logs wrong and/or did use "MAX RPM trim" at all or properly.

 

It was the smoothing factor. I had to lower it to 3 from the default of 12. Thanks.

EDIT: Lowered to 1

 

Here is a proper VDR dyno comparison

This is a comparison following along the lines of this thread.

The BASELINE is a 06 IX MR
(100% STOCK)

The COMPARISON is a 04 RS
(100% STOCK except it has an EVO 9 turbo & DV)

Both runs are on the "dynojet" setting. Both runs are uncorrected. Both run were done in late Oct. with similar temps.

Both were done with California's finest 91 octane.

 

Sorry those dynos are COMPLETELY wrong. Dont you notice how those curve are VERY VERY unnatural and wrong?? Im sorry, not trying to be mean.

Look at the example I posted above.

 

I dont think it was just smoothing factor. post up the new dyno's

To me it looks like either....

You didnt go 100% WOT at one time, and more likely "rolled" on the throttle. That will make it look like that.

OR

The road you did the logs on was very NOT flat.

 

Starting to look better but still off. Its seems like you "rolled" onto the throttle as opposed to going WOT all at once.

Your TQ should peak lower.

 

You might also wanna check out DLL (dataloglab), as its a lil easier to use.

 

The logs from evoscan posted are the same ones I pulled the data from. As you can see from the TPS plot I didn't roll into the throttle. Please, stop being so critical about the VDR plot. Just note the dotted line is above the solid line which shows an improvement even at less boost.

And for the record I used the EvoM setting.

And use the edit button!! you just quintuple posted.

 

Sorry, not trying to be "so critical about the VDR plot."

Just trying to help make it so your dyno plots are proper.

EDIT - LOL I dont have to use the edit button, Im allowed to quintuple post. LOL

DOUBLE EDIT - Oh yeah, you didnt roll on the throttle all at once. I would guess the road you did it on wasnt strait. But whatever.

 

Also what weight did you use for the car?

FYI, GSR weighs 3260, MR 3280 and RS 3175. These are approx weights, not exact.

Weights are "US curb weight", which includes all fluids.

 

It was straight and flat to the naked eye. For christ sake get out of here.

Its a GSR and I used 3400 + 175 driver. I had the stock exhaust manifold, turbo, o2 housing in the car along with ALL my tools and two ramps in the trunk plus two back packs full of crap along with other items and 3/4ths a tank of gas. Again none of that matters because I'm not trying to say I make 350 wheel. Just showing the DIFFERENCE from before and after!

 

LOL its okay. Dont get mad just cuz you post a way messed up VDR chart and I tried to help you fix it.

And yes, I never said you were trying to say you made XXXHP. I knew the whole time you were just trying to show differences and never stated otherwise.

Also, the only reason that a bunch of people havent already called you out on these charts is because most of the US is sleeping (as I wish I was, but I cant sleep)

 

And the chart changes for the third time....

 

Evo kid, Your comparison would be good if it did not show case 2 different cars. I believe that the op was attempting to show the difference btwn a evo 8 vs. evo 9 turbo on an evo 8, not an 04 rs evo 8 vs an 06 mr evo 9. So I think that your comparsion is butkis for this thread. I am sure that you where just attempting to "help" by insulting him...best done by pm if you are so inclined.

I am intrested to see more results. I was under the impression that the evo 8 turbo would spool faster than the 9 by past threads. Was the 8 turbo the 10.5 hotside? ported?