Notices
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results Discuss vendor and member dyno tuning techniques, results and graphs.

Evan's 444whp HTA Green Evo 8.5

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 8, 2013, 08:01 AM
  #16  
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
 
mrfred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR
Posts: 9,675
Received 129 Likes on 97 Posts
Originally Posted by nismogtr34
The reason why I ask is because the ETS stock replacement manifold calls for a 1.25" if you're under 600hp and 1.5" if you're over 600 hp. Someone on Tri-State Evo put the 1.5" on their stock IX turbo and it actually made the car laggier, thus why I'm surprised that the 1.5 was used in this case and ran fine.
No change in lag on my Evo with any of the four different exhaust manifolds I've used. The factory cast manifold has pretty large cross-section runners. An argument could be made that lag could be increased if the total volume of the EM is higher, but I think the increase in volume of a 1.5" tubular header is minimal compared to how much air a turbo is moving.
Old Feb 8, 2013, 08:18 PM
  #17  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (30)
 
JohnBradley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Northwest
Posts: 11,396
Received 65 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by nismogtr34
The reason why I ask is because the ETS stock replacement manifold calls for a 1.25" if you're under 600hp and 1.5" if you're over 600 hp. Someone on Tri-State Evo put the 1.5" on their stock IX turbo and it actually made the car laggier, thus why I'm surprised that the 1.5 was used in this case and ran fine.
This was with the ETS 1.5"?

Out of curiosity how did they come to the conclusion it was the header? Dyno testing with back to back timing curves, boost curves, and AFR, or butt dyno? I dont mean to sound disrespectful I am honestly interested in knowing because I was surprised how much faster this was spooling as well. Everything said that it should be worse based on popular opinion, the big plenum short runner intake manifold, larger cams, and the header, yet it was 180* out from expected. The changes here were SD, parts listed, tune. The preload was left the same because we never thouch that without reason and after asking to make sure it was ruled out.

Aaron
Old Feb 9, 2013, 07:43 AM
  #18  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (7)
 
nismogtr34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Brooklyn, N. Y.
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't remember much of the specifics (since the thread was over a year ago on TSE). Yes, they had the ETS 1.5" installed and that was the most major part changed out. It was done through a butt dyno, but I guess that's not a good form of measurement. However, is there a reason why ETS would list the manifold for different power levels?
Old Feb 9, 2013, 11:50 AM
  #19  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (30)
 
JohnBradley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Northwest
Posts: 11,396
Received 65 Likes on 49 Posts
The actual paper engineering might say that is acceptable. I havent ever tested the smaller ETS header so I cant say.
Old Feb 9, 2013, 05:20 PM
  #20  
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (12)
 
Dynotech Tuning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Seekonk, MA
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
I have found the TruBoost systems shortcoming was its maximum allowable duty cycle was 90%. I'm not sure if you were near this WGDC or not to hold boost up top or not though.

-Jamie
Old Feb 11, 2013, 09:11 AM
  #21  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (30)
 
JohnBradley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Northwest
Posts: 11,396
Received 65 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by Dynotech Tuning
I have found the TruBoost systems shortcoming was its maximum allowable duty cycle was 90%. I'm not sure if you were near this WGDC or not to hold boost up top or not though.

-Jamie
This car just doesnt want to hold boost without tapering for some reason. The other HTA Green cars havent had that issue, MBC or Tru boost. In order to fix that I just wired the solenoid into the ECU and tuned it that way.

Aaron
Old Feb 11, 2013, 09:28 AM
  #22  
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (12)
 
Dynotech Tuning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Seekonk, MA
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
I have had the same anomalies happen as well on HTA greens and standard REDs, even on cars with the exact same mod lists and checking all of the usual suspects like boost leaks, wastegates, valve overlap, etc...

-Jamie
Old Feb 11, 2013, 09:36 AM
  #23  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (30)
 
JohnBradley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Northwest
Posts: 11,396
Received 65 Likes on 49 Posts
Thats what I thought was going on with this one, so we checked preload and even after making an adjustment it seemed to be the same. 3 port got the boost where it needed to be to make the power but its odd that Brett's car (virtually identical build) held 26 through the mid range with just a Hallman.
Old Feb 11, 2013, 07:06 PM
  #24  
Newbie
iTrader: (1)
 
Matatan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Orlando
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nice numbers
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JohnBradley
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results
56
Apr 16, 2015 08:02 AM
JohnBradley
Evo X Dyno Results
11
Dec 22, 2013 10:59 PM
JohnBradley
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results
31
May 1, 2013 11:58 AM
JohnBradley
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results
20
Dec 22, 2012 03:39 PM
JohnBradley
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results
19
Dec 19, 2012 01:52 PM



Quick Reply: Evan's 444whp HTA Green Evo 8.5



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:57 PM.