FPEvoGreen First Impressions
Dec 17, 2006, 10:03 PM
#166
So far on 91 pump gas PD1 was able to hit 335 whp on both ECU+ and DLL. But that is on 91 CA pisstane and not on 93 with 21 psi and 9* timing @ 7K rpm. I really doubt that you will hit 400 whp with 93 octane gas. But we have to wait and see more dynoed cars with this turbo on quality pump gas.
This was on saturday in 55F temps.
Last edited by razorlab; Dec 17, 2006 at 10:25 PM.
Dec 18, 2006, 04:32 PM
#171
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well i will see how it performs on thursday on the dyno.....I had my car dynoed about one month ago and it put down 320awhp. I am putting the turbo on the car tomorrow night and then off to dyno4formance. I hope for some good gains
Dec 18, 2006, 04:59 PM
#172
Let me see, I just tuned Bobby's car 2 weeks ago, the car hit 30 spi and held 26 psi at redline, this was with the stock actuator. Made 20 psi by 3500 rpm and made 413 whp on our dyno. Seems to me that stock actuator works good. As I told you before, you should have done a boost leak check on that car.
The ONLY time to run the HD actuator is if you are planning on running pump/alky or race gas all the time.
The ONLY time to run the HD actuator is if you are planning on running pump/alky or race gas all the time.
Dec 18, 2006, 05:03 PM
#173
Evolved Member
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Idaho, not Iowa
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am interested to see some real world before and after dyno results and the tuning that went into it. not all of us are looking for an expensive bolt on turbo install and it would be nice to see some decent gains while still maintaining somewhat stock driveability and lowboost rpms in a lower-cost turbo setup, similar to the big16g and 20g that the eclipse community so love...
kinda funny how all the vendors bash with each other and neither one has any real-world dyno data to offer up on this particular turbo, just opinions and we all know what those are worth. I, personally have ordered from both companies and seem to be well respected, and would be nice to see some factual data added to this conversation, rather than flirting with the banstick that dave/al/shiv are so used to.
kinda funny how all the vendors bash with each other and neither one has any real-world dyno data to offer up on this particular turbo, just opinions and we all know what those are worth. I, personally have ordered from both companies and seem to be well respected, and would be nice to see some factual data added to this conversation, rather than flirting with the banstick that dave/al/shiv are so used to.
Dec 18, 2006, 05:18 PM
#174
Let me see, I just tuned Bobby's car 2 weeks ago, the car hit 30 spi and held 26 psi at redline, this was with the stock actuator. Made 20 psi by 3500 rpm and made 413 whp on our dyno. Seems to me that stock actuator works good. As I told you before, you should have done a boost leak check on that car.
The ONLY time to run the HD actuator is if you are planning on running pump/alky or race gas all the time.
The ONLY time to run the HD actuator is if you are planning on running pump/alky or race gas all the time.
How did you achieve 100% "dutycycle"? Through maximum settings on the controller or removing the signal line to the wastegate?
The facts on the last 20gLT we tuned was on a Forge UNOS mbc, cranked all the way clockwise to maximum setting with the wastegate signal line still attached to the WG.
It certainly possible that the loading from the dyno rollers differs than what is experienced on the street which will affect taper.
It is also certainly possible that the type of MIVEC advance maps used can use more of the available boost as the intake injests the air sooner in the cycle which may increase the taper.
Regardless of any of these circumstances, in the end no one has been able to peak and hold the claimed 30psi at 8000rpms how it was initially marketed.
Without proper testing this was an irresponsible comment to publically make about the capabilities of the turbo.
Last edited by TTP Engineering; Dec 18, 2006 at 05:21 PM.
Dec 18, 2006, 05:27 PM
#175
We used a Forged manual boost controller, hooked up to the BOV line like always. Next time you use a Forged boost controller put the HD spring in it. I've also explained to you that our dyno simulates the road so closely that a re-tune is not needed. We road tested this car afterwards so the customer could drive it and the boost was the same story.
I've done some searching of your cut and pasted slamming of the turbo and your suggestions that the EVO9 turbo was better. The posts were reported when you made them and apparently the moderators took them down as I asked them too.
Luckily Jarrod should still have one we forwarded to Robert today, if so in the morning I'll be sure to post it since you have requested that I do.
Also for you stupid comment above about us not having anything to do with the turbo other than marketing it. You should check with Robert on that. All the MAF data, inlet/outlet temp testing and back pressure data on the unit being sold and the units that didn't make it were done by us at our shop. We also had the unit back in August when we won the shootout with it running 10.89 at 128. I'd say we've tested it as usual and played a very important roal in helping get it right and what WE wanted to offer and sell. My WE means our shop of 9 employees and Robert at Forced Performance. Not WE like you use it which refers to yourself working out of your house and trying to make it sound like a shop.
So you know, you are getting on my nerves.
I've done some searching of your cut and pasted slamming of the turbo and your suggestions that the EVO9 turbo was better. The posts were reported when you made them and apparently the moderators took them down as I asked them too.
Luckily Jarrod should still have one we forwarded to Robert today, if so in the morning I'll be sure to post it since you have requested that I do.
Also for you stupid comment above about us not having anything to do with the turbo other than marketing it. You should check with Robert on that. All the MAF data, inlet/outlet temp testing and back pressure data on the unit being sold and the units that didn't make it were done by us at our shop. We also had the unit back in August when we won the shootout with it running 10.89 at 128. I'd say we've tested it as usual and played a very important roal in helping get it right and what WE wanted to offer and sell. My WE means our shop of 9 employees and Robert at Forced Performance. Not WE like you use it which refers to yourself working out of your house and trying to make it sound like a shop.
So you know, you are getting on my nerves.
Dec 18, 2006, 06:49 PM
#176
I look forward to your dyno numbers. Your would be the first non-vendor provided dyno numbers. PLEASE try and do at least one run with the same before and after boost. I just would like to see what power the turbo produces using the same boost.
Dec 18, 2006, 11:36 PM
#178
You may NOT discuss the editing of this thread here!!!
So before anyone blows a gasket wanting to know why your post was deleted, read post #1 and first see if your post directly applies to it. If it does not, that ends that. If you feel it still does, let it be known that Pd1 had input in cleaning up HIS thread. Even posts of my own were removed that were requested.
DO NOT discuss what was done in this thread here... feel free to PM the involved parties. Continuing off topic banter here would not be wise.
Pd1 felt that there was some useful information mixed in with some of the bickering... just because your post was left up without the "nasty" parts edited out, does not mean you are free to continue bickering in this thread... AT ALL! Matter of fact, those of you who actually do have some CLASS, should edit out any un-necessary content yourselves. Guess we will see who steps up on that.
Back to the topic at hand...
DO NOT discuss what was done in this thread here... feel free to PM the involved parties. Continuing off topic banter here would not be wise.
Pd1 felt that there was some useful information mixed in with some of the bickering... just because your post was left up without the "nasty" parts edited out, does not mean you are free to continue bickering in this thread... AT ALL! Matter of fact, those of you who actually do have some CLASS, should edit out any un-necessary content yourselves. Guess we will see who steps up on that.
Back to the topic at hand...
Last edited by Zeus; Dec 18, 2006 at 11:46 PM.
Dec 19, 2006, 10:22 AM
#179
I'll unsubscribe to this thread for now. Let the "Pro's" stay here and discuss their results.
Please check out this thread for more dyno sheets from today and information on this turbo:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...01#post3771901
Please check out this thread for more dyno sheets from today and information on this turbo:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...01#post3771901
Dec 24, 2006, 07:04 PM
#180
Evolved Member
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: central coast CA
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
/\
PD1, it will be interesting to see what your machine will put out when you get it tuned. you seem to be the only one on this board right now WITHOUT a biased opinion. too bad it became a bickering contest between two vendors.
Zeus, thank you.
PD1, it will be interesting to see what your machine will put out when you get it tuned. you seem to be the only one on this board right now WITHOUT a biased opinion. too bad it became a bickering contest between two vendors.
Zeus, thank you.