GSC S1 Exhaust Cam only results inside.
Jan 16, 2007, 06:38 PM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Navarre, FL
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GSC S1 Exhaust Cam only results inside.
Due to unforseen complications I was only able to install the exhaust cam from the S1 set that I have. So in the spirit of split testing I went ahead and did a run to see just what kind of results could be expected from that cam alone. Needless to say, I am very satisfied with the results.
The mods to the car for the exhaust cam test are:
Forge Unos MBC, TTP Downpipe, TTP Test Pipe, Buschur Bullet Catback, Buschur LICP, HKS drop in (Lidless), and a TTP Eflash.
The first graph is the above listed mods at 22 psi. It was about 25 degrees cooler that night so I adjusted for the temperature in DLL.
The second graph is with the GSC exhaust cam only. No modification to the tune was made whatsoever. It should be noted that the AFRs in the first run were around 11.4-11.5 tapering to 10.9 or so at the big end. In this run the AFRs were in the 10.9-11.2 tapering to 10.7 at the big end. Although the peak power is slightly lower, the area under the curve increase is significant (especially from 5000 rpms on). I think that the peak difference can be made up by leaning it out a bit...
I also added a third graph to display the exhaust cam with a couple additional mods. I added a TTP O2 housing and switched to a Buschur Downpipe. The third graph is from that run.
In all instances 3rd gear was used and boost was as follows:
~3400 22.3 psi
~4000 22.5 psi
~5000 22.3 psi
~6500 21.5 psi
~7000 20.2 psi
My car has a minimal spike (maybe .5 psi) and holds boost well to redline. I live and test the car at about 15 feet elevation...
The intake cam test should be in by next weekend...
The mods to the car for the exhaust cam test are:
Forge Unos MBC, TTP Downpipe, TTP Test Pipe, Buschur Bullet Catback, Buschur LICP, HKS drop in (Lidless), and a TTP Eflash.
The first graph is the above listed mods at 22 psi. It was about 25 degrees cooler that night so I adjusted for the temperature in DLL.
The second graph is with the GSC exhaust cam only. No modification to the tune was made whatsoever. It should be noted that the AFRs in the first run were around 11.4-11.5 tapering to 10.9 or so at the big end. In this run the AFRs were in the 10.9-11.2 tapering to 10.7 at the big end. Although the peak power is slightly lower, the area under the curve increase is significant (especially from 5000 rpms on). I think that the peak difference can be made up by leaning it out a bit...
I also added a third graph to display the exhaust cam with a couple additional mods. I added a TTP O2 housing and switched to a Buschur Downpipe. The third graph is from that run.
In all instances 3rd gear was used and boost was as follows:
~3400 22.3 psi
~4000 22.5 psi
~5000 22.3 psi
~6500 21.5 psi
~7000 20.2 psi
My car has a minimal spike (maybe .5 psi) and holds boost well to redline. I live and test the car at about 15 feet elevation...
The intake cam test should be in by next weekend...
Jan 16, 2007, 07:02 PM
#3
Newbie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Navarre, FL
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am assuming that it is due to the lack of a boost spike. I have noticed that a lot of people have peak torque where their boost spikes. Mine doesn't spike so I am assuming that peak torque comes in a bit more linearly...
Jan 16, 2007, 07:04 PM
#5
But you have an UNOS, so it should behave the same as everyone else with an MBC. I think it's just the Evoscan dyno simulator, because your HP curve continually goes up all the way to 7500, and that's not where we hit peak HP. Obviously, it's doing that because your TQ continually goes up instead of gradually going down like it should. You should be peaking in the 6500-7000 range then falling back down, but it doesn't, so the dyno simulator is off quite a bit.
Trending Topics
Jan 16, 2007, 07:18 PM
#8
Newbie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Navarre, FL
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But you have an UNOS, so it should behave the same as everyone else with an MBC. I think it's just the Evoscan dyno simulator, because your HP curve continually goes up all the way to 7500, and that's not where we hit peak HP. Obviously, it's doing that because your TQ continually goes up instead of gradually going down like it should. You should be peaking in the 6500-7000 range then falling back down, but it doesn't, so the dyno simulator is off quite a bit.
Jan 16, 2007, 07:18 PM
#9
Smoothing at 10 and your powercurves being choppy like that is a little disconcerting too. Also you have SAE correction on.
Warr, it's not the dyno simulator. Here is another IX in the same software (although with the correct IX gear ratios and smoothing not at crazy 10), his settings are incorrect.
Warr, it's not the dyno simulator. Here is another IX in the same software (although with the correct IX gear ratios and smoothing not at crazy 10), his settings are incorrect.
Jan 16, 2007, 07:25 PM
#10
Gotcha, Bryan. Good to know the simulator can be useful with the right settings. It's definitely obvious that his graphs were off, but I didn't know why. Yeah, you can see he's using "VIII 5spd" for some reason - the ratios are quite different on the IX 5spd. Good stuff.
EBP, that's very strange - your boost should not spike, fall, then go back up. YOu have a boost creep problem it seems?
EBP, that's very strange - your boost should not spike, fall, then go back up. YOu have a boost creep problem it seems?
Jan 16, 2007, 08:11 PM
#12
Newbie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Navarre, FL
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warr, I am not sure if it is boost creep or not. I have looked at a couple of Al's dyno's of IX's and they seem to do the same thing as mine. Up, down, up, down... It did this with the stock parts as well so I am hoping that it is just the Mivec.
The Evo IX was not available on my DLL so I just use the one for the 8. I realize that it is a bit different but the consistency is what is important. I would also like to state that the car pulls like a raped ape. So the bottom line is I am satisfied thus far.
At any rate here is a much better graph. This one was taken tonight, just now. It should be a little more like what everyone is used to seeing...
The Evo IX was not available on my DLL so I just use the one for the 8. I realize that it is a bit different but the consistency is what is important. I would also like to state that the car pulls like a raped ape. So the bottom line is I am satisfied thus far.
At any rate here is a much better graph. This one was taken tonight, just now. It should be a little more like what everyone is used to seeing...
Jan 16, 2007, 08:28 PM
#13
The TQ curve is still way different, but it may be caused by your strange boost. I haven't seen al's charts do that. There is sometimes a little down/up/down hiccup when using the ECU to control boost and removing the restrictor pill, but I haven't seen any behave like yours with peak torque occuring way late in the powerband.
Jan 16, 2007, 09:57 PM
#14
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dubai, U.A.E.
Posts: 2,723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Due to unforseen complications I was only able to install the exhaust cam from the S1 set that I have. So in the spirit of split testing I went ahead and did a run to see just what kind of results could be expected from that cam alone. Needless to say, I am very satisfied with the results.
The mods to the car for the exhaust cam test are:
Forge Unos MBC, TTP Downpipe, TTP Test Pipe, Buschur Bullet Catback, Buschur LICP, HKS drop in (Lidless), and a TTP Eflash.
The first graph is the above listed mods at 22 psi. It was about 25 degrees cooler that night so I adjusted for the temperature in DLL.
The second graph is with the GSC exhaust cam only. No modification to the tune was made whatsoever. It should be noted that the AFRs in the first run were around 11.4-11.5 tapering to 10.9 or so at the big end. In this run the AFRs were in the 10.9-11.2 tapering to 10.7 at the big end. Although the peak power is slightly lower, the area under the curve increase is significant (especially from 5000 rpms on). I think that the peak difference can be made up by leaning it out a bit...
I also added a third graph to display the exhaust cam with a couple additional mods. I added a TTP O2 housing and switched to a Buschur Downpipe. The third graph is from that run.
In all instances 3rd gear was used and boost was as follows:
~3400 22.3 psi
~4000 22.5 psi
~5000 22.3 psi
~6500 21.5 psi
~7000 20.2 psi
My car has a minimal spike (maybe .5 psi) and holds boost well to redline. I live and test the car at about 15 feet elevation...
The intake cam test should be in by next weekend...
The mods to the car for the exhaust cam test are:
Forge Unos MBC, TTP Downpipe, TTP Test Pipe, Buschur Bullet Catback, Buschur LICP, HKS drop in (Lidless), and a TTP Eflash.
The first graph is the above listed mods at 22 psi. It was about 25 degrees cooler that night so I adjusted for the temperature in DLL.
The second graph is with the GSC exhaust cam only. No modification to the tune was made whatsoever. It should be noted that the AFRs in the first run were around 11.4-11.5 tapering to 10.9 or so at the big end. In this run the AFRs were in the 10.9-11.2 tapering to 10.7 at the big end. Although the peak power is slightly lower, the area under the curve increase is significant (especially from 5000 rpms on). I think that the peak difference can be made up by leaning it out a bit...
I also added a third graph to display the exhaust cam with a couple additional mods. I added a TTP O2 housing and switched to a Buschur Downpipe. The third graph is from that run.
In all instances 3rd gear was used and boost was as follows:
~3400 22.3 psi
~4000 22.5 psi
~5000 22.3 psi
~6500 21.5 psi
~7000 20.2 psi
My car has a minimal spike (maybe .5 psi) and holds boost well to redline. I live and test the car at about 15 feet elevation...
The intake cam test should be in by next weekend...
Sorry, But why again werent you able to install the intake cam??
