Buschur Racing 20G-LT DYNO results review
Jan 29, 2007, 08:47 AM
#16
Ok that's one claim that you're making without dynographs, timeslips, and weight of the car, but all others who put down numbers there had trap speeds much different from that. Even the OP here put down right around 360 and trapped 116. 360 on low-reading MDs trap 120-ish. Also, don't forget Joeymia who put down 30 less whp/wtq on a different MD in FL than he did at CFT.
Jan 29, 2007, 08:50 AM
#17
Ok that's one claim that you're making without dynographs, timeslips, and weight of the car, but all others who put down numbers there had trap speeds much different from that. Even the OP here put down right around 360 and trapped 116. 360 on low-reading MDs trap 120-ish. Also, don't forget Joeymia who put down 30 less whp/wtq on a different MD in FL than he did at CFT.
Also Proccoevo dynoed 675 on CFTs dyno and made 737 on Fynetunes dynojet
Jan 29, 2007, 08:51 AM
#18
The review is excellent. I must advise though that after doing my calculations the average fuel mixture is 102.3 oct.
The dyno numbers are awsome, I just don't want to mix apples and oranges, I would love to see a 91-93oct dyno.
I know of a few people that made up to 40whp extra(mustang dyno) on a stock evo8 turbo by changing from 91 oct to 100 oct but again, I am not here to critizise his dyno I am just saying that the gas could make a huge difference on power, specially on that turbo.
Congrats regardless of the type of gas.
Carlos
The dyno numbers are awsome, I just don't want to mix apples and oranges, I would love to see a 91-93oct dyno.
I know of a few people that made up to 40whp extra(mustang dyno) on a stock evo8 turbo by changing from 91 oct to 100 oct but again, I am not here to critizise his dyno I am just saying that the gas could make a huge difference on power, specially on that turbo.
Congrats regardless of the type of gas.
Carlos
Last edited by fromWRXtoEVO; Jan 29, 2007 at 08:58 AM.
Jan 29, 2007, 08:53 AM
#20
Driving skills (or lack thereof) don't take a 120mph car and give it 116mph traps. People have claimed it was "recalibrated," but the numbers didn't change when people posted them on here.
I would love to believe this 417 would equal 460 on a Dynojet, because that of course is great for Buschur, but it's not likely in this case.
I would love to believe this 417 would equal 460 on a Dynojet, because that of course is great for Buschur, but it's not likely in this case.
Jan 29, 2007, 08:58 AM
#22
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: nw
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Driving skills (or lack thereof) don't take a 120mph car and give it 116mph traps. People have claimed it was "recalibrated," but the numbers didn't change when people posted them on here.
I would love to believe this 417 would equal 460 on a Dynojet, because that of course is great for Buschur, but it's not likely in this case.
I would love to believe this 417 would equal 460 on a Dynojet, because that of course is great for Buschur, but it's not likely in this case.
Jan 29, 2007, 10:37 AM
#27
Good numbers Manie. car must be a blast to drive. The car trapped 116 with the 16g according to his sig. I think 360whp 116 traps is about right for this dyno but maybe Manie can comment on that. It definately does not read like a heartbreak dyno. Local just recently dynoed 420 on dynomite dyno and 500 on CFT dyno.
Jan 29, 2007, 10:41 AM
#28
I am glad everyone likes the tune. Thank you. 
I just wanted to post the review of the Dyno. I know everyone was waiting to see how it would do. It was excellent and the car is strong.
I know there is allways going to be a dispute back and forth. So I will not comment on those. My main objective was to post the graphs and conditions in which it was done.
The car made 379 whp and 368 tq. on the 1st. run at a lower octane (before the addition of the C16 and at around 27 psi. The graph was wacky in the middle (needed a tune for sure).
I am sorry, but I will never be interested on pump gas numbers either at the Dyno or at the track. I figure if I am going to race my car, it is going to be all out or not at all. That is the way I have allways done it.
I can tell you guys that at 24 psi on pum, the car feels better than when I was at 28 psi on race fuel on the stock 9.8 16G.
Thanks and I hope everyone gets their 20GLT turbo soon too. You will love it.
I just wanted to post the review of the Dyno. I know everyone was waiting to see how it would do. It was excellent and the car is strong.
I know there is allways going to be a dispute back and forth. So I will not comment on those. My main objective was to post the graphs and conditions in which it was done.
The car made 379 whp and 368 tq. on the 1st. run at a lower octane (before the addition of the C16 and at around 27 psi. The graph was wacky in the middle (needed a tune for sure).
I am sorry, but I will never be interested on pump gas numbers either at the Dyno or at the track. I figure if I am going to race my car, it is going to be all out or not at all. That is the way I have allways done it.
I can tell you guys that at 24 psi on pum, the car feels better than when I was at 28 psi on race fuel on the stock 9.8 16G.
Thanks and I hope everyone gets their 20GLT turbo soon too. You will love it.
