You're trapping in the 116mph to 117mph range, which doesnt show 470+ on a dynojet. For reference I trapped 119mph while only making 393whp on TurboTrix' dynojet.

I honestly expected the car to be faster then what it is, there are people trapping as high as you did on the stock turbo.

Also the fact that you had timeslips but were only giving out parts of information from them makes me think that you already knew that the numbers dont match up.

116mph is good, but for the money I expected more. a 50trim car will trap 120+ and will drag this turbo down the street IMO.

 

Also, the colder temps are playing a part in everything as well....I dont forsee this getting faster as the winter turns to summer....

 

i made 379whp on turbotrix's dynojet and trapped 117.8 in the 1/4. so 4tun8 that sounds dead on.

i wish this car with the lt turbo was tuned on full c16 instead of just dumping this and that race gas in on the spot. I'd love to see this turbo tested on 30 psi on either 93/meth or c16. then I think it would even shine better then this. Buschur seems to be the only one who has ran it that hard

 

I dont think this turbo is going to pick up as much as a bigger turbo would pick up on increased boost.

I would have expected with 417whp on a mustang dyno that this thing would over 120mph.

I have to say that I'm not impressed for the time being.

 

That is cool. bro! You don't have to be impressed. Move on to something else that does impress you.

I am the one driving with this turbo. I am the one that knows the before and after difference. I am the one that at this time is happy with it and recommend it to others looking for a turbo that will spool like stock and make 60 to 80 more hp over the maxed out stock 16G.

This is just a review of the turbo on my car. I went to the Dyno and I posted the graph. That is all I can do. I also posted the time slip, and gived my opinion.

If you want to believe that I bolted on the 20G LT and only gained 1.68 mph looking at my old time slip verses the new one, and lost 2.6 mph in the 1/8, then your reasoning about this is wakky.

May be you can pull out your crystal ball and tell me the real numbers, .

There is allways going to be someone skeptical and there is allways going to be more questions.

Get your own Turbo and do your own test. Success, .

 

he already has his own turbo upgrade

 

Oh! Ok. That explains his buyer's remorse, .

 

Wrong.
That 11.8@116 time slip that I posted earlier was my car on the stock 9.8 turbo on 92 degree weather here in Orlando and heavy humidity. Do a weather search and see for yourself what the temperature was at that date and time. Come on, don't guess man. Your statement is non-sense. You are trying to predict the future.

If my car went 11.8@116 on the stock turbo with those weather conditions and only 359 whp and 385 lbs of torque then, why would it not go faster now with the 20G LT. Think about it!

 

are you saying the slip that you posted was of the old turbo?

 

Take a look at the dates on the slips man. They are right there.
The 20G LT was not even avaliable then.
Yes my car went 11.8 at 116 on the small 9.8 turbo.

Now you know what's up.

It is just the first steps. I am still dialing the car in, and test and tuning. That other slip is only the 2nd time I have run the car with the new set-up [ Tilton dual ceramic and the turbo and tuning ]. You know is making horse power when it is gaining 29 mph on the top half.

Give it time. It takes more than 2 runs to get it right, right?

That is why you should not jump the gun and say things without giving it a chance. I am telling you, the LT is nice.
Yes, if you got more money to spend and can get a 35R, I would go for it too. But then more things like an after market computer and stuff is then needed to take full advantage of that bigger set-up. That is why I went this route. Stupid and simple, but with a kick of boost!

 

I didnt look at the dates because I didnt ask for stock turbo runs.

So the 12.0@117 is the 20g-LT? Your lack of driving doesnt effect the trap speed as much as it effects the ET.

with 117mph in the trap that car would make around 417whp on a DYNOJET at sea level.

That's my point, there is NO WAY this car would make 470whp, which was your claim.

 

I was also concerned about the two timeslips, but didn't want to say antything, since I'm sure something is up here. The car has to trap better than that. I would say something was wrong at the track that day. Or the stock turbo run was race gas and this one was pump gas, etc.

What the car picks up in the backend doesn't mean a whole lot, since there are many variables that can affect that (like how fast you are going at the 8th, etc). A big factor on the EVO is where your 3-4 shift comes in. If you are doing slightly better in the 8th, but it's just enough to get the shift in before the 8th, your back end pick up will go up sunstantially. This was never an issue with the DSMs, since the gearing was much taller. The total trap speed is worth much more. And like 4TUN8 said, trap speed is much much less sensitive to driving than ET is.

I'm sure the car will do what it is supposed to at the new HP level, but those two slips don't exactly showcase that right now. I would expect poeple to question them, for now. Good luck!

 

OUCH

 

4tun8 Street Killer
-TurboTrix 20g Turbo Kit
-HKS 272/272 cams
-TurboTrix Intercooler Pipes
-TurboXs Exhaust
-Tial BoV
-Tial 44mm WG
-SMC Alcohol w/ 100% Meth

-----427AWHP----393FT-LBS---
------------11.8@118-----------

So your signature above ^^ says you have 427 WHP and 393 Ft LBS, and your track time is 11.8@118 right?

Then how come my old track times on the stock 9.8 turbo 11.8@116 with only 359 whp and 381 Tq. was just as good as yours with your upgraded turbo?

Are you impressed with your turbo?
I think you are looking for excuses rather than anything else. Is ok. Like I sayed, I am very happy with my car and new turbo.

By the way I see you are not getting it!
I posted both old and new time slips to show you that driving has alot to do with mph unlike you think. I can show you this all day, but you still won't get it. You will some day, experience is a biatch!
At any rate, if you want to start a new thread on this, it would be better. This one has served its purpose.



ps. There is an AWD Dynojet in Miami, Florida. That is about 4 hours from us here in Orlando. Here is the link: http://www.fynetune.com/ If you want to take an offer, I am willing to go to Miami and Dyno my car at their Dynojet facility. 100 for dyno, 65 for C16 fuel, 100 for the trip, gas and tip. ** I go and Dyno less than 471 there I pay all the cost and you get to prove you were right about the numbers and shame me. ** I dyno and make the numbers, you pay for all this cost. Fair?
You can send the moneys to the shop ahead of time. You win, you get it back. I win, I am stock with the cost and pay the Miami shop, fuel, tip, trip, etc., but at least I can settle this debate with you.
Let me know. I can do this any day!
Lets talk the talk and walk the walk. Lets do it. I want a 471 whp Dynojet graph anyway, .

vv Read Bellow vv


Dave2 at 21 psi 93 octane ONLY I'm at 400/362...new numbers coming soon with new toys swapped in.
Adam
_________________
http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...hed79/Dyno.jpg
FPEVO GREEN= 400awhp/362 tq 21 psi PUMP ONLY


He ^^ was at 21 psi and 93 octane and made 400/362.
I was at 30 to 32 psi on higher octane fuel. And probably have more mods.
Don't you think it makes sense that if he can make 400 whp on a dynojet at 21 psi on pump gas, I can make 471 whp on 10-11 more lbs. of boost with better fuel too.? Come on![/

 

Yes

Quote:

Then how come my old track times on the stock 9.8 turbo 11.8@116 with only 359 whp and 381 Tq. was just as good as yours with your upgraded turbo?

You do realize that the ET indicates how quick the car is and MPH indicates how much power it makes right? Your car was just as quick, mostly because I can't drive to save my life, but I was making substantially more power. So your "just as good" comment doesnt compare apples to apples. Yes the ET's are the same, but the power levels are different, and that has been my point.

Quote:

Are you impressed with your turbo?

Yes

Quote:

I think you are looking for excuses rather than anything else. Is ok. Like I sayed, I am very happy with my car and new turbo.

Looking for excuses for what?

Quote:

By the way I see you are not getting it!

I think you better start checking for boost leaks or something, because if you trapped 116mph with 359whp and then trapped 117 with 417hp I think your car has a problem.

Honestly, I mean seriously, do you think I really care about this enough to send you money so that you can dyno your car?

vv Read Bellow vv

Quote:

Dave2 at 21 psi 93 octane ONLY I'm at 400/362...new numbers coming soon with new toys swapped in.
Adam

I dont think so no, your trap speeds say differently





edit: btw the word is "said" not sayed