FP Black going on my Dyno Queen
Nov 20, 2009, 11:51 AM
#47
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Jersey
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All im saying is that Lucas has pointed out that hes using this turbo on a big cam high compression motor! Previous tests have not stated that they used big cam and high compression! On an average car this turbo will make alot less power (50whp)!
The turbine and the housing will never allow it to flow and I honestly cant see this turbo making as much power as a regular GT35R!
Great turbo non the less! I mean for a bolt on turbo you cant ask for more!!!
Only test i have seen that shows realistic numbers were by Dave B.
The turbine and the housing will never allow it to flow and I honestly cant see this turbo making as much power as a regular GT35R!
Great turbo non the less! I mean for a bolt on turbo you cant ask for more!!!
Only test i have seen that shows realistic numbers were by Dave B.
Last edited by Driven Innovations; Nov 20, 2009 at 11:55 AM.
Nov 20, 2009, 11:59 AM
#48
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: nw
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All im saying is that Lucas has pointed out that hes using this turbo on a big cam high compression motor! Previous tests have not stated that they used big cam and high compression! On an average car this turbo will make alto less power (50whp)!
The turbine and the housing will never allow it to flow and I honestly cant see this turbo making as much power as a regular GT35R!
Great turbo non the less! I mean for a bolt on turbo you cant ask for more!!!
Only test i have seen that shows realistic numbers were by Dave B.
The turbine and the housing will never allow it to flow and I honestly cant see this turbo making as much power as a regular GT35R!
Great turbo non the less! I mean for a bolt on turbo you cant ask for more!!!
Only test i have seen that shows realistic numbers were by Dave B.
Nov 20, 2009, 12:21 PM
#50
Evolved Member
iTrader: (88)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tacoma
Posts: 2,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robert at FP's car also made 635/640 on a 2.3 or 2.4 with FP5r/FP4r cams...not sure the fuel though...His could also be the exception, which it prob is, but just saying...not sure the compression of his motor either. 
Nov 20, 2009, 01:06 PM
#51
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: nw
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess the question is........ what is a realistic number and what are the conditions or circumstances that would dictate a " realistic number" ? Are we talking realistic numbers from provided dyno numbers or assumptions on what one would like to believe it should put down?
Nov 20, 2009, 01:20 PM
#52
Let's not discuss numbers but rather what this DJ number means for times (low low 10s high 130s if not 140+). This isnt even all thats left in it actually. There is more than 670whp if Luke were to choose to dump to atmo and reconfig some of the other areas that would cause backpressure and resulting power loss.
Nov 20, 2009, 01:26 PM
#53
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: nw
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's not discuss numbers but rather what this DJ number means for times (low low 10s high 130s if not 140+). This isnt even all thats left in it actually. There is more than 670whp if Luke were to choose to dump to atmo and reconfig some of the other areas that would cause backpressure and resulting power loss.
Last edited by Turbojunkie; Nov 20, 2009 at 03:28 PM.
Nov 20, 2009, 02:03 PM
#54
No worries, it was a general statement and not directed at anyone. There will always be the Mustang vs DynoJet controversy not much we can do about that. Its just having the mindset that a DJ number means this time and a Mustang number means that time.
my 2c
my 2c
Dec 9, 2009, 06:23 AM
#59
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From talking to Jens at FIC and Tom at DSMlink, the injectors are very well engineered by Bosch, and the latencies out of the box should be extremely well matched already. Not to discredit the work that ID has done, but it seems that even the cheaper FIC versions are working very well for everyone who's tried them.
That's much better than Siemens injectors out of the box. We just did some testing for a big company who was having misfire issues with a kit they were working on. When they sent the injectors in for testing, they met Siemens spec of +- 6% static flow, but the dead times varied so much that there was a 40% flow variation across the batch at 2ms pulsewidth!!!!!!
Matching injectors dynamically is a much bigger deal than most people realize...
Dec 9, 2009, 07:47 AM
#60
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Phila, PA
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, over a batch of 200 injectors, there is about an 8% spread at low pulsewidths when not matched dynamically with this particular injector. 8% spread from cylinder to cylinder at idle and part throttle can have a pretty noticable affect on idle quality and driveability.
That's much better than Siemens injectors out of the box. We just did some testing for a big company who was having misfire issues with a kit they were working on. When they sent the injectors in for testing, they met Siemens spec of +- 6% static flow, but the dead times varied so much that there was a 40% flow variation across the batch at 2ms pulsewidth!!!!!!
Matching injectors dynamically is a much bigger deal than most people realize...
That's much better than Siemens injectors out of the box. We just did some testing for a big company who was having misfire issues with a kit they were working on. When they sent the injectors in for testing, they met Siemens spec of +- 6% static flow, but the dead times varied so much that there was a 40% flow variation across the batch at 2ms pulsewidth!!!!!!
Matching injectors dynamically is a much bigger deal than most people realize...
Regardless of the theory behind one or the other, or which one works better in the real world, the biggest selling point for me is fitment. I personally know 2 people who have pulled the ID2000s out in favor of the FIC version because they were very unhappy with how they fit. The tapered adapter cone doesn't have a top seat to hold the injector in place, and they are too tall. The FIC seems to be a direct drop-in that fits as well as a stock injector. Perhaps you could pass this info along to ID and have them give an explanation of why their adapter is designed like it is.