Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

David Buschur's RS/BADBISH 2010 build

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 18, 2010, 01:07 PM
  #91  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
l2r99gst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 3,499
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Thanks for sharing the info, as usual, Dave. Much appreciated.
Old Feb 18, 2010, 01:08 PM
  #92  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
 
Appauldd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
DB .....you say small tube and big tube, but have you considered long tube vs short tube ? I would think that a short tube header would also help gain low end (up to a certain HP level).
Old Feb 18, 2010, 01:15 PM
  #93  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
 
CAD EVO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,146
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What will be really interesting is autocrossing an 8 second car!
Old Feb 18, 2010, 01:19 PM
  #94  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (33)
 
n2oiroc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: milwaukee, wi
Posts: 3,180
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by CAD EVO
What will be really interesting is autocrossing an 8 second car!
it is a bit absurd. i like his style!
Old Feb 18, 2010, 01:38 PM
  #95  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (53)
 
David Buschur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Received 32 Likes on 14 Posts
I've done long tube vs. short tube testing already. That was a few years ago when I went from my long tube header that had the turbo down by the passenger side frame rail. Not as much difference in that testing but the shorter the runners the quicker the turbo hits.

One thing I've come to accept is equal length plays either absolutely no effect in the peformance of a header or so little my dyno won't pick it up.

Also, since I'm in that kind of mood, to the haters-> My testing is flawed, this testing is as useless as all I've done in the past and hopefully an honest shop will do this testing some day too and post the same results as I just posted.

Last edited by David Buschur; Feb 18, 2010 at 01:46 PM.
Old Feb 18, 2010, 02:17 PM
  #96  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (53)
 
David Buschur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Received 32 Likes on 14 Posts
Found a little bit more power with the turbo swap. Not posting the graphs from that test. Power is up about 10 whp over 6400 rpm. Power is down in the low/mid range.

Tomorrow, if the guys have time, we'll put the new cams in. Glad this is moving along so nicely.

BTW, the small runner header, absolutely with complete certainty pissed the car off. I had one run all day the car didn't feel right and that was the only run at high boost with the small runner header. Not a good choice for this power level. Swapped the large runner header back on, car is smiling again.
Old Feb 18, 2010, 02:24 PM
  #97  
Evolved Member
 
crispeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Miami fl.
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by davidbuschur
First, thanks to Cris (crispeed) at AWD Motorsports for helping me get the idle figured out finally on the Haltech. It was driving me nuts, he helped me late last night, thank you for the help Cris, works perfect now.
Anytime David.
Old Feb 18, 2010, 02:48 PM
  #98  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (53)
 
David Buschur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Received 32 Likes on 14 Posts
Thanks Cris, I truly appreciate the help. The idle about had me throwing in the towel. It's weird cause my settings were very close to yours but something wasn't quite right cause as soon as I changed them to yours, BAM, rock steady idle. Thank you! I owe you dinner and a few beers.
Old Feb 18, 2010, 06:04 PM
  #99  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (38)
 
psphinx81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 1,597
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
that is unreal! congrats david.. i think you just made my decision on what motor of yours ill be going with
Old Feb 18, 2010, 06:27 PM
  #100  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (18)
 
4g63evoeight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany NY
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
nice work as always, can't wait to see this at the shootout in the summer!
Old Feb 18, 2010, 06:28 PM
  #101  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (53)
 
David Buschur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Received 32 Likes on 14 Posts
I'm sitting at home working on the Haltech. Trying to learn more about the logging and go over more of the programming. You can never learn enough. While doing this I found one of the greatest features ever for testing. This feature now allows me to compare multiple runs, boost, rpm etc. and be sure what I am comparing is equal. This make gathering data so much faster and makes it easier for my brain to grasp it. If you look at the logs of the boost, they dyno graphs look the same way. Check out this RPM vs MAP log of three of the highest WHP runs of the day with three different combinations.
Attached Thumbnails David Buschur's RS/BADBISH 2010 build-logcomparo.jpg  
Old Feb 18, 2010, 07:37 PM
  #102  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
 
awdwannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hey Dave, just after reading through the entire thread and seeing the differences between the small and large runners, have you guys thought of taking a look at the idea of having different internal runner area? Basically if you've ever looked at a two stroke quad or bike, about how the exhaust diameter is small when it first comes out, then expands then contracts. With this theory, you would get the stronger bottom end benefits your looking for with the smaller runner, and the top end performance with the expanded internal area.

Could be just some stupid thought, or just what you need.
Old Feb 18, 2010, 07:41 PM
  #103  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (53)
 
David Buschur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Received 32 Likes on 14 Posts
It would be a PITA to build. I am sticking with what we've built so far. For a smaller HP guy the small tube makes sense.
Old Feb 18, 2010, 08:51 PM
  #104  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (94)
 
EvoDan2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 8,984
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
dave awesome tests. i enjoyed reading that actually. but i have a question if you dont mind.

the small runner clearly is smaller then the ports on the head. was the flange that is bolted to the head port matched to the same size of the head or was it left alone?
Old Feb 18, 2010, 08:59 PM
  #105  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (94)
 
EvoDan2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 8,984
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
also dave being TS do you think the effects you saw would be the same/better/worse with small vs large runner being its TS and not single??


Quick Reply: David Buschur's RS/BADBISH 2010 build



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:35 PM.