Boost response with our SF GT42 kit
Jun 7, 2007, 11:36 PM
#31
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as for the twisty stuff, its no where near as bad.
Chris.
Jun 7, 2007, 11:40 PM
#32
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i dont think he is running a stock box! i thought he was running a Holinger dog box with straight cut gears. he also has a Ikeya sequential shifter with digital gear indicator (which you can buy and fit to any 5 SPEED Evo box).
Chris.
Chris.
Jun 7, 2007, 11:48 PM
#33
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then we must be watching two different videos. I am not seeing a fast spooling turbo. stabbing the throttle at those rpms with 35r would result in boost response 4 times faster than that 42r. I have built enough 35r and 67r cars to know that. Obviously it is you who lack any real world experience.
here is a dyno chart of HIS engine. tell me what you think???
http://www.lancerregister.com/showth...hreadid=132865
still think its laggy????
Chris.
Jun 8, 2007, 12:42 AM
#34
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then we must be watching two different videos. I am not seeing a fast spooling turbo. stabbing the throttle at those rpms with 35r would result in boost response 4 times faster than that 42r. I have built enough 35r and 67r cars to know that. Obviously it is you who lack any real world experience.
who cares about lag...that **** is fun
Jun 8, 2007, 01:13 AM
#36
clearly Norris must be using that magic dust again then! lol
here is a dyno chart of HIS engine. tell me what you think???
http://www.lancerregister.com/showth...hreadid=132865
still think its laggy????
Chris.
here is a dyno chart of HIS engine. tell me what you think???
http://www.lancerregister.com/showth...hreadid=132865
still think its laggy????
Chris.
WTF. It's expected for a 100 grand engine.
Jun 8, 2007, 04:57 AM
#37
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HAHA lots of magic dust!
really though, hes is on par with the builders over here. also, its like everything, your paying for this guys expertise as well as what he does. take a look at someone like Nelson Racing engines. yeah their motors aren't cheap, but they make 1100bhp on pump, 1600bhp on race, will bolt straight in, never have to be messed with and last forever!!!
there is no such thing as cheap power. you may as well do it right the first time than have to do it to or three times cos it was chreaper!
Chris.
really though, hes is on par with the builders over here. also, its like everything, your paying for this guys expertise as well as what he does. take a look at someone like Nelson Racing engines. yeah their motors aren't cheap, but they make 1100bhp on pump, 1600bhp on race, will bolt straight in, never have to be messed with and last forever!!!
there is no such thing as cheap power. you may as well do it right the first time than have to do it to or three times cos it was chreaper!
Chris.
Jun 8, 2007, 06:17 AM
#38
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cleveland, Oh
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then we must be watching two different videos. I am not seeing a fast spooling turbo. stabbing the throttle at those rpms with 35r would result in boost response 4 times faster than that 42r. I have built enough 35r and 67r cars to know that. Obviously it is you who lack any real world experience.
We are not comparing a 42r to a 35r, my 6 year old nephew knows that a 35r will spool up much faster than a 42. You are beating a dead horse, but if that gets you off feel free to keep stabbing at your keyboard. The video simply points out that this turbo, A GT42R, is responsive when set-up properly and is obviously a package that is working quite well for Norris. Not to mention the fact that a 35r would be making a significant amount less horsepower at the same boost level, and would most likely result in much slower times.
Jun 8, 2007, 06:25 AM
#40
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Flemington, NJ
Posts: 2,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jerry,
We are not comparing a 42r to a 35r, my 6 year old nephew knows that a 35r will spool up much faster than a 42. You are beating a dead horse, but if that gets you off feel free to keep stabbing at your keyboard. The video simply points out that this turbo, A GT42R, is responsive when set-up properly and is obviously a package that is working quite well for Norris. Not to mention the fact that a 35r would be making a significant amount less horsepower at the same boost level, and would most likely result in much slower times.
We are not comparing a 42r to a 35r, my 6 year old nephew knows that a 35r will spool up much faster than a 42. You are beating a dead horse, but if that gets you off feel free to keep stabbing at your keyboard. The video simply points out that this turbo, A GT42R, is responsive when set-up properly and is obviously a package that is working quite well for Norris. Not to mention the fact that a 35r would be making a significant amount less horsepower at the same boost level, and would most likely result in much slower times.
from a HUGE turbo.............
Granted that we could argue all day long that maybe a 35r running 2.0 bar of boost might make similar power with a longer powerband..........
BUT..........we are all sitting at our computers speculating..........while YOU are out racing........
So do you know who gets the benefit of the doubt? You do!
Cheers to you guys.....
Jun 8, 2007, 07:44 AM
#41
Former Sponsor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just a note this car is a COUPE!!! yes thats right only 2 doors! it has been cut shorter and the track (both fornt and back) made wider! its NOT A DRAG CAR.
jp@shearerfab have you got any picks of the manifold?? thought Norris was running a cutom one?????
thanks Chris.
This one's for you. You can compare it to the pics of our off the self T4 unit on the website if you have any questions.
Jun 8, 2007, 07:56 AM
#43
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Flemington, NJ
Posts: 2,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was just saying that from what people have read and what they think they know, there will be arguements against anything and everything regarding "This turbo at this boost Vs. this turbo at this boost.........."
the point i was trying to make is that you guys are the one's out there racing and we are the one's sitting here speculating.....
so if anyone has the upper hand in this debate, it's you...............
Last edited by Rez90; Jun 8, 2007 at 08:00 AM.
Jun 8, 2007, 08:03 AM
#44
Former Sponsor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i wasnt' arguing at all.......... read the rest of my original post.........
I was just saying that from what people have read and what they think they know, there will be arguements against anything and everything regarding "This turbo at this boost Vs. this turbo at this boost.........."
the point i was trying to make is that you guys are the one's out there racing and we are the one's sitting here speculating.....
so if anyone has the upper hand in this debate, it's you...............
I was just saying that from what people have read and what they think they know, there will be arguements against anything and everything regarding "This turbo at this boost Vs. this turbo at this boost.........."
the point i was trying to make is that you guys are the one's out there racing and we are the one's sitting here speculating.....
so if anyone has the upper hand in this debate, it's you...............
