jid2

iTrader: (62)

Sorry to get you guys all worked up. I said that in jest, it wasn't serious, thus the little faces. You guys do great work and I was just looking for a discussion not an argument. Carry on!

I'll go back to trying to make my car drivable at the track with a BOV other than the stock plastic one Yes my build struggles - at least I'm not the only one who noticed, I wanted to throw rocks at my car, or myself yesterday

Mitchubishievo

iTrader: (310)

Finally, a thread where we can all get along .

Back on topic, it's awesome to see what you guys are doing Indy .

Indy Evo

iTrader: (41)

It's water over the dam. Good luck on getting things sorted out.

berns

iTrader: (12)

I haven't gone through all 18 pages, but I'm sure nobody brought this up, and I doubt you'd try it, but it's worth a shot.

Could you throw the stock airbox back on and get the boost back to your peak of 26.3 and make a few runs? I'm really curious to see what just the filter is doing for you in terms of times etc...
I'm 99% performance oriented, but I can't stand the added noise/woosh of an intake with the stock turbo, so I'm keeping my airbox, unless of course there's a huge difference in times etc.
I've seen the dyno comparisons, but those aren't the numbers I care about.

Thanks, and good luck with the build -- looking great.

Fast_Freddie

iTrader: (50)

Keep up the great work guys... very interesting thread thus far... I think the E85 switch will get you where you want to be with the least amount of pain... and much cheaper than race gas!

Randog

iTrader: (3)

Just insance keep it up guys. you inspire broke guys who can afford all those mods.

Indy Evo

iTrader: (41)

It's killing me not running this week. Matt Hines, from Vance and Hines Motorsports made 11 passes Tuesday night . He said he could have made 15+ easy if he was not making tuning changes. It would have been a good night for us to make adjustments with around 20 cars there.

This Saturday Fathouse will be installing the Quarter Master clutch, and after breaking it in we plan to get out at least once next week if the weather holds.

I'm trying to get all the i's dotted and t's crossed for 9sec9 to pick up his car next weekend. I'm pretty pumped to get back to building parts for the A car of our team and see Tony get back behind the wheel as I'm sure both he and Tom are.

Thanks, Indy

9sec9

iTrader: (2)

jid2, no harm, no foul, no sweat. thanks for the post and the comments. It's nice to know that not every person posts with an axe to grind. You're comments are always welcome here.

berniEvo, the reason we changed Indy's filter and box was due to the baro drop during pulls. His baro reading was dropping as much as 5 points, from 98-93 and IIRC even 5.5 at times. That was with the stock air box and KN filter. The new Perrin drops from 98 - 94.5 at worst. This is part of the reason for staying with the filter. Bigger numbers just require more air, which means more fuel, which means more butt pucker.

Indy Evo

iTrader: (41)

I was in the same boat, I did not want to remove the stock airbox...that was untill 9sec9 told me I had a cement head and read the data . After that it came out...we tried a Vibrant then the Perrin which is still on the car and never leaving. I'm sure the car could have run around a 12.50 with the stock box on Shell 93 if we really leaned on it, but with the info 9sec9 showed me we thought it best to move forward. I ran the OEM paper filter for the first 12 passes on the car, tried the K&N logging and did not see a change although I never took it down track. 9sec9's numbers confirmed this was the cork and we moved on.

We have a few directions we can take, but right now to throw in a couple of gallons of race gas was the quickest and most cost effective way to get there for the average guy who may only go to the track a couple times a year. After we hit our goal we have plans to go back to Shell 93 with a few other parts or as 9sec9 says explore other options to run 11.50 which include E85.

Thanks, it's the road less traveled, but with the economy what it is who can justify a 10-20k build.

Fast_Freddie

iTrader: (50)

[QUOTE=Indy Evo;7160251]
We have a few directions we can take, but right now to throw in a couple of gallons of race gas was the quickest and most cost effective way to get there for the average guy who may only go to the track a couple times a year. After we hit our goal we have plans to go back to Shell 93 with a few other parts or as 9sec9 says explore other options to run 11.50 which include E85.
[QUOTE]

Noted for truth... I wish i had E85 or race gas within an hour of me and I would definitely make a race gas tune... maybe I will go pick some up this weekend

Indy Evo

iTrader: (41)

[QUOTE=Fast_Freddie;7160399][QUOTE=Indy Evo;7160251]
We have a few directions we can take, but right now to throw in a couple of gallons of race gas was the quickest and most cost effective way to get there for the average guy who may only go to the track a couple times a year. After we hit our goal we have plans to go back to Shell 93 with a few other parts or as 9sec9 says explore other options to run 11.50 which include E85.
Indiana = lots of corn, but only two stations that have E85 near by... go figure
We started on Shell 93 and made 8 passes, then added 1 gal of Sunoco 98 for knock protection 94.36 oct, bumped it to 1.5 gal for 95 oct, on the 12.015 pass I believe it was between 96.5-97, then on the last four passes we ran straight 98 after running out of 93 in front of my friends Indy Lights shop where I get the Sunoco. After finding out 100 oct pump gas is available we could have run that, but the Sunoco was free and I could not pass that up .

9sec9

iTrader: (2)

I thought I would share the reason that I've been optomistic about our recent runs and why the slightest changes are important. The following image shows idential ET runs, the one on the left is from 5/12 the one on the right is from 6/05. Both were 12.02 with the early run at 113.35, the latter was actually at 112.52. The winds were 0 and no direction on the left (early run). On the latter run, the winds were out of the WNW at 1-5 mph (into the front of the car). The early run was made at 63.9 F, the latter run was at 76.6 F. Humidity was 18 early, 15 latter. Barometric early was 29.42 (better), latter was 29.24. I've given all of this to show how easy it is to actually be improving in performance, but due to atmospheric conditions, it won't show on the time slip. Pay attention to those details and take away what you can from each time at the track. The early run was very similar tune as the latter run, with exception of some Mivec changes and timing. Boost was still targeted at 26.5 psi.

You can also see that the early run 'corrected' to an 11.91 whereas the latter run corrects to an 11.82. Yes, these corrctions are identical to the corrections on dyno charts. As a matter of fact, this is why correction is necessary to accurately compare one dyno pull to another. I've seen dyno pulls advertising huge numbers that were actually made at nearly 600' BELOW sealevel, while others were made at 5000' ABOVE sealevel. NO WAY to compare them, even from similar dynos, without an accurate correction factor using weather conditions. Sorry for the poor image, but the alt-printscreen didn't get a very good shot.

Notice that the early run shows that Indy did a better job of driving, traction, and creating the 'used' horsepower, than the second run. 97.2% effective hp vs 94.98

wreckleford

iTrader: (2)

What is the program you are using here?

Indy Evo

iTrader: (41)

Sorry Tom, next time I'll try harder .

http://www.sccoa.com/faq/dragetcalculator.html


I just got back a little while ago from checking on 9sec9's car, here is a sneak peek of what's happening behind the scenes.

Erik@MIL.SPEC

iTrader: (94)

Indy, you have mail

Snail mail that is. Should be there soon