Just dynoed 449WHP on stock 2003 turbo :)
Nov 14, 2009, 08:14 PM
#1
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FAAAR FAAAR AWAAY :)
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just dynoed 449WHP on stock 2003 turbo :)
So after the drive we decided to go and have our cars dynoed. I was very surprised to see the numbers I got. Especially with stock 2003 turbo. Only explanation I see is that my cam gears are adjusted to +4 to give more power in the upper band + e85 of course.
Lucas said thats the second car after his own to show this kind of power on his dyno.
Thank you Lucas for great tune
See dyno pic-attached
What do you guys think? freak
?
Lucas said thats the second car after his own to show this kind of power on his dyno.
Thank you Lucas for great tune
See dyno pic-attached
What do you guys think? freak
?
Last edited by mikiblueeyes; Nov 19, 2009 at 05:34 PM.
Nov 14, 2009, 08:21 PM
#2
Evolving Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NorCal
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That dyno needs to be recalibrated.....badly.
That turbo is only rated to flow around 37lbs/min. Equivalent to around 350-370whp in excellent conditions. Even if you had a stroker kit this just isn't possible.
That turbo is only rated to flow around 37lbs/min. Equivalent to around 350-370whp in excellent conditions. Even if you had a stroker kit this just isn't possible.
Trending Topics
Nov 14, 2009, 08:47 PM
#9
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FAAAR FAAAR AWAAY :)
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well few other cars run 350/330 on pump, which is where tipical power is on pum gas and dynoject. So I dont see its being out of calibration.
Lucas can chime in on calibration subject.
Lucas can chime in on calibration subject.
Nov 14, 2009, 08:56 PM
#12
Evolving Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NorCal
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In what world does more displacement not make more power?
Nov 14, 2009, 09:03 PM
#13
Evolving Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NorCal
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You run was uncorrected, which factors in no more than around 30whp. Which puts you at most 420whp.
400whp is "possible" depending on how their dyno reads. The fact that your corrected numbers would still be over 400whp tells me their dyno wasn't calibrated correctly.
400whp is "possible" depending on how their dyno reads. The fact that your corrected numbers would still be over 400whp tells me their dyno wasn't calibrated correctly.
Nov 14, 2009, 09:07 PM
#14
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FAAAR FAAAR AWAAY :)
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesnt uncorected # gives you straighforward results, without correction?
Now if you get correction factor in, then there would be question about correction.
Now if you get correction factor in, then there would be question about correction.
You run was uncorrected, which factors in no more than around 30whp. Which puts you at most 420whp.
400whp is "possible" depending on how their dyno reads. The fact that your corrected numbers would still be over 400whp tells me their dyno wasn't calibrated correctly.
400whp is "possible" depending on how their dyno reads. The fact that your corrected numbers would still be over 400whp tells me their dyno wasn't calibrated correctly.
