Erik@MIL.SPEC

iTrader: (94)

If that were true across the board, I would expect that a SMIM like the Magnus or Weapon-R would be counter productive on an EvoGreen set-up too. However, for example, Aby made pretty good gains with an EvoGreen and SMIM so I sit here and scratch my head....

I guess it is possible that adding the V2 IM reduced the restrictions in the engine to such a degree that the turbo just couldn't keep up...hence the boost drop. I have seen boost drop and power go up when a SMIM has been added to a car with a stock head. To me that means the engine is now more efficient. On the car in question, maybe too efficient for that Green turbo

Kracka

iTrader: (49)

I don't get why people are so butthurt over the fact a product lost power on ONE car. Every car is different and will react differently to each part. Just b/c one part is the best for a certain setup doesn't mean its the best for EVERY setup. The amount of leg-humping on this board is seriously getting just silly. I thank the OP for letting people know his personal findings and I respect TTP for weighing in with his thoughts on the matter.

TTP Engineering

iTrader: (465)

Someone that actually "gets" it.

SLVRNBLK

iTrader: (169)

SloRice I don't consider myself a "shop jumper". My sig clearly shows who I support. I've had TTP-E as my main tuner for several years, each session yielding good results. I'm a Buschur Racing supporter (always have been) with all my parts (with the exception of a few) being Buschur powered! I approached Mike at AWD because of his affiliation with Buschur and parts being readily available to central and south Florida. His shop offers service and installation so I found it beneficial to have them do the work. I could have easily dynoed there, but again, I'm loyal to my supporters and wanted to tune the car in the same environment and equipment as before for comparison reasons.

9sec9 No change in the position of the intake since previous tuning session 2 months ago. I run the stock Evo 8 cam gears which was highly recommended by Daniel when the build was conducted. The turbo feels fine to me. No noticeable difference since it was installed at Buschurs.

I appreciate everyone's feedback and support. My intension regardless of the outcome was to share the information with the community. As many knowledgeable folks as there are here, IM sure I can find an answer to the situation.

SloRice

iTrader: (8)

does the car feel faster or slower??

AWD Motorsports

iTrader: (211)

Possible but not likely as the Fp white shows gains on the v2 and that turbo doesnt flow anywhere near what the green does.. I am going to get with Ozzie and I am confident things will get sorted out here shortly..

mrdevo

iTrader: (4)

I read throught the pages and was going to also say that the car is more efficient and that the turbo can't keep up but I'm unsure if someone mentioned that the pulls could have been done in 3rd gear one day and 4th the other...that would account for the power/ faster spoolup and more torque at onset. Just throwing that out there.

TTP Engineering

iTrader: (465)

We do not practice 3rd gear tuning. Ozzie has contacted us and will be returning for more testing to include the removal of the Sparktech ignition system and reverting back to HKS DLi.

David Buschur

iTrader: (53)

My name is coming up in this thread more than I'd like to see it and I am trying to stay out of this.

There's been more than enough references at this point that I am not happy with.

First off, there are TWO Wilson Intake manifold distributors, myself and AWD Motorsports. The little jab about us coming in here to defend the product wasn't really needed.

The second problem I have is the claim that with no boost change there was a 60 whp gain over the tune in the car that I did. That I would love to see first hand.

Now that I've addressed those I will address the rest.

The V1 doesn't exist, there was one built and that is the only one. The V0 was not tested but in my opinion is going to perform very close or identical to our standard ported intake. The V3 that has been referenced in other threads is also a part that doesn't exist because when that design was tested it tested so well that the V2 was replaced by it.

So what is actually available is the V0 and the V2. That's it.

Unlike what happened here which was not a test at all, I do actual testing.
Testing of a part means you run the car on the dyno and then change a part and run it again. That is not what happened.

You cannot run a car 2 months apart and call it a test. That is simply two different dyno tunes with different combinations, not a test.

In this case, TTP your dyno numbers you were spitting out when you got the dyno were so far above what anyone else has done there was obviously something whacked about your dyno. Mine was the same way when I got it but mine was whacked the other way, too low. Now your numbers are coming around to being more realistic. Personally I feel that is part of the problem in the case of Ozzie's car.

The other problem is that I have tested more of these intakes than anyone else at this point. The dyno sheet you are posting is the exact opposite of how the intake manifold acts on every single car I have tested.

This leads me to believe something else is wrong or just that the dyno has changed or the conditions of the car/weather changed over the 2 month period.

I am NOT accusing you of anything shady. I don't think you have done anything wrong but I also don't think the testing is correct for one or more of the reasons above.

EVERY time I have run this intake on a car it has lost low end, EVERY time. You have very little to no losses down low. That is a huge flag to me. I also am positive that the losses up top could be possible but the 3.5 psi of boost the car lost up top is huge. I calculated that just from the max/min boost values and then figured it out from the lines on the graph. Looks like about 3.5 psi to me.

Something isn't right, the intake manifold could have very well had losses under 5500 rpm but there is no way it lost that much up top if the testing was done right. 3.5 psi less boost up top, OK it lost power but not from the intake......

In this thread I have gathered that you think I can't tune, Mike's dyno sucks and the Wilson intake sucks on anything with a turbo smaller than a 30r. The blame goes to everyone but the one doing some half assed comparison, has a dyno that reads higher than even a Dynojet and didn't do any testing on the same day.

I think you should step up to the plate and perform a proper test, a boost leak check and then find out why the dyno graph looks like a graph from an earthquake scale. Obviously the car is not running at it's best, the dyno sheet looks like hell.

compscibOi

iTrader: (19)

Oz (Aka: Mr Clean) don't get discouraged, you'll figure out the issue. I am sure it's something simple and look forward to what the cars gains are.

TTP Engineering

iTrader: (465)

I think you are quite a superb AEM tuner. That is all I'm really going to say about that subject. We have purposely avoided this engaging subject out of professional respect, however claims of maltuning were getting old so we used the fact as a reference. If you would like to contact us privately we would be glad to over the data with you.

We never intended on conducting a test, doing a comparison, writing a review... Hell this is not even our thread. We are not a dealer of the product.

Our dyno is factory calibrated 3 roller front AWD-500 EURO. Our dyno is an eddy brake load bearing dyno just like yours, except its a 2008 model with the latest software and display.

The dynosheet looks wavy because we display our dynosheets at a factory set 6% smoothing factor to show every intricate detail. We do not use the smoothing factor of 60% like your dyno is setup.

Using a 60% smoothing factor as you do, will washout much of intricate details of the run such as as little as 1* of timing pull, a spark misfire, blow off valve leak, etc. We CHOOSE not to change our Mustang Dyno to 10x the smoothing factor to hide the details of the run.

For $80,000.00 we WILL use this TOOL how it is able to be used. To monitor each little detail in engine performance.

It's interesting as a Mustang Dyno AWD-500 owner, you already know your smoothing factor (60%), yet try to make it look like there is something wrong with the tune because we use the (6%)= 1000% higher resolution smoothing filter.

Would you care to post some of your sheets set at 6% smoothing or would you like us to repost this before and after test at the 60% smoothing factor that you use on your dyno?

Let us know.

*edit... Nevermind...

I have an old sheet already hosted so as we did a comparison already to your dyno's smoothing factor after we tuned it once you did the engine back in July.

SLVRNBLK

iTrader: (169)

I just want to make one thing clear. This was never intended to be a test.
I simply added a new ignition set-up and the Wilson V2 manifold and re-tuned. Despite the results, I wanted to share them with the community since data for this particular set-up was not available. I appreciate all the support. IM confident
this matter will be rectified.

PeteyTurbo

iTrader: (9)

I can easily see the manifold causing a loss of power if the car was previously set up to get the most out of the green turbo..Adding the IM would change the VE of the engine causing the turbo rpm to spin faster and move it farther out of it's efficiency range..This would be exaggerated on a previously maxed out green..Just needs more snail imho..Surely it does not necessarily mean the manifold is a bad part..

2.3 Evo 8

iTrader: (6)

Sounds like you have some troubleshooting to do.

First, alot can change on a car in 2 months between two dyno sessions.


Second, I wouldn't be so quick to blame a kickass manifold as the issue just yet! Do some test and see what is going on.

When is the last time you did a boost leak test or checked compression?

Like others and TTP said, switch the ignition back to the HKS DLi, change the plugs back to 8's, leave the V2 on, and see if anything changes on the tune.

If nothing changes then pull the V2, install the original manifold back on the car, and compare the numbers to your tune in August when the setup was the same.

If everything is back to the original setup as it was in August and your dyno numbers have changed, your answer may be right in front of you.

Just my .02

Good luck.

SLVRNBLK

iTrader: (169)

Boost leak test was done by Cwill after the manifold was installed. I have not done a compression test since the build. I appreciate your input, thanks!