388whp on OUR dyno
Nov 20, 2003, 09:37 AM
#31
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danville/Blackhawk, California
Posts: 4,941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of my good longtime friends is the manager of the aftermarket performance division of Garret/Honeywell. Formerly an engineer in another division of Garret Boosting Systems, I've been fortunate enough to work with him directly for these projects and for turbo selection. The Garret boys are coming up from LA again this weekend to test some of their new products on their test WRX, on our dyno, and with our EFI tuning.
Cheers,
shiv
Cheers,
shiv
Nov 20, 2003, 10:35 AM
#34
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MP5
You mean other than the huge dynograph on the first page?
You mean other than the huge dynograph on the first page?
Nov 20, 2003, 10:39 AM
#35
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danville/Blackhawk, California
Posts: 4,941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shoot me your email address and I'll send it to you. Pls realize that you are running a completely different kit than our Stage 2 and that it is very unlikely that the Stage 2 XEDE map will work well for you as it is. It will have to be custom tuned for your particular car. Fuel, boost, timing-- all will have to be changed.
Shiv
Shiv
Nov 23, 2003, 11:42 PM
#36
Evolving Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what i have seen, there won't be much of a loss in hp by switching to the .63 a/r turbine housing. Most customers will be happier with the better spool up. Also, on a dsm the. 264/272 set up is generally LAGGIER than the straight 264s. The bigger exhaust cam probably won't help spool up. Just out of curiousity, does anyone know the flow rating of the 3037? lbs/min or cfm?
Nov 24, 2003, 06:04 AM
#37
Originally posted by slowTsi
From what i have seen, there won't be much of a loss in hp by switching to the .63 a/r turbine housing. Most customers will be happier with the better spool up. Also, on a dsm the. 264/272 set up is generally LAGGIER than the straight 264s. The bigger exhaust cam probably won't help spool up. Just out of curiousity, does anyone know the flow rating of the 3037? lbs/min or cfm?
From what i have seen, there won't be much of a loss in hp by switching to the .63 a/r turbine housing. Most customers will be happier with the better spool up. Also, on a dsm the. 264/272 set up is generally LAGGIER than the straight 264s. The bigger exhaust cam probably won't help spool up. Just out of curiousity, does anyone know the flow rating of the 3037? lbs/min or cfm?
Automotosports test 264/264 vs 272 e/264I I dont know if you know of AMS but their results seem to be totally oppposite from your suggestion
Nov 24, 2003, 06:14 AM
#38
You can't really tell much about lag from a dyno run. Assuming that they hit the throttle at the same time in both runs, and that the turbo wasn't more spooled in one than the other, all that run tells you is that the engine with the 272 exhaust cam produced torque earlier. That could be from the cam profile being more efficient at those RPMs, or it could be from the turbo spooling up, or it could be one of the assumtions I made above being wrong.
You really need a boost plot and RPM plot to correlate to the dyno run.
You really need a boost plot and RPM plot to correlate to the dyno run.
Last edited by ShapeGSX; Nov 24, 2003 at 06:18 AM.
Nov 24, 2003, 09:04 AM
#39
There may be a difference in the two, but that is really splitting hairs. Would you even be able to tell a difference when driving two cars, one with each setup, back-to-back? I am not saying that you could or could not, but those two graphs could nearly be the same car withthe same cams with one run say an hour after the other. They are pretty close.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jeremy@matrix
Northwest Region
72
Feb 1, 2004 11:29 PM
