evo ix 6266 gen2 849whp
Jan 26, 2016, 10:49 AM
#33
Congrats, that beast sounds great on the dyno! You have a 6266?? It is only rated to 800hp. http://www.precisionturbo.net/Street...-CEA%C2%AE/567
To make 50 More HP at only 45PSI on a 2.0L would be amazing on any dyno, regardless of cam size, Intake Manifold and RPM.. unless there was some nitrous involved
. What is the correction factor set to on the dyno.. sounds like the dyno is generous.
Good luck and enjoy it. Regardless it is a beast..
Ένα γρήγορο αυτοκίνητο ! I'm in for track results!
To make 50 More HP at only 45PSI on a 2.0L would be amazing on any dyno, regardless of cam size, Intake Manifold and RPM.. unless there was some nitrous involved
. What is the correction factor set to on the dyno.. sounds like the dyno is generous.Good luck and enjoy it. Regardless it is a beast..
Ένα γρήγορο αυτοκίνητο ! I'm in for track results!
Jan 26, 2016, 12:31 PM
#34
Evolved Member
Congrats, that beast sounds great on the dyno! You have a 6266?? It is only rated to 800hp. http://www.precisionturbo.net/Street...-CEA%C2%AE/567
To make 50 More HP at only 45PSI on a 2.0L would be amazing on any dyno, regardless of cam size, Intake Manifold and RPM.. unless there was some nitrous involved. What is the correction factor set to on the dyno.. sounds like the dyno is generous.
Good luck and enjoy it. Regardless it is a beast..
Ένα γρήγορο αυτοκίνητο ! I'm in for track results!
To make 50 More HP at only 45PSI on a 2.0L would be amazing on any dyno, regardless of cam size, Intake Manifold and RPM.. unless there was some nitrous involved
. What is the correction factor set to on the dyno.. sounds like the dyno is generous.Good luck and enjoy it. Regardless it is a beast..
Ένα γρήγορο αυτοκίνητο ! I'm in for track results!
As I have enough times said on such forums, the compressor maps and "HP rating" given by companies for their turbos are not to be taken precisely for what they are.
Nothing is "regardless" :
-Dyno setup is very relative.
-Inlet manifold is very relative.
-Camshaft choice is very relative.
-RPM limit is very relative.
-45psi on internal combustion engine is a pretty high amount of boost.
-Vp import is very relative.
No nitrous oxide is required to make 850 flywheel hp on a 6266.
To help you understand why all the above are relative ask yourself :
-How does a dyno work, and how can it be manipulated?
-What is boost on internal combustion engine?
-What is the relation between an inlet manifold /turbocharger/boost?
-What is bhp and what does RPM has to do with it?
-How do different camshaft characteristic affect an internal combustion engine's performance in relation to the turbocharger it is using?
-What is octane rating and how it affects performance?
-What is the positive impact of leaded-oxygenated fuel on performance, especially on small displacement compact engines?
Marios
Jan 27, 2016, 11:21 AM
#35
As I have enough times said on such forums, the compressor maps and "HP rating" given by companies for their turbos are not to be taken precisely for what they are.
Nothing is "regardless" :
-Dyno setup is very relative.
-Inlet manifold is very relative.
-Camshaft choice is very relative.
-RPM limit is very relative.
-45psi on internal combustion engine is a pretty high amount of boost.
-Vp import is very relative.
No nitrous oxide is required to make 850 flywheel hp on a 6266.
To help you understand why all the above are relative ask yourself :
-How does a dyno work, and how can it be manipulated?
-What is boost on internal combustion engine?
-What is the relation between an inlet manifold /turbocharger/boost?
-What is bhp and what does RPM has to do with it?
-How do different camshaft characteristic affect an internal combustion engine's performance in relation to the turbocharger it is using?
-What is octane rating and how it affects performance?
-What is the positive impact of leaded-oxygenated fuel on performance, especially on small displacement compact engines?
Marios
Nothing is "regardless" :
-Dyno setup is very relative.
-Inlet manifold is very relative.
-Camshaft choice is very relative.
-RPM limit is very relative.
-45psi on internal combustion engine is a pretty high amount of boost.
-Vp import is very relative.
No nitrous oxide is required to make 850 flywheel hp on a 6266.
To help you understand why all the above are relative ask yourself :
-How does a dyno work, and how can it be manipulated?
-What is boost on internal combustion engine?
-What is the relation between an inlet manifold /turbocharger/boost?
-What is bhp and what does RPM has to do with it?
-How do different camshaft characteristic affect an internal combustion engine's performance in relation to the turbocharger it is using?
-What is octane rating and how it affects performance?
-What is the positive impact of leaded-oxygenated fuel on performance, especially on small displacement compact engines?
Marios
Hey Marios, I was joking around.. All the hardware surrounding the turbo plays a big role. VP Import does do a nice job of helping extract more HP. The large 280/288 cams, F1, 4inch exhaust will give the graph a large shift to the right where it needs to be to make HP out of 2.0. I personally like this combo a lot.
Those are all nice, but the 2.0L airpump is limited to the turbo size.
What compression ratio? around 11+ to 1 ? Also only making peak power at 8K with those big old cams, Intake and exhaust seems a little low.
Unless this dyno reads closer to flywheel? And not like an unmanipulated US Mustang Dyno.
I like your questions a lot at the end.. I completely agree that Nitrous is not required to make 850 Flywheel HP, but to me this post is claiming 850WHP on a Mustang dyno.
The track will tell tale even at 3000Lbs this car should trap mid-high 160’s with that curve.
Jan 29, 2016, 10:34 AM
#36
Evolved Member
Hey Marios, I was joking around.. All the hardware surrounding the turbo plays a big role. VP Import does do a nice job of helping extract more HP. The large 280/288 cams, F1, 4inch exhaust will give the graph a large shift to the right where it needs to be to make HP out of 2.0. I personally like this combo a lot.
Those are all nice, but the 2.0L airpump is limited to the turbo size.
What compression ratio? around 11+ to 1 ? Also only making peak power at 8K with those big old cams, Intake and exhaust seems a little low.
-Every turbocharged setup makes power according to the turbocharger it is using.
-Camshafts are up to the job with the 6266. He could have gone with other camshafts, having a different powerband but like everything is a matter of personal preference. Apart from the cam choice do not forget that 50% of the job you will expect the cams you choose to do lies in their dialing.
-I have no idea whatsoever about how the setup was built and what compression it is running.
Unless this dyno reads closer to flywheel? And not like an unmanipulated US Mustang Dyno.
-As I presviously posted, the figures presented here are flywheel hp NOT wheel hp.
I like your questions a lot at the end.. I completely agree that Nitrous is not required to make 850 Flywheel HP, but to me this post is claiming 850WHP on a Mustang dyno.
-I am glad my questions arose your critical thinking. Finding the right answers to them in detail will give you a much better insight on engine building and tuning in general.
The track will tell tale even at 3000Lbs this car should trap mid-high 160’s with that curve.
Those are all nice, but the 2.0L airpump is limited to the turbo size.
What compression ratio? around 11+ to 1 ? Also only making peak power at 8K with those big old cams, Intake and exhaust seems a little low.
-Every turbocharged setup makes power according to the turbocharger it is using.
-Camshafts are up to the job with the 6266. He could have gone with other camshafts, having a different powerband but like everything is a matter of personal preference. Apart from the cam choice do not forget that 50% of the job you will expect the cams you choose to do lies in their dialing.
-I have no idea whatsoever about how the setup was built and what compression it is running.
Unless this dyno reads closer to flywheel? And not like an unmanipulated US Mustang Dyno.
-As I presviously posted, the figures presented here are flywheel hp NOT wheel hp.
I like your questions a lot at the end.. I completely agree that Nitrous is not required to make 850 Flywheel HP, but to me this post is claiming 850WHP on a Mustang dyno.
-I am glad my questions arose your critical thinking. Finding the right answers to them in detail will give you a much better insight on engine building and tuning in general.
The track will tell tale even at 3000Lbs this car should trap mid-high 160’s with that curve.
-Hopefully for those that are interested in them, the O/P will post some track results, as I agree what actually matters is the pragmatically applied result of a setup.
Marios
Jan 30, 2016, 06:07 AM
#37
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: preveza
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi guys. I make a big mistake! my car hit 53psi overboost and goes to 45 on the limit.
i buy a maktrak sequential gearbox and im ready for the drag day on 12 march
i buy a maktrak sequential gearbox and im ready for the drag day on 12 march
Mar 17, 2016, 11:09 PM
#41
Evolving Member
NEW video with maktrak sequential gearbox (5 speed) on the dyno enjoy!
evo 9 preveza test maktrak sequential gearbox - YouTube
evo 9 preveza test maktrak sequential gearbox - YouTube
holy **** that sounds and looks like a beast...
The following users liked this post:
Migsubishi (Apr 1, 2016)
The following users liked this post:
Shamsiel (Oct 9, 2019)
