Case Study # 123 - Most Powerful Evo IX (so far) - 375 whp ! exhuast, intake & MBC!!
Originally Posted by Steiner
..... when will somebody test an IX turbo on an VIII?
I wish mitsu came out with the MIVeC 2 years earlier though - thats the root of the IX improvement.
Even though the mivEc system is more powerful and efficient, I wonder if there is a lower cap on it's HP capacity, like surpassing the performance of a stage 4 and beyound without radically changing the upgrade technology ($$$).
Last edited by C6C6CH3vo; Dec 9, 2005 at 06:56 AM. Reason: Edited as per Warrtalon
Thread Starter
Account Disabled
iTrader: (91)
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 16,850
Likes: 0
From: 2003 Evo VIII - Silver
Originally Posted by dafarmer69
al, aside from redoing all your tuning software for the 9, do you see any downfalls yet with the 9.. be it the mivec, or newer ecu software.. the 9's sound great, but there has to some downfall.. i know i always look at the downside of things..
Thread Starter
Account Disabled
iTrader: (91)
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 16,850
Likes: 0
From: 2003 Evo VIII - Silver
Originally Posted by gsnt
Its not. Its only giving some correction based on weather conditions. Its more suited for normally aspirated cars but it still gives some level playing field when comparing what a car does in one weather extreme compared to the other. Most of the time the SAE correction is only going to be 3-4% +- unless you are at very high alltitude or the weather conditions are very extreme. I just don't like the fact that people scroll thru the different types of corrections and find the highest one then post it. If it were 90 degrees during that run, and the STD correction factor was giving you 4% more HP, do you think that dyno sheet would have been posted as uncorrected?
If you pay attention over a period of time, most people who do this will post sheets in STD. during the summer, but will post uncorrected numbers all winter long. This car makes great power regardless, so I dont want the owner or Al as a tuner to think that I'm knocking it. Its pretty amazing compared to '03's with the same mods!
If you pay attention over a period of time, most people who do this will post sheets in STD. during the summer, but will post uncorrected numbers all winter long. This car makes great power regardless, so I dont want the owner or Al as a tuner to think that I'm knocking it. Its pretty amazing compared to '03's with the same mods!
I don't think you would appreciate me comming onto your vendor forum area and questioning your methods and approaches to what AMS does - not that I would do that.
As far as I am concerned you cant get more accurate than a uncorrected Dyno Jet dyno sheet - its about as basic and unmolested as you can get. 375 is what is it - maybe it would go down to 368 with SAE corrected - who cares? Its still a lot of power with minimal mods.
Evolved Member
iTrader: (20)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,941
Likes: 0
From: Danville/Blackhawk, California
Originally Posted by DynoFlash
I don't like the tone of your comments at all
I don't think you would appreciate me comming onto your vendor forum area and questioning your methods and approaches to what AMS does - not that I would do that.
As far as I am concerned you cant get more accurate than a uncorrected Dyno Jet dyno sheet - its about as basic and unmolested as you can get. 375 is what is it - maybe it would go down to 368 with SAE corrected - who cares? Its still a lot of power with minimal mods.
I don't think you would appreciate me comming onto your vendor forum area and questioning your methods and approaches to what AMS does - not that I would do that.
As far as I am concerned you cant get more accurate than a uncorrected Dyno Jet dyno sheet - its about as basic and unmolested as you can get. 375 is what is it - maybe it would go down to 368 with SAE corrected - who cares? Its still a lot of power with minimal mods.
But as it stands, it always seens that you always based your decision (STD, SAE, DIN, Uncorrected) on what is going to generate the largest number.
shiv
Originally Posted by DynoFlash
As far as I am concerned you cant get more accurate than a uncorrected Dyno Jet dyno sheet - its about as basic and unmolested as you can get. 375 is what is it - maybe it would go down to 368 with SAE corrected - who cares? Its still a lot of power with minimal mods.
Last edited by jj_008; Dec 9, 2005 at 10:51 AM.
Thread Starter
Account Disabled
iTrader: (91)
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 16,850
Likes: 0
From: 2003 Evo VIII - Silver
Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu
Please post up the corrected graphs. It is, quite literally, freezing where you are. Quite an extreme don't you think? Perhaps it would be a good idea to account for that when you post up results. Of if you don't like "molesting" numbers with corrections, don't do it ever.
But as it stands, it always seens that you always based your decision (STD, SAE, DIN, Uncorrected) on what is going to generate the largest number.
shiv
But as it stands, it always seens that you always based your decision (STD, SAE, DIN, Uncorrected) on what is going to generate the largest number.
shiv
The correction factor I am using is always posted clearly WITHIN the dyno sheet so everything is clear about the number claimed and the correction used - if any
Last edited by DynoFlash; Dec 9, 2005 at 11:17 AM.
Thread Starter
Account Disabled
iTrader: (91)
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 16,850
Likes: 0
From: 2003 Evo VIII - Silver
I just called pruven to get the figures off the dyno
Uncorrected power = 375.9 - TQ 381.9
SAE - 353.6 TQ 359.1
STD - 365.3 TQ 371.1
DIN - 367.9 TQ 373.7
EEC - 353.3 TQ 380.8
Dyno conditions - absolute bar pressure - 30.21 - IN.HG Vap press - 0.034 In.HG - Intake air temp - 65.8
SAE correction factor - .94
Note - the uncorrected figure is always how fast the car is acutally pulling the dyno wheels
Note - while it may be freezing outside - we work in a heated shop with hot engines running n the dyno - it is always warm inside - or at least warmer and in the summer its hotter
The corrected figures are just estimated figures
Either way you slice it regardless of which correction factor you use this car is making strong power.
Those who have drank too much haterade should spew toxic energy elsewhere
Uncorrected power = 375.9 - TQ 381.9
SAE - 353.6 TQ 359.1
STD - 365.3 TQ 371.1
DIN - 367.9 TQ 373.7
EEC - 353.3 TQ 380.8
Dyno conditions - absolute bar pressure - 30.21 - IN.HG Vap press - 0.034 In.HG - Intake air temp - 65.8
SAE correction factor - .94
Note - the uncorrected figure is always how fast the car is acutally pulling the dyno wheels
Note - while it may be freezing outside - we work in a heated shop with hot engines running n the dyno - it is always warm inside - or at least warmer and in the summer its hotter
The corrected figures are just estimated figures
Either way you slice it regardless of which correction factor you use this car is making strong power.
Those who have drank too much haterade should spew toxic energy elsewhere
Last edited by DynoFlash; Dec 9, 2005 at 11:19 AM.
Al etc... I hope there is some knowledge myself and other VIII owners can benefit from. MIVEC aside, I think we're all interested in hearing more about the variance in turbos from 05-06 and what we can do to capture some of the benefits in our own cars.
On the comments regarding AL merely posting the highest #s - I think that if this were his prerogative, he would be running cars a lot leaner (at least for dyno results) and as he stated earlier, he keeps air/fuel at a modest level. There are people that deserve to have their integrity questioned, I don't think Al nor Pruven is on that list.
Most importantly - refer to paragraph #1!
On the comments regarding AL merely posting the highest #s - I think that if this were his prerogative, he would be running cars a lot leaner (at least for dyno results) and as he stated earlier, he keeps air/fuel at a modest level. There are people that deserve to have their integrity questioned, I don't think Al nor Pruven is on that list.
Most importantly - refer to paragraph #1!
Evolved Member
iTrader: (20)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,941
Likes: 0
From: Danville/Blackhawk, California
Originally Posted by DynoFlash
375 is what is it - maybe it would go down to 368 with SAE corrected - who cares?
just called pruven to get the figures off the dyno
Uncorrected power = 375.9 - TQ 381.9
SAE - 353.6 TQ 359.1
Uncorrected power = 375.9 - TQ 381.9
SAE - 353.6 TQ 359.1
Originally Posted by DynoFlash
Shiv will all due respect - at least I do not attach the air temprature sesnors to the hot parts of the motor and manipulate the dyno conditions - lets not even go there my friend. I nearly fell off my chair reading YOU of all people posting this stuff on my forum. It was shocking when Mr. Scott Gladstone formerly presdient of SPARCO USA had to come onto the public forums to expose the fact that you had distorted the air temp reading on the XS dyno by placing the air temp sensor near the engine creating a ambient temprature of over 150 degress or so. i don't think you are in a position to question anyone else's dyno results after being exposed trying to pull a stunt like that one.
The correction factor I am using is always posted clearly WITHIN the dyno sheet so everything is clear about the number claimed and the correction used - if any
The correction factor I am using is always posted clearly WITHIN the dyno sheet so everything is clear about the number claimed and the correction used - if any
And if SAE/STD corrections are bogus, could you explain why you always posted corrected graphs in the summer? Because where it stands, it looks like you use whatever will give you the highest number and change your arguments accordingly. So what is the story?
Shiv
Last edited by shiv@vishnu; Dec 9, 2005 at 12:25 PM.
Evolving Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
You guys should just show your stuff on the racetrack, that's where it counts. People know you tuners are all competitive so the biggest difference you could make is in customer support and service. I have experienced with some of you and can honest say that if you are as competitive in service everyone would be better off.
