Haha +1

 

No offense man, but why is it everyone from PR seems to leave out pertinant info such as mods whenever they make a post? First post has a mod list, then later you add a intercooler, then WG and EBC.... I am sorry but that is what leaves doubts in peoples minds when you guys bust out all these fast times and big HP numbers on "minimal mods".

Again, not trying to be a dick, but just be straightforward when you make a post like this.

SQ

 

"I run a 10.5 and all I did was change my oil.........oh yeah, and added a GT42R and all the supporting mods "

lol, just playin'.

 

WOW!!! That is really good information to have...

I had no idea that psi changes with elevation like that. So you would suggest going even higher at my elevation? If I visit my dad in San Diego, do I lower the boost controller then?

 

I am from PR and do not leave pertinant information when placing my posts. At least not on purpose!

Lets be objective on answering the threads and leave the fingerpointing on the side!

 

What the heck are you talking about?

I use stock hoses and have no "spikes" or "drops" because of it. Also have tuned tons of evos with the same and see no spikes or drops because of it.

Just ridiculous.

 

Amen, and there also seems to be quite a bit of people in here that don't know what is going on..

28psi on the stock turbo with 93 is completely possible, also with decent ignition timing. And I am not talking of a spike either, I can hold 28spi for about 1500-2000 rpm's starting at 3500.

And, if you want to see a data log by JDM MAP sensor, I can show you those as well.

28psi is definately doable on 93.

 

Well then, you are one of the very FEW capable of such feats. Ignition is not the issue, its PRE-ignition. Even if you showed us a datalog, who's to say that it was truly done with 93 anyways? People can debate the datalog regardless if you posted it. I probably could get my car to run 28psi on 93 but my timing would be in the negative numbers for sure.

 

Keep it at 1.6 at your elevation since you're on 91. Better safe than sorry. Go down to 1.4 Bar in San Diego since they're still on 91 Octane.


I ran into this a lot when I lived down there. When I was trying to line up races it seemed like everyone would understate their mods. I thought it was because they were trying to be sneaky in order to sucker me in or something, but then when I went car shopping (both for one of my DSM's plus a DSM and a 3KGT for some friends of mine) all of the owners forgot to mention quite a few of the mods that were done to each of the cars. I don't know what it's all about.

The most infamous one was this 91 Talon TSi that wanted to run me. He claimed he had a 16G but yet he wouldn't pop the hood. He went on that night to run an 11.3 with nobody in the other lane.

 

To answer your question, unless thats some really low mustang dyno, I actually think those numbers are anywhere from nominal to bad. But the reason is because you're sacrificing timing for inefficient boost at 28psi. I push it at 25.5ish with water injection at 12.3AFR and just barely eek out 350whp. I think you're killing yourself by running very high boost on 93. You could likely make the same on less boost. (although I have to say I find it hard to believe you make reliable 350whp w/o knock on 93 alone on a stock turbo... because even mine acts up every now and then)

 

No, I do not believe so. I would be hard pressed to believe that you *can't* get your car to run 28psi on 93, and at a Minimum, have at *least* 1 degree of timing, probably in the 3-4 range. But, your tune will need to be dead spot on.

I used to live in NY, and had my car tuned this way up there too, so being that I live in SC now, I know the gas differences. I haven't found any appreciable difference. (But, my switch from the run of the mill gas stations to Shell V-Power was a noteable change, on the other hand.)

If I showed you a data log of 28psi on 93 you should take my word for it there was 93 in it. Reason being is if you look at my posting on here, I do not have integrity issues. Saying that you qestion someone's integrity is not cool. There are a few people on here with whom I wouldn't question things like that. I would like to think I am one of them, but who knows what others think.

If you wanted to, you are a smart enough chap to get your to work that way if you wanted to, but in all the data logging I have done with mine, trying and testing the boost vs. timing, I have found my car is the same with 25-26psi and 5-6* at peak torque than 28-29psi with 2-3 degrees. So, rather than string my turbo out, I would rather do 25-25psi than 28-29. Plus by 28-29 your blowing a lot of hot air, and thus your timing will have to be dead on.

 

If Looks Good.. safe too

 

joedr, sorry to offend. I could have used better wording on my part.

I ran 28psi spike with 4deg timing, at peak tq. Boost tapered down to redline and timing ramped up to 18degrees at redline. All on 93 pump. This particular tune was very close to knock and about as aggressive as I could make it with timing/boost. In hindsight, I believe that a spike of 25 holding for around 2k rpms then a nice taper to 21/22 at redline would have been better.

SQ

 

I was not traying to omitte any information about what the engine has, that was not my intention. It's that I thougt that the numbers where not good. I will post today the dyno chart so you guys can see that the boost its true and the power curve looks great. At one pass at the dyno hit 30psi of boost on pump gas 93oct. Torque made 350.
I tried to look up for more horsepower but no luck. I will post the chart today.

 

Lower the boost and add more timing, if done right you can make more power than that. Now if you were running alky or race gas @ that boost level different story.

Raising the boost doesnt mean more power. Post up a log man, or pm me maybe I can help.