Ernald711's BBK Full Dyno
Jun 10, 2009, 03:01 PM
#1
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (26)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ernald711's BBK Full Dyno
BIG THANKS 
to Aaron at English Racing for hooking me up!!! I'm very satisfied with my numbers. Comments? 
Run Conditions
88.65F
22% Humidity
Numbers
378.50whp/341wtq @26psi on 92
Mods
BBK FULL (ported) turbo
PTE 1000cc injectors
GSC S1
K&N Cone Filter
Borla Exhaust Manifold
Megan 02 housing
3" Greddy TI
HKS 2.75 downpipe
Megan Test Pipe
NGK BPR7IEX
Walbro 255 FP
ETS 3" FMIC
ETS LICP
ARP ConRod bolts
ARP Head studs
MR DV
AEM 52mm Tru Boost EBC
Engine Bay shot
to Aaron at English Racing for hooking me up!!! I'm very satisfied with my numbers. Comments? Run Conditions
88.65F
22% Humidity
Numbers
378.50whp/341wtq @26psi on 92
Mods
BBK FULL (ported) turbo
PTE 1000cc injectors
GSC S1
K&N Cone Filter
Borla Exhaust Manifold
Megan 02 housing
3" Greddy TI
HKS 2.75 downpipe
Megan Test Pipe
NGK BPR7IEX
Walbro 255 FP
ETS 3" FMIC
ETS LICP
ARP ConRod bolts
ARP Head studs
MR DV
AEM 52mm Tru Boost EBC
Engine Bay shot
Last edited by ernald711; Jun 10, 2009 at 03:08 PM.
. Already have the injector
Jun 10, 2009, 05:15 PM
#3
I am kinda curious why your numbers are so different than Caesars when you both have damn near the same mods besides yours being an VIII? Good numbers none the less but I would have thought you would come close to 400whp. Does Lucas's new dyno read lower than Drift Office?
Jun 10, 2009, 09:17 PM
#5
Lou, happy to help as always 
Enjoy and I cant wait for round 3 
Our dynojet is the same as any other dynojet, thats the beauty of them. There are 2 main differences that might come into play in the power differences at the same boost level. I think Ceasar's numbers were uncorrected on a cooler day for one. #2 while I dont think MIVEC makes power, the fact that the IX has better intake ports than most VIII heads I have seen goes A LONG way. There seems to be alot of core shift in the VIII heads that really make the bowls horrible in comparison to the average IX head stock to stock. A port job fixes that pretty quickly.
Not sure if its another cause or not, but I am not entirely in love with that header either.
As far as the low end torque, any turbo can make MASSIVE low end if the timing is high enough. The downside is if the timing is high and the car gets heatsoaked it gets really inconsistent and knock happy. This is not preferable on a stock bottom end so the best strategy is to keep cylinder pressure low (in this expression, torque) and rely on peak horsepower to make the car fun. I think that Ceasar's car made 355 at the same boost level as I recall.
Enjoy and I cant wait for round 3 Our dynojet is the same as any other dynojet, thats the beauty of them. There are 2 main differences that might come into play in the power differences at the same boost level. I think Ceasar's numbers were uncorrected on a cooler day for one. #2 while I dont think MIVEC makes power, the fact that the IX has better intake ports than most VIII heads I have seen goes A LONG way. There seems to be alot of core shift in the VIII heads that really make the bowls horrible in comparison to the average IX head stock to stock. A port job fixes that pretty quickly.
Not sure if its another cause or not, but I am not entirely in love with that header either.
As far as the low end torque, any turbo can make MASSIVE low end if the timing is high enough. The downside is if the timing is high and the car gets heatsoaked it gets really inconsistent and knock happy. This is not preferable on a stock bottom end so the best strategy is to keep cylinder pressure low (in this expression, torque) and rely on peak horsepower to make the car fun. I think that Ceasar's car made 355 at the same boost level as I recall.
Last edited by JohnBradley; Jun 10, 2009 at 09:19 PM.
Jun 10, 2009, 09:23 PM
#6
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (26)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am kinda curious why your numbers are so different than Caesars when you both have damn near the same mods besides yours being an VIII? Good numbers none the less but I would have thought you would come close to 400whp. Does Lucas's new dyno read lower than Drift Office?
i was still happy though nonetheless. i'm sure they can hit 400whp for me when i get a better BOV.
Last edited by ernald711; Jun 10, 2009 at 09:25 PM.
Trending Topics
Jun 10, 2009, 11:55 PM
#13
There are 2 main differences that might come into play in the power differences at the same boost level. I think Ceasar's numbers were uncorrected on a cooler day for one. #2 while I dont think MIVEC makes power, the fact that the IX has better intake ports than most VIII heads I have seen goes A LONG way. There seems to be alot of core shift in the VIII heads that really make the bowls horrible in comparison to the average IX head stock to stock. A port job fixes that pretty quickly.
Jun 11, 2009, 08:13 AM
#14
I think S2 would more add some midrange and topend...I agree with Aaron on the bov. I have heard alot say they hold up to 25-27psi, after 35k miles of 25psi+ my stocker leaked pass 23-24psi. After not being able to fix a dip in my Ecuboost during peak spool I put a friends APS bov on and it fixed it. My torque went up and it spooled a couple hundred RPM sooner. My drivability even improved, no more bucking going up hill in 5th and 6th with the bov fluttering trying to build low boost. I haven't ran a DLL to see if it gained any power but it does feel stronger and my boost is now higher. Only problem is my A/F is off a tad.
