Notices
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results Discuss vendor and member dyno tuning techniques, results and graphs.

FP black and some E85

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 08:08 AM
  #61  
BenJ's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,259
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
Thanks for the comments everybody.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 09:58 AM
  #62  
James Reese's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by mudduck
just want to point out that I am seeing a trend of non-traditional boost/tq curves coming from these upgraded HD WGA's. Could be my imagination though.


IMO, it is due to running a "low" (relative) amount of boost compared to the strength of your WGA. Seems like you have to run a good bit more boost than your WGA is rated for to avoid this.


i.e. compare Green or Red torque curves with stock WGA vs with HD WGA...


I suspect that to get a nice initial torque spike (like a bolt-on stock turbo Evo), you need to run even higher boost levels when using these upgraded WGA's.


To the OP - have fun with your new setup

I agree as well. FP claims its a 25psi actuator. Robert told me personally it is a 22.5psi actu. This could explain a little as well. Either way we need to tac it shut. J/K

James
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 11:51 AM
  #63  
batty200's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,203
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by pfunk47
It seems as though you have never tuned an Evo before.
Show me some information anywhere that would support this observation. Because I disagree with the methods someone uses to tune doesnt have any bearing on what I have done and what I know. I have tuned many cars including EVOs with great sucess. What are your opinions on the subject? Because to me unless someone can speak inteligently about the subject they should keep their mouth shut. Reese can provide data supporting his ideas as well as Aaron. I am going to do some testing of thier theories as well and see what happens. I beleive I already know the answer but I will still give it a shot. If it ends up being that I was wrong I would admit that and have a better understanding. Anyone who just says people are wrong and there is no debate are usually the ones who have no idea and their thoughts dont stand up to scrutiny.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 12:01 PM
  #64  
GST Motorsports's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,366
Likes: 2
From: Hayward
Originally Posted by batty200
To tune a car with 3* timing at peak tq is crazy low. The timing should never be that low in my opinion. If timing needs to be that low you are severely octane limited and need to turn the boost down. Keep in mind that na cars run somewhere in the high 30's for timing. However if this is how you tune then good for you but I would never run a car that way.
3* at peak torque, at 29psi, on E85 seems very inline for a "lower tune" to me. You would be surprised where MBT is at on a stock 4G63, on E85, at peak torque, with that boost level.

- Bryan

Last edited by GST Motorsports; Nov 30, 2009 at 12:04 PM.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 04:51 PM
  #65  
SLVRNBLK's Avatar
Evolved Member
Veteran: ArmyFCOTM Winner
iTrader: (169)
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 51
From: Tampa, FL
Nice results! Can't wait till James tunes a "BLACK" on my car

Last edited by SLVRNBLK; Dec 1, 2009 at 07:19 AM.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 04:59 PM
  #66  
batty200's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,203
Likes: 5
Well this interested me enough that I went out and did some VDR pulls to see how this timing would affect the output of the engine. The mods on the car are:
BR cone filter
JDM MR BOV
HKS 2.5in Dp 3in catback exhaust
720cc ND injectors
Walboro 255HP modded
Greddy Profec Spec B
Tuned by me

Car ran a 12.400@112.7mph as it was sitting at 25psi peak and 3420 weight.

Tonight I got some interesting results. With my original tune I averaged 316hp/332tq dll hp in evoM comparator mode on an uphill rd.
On the same section of road with no other changes just pulling timing to 3* at 3000rpm and ramping to 10* at 7K the numbers changed to 301hp/305tq. That is a 5% power loss and 9% loss in tq with the lower timing #'s. Fuel used was 75% winter blend e85 with 25% 93 octane to aid in startup. So this timing was not even on full e85 which is higher octane and should be albe to take advantage of even more timing than I am running. Spike to 30psi and falling off to about 23psi on top. 2003 EVO8.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 06:20 PM
  #67  
BenJ's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,259
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
From your last post I gather that when you reduced your timing, you lost power correct? That is in line with what I have been saying so I am unsure as to your point on the matter unless it was to simply say that pulling timing will decrease power...which it did for me as well and purposfully so...
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 06:24 PM
  #68  
batty200's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,203
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by BenJ
From your last post I gather that when you reduced your timing, you lost power correct? That is in line with what I have been saying so I am unsure as to your point on the matter unless it was to simply say that pulling timing will decrease power...which it did for me as well and purposfully so...
Ben, you have never said anything I disagreed with however your tuner and a few others said that 3* at peak torque was as much as was needed and no benefits existed from running more timing and that it was stupid to do so. By reducing the timing to where other suggested was where it should be I not only lost 5% power but 9% tq. That was over 30lb/ft tq through the meat of powerband. If I was on a larger turbo that could keep up that would probably have been over 50whp at 7K rpm.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 06:33 PM
  #69  
Drifto's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 809
Likes: 2
From: Alabaster, AL
I'm pretty sure the OP said it made 520 with more timing and boost so I'm not sure what you are arguing about. Reese and the owner stated is was not an optimized tune, but a conservative one to keep things rolling until the new engine is installed. I believe you just proved this point. Less timing = more consevative power. Reese never said that 3* was optimal. He stated that that is what he used to detune the car until a better engine is inplace. Let it go man...
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 06:35 PM
  #70  
evoevo8's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
From: texas
nice number on the black man, i am trying to decide either to go with the fp black or red, do u know what is the different in rpm spool between the black and red?
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 07:35 PM
  #71  
BenJ's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,259
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
I never had a red on my car nor have I ever driven in an evo that had a red, but can you argue about hitting full boost at 3800rpm's...well maybe, but that is pretty good in my books for a turbo capable of over 600 on a md.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 07:43 PM
  #72  
localtoys73's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (24)
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 1
From: deltona
my red spools at 3800 to 4 k with stock cams on e85

so sounds about the same
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 07:53 PM
  #73  
High_PSI's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,152
Likes: 17
I really want to run a BLACK on pump gas. People do it with 35R's and I want to give it a try.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 08:12 PM
  #74  
BenJ's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,259
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
I'm sure that it will make great power. Once I put my built bottom end in I will be seeing 550 easily with this turbo on e85...I can't wait....but I also have a set of ohln's that are calling my name!
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2009 | 09:05 PM
  #75  
James Reese's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by batty200
Well this interested me enough that I went out and did some VDR pulls to see how this timing would affect the output of the engine. The mods on the car are:
BR cone filter
JDM MR BOV
HKS 2.5in Dp 3in catback exhaust
720cc ND injectors
Walboro 255HP modded
Greddy Profec Spec B
Tuned by me

Car ran a 12.400@112.7mph as it was sitting at 25psi peak and 3420 weight.

Tonight I got some interesting results. With my original tune I averaged 316hp/332tq dll hp in evoM comparator mode on an uphill rd.
On the same section of road with no other changes just pulling timing to 3* at 3000rpm and ramping to 10* at 7K the numbers changed to 301hp/305tq. That is a 5% power loss and 9% loss in tq with the lower timing #'s. Fuel used was 75% winter blend e85 with 25% 93 octane to aid in startup. So this timing was not even on full e85 which is higher octane and should be albe to take advantage of even more timing than I am running. Spike to 30psi and falling off to about 23psi on top. 2003 EVO8.
*wasting my time*

Last edited by James Reese; Nov 30, 2009 at 09:16 PM. Reason: spelling
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:02 AM.