I don't think ANYBODY thinks he is making it up. Most people just know his results are not NORMAL and most cannot hope to even come close unless they have similar air quality.

Fact of the matter is that Ohio has STUPID DENSE air almost year round. Seriously almost every chart out of his shop is at ~60F and like 30.5"+ relative pressure with density altitudes BELOW SEA LEVEL. Look into what this has an effect on when you start pushing a turbo hard and it should be pretty self-explanatory why David sees such stellar results on any given turbo size.

It is nothing to hold against him either, just something everybody should keep in mind anytime you see a dyno chart from that area. Hell, the HKS GT7460 might make 550 WHP on his dyno for all we know... But David hasn’t tested it (or maybe he has and just hasn’t posted about it?) and yet he is commenting on it like he has tested it.

 

Whoops, nevermind then.

 

I didn't know I lived in the Land of Oz! Wow, it's incredible, here I had hoped that the 20+ years of doing this helped in some odd way, it's just that I live in Ohio. I am so disapointed in myself now that I know that. I'm not going to waste more time explaining the weather conditions on some of our quickest and fastest runs or how well the car ran in Colorado with no compression in the engine.....it's obviously going to be wasting my time.

I have not tested the HKS turbo, nor have I said ONE FREAKING WORD ABOUT IT. NOT a SINGLE word other than not seeing the gains that were posted in the other thread over a stock EVO turbo and it was posted as a question and not a statement.

Don't hate.

 

Mike you live in Florida and hold more dyno and track records than anyone else, how's the weather there?

I know the weather here can be favorable but it's not like I only post dyno sheets from the fall and winter. It's also not like we haven't run some of our best times in the hottest most humid conditions of the year. It's not like I haven't run fast in other states on other tracks, one in particular being Colorado on a totally FUBAR'd engine.

Dan's car is also one of the highest stock turbo'd EVO's we've had on the dyno. I didn't post 10 sheets like this one. I'd say a good stock turbo EVO, which also usually means mild cams and stock engine will make up to 380 on our dyno instead of 403.

A good old style Green will go up to around 420 and run 11.0's at around 128 mph, Eric Nixon for example. I also believe that was on pump gas.

 

Sorry 03white, you are getting more crap than probably needed on your observation. As I said, I know our weather here effects the power, to a point. I also run NO weather correction nor do I own a weather station. So in the spring/summer/fall or winter it is what it is here, what the dyno prints is what the car makes that day.

Last year the shootout had to be the most miserable day for heat and humidity I've seen at the track, it was flat out horrible. The car ran three back to back 9.1 at over 158 mph. I do not see a large loss in ET or MPH when we run in the heat.

 

I can say I have never seen a stock Evo ix turbo put out as much power as you guys seem to make (admittedly I haven't worked on/Owned an Evo as long as y'all). Couldn't you logically deduce that some of the other stock frame offerings make more power given your (AWD and BR) tuning ability. If you can get 430 out of a stock ix turbo then you should be able to get more out of the turbos smaller then the hta green and up.

It's not like those turbos (HKS. BBK full, etc) are vaporware.

 

On e85 we have seen as much as 460 on stock IX's with Regular good combination setups and near 490 on RACE Setups.. We do get more out of green, red and blacks.. Im not sure if maybe i missed the point..

 

There are a couple of those people on the forum that have the math behind them and the theory but it isn't always correct. We can get away with a little more timing up here and more boost. He also compared his numbers on 91 octane. I don't think those numbers should even be looked at, 380 on 91 octane at 3000+ feet with a stock turbo is really impressive. 93 to e85 normally adds 30+hp and 91 to 93 should be good for 20hp easily.

Someone will always want to know why it works and how it is possible but sometimes the real worlds throws off the theory and math, take SAE correction factors as an example.

 

Yeah, it isn't like say English Racing ever made 504 with a stock Evo IX turbo. They hold the "record" for most HP out of a stock turbo. Aaron is a bad *** tuner.

If you need a link, I will be more than happy to look it up so you can't say that you have never seen one...

 

smurfzilla, you are completely missing the points. Of course a green/red/white/black/bbk/hks turbo will all produce more power than a stock EVO8-9 turbo.

Also agree on 03white's car, on 91 octane 380 is stellar, he just likes to argue.

 

I'm not missing the point I'm asking a pointed question.

The way this thread read to me it was to show well the IX turbo performed. I do think it was kinda a rebuttal to some of the shennanigans going on in the other thread (That shall remain nameless, LOL).

I guess my point is no matter how good the EVO IX turbo is in the most capable hands (Yours, AWD, ER, etc) the questioning about the smaller then HTA green turbo's being worth it is (to me) irrelevant since I think in your hands it will make moire power (Take your brothers car, and put one of the smaller the HTA green turbos on it and he should make more power, right).

I don't have a ounce of the knowledge you guys posses I'm asking questions to get a better understanding. I def. don't have knowledge to question your ability or results (esp when they've been backed up time and time again).

IN any event I suppose when Mike gets his hands on one and either he or DIIRK get to work on it my questions well have been answered. What you and Mike do and results you come up with I always pay attention to because you guys do this for a living and I'd be stupid ot not pay attention to the information all you guys share.

Carry on guys. Sorry to get off on a tangent.

 

I misunderstood them smurfzilla. The thread that started this was about the new HKS turbo, I have ABSOLUTELY NO experience with it. I simply looked at the spool up that was being bragged about, the combination of parts on the car, the 35 psi of boost, the E85 and the power it was producing taking into consideration all of those things. Then there was a reference to Mustang Dyno numbers would have been like 420'ish. I thought to myself, "Man, that's a lot of boost, really good fuel, a ton of mods to make that much power and I don't see where it's spooling much faster, if any, than a stock EVO turbo." So I then made a polite statement saying I didn't really get the idea of the HKS turbo because I had seen abouut the same power on the stock turbo on pump gas at 28-30 psi and ask, "so what's the selling point?" Something like that is how it went.

I was then insulted so I left the thread, the insults continued for about 5 more pages and I ignored it. I figured for once I'd take the high road and just start a thread showing how well the stock turbo did actually do on pump gas at 28-29 psi of boost.

HKS builds good parts but they certainly have never built the highest power producing parts in any production situation, never. Everything they actually sell is geared at moderate power, moderate noise etc. This turbo is much the same, a moderate gain over stock and it's suppose to spool faster. Is the gain worth the cost? I don't believe it is and that was my point.

This "transient" response that everyone is talking about all sounds great on paper and yes a quick spooling car with good low/mid range is absolutely the most fun to drive, easiest to drive and in some rare cases the fastest in certain types of racing, limited situations though.

I will put a properly set up Red (which is laggy in comparison to the HKS or stock turbo) against the stock turbo or HKS any day of the week and in 99% of the situation the Red will come out on top.

My most recent example I like to use is this years shootout and many of you who read what I post have already read this, but...... The short version, this years shootout had a class with autocross and drag combined, 4 runs of each, lowest ET from both combined to determine winner. My RS was entered in the race tire class. My race tires were MT ET Streets, a DRAG tire. I placed 3rd in the autocross in my class and was 3rd quickest period. The two guys that beat me are the multi-National Champ Jarrod Hoops and Dave Sutton who beat Jarrod. This was in a car with a drag alignment, drag tires, a 2.1 and an HTA86. At NO time during the autocross did I wish I had more power or more response with the expection of one corner I had to drop to 1st gear in, also keep in mind that the top speed on this VERY tight course was maybe 50 mph.

Keep in mind also that I got my *** beat by those two guys BUT my car is certainly NOT set up to be a competitive autocross car. The point is the response in the car was not the reason I got an *** beating either, it was alignment and tires along with them both being TOP level autocrossers.

It's like Mike pointed out, gaining 200 rpm in spool up, hell even 500 rpm in spool up, is not going to beat a set up making 50 and more whp after 5500 rpm. If you are racing in a situation where you can't run the car over 5000 rpm, it's called PARKING not racing! haha

 

AGREED. HTA Green should be able to walk away from the HKS at almost any track.

 

Dave I understand your point now.

Makes sense.

Hopefully Mike can get some decent numbers with it. Hell I hope I can. I thought the same way about HKS so when I initially heard about the turbo I was assumed that it would be mediocre at best and not worth the money.

I had a BBK previous to this and the numbers looked as good or better then a BBK-Full so I decided to try it. I sold all the parts I was replacing and since i was already getting work done it made sense to pull the trigger now. It basically cost me nothing to get the HKS kit with cams, springs and manley retainers.