EVO9, E85, FP Black, 2 liter
Dec 23, 2010, 11:16 AM
#1
EVO9, E85, FP Black, 2 liter
This is a repeat car we've had in before but it was back for some new parts we just released.
The car is an EVO9.
BR Stage 3, 2 liter
BR Stage 3 head
Cosworth M2's
BR double pumper
ID2000's
BR upper/lower i/c pipe
BR Race FMIC
BR 3" turbo back
BR COP
Exedy Twin HD
FP Black
BR ported exhaust manifold/intake manifold
BR 65 mm throttle body
BR 02 housing
We installed our new 3/4 width radiator this trip along with removing the A/C (required for the radiator/air inlet kit) and installed our new air intake that turns the stock turbo into basically a forward facing set up.
Here's the 3/4 width radiator:
Here's the intake using the short ram section, this would be used in poor weather conditions:
Here's the full cold air/forward facing turbo inlet and filter:
Results were good as they were before. No gains from last time. The FF kits make the largest difference when they start packing air into the filter at high speeds.
579whp and 504 ft lbs were the final numbers.
Here's today's dyno sheet:
The car is an EVO9.
BR Stage 3, 2 liter
BR Stage 3 head
Cosworth M2's
BR double pumper
ID2000's
BR upper/lower i/c pipe
BR Race FMIC
BR 3" turbo back
BR COP
Exedy Twin HD
FP Black
BR ported exhaust manifold/intake manifold
BR 65 mm throttle body
BR 02 housing
We installed our new 3/4 width radiator this trip along with removing the A/C (required for the radiator/air inlet kit) and installed our new air intake that turns the stock turbo into basically a forward facing set up.
Here's the 3/4 width radiator:
Here's the intake using the short ram section, this would be used in poor weather conditions:
Here's the full cold air/forward facing turbo inlet and filter:
Results were good as they were before. No gains from last time. The FF kits make the largest difference when they start packing air into the filter at high speeds.
579whp and 504 ft lbs were the final numbers.
Here's today's dyno sheet:
Trending Topics
Dec 24, 2010, 08:58 AM
#11
Evolving Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: ohio
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but if a dynojet reads 13% higher then the mustang then it would be multiplied by 1.13 or 654.3 whp on a dynojet.
Everyone seems to do this differently so I'm just curious which is actually correct, does the dynojet read higher, or the mustang read lower (I know it sounds like the same thing but the formula is different)? I know it doesn't really matter because I don't even care about numbers more how the car runs and feels....just curiosity I guess. In any case awesome job Buschur and this is the setup I'mworking towards myself. Great power, congrats!!
Dec 24, 2010, 09:09 AM
#12
Evolving Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: overseas
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who cares what the numbers are on a DJ. As long as this car pulls hard I dont really see why everyone is so infatuated with numbers. Take it to the strip to get an idea if that is the case
Dec 24, 2010, 09:12 AM
#13
I personally have always looked at the Mustang reading lower because the Dynojet can't be adjusted to read any different than it does from the factory. I kind of look at Dynojet hp #s as the "measuring stick" for all other dynos. I usually just add a 100whp to any # that comes off of a mustang dyno, and should just about equal up to what the car would put down on a dynojet.
Dec 24, 2010, 09:16 AM
#14
Evolving Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: ohio
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah I hear you. I don't personally care, I was more or less just curious, since in one thread you'll have 3 different people jumping in all talking 13% and all saying different numbers. I could care less what number a sheet of paper says for my car, if it drives smooth and pulls hard a number doesn't mean anything. But, either way that is a ton of power on Buschur's dyno and the car must pull like crazy. Great job, and an awesome setup on the car!
