i cant believe some of you tried to compare a bbk full to a fp black for spool lol.. thats like saying a gt35r spools the same as a 16g come on!

something a dyno doesnt show and that is transient response.. and the bbk full has LOADS of it since its like a fp green hta.

 

Nice results Tom. Im hoping to join the BBK fan club this winter.

Definitely interested in more info on the MBC vs ecuboost debate. As stated earlier, would you and Roadspike mind posting some data in the ECUFlash section? Im assuming he's waiting to verify his findings. But its the first Ive read of the issue. And Im pretty much ready to put my 3 port in and start tuning, so I guess I'll get a chance to see for myself.

 

Yeah, thats absurd... they aren't even remotely close. Also for pump gas on a stock bottom end the BBK car will have a LOT more area under the curve.

 

go with your instincts.. whatever you feel is better. my vac lines on my personal car run to my mbc thats all im going to say about that. (but i have a built engine)

for a stock block the ecu boost is great, you can maintain the tq curve downlow and ramp the hp uptop without having to spike high boost early to get that peak hp.

so it all depends what you're after.

 

Interested in seeing the results from e85

 

all depends on the amount of control you want

Tom, now im just poking at you

Cheers

cb

 

i agree with you.

i prefer the 3 port on stock blocks when the customer wants to really keep torque down and make high hp. doesn't get any more controlled then a 3 port from what ive seen so far.

 

not sure thats going to happen.. in all honesty i could give this car over 500wtq on e85. i dont think thats healthy and something the owner wants to do with his car though. I can keep the torque low and make the HP high, but even past a certain HP level it gets unreliable also.. honestly i think hes more then pleased on his 93oct numbers so far, but if we do put in e85 dont expect me to make wild amounts more torque, because im not going to.. Chuck stressed to me he didnt want anything to happen and keep the tune on the safe side, so ultimately we are gonna set it right around 380wtq and leave it be.

For an accurate E85 number on this car in kill mode though it would be somewhere around 500hp/tq (the tq would be a quick spike and quick taper).. that's just based off what ive done to the current tune right now and the data in the tuning in general that i have here.. that is really pushing the turbo tho.. those numbers im confident could be achieved with 34psi~.

 

i was wondering what you guys were going to use as far as injectors. i also have the full with 1000cc injectors and was contemplating e85, but i think i'm going to wait for a while and get a few things worked out first.

 

for e85 i would recommend 1450cc fic bluemax. its a good mid range injector and leaves you with power available for future modifications. PM me for good pricing on them

 

Very impressive.......

 

Let's see if I'm following this correctly:

1) You're saying that ECU boost with tephra V7 cannot build boost as fast as an MBC?

2) You're saying that for a given rpm and a given boost level, tq/whp will be less with tephra V7 ECU boost than an MBC?

3) Obervations were made with a tephra V7 ROM and have not tried with a non-tephra ROM?

 

on my car yes. i lost a large amount of low end tq that i could not get back no matter what i set the wgdc to and WGDC=100% under this Load. i just couldnt make up for a certain area which caused me to lose torque in a certain area.

I just did another car last night with a HKS7460 and for the hell of it i decided to overlay his boost curve with my customers with the hallman and surprisingly i was able to get it to spool as quick on ecu boost as the hallman was spooling it, but right after spool there is that blackout area where the ecu boost cant seem to ever follow the curve the mbc makes.

ill show a little example below, and ill work on it more tonight and see if i can clone the mbc curve. If i can clone the curve ill post the data here.

orange line: hallman
red line: grimmspeed



usually at the arch circled is right where the mbc can grab some more boost where the ecu boost flattens out and cant get that additional boost. that additional boost will create some more tq since its occuring right after peak boost occurs.

ill test more tonight with this car and see if i can clone that mbc curve 100% and post back.

dont mind the hp/tq data in this graph, its 2 completely different evo 9s., one in nj, one in canada. one has hks cams, one has cosworth m2.

but you see i got the spool to match on them both initially, so it really depends on the setup.

for my personal car i was able to match the hallmans spool up until a certain psi target, then i lost area under the curve that i was unable to get back after 10-15 pulls attempting to, which i thought was unacceptable so i put the mbc back on and i gained that area under the curve back.

from my experience the ecu boost hits smooth, where as the mbc will have a hard hit/punch feeling to it downlow. i want as much torque, punch, etc i can get downlow.. i have a built engine im not trying to hold any torque/hp back.

 

I'm confused on why you can't match the boost level? Are you saying there is a ceiling you are hitting with ECU Boost?

I also don't understand why you continue to show two different boost plots with the MBC always having the higher peak boost level and then state the MBC makes more power then the Ecu Boost. Of course it does if it's running higher boost.

Also, on the same car, same parts, 1:1 match of boost should be the exact same amount of airflow, no matter what boost control you are using. So if you are seeing differences in power from the same exact boost level 1:1, I would contribute it to dyno/pull/temp variance.

It seems silly to me to compare two different cars with different parts and different peak boost level (see my first question above) on different days, different start RPM, with a software dyno where it's much less of a controlled environment

 

There is no ceiling, but let me just use my personal car for reference since the HKS one is not exactly the right way to do it.. The only reason i posted the HKS one was to show the 3 port could run the same boost line as the mbc within a certain boost level target.

----------------------------------

Mods:

BR 2.3L Stroker - Manley/JE
BR stage III head
BR Double Pumper
FP Black HTA82 (Ported)
ARP L19 Headstuds
FIC Bluemax 2150cc
MAP Rev3 Intake Manifold
MAP Ported exhaust manifold
MIL.SPEC 65mm TB
FP 80mm intake + Perrin filter
Forge Type RS BOV
Upper / Lower Muse ICP
Buschur Race FMIC
Cobb 3” TBE
Invidia o2 housing
Kelford 272/272

plus much more.

so you get the idea of my personal evo. Its pretty modified and its a good car to test with. Its mostly always burning E85 also.

--------------------------------

From my personal experience on my car, the minute I switched over the hallman for the 3 port i felt a loss in response downlow.. like I said it smoothed the torque transition out vs the mbc was more aggressive of a pull downlow. It went from throwing you back in the seat type sensation to smoothly putting you back in the seat.. so it smoothed the curve out. the torque curve remained the same until i started to raise the ecu boost.. then it suffered and ended up being 500rpm or so laggier where peak tq occurs during high boost conditions (37psi+). less boost it followed the same lower half peak tq curve as the mbc for the most part. (30psi)

No matter what I did I could not get that same feeling out of the 3 port, and i know every trick there is to the 3 port to spike the wgdc early and all that stuff. After attempting spikes, more wgdc at 100, less wgdc at 100, and whatever else i tested in between 10-15 rom edits i could not get the car to respond the same downlow. at the same time all of this had the same AFR, so it wasnt tune related as far as the spoolup speed went. so yes being the same afr would back you up saying its the same airflow for the most part, but the two are quite different......

so different that i reconnected the lines back to my mbc and have the 3 port just bolted in my car sitting there now. after i took the car out on the mbc i got all my response downlow back and when i ran the same 42psi on my car that i was running with the 3 port, i was spinning 1st very hard and spinning 2nd a bit if i shifted quick enough into it. the car felt like i gained an additional 60whp+ or more easily. it had to be around 650-660 with the mbc in a hot 80f day.

car is equip with megan street coilovers with less then 2k miles on them, energy suspension bushings with less then 2k, whiteline front roll kit, less then 2k. 255/35/18 bridgestone potenza RE11, less then 1k.

so the car has a very good suspension for the most part, and with ecu boost i was unable to grab enough torque downlow to do anything to hurt traction, where as mbc it was an entirely different situation.

when i ran 94% wgdc at redline i was able to hold 38psi which lost power, which is over the choke line of the turbo..

after i lowered it down to around 80% i was able to produce about 635whp in a 90F day with extremely high humidity since a thunderstorm was hours away.

I believe that if i use the hallman taper boost curve for a reference and match the 3 port it will have the same HP that is no doubt.. my discrepancy is low end where peak tq area occurs

i know i posted more mumbo jumbo that was necessary to answer your question, but im just trying to cover all my bases and let you get a visual of what i experienced in my car and knowing all the details regarding the test vehicle and conditions.

there's not much more i can really say.. it is what it is.