mrfred

iTrader: (50)

Logs sent, but since its Aaron's tune, I took out load and timing values.

Also, I updated the plot in the first post for the correct total vehicle weight.

tscompusa

iTrader: (31)

NP i don't need to see that stuff anyways. I will post overlay soon with the same VD stuff you used. Also check your email

tscompusa

iTrader: (31)

OK this sucks. I cant find the one i wanted to overlay specifically. I have logs going back from even 2010 on old setups yet i cant find this damn log from 2014. O well. I do have the VD screen shot of it from before. I'll have to make fresh logs later with a slightly altered new setup.

But here's what i could overlay for now:



This overlay sucks because i started the pull so late.

Here is the other one where the log file has gone missing. I cant find it. (This is what I really wanted to overlay but since I cant find it i cant. I could Photoshop it over but that is pointless.

It should be noted that was with the rusty tank, so afr are nuts. Car definitely didn't feel as torquey after I fixed the gas tank and afr's went super rich. high 10's.

Here it is though:



Ok now for comparison purposes.

My car is a 2.4L 9.8:1 comp 28lb billet crank / non mivec
ported head / stock size valves
ported intake mani /w 70mm inlet
s3 cams
6466 turbo in .82 AR vband single scroll Forward facing
Tial MVR 44mm wg /w dump (non recirc)
Just a regular hallman pro mbc
Carbon fiber shaft i believe 27lb
4.11 final drive trans


I think the trans makes this comparison really retarded, but its still cool to share 2 completely different cars against one another that produce similar power numbers on low boost.

I wish i could overlay that one where i loaded it up but i cant find the log. But it seems like the 8374 does a pretty good job in general.

but ya like i said apples to oranges.

The 8374 spools faster im not sure how it compares to a 6466 airflow wise. but its gotta be smaller.

8374 got a much faster spool to it though. just look at 4500RPM i got 25psi only, while it has 32psi.

tscompusa

iTrader: (31)

also while im here let me teach you something about VD. You dont want to show those results both at smoothing 1 and here is why:



Using smoothing 0 you can see there is a spike, which inflates. so you must clean that spike up.

Smoothing 2 cleans both these runs up. but if you really want to get technical compare 6 to the lowest smoothing it cleans up at. that is your true number (lowest smoothing) as long as its within a 10HP difference for example.

Most the time the car will make more on the real dyno if the roads nice and flat so even if vd reads lower who cares.

Blue line is 'inflated' with the spike.

at smoothing 2 it semi cleans up. at smoothing 1 it does not clean up. at smoothing 3 its entirely smoothed out.

JohnBradley

iTrader: (30)

Roll racing (1500 ft +) you want richer since the EGT has more opportunity to stablise. Running an 11.2-11.5 while it may kill power will save the motor in the long run.

The 8374 is definitely smaller than a 6466 and the 1.05 TS housing is too small for this turbo. If BW ever gets it to production, the 1.45 will cure alot of the issues with dropping power up top. Based on what I have seen with other TS setups I bet it wont lose much spool either.

cerealkeller

Sweet build, do you have a tune for 93 oct? I'm curious how it performs. I ask because I'm planning my build very close to what you have except ill be limited to 93 oct pump gas