3240

"Cut and run?" OK George Bush!

Who cut and run? I owned this car for three years and it was running consistently in the high 10's at only 30psi with the twin charge system. It had the low end "grunt" of a muscle car.

The biggest challenge that we faced during this project was the fact that I lived in Denver and the gentlemen who designed and built the car lived in Philly. Once we started pushing past 700+AWHP we ran into problems related to tuning. The guy who built this car was a brilliant engineer but he had very little experience tuning DMS vehicles for extremely high HP.

The last time it was on a dyno we were attempting to tune to 40 psi and threw a rod bearing. This was my third engine failure! I decided to send the car to AMS for a new destroked 2.1L engine and they were going to complete the tuning. Unfortunately the car was so complex that AMS was not comfortable working on it and they talked me into bailing on the twin charged system and going with a 2.1L, GT42r with nitrous. We began this project but I just couldn't get excited about it as it seems that everyone and their brother has a GT42r powered Evo. I let AMS know that I wasn't enthusiatic about the project and they offered me a very fair price for the car.

If the guy who built the car lived in Denver I'd still have it but unfortuantely this is not the case. The car was complex and needed someone around who could maintain it and continue its development. The distance between Philly and Denver made this impossible.

The twin charged Evo was a succesful and, more importantly, fun project. I've been modifiying cars for a long time and this was one of my favorites. It did exactly what we expected, my only disspointment being that we weren't able to push it beyond 700awhp without engine failure.

This board has been great and the support that I received from members for this project made the twin charging adventure even more fun. There are those like High PSI that just don't get it. "Use a big turbo with nitrous, it's much simplier." Yeah, no s h i t Sherlock! The entire intent of this project was to do something different, something that no one has really tried before. Yes, twin charging has been attempted, but not to this level.

I'm a car nut and enjoy working on projects that are different. If I only wanted a really fast car it would not have been an Evo. Making an Evo, Corvette, Mustang, etc., go fast is easy. Doing something that hasn't been attempted before is the fun part IMO. I've been blessed in life and I do well allowing me to spend money on something that I enjoy, modifying cars. The comments about wasting money crack me up as anyone knows that modifying cars, whether you spend $1k or $100k, is a waste of money. H e l l, cars in general are a horrible investment.

I miss the twin charged Evo and really regret selling it. However, I just got back my 700 HP Cayenne Turbo from Evolution Motorsports. You can see videos of it running a stock Cayenne Turbo on www.evoms.com This beast is fast! Evoms is currently building me custom rods, pistons, and twin GT35r turbo's that will be installed early this spring. We're hoping to push 900 HP and run in the High 10's or low 11's. For people like High PSI let me point out the obvious: A 6000 LB Cayenne Turbo is not an ideal drag racing platform. But it sure is fun to try! I know that those who "get it" understand were I'm coming from.

I'd like to have an Evo again sometime soon and AMS is dying to build a twin turbo set up!

meanmud

iTrader: (74)

What a shame; Your Philly-boy Bert has been in Colorado for the last few months doing work for Kleeman I fear that he will eventually take up residence there

3240

I know. Murphy's law; he started coming out here about 6 months after I sold the car.

meanmud

iTrader: (74)

Maybe we'll see you around here when they introduce the Evo X

High_PSI

iTrader: (50)

Wow high Ten's huh, amazing especially for a 42R. People amazing have hit 11.5's on stock turbos. Low end grunt of a Muscle car? Have you ever ridden in a 454 Camaro sir? I don't care what you do to a 4-Banger it'll never have the low end "Grunt" of a Muscle Car.

Once we started pushing past 700+AWHP we ran into problems related to tuning.

Unfortunately the car was so complex that AMS was not comfortable working on it and they talked me into bailing on the twin charged system and going with a 2.1L,

The car was complex and needed someone around who could maintain it and continue its development.

And then you cut and run, great project, but from your own admission you simply could not get it to work. The entire novelty of your car was the twin charged unit which you had so adamantly professed it's abilities.



No I got it, you spent a bunch of money, couldn't get it to work, and then just gave up by your own admission. I paraphrased by stating "Cut and Run" which accurately depicts a failed strategy in which a large investment of time/cash/property/etc. Is invested into a continually losing program in which the only alternative is to simply eat the lose and quit.

Or

"Cut and Run"

Which you admittedly did. Not a negative statement, has nothing to do with George Bush, just an observation which your statements make true. I was personally upset as I wanted to see you succeed. I wanted a properly running Twin Charged unit and I thought that you had the Bank to make it work. But you yourself must realize that you just don't want to lose any more money, which is why you gave up. IDK where all this negative energy is coming from.

I wish you luck with your 6000 LB Cayenne Turbo and I also hope you don't quit and sell it half way through and then try to explain it was a success although you couldn't get it to work and simply cut and run, ooops there is that word again. I'll try not to be so painfully accurate next time and honestly do wish you luck.

3240

A couple for errors that I'll correct for you:

We did not use a GT42r, we used an HX50 turbo. The car was not built as a dedicated 1/4 mile car. It was built to see if we could overcome turbo lag when using a large turbo.

Money (in your words "bank") had nothing to do with selling the car. Lack of interest after owning the car for three years and the fact that this car resided in Philly and I resided in Denver had a lot to do with it. The car became too complex to be far away from its designer.

I'm still confused over "cut and run." If selling a project after several years is considered to be "cut and run" than I have cut and run dozens of times. I've been modifying cars for a long time and have sold them every time once the novelty wore off.

The project was not a total success for the following reasons:

1. We never made as much total power as I had hoped.
2. The car proved to be extremely complex.

The project was a success for the following reasons:

1. We greatly reduced turbo lag (muscle car acceleration was an exagerration, but it felt like one when compared to a stock Evo).
2. We did something that no one else has tried and had a lot of fun doing it.

In summary the results were mixed as is the case when you try something different. Keep in mind that this car was extremely quick for its time as the project began 3 years ago.

I'll "cut and run" on the Cayenne as soon as I'm tired off it. There's a chance that it might not run in the low 11's or high 10's. Whether it does or not won't matter because I'll probably "cut and run" by the end of the summer. I judge projects by enjoyment, not 1/4 mile times, and I'm enjoying the Cayenne as I enjoyed the Evo.

After the Cayenne I plan on "cutting and running" on a few new projects. A twin turbo'd E55 is also in my future with the goal of running in the 10's. After about a year I'll "cut and run" on that one also.

If the twin charged Evo had hit the 8's guess what...it would still be sold. "Cut and run?" After three years I lost interest in the car.

I really enjoyed this project but I didn't enjoy the fact that it was 2000 miles away. The distance made "cutting and running" a little easier. If it was sitting in my garage at home it would have been a more difficult decision but, by now, I would have "cut and run."

It seems as if you and a few others try to make sense of this project. Pouring money into cars doesn't make any sense. The idea is to have fun. The twin charged Evo was a success in my book as it accomplished most of what I hoped to accomplish. Was it the most logical way to reach 900HP? Of course not but that wasn't the point. Just like the Cayenne isn't the most logical 1/4 platform...get it?

Spending money on cars is all relative. As a % of income I might have less in this car than you have in yours. I could go to AMS again and ask for an 8 second 1000 HP Evo but it just doesn't interest me. The twin charged Evo was an awesome project but after three years of ownership, I sold it (cut and run) and moved on.

Rez90

iTrader: (17)

you must have a sh_t load of extra money laying around............................................ ..

Magnumpsi

iTrader: (2)

Well congrats for trying somthing new. I always wondered what happened with this car. Good luck on future projects.
Mitch Mckee

3240

High PSI,

Here's some more history for you. On July 19th, 2004 this car made the following power:

"My car posted the following numbers today:
550 AWHP
470 ft-lbs
25 PSI boost
101.27F (Hot day in Denver)
3 gallons 91 oct mixed with about 11 gallons of C16

We're not done with the tuning yet and plan on running 30psi of boost. I'm hoping to see over 600 whp. We have the rev limiter set at 7000rpm's right now and will bump that to 7500 rpm's. This car puts down 420whp and almost 400 ft-lbs of torque on 91 octane. The car is still very streetable and a blast to drive."

This was one of the highest HP Evo's at the time and much of the build was an experiment. Two weeks later we made almost 600 awhp and ran in the low 11's in Denver (5800 ft above sea level). This is still the fastest 1/4 mile time in Colorado for an Evo.

After this I became board with the existing build and decided to move on to a larger turbo. Lag became a huge issue due to altitude and the twin charged design was born.

As you can see I cut and run several times. Once at 550 awhp, once at 600 awhp, and once on the twin charged program. None of these builds were completed to their full potential. I guess I have the "cut and run" mentality but I sure do enjoy it!

3240

I've been very fortunate and enjoy spending on projects that I'm passionate about.

arpad

iTrader: (26)

You don't have to explain yourself 3240... We empathize.
I'll be right there with you in a few years after I make my first billion... except I might get bored of projects even quicker. I probably wouldn't have been able to make it 3 years... that's almost double the length of my longest relationship!

3240

Here are the numbers from the Cayenne:

"Stock the car made ~330 HP and ~374 TQ stock on the Mustang AWD dyno. Today it made 510 awhp and 560 TQ on this same Mustand dyno. This is running 93 octane."

Using a drift box we're running 0-100 in 9.8 seconds. The 1/4 mile track doesn't open until spring. This truck took 6 months to build and I plan on "cutting and running" by the end of the summer.

Check out www.evoms.com if you get a chance. Look at the video's under Cayenne GT700. My truck is the dark grey truck racing a stock Cayenne turbo. The stock turbo is at WOT.

computerguy

iTrader: (1)

Kudo's to you.

3240

Thanks. I really do regret selling it but I became so frustrated with only having "visitation rights" in Philly.

High_PSI

iTrader: (50)

Lack if interest? You simply decided that after you spent thousands of dollars, couldn't figure out how to fix the problem and even have AMS tell you that they couldn't do it, and THEN you decided you lost interest. Please.....

If you are confused over "Cut and Run" please re-read my post above describing it. I had a feeling that it would be an issue so I included it just in case.


This is what you did.



2. We did something that no one else has tried and had a lot of fun doing it.


This part I get , I really do, but I just can't get over how much time and money you spent just to give up and take a loss like that. IDK why you would put such a negative connotation on "Cut and Run" as you are clearly taking it negatively and politically (George Bush)


I think you are also confused on having a car sold = Cut and Run. You basically admitted defeat with the Twin Charged Evo ate all the costs associated with a car that by your own admission never ran properly and then sold it. How is that not a "Cut and Run"? It is, in fact it is the definition. I also don't remember asking about any of your future projects, just why you decided to quit on the Evo which you claimed was "Lack of Interest". I believe the lack of interest coincided with the failure to get the results you felt were adequate and, yes, once again, here it comes, "Cut and Run.'