The car was previously tuned and the knock limits digested two years ago

I have prob tuned at least 100 similar BR stage IV cars on the dyno and another 250 on the road - I think by this point I know how they run just by ear

By looking at the boost curve and dyno sheet I could tell that the tune was still spot on

The customer was given the option to re-tune it and pay the fee or just stay with the current tune

Obvously - if the car went 11.9 on the limited mods it has with the previous owner and is still running with the same engine two years later only a total moron would think that the car needed additional tuning

I like to let the obvious reliability of my tuning (zero tuning related failures in two and a half years) and performance speak for itself.

David Buschur and I were discussing manifold design and theory yesterday and he pointed out the obvious divergance of theory and practice

I like to think that experince and hard work give me the insight to understand when an evo needs tuning and when it does not

It would have been nice to collected a fee from the customer - but a waste of my time to retune something that was tuned perfectly the first time

All the dyno pull showed is confirmation of what my instruments showed two years ago when the car was tuned

 

David's RS is a very highly tuned car

I can only speak of what I see with my hundreds of cars I tune here at Pruven Performance

Generally, 90% of my customers tune on pump gas and with say a Stage IV car on our dyno, they all make about the same power level with in 10 whp or so regardless of which cams are used

On the other hand, I am never tuning to maximize the most possible whp that can be extracted, with street driven daily drivers on pump gas the #1 objective I have is reliability and motor saftey. I am sure that when you turn down the boost controller to the end and push it to the limit the 280 cams will prob realize more power than the 272

However, I am not sure how much more power you will see at 20 psi with pump gas

One of these days IF I can get motivated I will do a test of all hks cams on the same evo same day

back almost three years ago on my own evo (stock turbo stock engine ) going from 264 to 272 cams yielded very nominal gains

 

what if we use the MAFT-Pro and your custom flash? in this case would revolvers work?

 

There are many speed density tuning options which allow you greater flexability with tuning more agressive cams.

With any MAF based system the 272 is about a big as you should go for a very good driveability

 

Just by way of referece on this IX 20G discussion

When you turn UP the boost far on the the stock IX turbo you see that the TQ curve and power curve fall down quickly



This was on high boost and with pump gas on alchy

You will note that the TQ does not stay flast at any time

IMHP - on this car the 20 G modification would make the TQ curve longer and broader and make much more area under the curve if not at least 30 whp more also


That is my idea of what the turbo can do

 

how much psi were the cars with the 20g running? for example, the car that made 330whp, how much psi was it running?

you mention that the 20g holds power and tq well, how does it compare to the garret turbos, especially the 30r?

 

i think it will be most helpful for david to post up the dyno sheets so we can discuss them in a meaningful manner

 

On David's RS, that was all pump gas tuning on the RS and he said throughout the process that the tuning was conservative on both boost and timing -- that he was developing maps suitable for customers.

I think a back to back test of the different cams would be interesting, but a necessary component of that testing would be testing the knock resistance of each combo and tuning accordingly. As David pointed out, the gains from the 280s were almost 50% the ability to add more timing. Same thing with exhaust porting on the manifold/turbine/O2. One of the things that everyone seems to like seeing is back-to-back testing of parts with "nothing else changed," but I think that tends to obscure the more subtle advantages of some parts.

 

I was one of those whose dyno results were less than outstanding. I would not have known this except that Dave let me know that my numbers were not up to what he expected. So, I asked him, "What would you suggest?" He said that he was suspicious of my 3" TBE. Frankly, I thought that he was more than a bit biased in that comment.

Then I drove home and pulled the exhaust from the car. All of the exhaust was a true 3" system. So, I was a bit stumped. I could not figure out how the extra mandrel bends in the system could cost so much power. Dave said that he expected 20 more HP than what I got. So, I kept looking at everything. The muffler was a true 3" and passed the soda can test. So, all that left was the resonated section. I had dropped the can in it but it did not come out the other end. This didn't concern me at first because there was a little bend at the iother end of the resonator sectiont. So, I flipped the section of pipe around and looked into the inlet with my 5 cell flash light. True to Dave's words the perforated liner of the resonator had fractured near the catalytic converter end. This is less than 6 inches from the cat. This liner was collapsing and the "true 3" system" was being reduced to a 2.5 inch system. So, all I can say is that the man truely knows his stuff! Thanks Dave.

I wanted to also thank Al. He was extremely patient during the tune on my car. They did more than 5 pulls. Al, figured out that there was a minor equipment failure (the tail pipe O2 sensor became lazy) which was quickly replaced by Dave. Suddenly, the last two dyno pulls made sense to him and my tune was finished. BTW, Al had put in some heroic hours trying to get to Buschur's in time for his first appointment. We should all commend him for the service he provides to the Evo community. Without someone like Al coming to your part of the country we would all be limited to mail in tunes or the more pricey custom stand alone ECUs. Thanks Al.

 

...

 

In regards to Girlie's car as the highest Evo IV dynoed. What do most Evo IV's with the same modifications dyno at? Would a test pipe have put her at 290? I'm considering the same tbe, but with a test pipe instead and no intake. How much of a difference would it make?

Thanks.

 

I do log a lot of travel miles - over 150,000 last year - but I really enjoy what I do so it seems very normal to me. I have found that tuning is a fascinating subject and you can always learn more so I am always interested and discovering new ideas.

 

Dave commented on the results if there was a test pipe rather than a hi-flow cat in my other thead.

"My guess is an offroad pipe will put the car in the upper 290 whp range."

Here is the thread for referance:

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...=182631&page=3

Girlie

 

Well it looks like you all had fun. see you in a week

 

Just a few quick comments up to page 3.

Justchil, very glad to hear you are happy with how the car pulls. That is the bottom line and what is most important. I think I jumped the gun making so many negative observations but I was trying to point out that everything isn't always "heaven" before all the customers did. I actually expected you to be disapointed by the numbers even though you told me how well the car pulled. Thanks for being smart enough to not just be caught up on dyno numbers.

Calibrating our dyno. We don't have a new way of calibrating it nor did we change the settings. This is the deal. When we bought the dyno it came with a normal lead that measures RPM from the spark plug wire, bottom line is it doesn't work worth s hit. The next way to get RPM is to put the car in a 1:1 gear and set up RPM based on the roll speed of the car. Since I prefer to dyno in 3rd gear when we first got the dyno we would put the car in 3rd gear and then hold the RPM at 3,000 in 3rd gear and press "OK" on the roll speed selector. This calibrates the RPM based on a 1:1 gear. Doing the pulls in 3rd gear instead of a 1:1 gear will throw off the RPM slightly. We did it like this for a month or two until I was able to find a cheaper TS1 tach input, which we have now and works flawlessly. We thought after dyno'ing Justchil's car that may have been the difference. I compared the charts from the first time he dyno'd to this weekends and it looked to me like we had the TS1 back then too. So no differences in the dyno settings or RPM reading.

EVO8LTW,

Al should probably answer you question but we have a very good idea what a particular combination is going to make on our dyno. To be honest, Gary's car making 280 whp was not only good it was amazing. The AFR's were dead on flat. He had a choice of trying to make a few more WHP, which Al and I didn't think would be much if any and paying an additional $300 or just leaving the car as is for the $75 for the few dyno runs we did. He chose to leave it as I didn't think he would get $300 of performance out of the some additional tuning.

Shiv,

The car that Andrew owns he bought from a friend of his (did not ask for the guys name). Andrew's friend bought the Vishnu Stage 2 kit from you with your reflash. Andrew bought the entire car, modified, from his friend. Al said from the ID in the computer he could tell it was yours, he posted that ID here for you. We are done with the comparison and I am not going to waste my time, Al's time or yours in making some elaborate post about the gains. We don't honestly care at this point. It's not worth argueing over. Please just drop it.

David Buschur
www.buschurracing.com