Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

Turbo experts please look

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 07:19 AM
  #16  
Curt@MrLed's Avatar
Former Vendor
iTrader: (107)
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,364
Likes: 0
From: A.K.A. DaFarmer
get rid of that a.f.c.
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 07:21 AM
  #17  
scorke's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (18)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,192
Likes: 0
From: Nj
Or a 30R thats tried to relocate some sand or something, thos tq numbers seem very low, when were you making peak boost.

Scorke
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 08:05 AM
  #18  
joeymia's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,509
Likes: 2
From: FL
His numbers will be low because his timing numbers will be off. Get a custom relash and bump up that rev limiter to atleast 8000!
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 09:06 AM
  #19  
3deep's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Are those 91 pump numbers.Looks pretty laggy for a 30r regardless of tuning.What are your mods.Are you running a stock cat or exh.Need more info?
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 02:41 PM
  #20  
fr34k's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
From: Beverly Hills CA
Originally Posted by 3deep
Are those 91 pump numbers.Looks pretty laggy for a 30r regardless of tuning.What are your mods.Are you running a stock cat or exh.Need more info?
I have all the mods ready and yes it was on 91, thta's what I like to hear too laggy for a 30R
what do you guys think? too laggy for a 30R??
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 02:45 PM
  #21  
Ludikraut's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,224
Likes: 0
From: 41° 59' N, 87° 54' W
Just going by the dyno chart, my guess would be that this is a 3076 on 91 Octane (edit: I guess it's not a guess anymore ). Judging from the late spoolup, I'd also guess that you have one (or more) of the following issues:
1.) poor choice of turbo housings
2.) poor choice of cams or cam gear settings
3.) poor choice of exhaust manifold
4.) some kind of mechanical issue (install/bad parts, etc.)
5.) poor tune

l8r)

Last edited by Ludikraut; Apr 6, 2006 at 02:46 PM. Reason: simultaneous post of additional information
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 02:53 PM
  #22  
Ted B's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Liked
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,334
Likes: 63
From: Birmingham, AL
Is the equivalent of ~385whp and 350ft/lbs really that bad for a GT30XX on 91 oct and a SAFC?

After all, I'll bet he's not running a ton of boost. I agree that it does appear to be somewhat laggy (which may be rectifiable), but it seems plausible that better fuel and more boost pressure will increase the power in the familiar fashion.
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 02:56 PM
  #23  
Ludikraut's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,224
Likes: 0
From: 41° 59' N, 87° 54' W
Yeah, the whp looks to be in line with what I'd expect on 91 Oct. My setup (3071) put down the same amount, but that was on 93.

l8r)
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 02:57 PM
  #24  
fr34k's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
From: Beverly Hills CA
Originally Posted by Ludikraut
Just going by the dyno chart, my guess would be that this is a 3076 on 91 Octane (edit: I guess it's not a guess anymore ). Judging from the late spoolup, I'd also guess that you have one (or more) of the following issues:
1.) poor choice of turbo housings
2.) poor choice of cams or cam gear settings
3.) poor choice of exhaust manifold
4.) some kind of mechanical issue (install/bad parts, etc.)
5.) poor tune

l8r)
or maybe it is not a GT30R afterall?

i have 264/272 cams
i have the RNRracing manifold
i dont think I have any mechanical issues..
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 03:01 PM
  #25  
Ted B's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Liked
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,334
Likes: 63
From: Birmingham, AL
How much boost are you running? I
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 03:08 PM
  #26  
Ludikraut's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,224
Likes: 0
From: 41° 59' N, 87° 54' W
Originally Posted by fr34k
or maybe it is not a GT30R afterall?

i have 264/272 cams
i have the RNRracing manifold
i dont think I have any mechanical issues..
You are currently running a 2.3l, correct? In which case this whole discussion is a moot point, since the car is no longer in the state that it was in when it generated the dyno chart in the first post.

l8r)
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 04:10 PM
  #27  
PeteyTurbo's Avatar
Evolved Member
20 Year Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,581
Likes: 10
From: Philadelphia
I think he is hoping someone has mistakenly sold him a larger turbo then he wanted to get.
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 04:34 PM
  #28  
Pd1's Avatar
Pd1
Evolved Member
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
From: NorCal
FWIW, my 3071 hits peak torque (on both Mustang and DynoJet dynos) at 5100rpm. My power and torque are in the same ballpark (350hp/330tq @23psi) with the mods listed below. So, unless there's a problem somewhere, this appears to be a laggier turbo than a 3071 on a 2.0L.
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 06:11 PM
  #29  
Derek888's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (54)
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,730
Likes: 1
From: Taipei
edited...found the answer
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2006 | 07:41 PM
  #30  
fr34k's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
From: Beverly Hills CA
Originally Posted by dexmix
it could be a gt30... with journal bearings
so you think it don't seem like a GT30 with ball bearing?
but aren't all gt30 ballbearings?
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:29 PM.