Thanks, to Andrew at Dyno4mance for getting me in on Sat. Car made good power for 93 only although it appears that the 264ex cam I have is limiting top end power. My goal was 370-380whp on a DD dyno (435whp on a DJ) with pump gas only and while it fell short on this day, it's nothing some 280 cams can't fix. I was really impressed with how the spool was. The primary reason for building the twin scroll was trying to recover spool up after going to a larger turbo and it definately succeeded. I have a graph attached of another companies turbo kit that uses the 3076 along with staight 272 cams and while it did make 7more peak whp than me, my set up spooled quicker and made more power from 2600-5200rpm. In some places 60whp! To be fair, this car had it's cams moved to gain some more top end so maybe this hurt its spool. When we laid the graph over a 3071 kit, the spool characteristics were almost identical. Anyway, I will be going back to the dyno when I get the larger cams installed and post those graphs. On the street the car makes 22psi in 2nd gear around 4200, 3900 in 3rd, and 3600 in 4th.

*Last graph is the comparison graph*

 

very nice

 

What size Turbo is this? I assume you are still on the stock bottom end and do not have any headwork done, except cams?

 

Stock engine other than cams. GT3076 turbo

 

The Stock turbo is a twin scrool turbo.

 

^ YAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYY Here's your cookie > 0 .

Scorke

 

Comparing your car to another with same turbo isn't saying much. Definately not proof the twin scroll is working or not. My 35r on a cast manifold with adapter plate to mount turbo spools my 35r to 300whp at 4400rpm, 360whp at 4600. Your graph looks laggy to me with only 190whp at 4400. 280s wont spool the turbo faster either. Going from stock to 280s spooled a 35r car here 700rpm slower.

 

How about posting a dynochart and upgrade details for your GT35R setup?

 

I want to know wtf it takes to run 134mph trap speeds on 93 octane (coupe)

 

^Probably meth, nos, and a 20 mph tailwind, which is usually left out of sigs.

Scorke

 

I didn't say it proved anything Jerry. It was merely a comparison, but it does spool faster than this particular car and makes much more power from low to middle. I did state that it could be from different cam setting. My cam gears are stock. This is not a Dynojet. The numbers are much lower on this dyno and honestly there is no real way to compare them, but yes it sounds like your 2.4l w/meth makes more power than my stock motor on 93 only so congrats.
Telling me that comparing two different cars with very similar set ups, on the SAME DYNO, doesn't prove anything and then trying to compare your COMPLETELY different set up on a COMPLETELY different type of dyno shows me that you have no idea about what your saying. Thanks for all the help.

 

You made the statement the twin scroll succeeded in making the turbo spool faster. Yet you show no real evidence. Sorry my post is negative. You posted a dynograph that more likely shows how laggy the turbo is, or how laggy your manifold turned out. My 2.4 has 7.7/1 pistons and a cast manifold and a bigger turbo. And it was on a mustang dyno. So my comparison is worth noting if you want to gain knowledge on how to make a turbo spool fast. I like most love fast spool. I seek all the tricks to make turbos spool faster. I unlike most will even sacrifice some total power to maintain good spool. Just not seeing anything in your setup that says the twin scroll is the way to go. Maybe it would help to show how much it improved at the track. Comparring dyno numbers is just a bunch of bench racing at its best.

 

Seriously dude, can you stop? You never have a productive comment.

 

We cannot realistically compare a 2.4L to a 2.0L. The additional 20% in displacement makes spool characteristics between the two substantially different.

When compared to other cars on this particular dyno with a variety of turbos and setups, his turbo does spool quickly. This is not evident unless one considers other examples with this dyno. I might toss in that comparing spool rpm between different dynos isn't really apples-to-apples unless the load ramps are darn near identical.

 

I showed evidence by comparing it to another companies turbo kit that used identical turbos on the same dyno major difference being their 4into1 header vs. my divided. While I was at the dyno I overlaid my graph onto that of a 3071 that had been dynoed at the same time as my comparison car. The spool of my set up was almost identical. I never said any of this was conclusive as I have not done enough testing. I only offered a comparison. Pm Scorke and ask him when he see full boost from a 2k kick in 2nd, 3rd, 4th. He has a 2.3L, cast manifold, and the same size turbo which should guarantee better spool than me, but I bet you will be suprised at what you find.


I already understand that more displacement spools a turbo better so thanks for the help with that. I also understand that lower compression motor has less thermal efficiency than a higher compression motor. This means more heat gets into the exhaust manifold. What spools a turbo... Anyone...anyone... HEAT spools a turbo and since 7.7 is lower than 8.8 your should have a spool advantage all things being equal although they are not even close in this case. I also understand that the Mustang dyno at CFT is set up to give Dyno Jet numbers so honestly 565 or whatever you made isn't all that impressive for 34 psi when lots of cars with a GT35 make more with less.


Again Jerry, if you don't think it's all that don't get one. It seems to be your goal to discredit this. Why? I'm not posting hype all over the place. I've made 2 post about building the manifold and the first time to the dyno. Honestly I didn't have to post crap about the dyno. When every other post here is 500 this 600 that - my little numbers are not impressive. I was just sharing. When I go back to the dyno with the bigger cams I will post those graphs too and you still don't have to like it then either.