fpevo green dyno numbers
I've reviewed the 10 sec list and the 11 sec list and can't find any IX's with Dynojet numbers similar running 11.31 @ 121. If you look closely at all IX's on the 10 or 11 list, you'll see that in actuality, the most similar whp/wtq is Dadriva and he's obviously a lot better than a newbie driver, yet not a single IX is on the top of their respective et list. look at 11.0, 11.1, 11.2,11.3 etc. The IX is ALWAYS lower MPH and it's actually pretty hard to find a IX on the lists. Another IX made exactly the same speed and mph, but I can't find his posted whp/wtq. What dynojet IXs making those numbers do you know of and most importantly, with those dynojet numbers are running similar or faster mph and quicker et's? The lists are perfect examples of the VIII vs the IX mph/ets.
Alan, I lied about him only having 12 runs, he has a whopping 14 total. Heres his times and speeds: 60ft, 330ft, 1/8thmph, 1/8th time
1.711, 4.757, 93.52, 7.318
1.7, 4.762, 95.21, 7.344
1.952, 5.402, 91.5, 8.088
1.838, 4.971, 93.3, 7.52
1.871, 5.135, 96.11, 7.743
1.616, 4.683, 92.89, 7.25
1.807, 4.94, 93.39, 7.526
1.671, 4.846, 90.76, 7.494
1.831, 5.529, 89.8, 8.374
1.718, 4.831, 91.59, 7.429
1.663, 4.794, 87.02, 7.413
1.95, 5.125, 90.54, 7.777
1.856, 5.096, 91.24, 7.774
1.87, 5.042, 92.07, 7.711
The earlier times on the list are the more recent runs, with the bottom ones being his very first runs. I know, and so does he, that he's very inconsistent, but part of that is also me changing tire pressures, launch rpm, etc.
1.711, 4.757, 93.52, 7.318
1.7, 4.762, 95.21, 7.344
1.952, 5.402, 91.5, 8.088
1.838, 4.971, 93.3, 7.52
1.871, 5.135, 96.11, 7.743
1.616, 4.683, 92.89, 7.25
1.807, 4.94, 93.39, 7.526
1.671, 4.846, 90.76, 7.494
1.831, 5.529, 89.8, 8.374
1.718, 4.831, 91.59, 7.429
1.663, 4.794, 87.02, 7.413
1.95, 5.125, 90.54, 7.777
1.856, 5.096, 91.24, 7.774
1.87, 5.042, 92.07, 7.711
The earlier times on the list are the more recent runs, with the bottom ones being his very first runs. I know, and so does he, that he's very inconsistent, but part of that is also me changing tire pressures, launch rpm, etc.
Last edited by 9sec9; Jun 13, 2007 at 04:42 AM.
The midrange on this 20LT is incredible. In one of the times, he actually pulled on a 10.70 car during 2, 3rd and early 4th. I think we have video of that particular run. The Green is a very good turbo! The times are in Most recent order, which shows what I posted earlier about just starting to get a handle on the newly found power and traction, before he was ejected. The 1.7's are not as good as he had done the previous raceday, but they were getting better before ejection. The MPH was also up a little the last time out. Can't wait until we get back to the track.
Last edited by 9sec9; Jun 7, 2007 at 03:37 AM.
9sec9, I see now what you're saying regarding the IX's trap speeds being lower than the VIII's, given a specific ET. I forgot to take into account the gearing differences between the two, and was comparing VIII Dynojet numbers to your son's IX... ooops! 
hey guys..
we added GSC cams to a clients evo today.. he has the green
we hit 356whp/335 wtq at 22psi. the car made close to that before, but it took about 24.8 psi to do it!!
the combination of the cams and green is working well...
cb
we added GSC cams to a clients evo today.. he has the green
we hit 356whp/335 wtq at 22psi. the car made close to that before, but it took about 24.8 psi to do it!!
the combination of the cams and green is working well...
cb
If you're talking about Dynojet numbers, maybe very CLOSE to 500. Mustang numbers are more like 440-450 whp on a very, very good tune. I can only think of one at that level, and that was David Buschurs when it made 450/450 Mustang Dyno. That would be at least 500 Dynojet numbers. Most are going to be 380-430 Dynojet.
One comment about the calculated loads when I used the Evoscan logs and used the correct vehicle settings to calculate horsepower. On the last 3 dyno runs, the calculated horsepower and torque in the Evoscan power calculator were 10 and less than the actuals displayed by the Mustang Dyno. I found that interesting. The difference was the dyno showed less horsepower with more torque than the Evoscan, which showed the numbers reveresed. Still both numbers were within 10 of the dyno.
What is the "factory vehicle weight" that you enter on the Evoscan and "people contents weigh" ?
The reason i ask is my MD #'s are way off from evoscan , 279hp (MD) vs 345hp (evoscan) . Also I have changed the "people contents weigh" from 1 - 750 LBS (3 fata$s were in the car at the time) with no change in HP , But when I change the "factory vehicle weight" the HP changes like you think it would (ie 346hp =3500LBS vehicle +1LBS driver , 328hp=3300LBS vehicle + 200lbs driver and 328hp =3300LBS vehicle +750LBS driver )
Ok i checked just the "stock" evoscan settingd 3042 LBS for the car and 187LBS for the driver . My car weigh more than 3042 and iam closer to 200 LBS , but my hp droped to 310 hp.