Anyone ran a Green on an IX?
This is only true if you go with the upgraded 18psi actuator. The boost "hump" that results gives you that extra bit of torque 1000rpm after you would normally see it. For instance, you could boost 20psi by 3700rpm and then it will rise to 23psi by 5500rpm and then fall back down to around 20 by redline. While the curve is a bit harder to tune then a "normal" curve, some prefer it because of the increased headroom in terms of peak boost.
If you go with the stock IX WGA, you'll only see a 200rpm lag increase to reach peak boost over a IX turbo. I've logged this data on a MAP sensor and posted about it when I had my VIII sporting the aforementioned turbos.
If you go with the stock IX WGA, you'll only see a 200rpm lag increase to reach peak boost over a IX turbo. I've logged this data on a MAP sensor and posted about it when I had my VIII sporting the aforementioned turbos.
This is only true if you go with the upgraded 18psi actuator. The boost "hump" that results gives you that extra bit of torque 1000rpm after you would normally see it. For instance, you could boost 20psi by 3700rpm and then it will rise to 23psi by 5500rpm and then fall back down to around 20 by redline. While the curve is a bit harder to tune then a "normal" curve, some prefer it because of the increased headroom in terms of peak boost.
If you go with the stock IX WGA, you'll only see a 200rpm lag increase to reach peak boost over a IX turbo. I've logged this data on a MAP sensor and posted about it when I had my VIII sporting the aforementioned turbos.
If you go with the stock IX WGA, you'll only see a 200rpm lag increase to reach peak boost over a IX turbo. I've logged this data on a MAP sensor and posted about it when I had my VIII sporting the aforementioned turbos.
didnt really create any issues with tuning it, and it still had the same power on spool (then more) compared to the stock ix turbo!
cb
Bottom line is that if you want to run the FPGreen on pump gas at boost levels below 24psi, you should use the stock actuator. If you're running meth/race gas/E85/etc, and plan to run over 24psi daily, get the upgraded actuator.
this turbo has the standard actuator on it from FP... im not sure if the standard green WG actuator is the standard ix actuator, the client supplied me with the turbo...
didnt really create any issues with tuning it, and it still had the same power on spool (then more) compared to the stock ix turbo!
cb
didnt really create any issues with tuning it, and it still had the same power on spool (then more) compared to the stock ix turbo!
cb
Here's a curve of the "upgraded" actuator. Don't pay attention to the axis numbers...they're off a bit on this graph.
we are running whatever came on the turbo from fp, torque peak is before 4500...
i still need to scan the charts.... ill get them for you guys asap....
-------
i havent tuned a 50 trim on our dyno... so i cant compare...i think this is a great turbo for people wanting a more stock appearance, and great performance...
cb
i still need to scan the charts.... ill get them for you guys asap....
-------
i havent tuned a 50 trim on our dyno... so i cant compare...i think this is a great turbo for people wanting a more stock appearance, and great performance...
cb
Okay. I have no idea what you've got, then. Before, you said that the peak boost was 1000rpm later than a stock turbo...which would suggest (if not insist) that you're running the upgraded actuator with the aforementioned "hump" activity. Now you're saying that the torque peak is sub-4500rpm. One of those two statements must be incorrect.
If you plan on running 30psi with this turbo at any time, you should use the upgraded actuator. It would be possible with the stock WGA if you incorporated a huge amount of preload, but it would be achieved via a nasty spike and taper. In your case, the 18psi actuator is best.
I just got my FPGreen road tuned by Chris from AMS this weekend here in San Antonio, TX.
Obviously I don't have any numbers to post, but when I get my tactrix cable back from mitsuorder I will go ahead and do some third gear pulls so that can put the logs into either Dataloglab or the new Evoscan to see what the power/torque graphs look like.
The car is definitely way stronger than it was before. Top end is great with no falloff. I haven't had too much time to get out and thrash on it because I had to be present for both days of tuning but as time permits this week I will post impressions if anyone is interested.
Tony
Obviously I don't have any numbers to post, but when I get my tactrix cable back from mitsuorder I will go ahead and do some third gear pulls so that can put the logs into either Dataloglab or the new Evoscan to see what the power/torque graphs look like.
The car is definitely way stronger than it was before. Top end is great with no falloff. I haven't had too much time to get out and thrash on it because I had to be present for both days of tuning but as time permits this week I will post impressions if anyone is interested.
Tony
Okay. I have no idea what you've got, then. Before, you said that the peak boost was 1000rpm later than a stock turbo...which would suggest (if not insist) that you're running the upgraded actuator with the aforementioned "hump" activity. Now you're saying that the torque peak is sub-4500rpm. One of those two statements must be incorrect.
ill just get the chart up, so i stop confusing you lol... sorry
cb
PD1 -- I am sorry but I don't understand from an engineering / design perspective why the upgraded WGA would create the double hump as you call it...The tighter WGA should allow the car to hit boost quicker if using the stock BCS setup and hold more boost at the top end. If you are seeing boost creep, then I think that is a different issue that should be addressed (IMHO).
FWIW -- I am currently hitting, on my 9, 24 psi @ ~3500 - 3600 rpm in 3rd gear from a 2000 rpm WOT run. I was concerned as I thought I should have been hitting peaking at more like 3100 rpm. I have been considering the Green and a 50 trim as options, but want a much bigger power band
than what most are reporting....
FWIW -- I am currently hitting, on my 9, 24 psi @ ~3500 - 3600 rpm in 3rd gear from a 2000 rpm WOT run. I was concerned as I thought I should have been hitting peaking at more like 3100 rpm. I have been considering the Green and a 50 trim as options, but want a much bigger power band
than what most are reporting....
PD1 -- I am sorry but I don't understand from an engineering / design perspective why the upgraded WGA would create the double hump as you call it...The tighter WGA should allow the car to hit boost quicker if using the stock BCS setup and hold more boost at the top end. If you are seeing boost creep, then I think that is a different issue that should be addressed (IMHO).
FWIW -- I am currently hitting, on my 9, 24 psi @ ~3500 - 3600 rpm in 3rd gear from a 2000 rpm WOT run. I was concerned as I thought I should have been hitting peaking at more like 3100 rpm. I have been considering the Green and a 50 trim as options, but want a much bigger power band than what most are reporting....
FWIW -- I am currently hitting, on my 9, 24 psi @ ~3500 - 3600 rpm in 3rd gear from a 2000 rpm WOT run. I was concerned as I thought I should have been hitting peaking at more like 3100 rpm. I have been considering the Green and a 50 trim as options, but want a much bigger power band
than what most are reporting....
When I DC'd the lines and went to an MBC, it still has a double hump. The curve is great, but the boost gauge on the dyno logs a double hump as well.