HTA GT35R Dyno results right here!
So Robert there were no fueling changes?
How did the car manage to make that much more power without adding fuel to compensate for the extra air the turbo was pushing without going lean?
Have to play devils advocate
When taking data from the people that produce the product there is a huge reason to justify swaying the data in your favor. I trust you and don't believe you did purposefully fudge the results, but if for some reason it did perform worse ( I don't believe it did ) then you would have a very hard time talking people into buying it.
I will be satisfied when somebody (Not a shop/vendor) does the same test you do, because they have nothing to gain/lose in disclosing the information.
Also, almost nobody in the EVO world currently runs a .82 A/R hotside, so although it might be more fair in terms of apples to apples, for Evo owners/tuners sake a .63 A/R comparison would be more helpful.
Also LT1 runner was running a .63 not a .82, so that would add low end and mid range tq over a .82 you agree?
Scorke
How did the car manage to make that much more power without adding fuel to compensate for the extra air the turbo was pushing without going lean?
Have to play devils advocate
When taking data from the people that produce the product there is a huge reason to justify swaying the data in your favor. I trust you and don't believe you did purposefully fudge the results, but if for some reason it did perform worse ( I don't believe it did ) then you would have a very hard time talking people into buying it.
I will be satisfied when somebody (Not a shop/vendor) does the same test you do, because they have nothing to gain/lose in disclosing the information.
Also, almost nobody in the EVO world currently runs a .82 A/R hotside, so although it might be more fair in terms of apples to apples, for Evo owners/tuners sake a .63 A/R comparison would be more helpful.
Also LT1 runner was running a .63 not a .82, so that would add low end and mid range tq over a .82 you agree?
Scorke
It never ends does it? All the crap, 19 years of putting up with it is getting tiring.
First off, nice job with your car and nice numbers. Glad you like the turbo, so do I and I still have it on my RS.
I am sick to death of the ignorance though, the doubters, the trouble makers.
If this turbo didn't work Robert nor myself would waste our time selling it. Robert would have went back to the drawing board until it DID work and I'd have kept testing them for him.
Also, there is some important information left out of all this. This turbo was tested back to back in FP's cast turbine housing on our cast manifold before it was ever tested on the header that is on my car. That is very important information. That turbine housing a LOT tighter than the .82 turbine housing.
The HTA hands down out performs the standard 3582 in the low/mid range regardless of what turbine housing it is in. End of story. The power up top is very close to the same though, enough that if you are worried about top end only I will tell you to get the normal 3582.
I have the HTA35R on my car, I refuse to change it as it is the best "large" turbo I have run and I am not willing to put up with anymore lag. The car has run 9.77 at 148.32 mph in 100% full street trim. The turbo kicks ***.
Also, there are more .82 housings out there than some of you obviously realize. The ONLY reason I ended up with it was the Full Race header I ended up putting on my car, they informed me the header was built for the 4 bolt Garrett housing, that's what I bought and used.
Give us a break. Not everyone selling parts are liars and crooks and if that is the outlook you seriously have on vendors you need to find someone else to deal with so you can get some trust built up.
First off, nice job with your car and nice numbers. Glad you like the turbo, so do I and I still have it on my RS.
I am sick to death of the ignorance though, the doubters, the trouble makers.
If this turbo didn't work Robert nor myself would waste our time selling it. Robert would have went back to the drawing board until it DID work and I'd have kept testing them for him.
Also, there is some important information left out of all this. This turbo was tested back to back in FP's cast turbine housing on our cast manifold before it was ever tested on the header that is on my car. That is very important information. That turbine housing a LOT tighter than the .82 turbine housing.
The HTA hands down out performs the standard 3582 in the low/mid range regardless of what turbine housing it is in. End of story. The power up top is very close to the same though, enough that if you are worried about top end only I will tell you to get the normal 3582.
I have the HTA35R on my car, I refuse to change it as it is the best "large" turbo I have run and I am not willing to put up with anymore lag. The car has run 9.77 at 148.32 mph in 100% full street trim. The turbo kicks ***.
Also, there are more .82 housings out there than some of you obviously realize. The ONLY reason I ended up with it was the Full Race header I ended up putting on my car, they informed me the header was built for the 4 bolt Garrett housing, that's what I bought and used.
Give us a break. Not everyone selling parts are liars and crooks and if that is the outlook you seriously have on vendors you need to find someone else to deal with so you can get some trust built up.
Damn Straight David
Well said.
Mr Scorke, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for someone else to blow $7k+ to reproduce the A/B then A/B/A/B testing that Mr. Buschur and I conducted earlier this year. With that said, I do invite anyone to reproduce this test and I have 100% confidence they will duplicate our results.
The fast spooling and increased efficiency characteristics of the HTA compressor section are not dependent upon turbine housing A/R. These characteristics are present regardless of A/R of turbine housing. The rapid shift recovery of boost and lowered boost threshold are real benefits that any "big turbo" project can appreciate.
Additionally a $1299 GT3582R (surge ported of course) and a $1699 FP3582R (also surge ported of course) are only $400 apart, not $500
And remember that healthy used GT3582R turbos can be converted for much much less.
Boost On!
Robert Young
Mr Scorke, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for someone else to blow $7k+ to reproduce the A/B then A/B/A/B testing that Mr. Buschur and I conducted earlier this year. With that said, I do invite anyone to reproduce this test and I have 100% confidence they will duplicate our results.
The fast spooling and increased efficiency characteristics of the HTA compressor section are not dependent upon turbine housing A/R. These characteristics are present regardless of A/R of turbine housing. The rapid shift recovery of boost and lowered boost threshold are real benefits that any "big turbo" project can appreciate.
Additionally a $1299 GT3582R (surge ported of course) and a $1699 FP3582R (also surge ported of course) are only $400 apart, not $500
And remember that healthy used GT3582R turbos can be converted for much much less.Boost On!
Robert Young
We do the conversion for $450 and we need the complete turbo in order to do it, not just the CHRA. If you are going to send it in, be sure to pack it carefully and plug the oil holes so no crap gets in there. If your turbo has been scuffing the blades against the housing then we cannot do the upgrade since it's bearings are damaged.
Boost On!
Robert Young
Boost On!
Robert Young
I know the dyno in question very well, and the figures are indeed very good. Those who are curious about the turbo and dyno will nevertheless seek a reliable frame of reference to establish a basis of confidence in the product. There isn't anything unreasonable about it. Independent, objective results carry far more weight than ad copy.
Robert, as a request for more information, would you be willing to post the dyno chart from your website with complete run conditions and all the required input variables? Also, an RPM graph by time between the two runs would really show the differences as to how much the quicker spool really impacts the vehicle acceleration. Would you be willing to post a time based graph?
Also, what is the difference between the charts on your website and the charts in these threads as they show different results?
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...&highlight=hta
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...&highlight=hta
Sorry if I was off on the price difference. I know what I can get a GT3582R at as a wholesale price, so I was more guessing on a normal retail price difference. At wholesale, the price difference is very significant and the #1 reason I would just go with a standard GT3582R.
Out of curiosity though, why is an entire turbo required and not just a CHRA? You use a completely different compressor cover then the standard GT3582R, right? Or are you machining the original GT3582R housing?
Also, what is the difference between the charts on your website and the charts in these threads as they show different results?
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...&highlight=hta
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...&highlight=hta
Sorry if I was off on the price difference. I know what I can get a GT3582R at as a wholesale price, so I was more guessing on a normal retail price difference. At wholesale, the price difference is very significant and the #1 reason I would just go with a standard GT3582R.
Out of curiosity though, why is an entire turbo required and not just a CHRA? You use a completely different compressor cover then the standard GT3582R, right? Or are you machining the original GT3582R housing?
Last edited by 03whitegsr; Oct 8, 2007 at 09:17 PM.
Your questions answered.
I'm not opposed to giving the conditions, but the point of doing the final testing all on the same car within the smallest time window possible is to be able to consider the conditions more or less equal. I mean you can't get much more accurate/equal conditions than running one test mid-day on monday and the second test mid-day on tuesday with the temps and such being about the same. At least I don't know how you'd get more accurate than that. Perhaps we can share the time based graphs at some point.
I suppose we could have done both tests in an abandoned nuclear missile silo a thousand feet underground or something, but we did have a budget . Anyway, the turbo kept doing the same thing. Swapping the FP3582HTA on gave the increase, swapping the GT3582R back on made the power go away. It happened over and over, with the cast manifold or header - didn't matter. These were more than A/B tests, these were A/B/A/B tests. Same thing happened over and over. I mean how many times have you seen somebody put the first turbo back on after testing the product and verify the power drop and that it cannot also generate the increase in power? I would speculate never.
The other graphs you link to are some of the preliminary testing that lead us to the final product, sort of like drafts of a final document if you will. You'll notice that this testing was spread out over almost a year long period. Normally you wouldn't see the development work like that as an end user, but Buschur likes to share so you got to see progress reports along the way.
As far as pricing, you should be as careful in your price comparisons as you are your dyno comparisons. Comparing one items wholesale price to the retail price of another is like comparing dyno jet to mustang charts :P
Regarding the upgrade program - We want the entire turbo because we want to inspect it. If there is something wrong with the used turbo, you'll want to know PRIOR to spending $450 to modify it (and we'll want to know before putting our name on it). Plus the profile of the HTA wheel is not the same as the Garrett 56trim 82mm, so your cover will require replacement also. We'll keep the used covers for a rainy day, it's all built into the low $450 price tag. So the question about "any type of T3 housing" has an answer - Yes. You may run any variety of turbine housing with this upgrade.
Regarding GT30 - Yes, Our new HTA aero will bleed over into other sizes and applications such as 76mm and 88mm. The 82mm for the 35R was the first one to be produced.
Ok, that's it. I'm going to bed. Enough internet for me tonight.
Boost Dreams!
Robert Young
I suppose we could have done both tests in an abandoned nuclear missile silo a thousand feet underground or something, but we did have a budget
. Anyway, the turbo kept doing the same thing. Swapping the FP3582HTA on gave the increase, swapping the GT3582R back on made the power go away. It happened over and over, with the cast manifold or header - didn't matter. These were more than A/B tests, these were A/B/A/B tests. Same thing happened over and over. I mean how many times have you seen somebody put the first turbo back on after testing the product and verify the power drop and that it cannot also generate the increase in power? I would speculate never.The other graphs you link to are some of the preliminary testing that lead us to the final product, sort of like drafts of a final document if you will. You'll notice that this testing was spread out over almost a year long period. Normally you wouldn't see the development work like that as an end user, but Buschur likes to share so you got to see progress reports along the way.
As far as pricing, you should be as careful in your price comparisons as you are your dyno comparisons. Comparing one items wholesale price to the retail price of another is like comparing dyno jet to mustang charts :P
Regarding the upgrade program - We want the entire turbo because we want to inspect it. If there is something wrong with the used turbo, you'll want to know PRIOR to spending $450 to modify it (and we'll want to know before putting our name on it). Plus the profile of the HTA wheel is not the same as the Garrett 56trim 82mm, so your cover will require replacement also. We'll keep the used covers for a rainy day, it's all built into the low $450 price tag. So the question about "any type of T3 housing" has an answer - Yes. You may run any variety of turbine housing with this upgrade.
Regarding GT30 - Yes, Our new HTA aero will bleed over into other sizes and applications such as 76mm and 88mm. The 82mm for the 35R was the first one to be produced.
Ok, that's it. I'm going to bed. Enough internet for me tonight.
Boost Dreams!
Robert Young
Ted B, obviously we are entitled to our choices and opinions, I don't feel the thread is all rosey though. When I see the *** busting work I put into testing any product being questioned time and time again and people wanting to see an independent outside source test it and make sure it works as I said it ticks me off. If something doesn't work I say it sucks, if it does, I endorse it.
I am a lot of things, A LOT, but I am NOT a liar or crook.
I am a lot of things, A LOT, but I am NOT a liar or crook.
03whitegsr, thank you very much for digging up those old threads. There is a lot of information in there and the dyno sheets show the great improvements to the low end/midrange I was talking about. Thanks.
Evolved Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,788
Likes: 1
Chris Hodges owner of Dyno Dynamics quote:
"Dyno Dynamics Shootout software rules out cheating with software;"
From this link: http://www.redline.lt/magazine/spec-.../article/16/1/
As I said, every DD shop in the UK uses Shootout mode when dynoing Evolutions. It can I'm sure give a flywheel estimate, but all the results I've seen are ATW. Everyone always says comparing dyno graphs is tricky business and indeed it is. But if you looked at the MLR modified, and if you see DD claiming results within 1% between shops when using Shootout mode. I really think this takes a big step towards making comparisons easier. And I wish DD shops in the states would start using it.
"Dyno Dynamics Shootout software rules out cheating with software;"
From this link: http://www.redline.lt/magazine/spec-.../article/16/1/
Chances are, many of you from around the automotive industry have already heard of the ShootOut system when dyno tuning cars. Dyno Dynamics, the manufacturer of Australia’s leading dynamometer brand, has for many years been considered the benchmark for both accuracy and repeatability. Now, after 4 years of effort (not to mention a substantial financial investment), they have just ‘upped the stakes’ - Dyno Dynamics has developed a system that is set to become the industry standard for power comparison. The system is called ShootOut, it is being utilised by a network of accredited Dyno Dynamics equipped workshops across Australia and will soon be available to all customers worldwide.
The ShootOut mode system is not just a hardware or software upgrade – it is a standardised approach to power measurement, designed to ensure that you can take your car to any accredited workshop and get accurate power measurements for your car. The results will be the same regardless of which ShootOut mode accredited workshop you select. This also means that results from different cars, measured on different dynos can be compared much more accurately which opens a lot of insight to power readings.
ShootOut was developed by Dyno Dynamics primarily to eliminate "Operator Technique" and as a tool for measuring horsepower accurately and CONSISTENTLY for ALL Dyno Dynamics dynos with Shootout accreditation. All dynos with Shootout accreditation have been calibrated the same accross the board, and should not vary more than 1% when comparing between Dyno Dynamics dynos.
Ethical standards
All ShootOut workshops must abide by a code of practice. When a company gets its ShootOut accreditation, it is only leasing the right to use the ShootOut mode and the ShootOut logos on the dynos, which are bgasically the physical and interlectual property of Dyno Dynamics. We are bound by a contractual agreement which is renewed on a yearly basis with very strict guidelines and procedures whenever we use the ShootOut logos on printed dyno graphs. If a company does not adhere to these guidelines, and decides to employ "Operator Techniques" and manipulate the ShootOut process, Dyno Dynamics will issue the company with a warning. After 3 warnings, the company loses their ShootOut Accreditation. Dyno Dynamics expect Dyno Operators to be honest and follow the required procedures in accordance with the ShootOut Agreement between the operator and Dyno Dynamics.
Proof of integrity
1. All ShootOut graph runs must be supervised by an accredited ShootOut scrutineer.
2. When the Shootineer is confident that the run has been performed to Dyno Dynamics’ ShootOut standards, the approved ShootOut logo will be added to the graph.
3. Test conditions and other data is printed on the lower edge of the graph as further evidence of accuracy.
4. When the graph is printed, the Shootineer will apply the official ShootOut stamp and personally sign it.
5. As final proof, the customer is provided with a checklist to verify that all steps in vehicle preparation for the test have been carried out correctly.
Whether you are planning on attending a ‘head to head’ dyno day, or want your vehicle tested to verify the effects of a performance enhancement – A Dyno Dynamics ShootOut accredited workshop will determine the figures accurately, time after time, regardless of location.
The ShootOut mode system is not just a hardware or software upgrade – it is a standardised approach to power measurement, designed to ensure that you can take your car to any accredited workshop and get accurate power measurements for your car. The results will be the same regardless of which ShootOut mode accredited workshop you select. This also means that results from different cars, measured on different dynos can be compared much more accurately which opens a lot of insight to power readings.
ShootOut was developed by Dyno Dynamics primarily to eliminate "Operator Technique" and as a tool for measuring horsepower accurately and CONSISTENTLY for ALL Dyno Dynamics dynos with Shootout accreditation. All dynos with Shootout accreditation have been calibrated the same accross the board, and should not vary more than 1% when comparing between Dyno Dynamics dynos.
Ethical standards
All ShootOut workshops must abide by a code of practice. When a company gets its ShootOut accreditation, it is only leasing the right to use the ShootOut mode and the ShootOut logos on the dynos, which are bgasically the physical and interlectual property of Dyno Dynamics. We are bound by a contractual agreement which is renewed on a yearly basis with very strict guidelines and procedures whenever we use the ShootOut logos on printed dyno graphs. If a company does not adhere to these guidelines, and decides to employ "Operator Techniques" and manipulate the ShootOut process, Dyno Dynamics will issue the company with a warning. After 3 warnings, the company loses their ShootOut Accreditation. Dyno Dynamics expect Dyno Operators to be honest and follow the required procedures in accordance with the ShootOut Agreement between the operator and Dyno Dynamics.
Proof of integrity
1. All ShootOut graph runs must be supervised by an accredited ShootOut scrutineer.
2. When the Shootineer is confident that the run has been performed to Dyno Dynamics’ ShootOut standards, the approved ShootOut logo will be added to the graph.
3. Test conditions and other data is printed on the lower edge of the graph as further evidence of accuracy.
4. When the graph is printed, the Shootineer will apply the official ShootOut stamp and personally sign it.
5. As final proof, the customer is provided with a checklist to verify that all steps in vehicle preparation for the test have been carried out correctly.
Whether you are planning on attending a ‘head to head’ dyno day, or want your vehicle tested to verify the effects of a performance enhancement – A Dyno Dynamics ShootOut accredited workshop will determine the figures accurately, time after time, regardless of location.
Last edited by crcain; Oct 9, 2007 at 05:31 AM.
We've used shootout mode, and it gives numbers so large that they seem silly - definitely not ATW figures except in pipe dreams. There may be more than one shootout mode, and that doesn't make things any less confusing. The fact is that Dynojets, Mustangs, and DD are all very consistent, so long as the eddy current dynos share the same settings.