DB,

 

scheides, the mileage my car has on it is low, I'd say in the almost 2 years I've put 2500 miles on it. I only live about 6 miles from the shop. The mileage isn't a good reflection of the durability in this case. I'd guess this engine has over 100 dyno pulls on it, 50+ 9 second passes, 25 10 second passes and I don't know how many 11's second passes. This is the same engine that I have been running since the car had the 20gLT/Green on it. The only change I have made to it was when we did all the camshaft testing and the head never came off the car.

 

evovin, you aren't getting an answer because you aren't reading. Go back and read post #55 and then from there go back a few more pages.

 

My statement is intended to be general FYI, nothing more, nothing less. It really doesn't have anything specific to do with this turbo (which performs well), and it wasn't intended to divert the discussion.

There isn't anything advantageous about a flat hp curve . . . at all. All hp does is indicate what's happening to torque with respect to rpm. Ideally, the hp curve will continue to rise like a rocket right up to the optimum shift point (which is determined by tq, not hp). Of course, getting reality to approach that which is ideal is a challenge.

The torque curve is representative of the VE. The displacement of the engine isn't a factor. What factors into the ability or inability to maintain torque as rpm rises includes things that affect mechanical tuning like cam timing, intake manifold tuning, port flow characteristics, and of course, the size of the turbo. The better we hold torque at higher rpm, the more hp we make.

Again, just general FYI.

 

Flat torque curve= oversize turbo/huge hot side. Show me a small turbo setup with a flat torque curve. Flat torque curves start at the 2.0/37r territory. Any turbo smaller that has a flat torque curve just has way to big a hot side.

Dave, great numbers. I am sure you will reach your goal of 150 now. I think its great you are also trying to make it clear that a flying 20g setup is more fun than a 35r setup. Your goal has always been to go fast as possible on the parts that you sell. While that is fine and dandy and has a purpose, that goal always leaves a "fun power band" in the shadows. 99% of your customers use their car as daily drivers and their focus SHOULD be to maintain a fun power band while trying to achieve certain HP goals. There are many things that can be done to a 35r setup to maintain that 20g like feel. I point this out not to knock what you do. You have a very admiral business and your track records speak for themselves. I make this point because I think its a shame that you customers and most everyone else's for that matter fall into trap when they build a fast car. They mimic those in the limelight. Which they should. Unfortunately that leads to most people building fast cars that are not all that much fun to drive on a daily basis.

 

I am in complete disagreement with the statement that "there is nothing advantageous about a flat HP curve". Going by what you are saying in your first paragraph would mean that I would need to shift my RS at 5800 rpm, I can gaurantee you that will not work. I know the calculations for HP are derived from torque. I also know just getting an engine to keep the HP curve FLAT is an accomplishment. Put a half dozen different tuners on this same combination and then let's all go race. I'll prove there is more to it than meets the eye and text book.

I also do not agree with the ability to keep HP rising is all mechanical tuning. If that were the case my HP would drop off up top. I do agree the turbo size is a huge part of it which goes back to the useful power curve. Of course I agree with the statement you made "the better we hold torque at higher rpm, the more hp we make" torque is what is measured and HP is nothing but a calculation from that, so the statement is obvious.

Anyway, getting off topic and we aren't going to agree, one way of thinking is purely book the other is sitting on the dyno for hours on end and I can tell you keeping the power flat is a huge accomplishment and is desirable and DOES win races and sets records.

 

Can a 10 on a 20glt be done with a maf, or does the car have to be done on AEM?

 

But doesn't the Header kit have the smaller AR turbine housing? Giving you faster spool???

 

Now, the conversation is touching on my original goals for the OKIX car. The high torque and flat horsepower were dialed in pretty much intentionally. In early posts I was told by another tuner that you don't tune for torque, but I did. The flat horsepower curve came from LOTS of minor tweaking and going against the norm. The result was a 20G-LT with huge torque, flat horsepower that shifted precisely at 8000 rpms and set a record. The fun-factor that 94awdcoupe mentions is still there in bundles and that's why we're very cautiously making changes to that setup. No question we could go faster with a bigger turbo, but daily driving and tracking are being kept in balance. I think the 35R-HTA that David has is all of that and more. DB, I bet you're anticipation is beyond belief. Your 150+ is ABSOLUTELY already there. As you know, your midrange is going to be MONSTROUS. Best of luck, but I don't think LUCK is needed.

 

Yes the 10 sec mark can be achieved with the MAF and without the help of AEM.

 

It should be pointed out, however, that the AEM will most like make more power in the end. The AEM has more precise control and I would not go much further without it's use. There's a big difference between excellent street driver and all-out performance. We'll probably be going to the AEM on the next upgrade.

 

"Flat" is a relative term that means 'not peaky'. You're assuming 'flat' means absolutely flat to the rpm limit, and while that would be great, it's unlikely (and not what I intended).


Flat as opposed to dropping, yes. If we had a way to go from flat to rising, would we want it? Of course.


The optimum shift point in this case (and virtually every case) falls well past the torque peak (5800rpm).

HP will only drop if the rate of torque loss exceeds the rate at which rpm rises. The rate at which torque decreases is likely due to mechanical tuning, the size of the turbo, or both.


I'm unsure of what this implies, so I'll leave it alone.

Anyway, best of luck with testing the new turbo setup! Carry on.

 

Does anyone have any information about there bigger turbos they are supposed to release? I've heard rumors about a FP4094HTA, that would be very interesting in my eys.

 

Hey david is this what it looks like when you leave the line?

 

Thanks 94awdcoupe for the compliments, very much appreciated.

The FP housing is ".70" A/R, no stamping on it, that is what we are told it is. So technically comparing it to the .68 housing the header kit comes with yes, it should spool slower. The manifold though with the shorter runners and higher heat retention for sure spools quicker than the header.

TedB, it appears after a little more discussion we are in agreement more than I thought. Yes, having a flat HP curve is more desirable than falling off. Yes, I'd rather have the HP level continue to climb with RPM BUT to have that happen it generally means you have a larger laggy turbo.

Tom, the tuner that told you tune for HP and not torque is not correct. First you already know what I am getting ready to tell you. HP is just a number calculated from torque and RPM. So tuning for HP is basically impossible, you are always tuning for torque whether you realize it or not.

If the HP level when you start tuning falls off up top then the torque is falling off too. If you continue to tune and have the HP coming up flat or even climbing then if you start looking at torque you are going to find it doing the same thing, see what I mean?


OKIX, being as I work with a bunch of smart asses, I showed Trent and Dan the post you made. Trent said to tell you, "I'd have to ask Trent what the car looks like when I launch." He's real funny! haha