Do you believe changing a shortblock destroys all possibility of comparisons to the old header?

 

crcain, if I was building the new short block, yes it might change the outcome. Meaning most novices will not maintain clearances, etc as well as a professional builder. The power variance would be much greater with a novice building the motor than with a professional. Just my .02. I don't think the difference from ANY professional should be too notable.

 

This thing has got to be a beast. Very nice David!

 

crcain, no I do not think that changing the shortblock made any difference. There are too many dyno runs to verify the power other than the turbine housing/header changes have remained constant.

 

Here's the dyno sheet showing the best FR header run with the Garrett .82 housing against the BR header that is on the car now also with a Garrett .82 housing.

 

I would love to see the Shearer mani you use for your kits tested as well with the 3in outlet turbo for the folks who want to keep the AC and compare it to the FR and your BR header.

 

where did boost and a/f go?

Sorry

Scorke

 

^^ They were not hooked up.

 

I don't see how/why they would not be monitored when doing a "test"?

I know DB knows what he is doing but wouldn't monitoring changes in these two dependent variables shine some light on whether or not both setups were fully utilized or both independent variables had an impact or not.

Scorke

 

scorke, I'm really stating this for the benefit of those who don't think about it, or haven't experienced it. With each part that is being tested, you also have a tune that is being used to produce X amount of power. Part 1 might be maxed with the current tune. Now, swap out Part 1 with Part 2. If a tester uses the exact same tune to 'test' the new part, someone invariably focuses on the fact that PART 2 wasn't tuned to the max, so therefore it's not a good test. Then, if you tune for PART 2, someone else says that the TUNE is what made the difference, not the part. It's almost a no win situation. For those with knowledge and understanding of the testing situation, it's not an issue. For those who just want to shoot the messenger, it becomes a point to argue. Certain shops just need to be given the leeway of being fair with their tests. I know that DB is very picky about keeping the playing field equal. Scorke, I KNOW that you understand that, but it might give a distorted view to those who just want to shoot the messenger.

 

No AFR or boost on ANY dynographs from my own personal car and testing. This information is being made public but is for my own use. This isn't a header that I am offering. Just misc. babble and information.

So, no, AFR and boost do not need to be on these graphs. I use the AEM and every single run is logged and reviewed.

 

Thanks Tom, you must have been typing at the exact same time I was!

 

With what Tom said, I think the fact that this thread isn't about me trying to sell anything at all, simply about my car and what I am messing with makes the test results even more "belieable" for people who don't know me and know that they can trust what I do.

 

yeah, ok, but don't think I'm going to swing from your nuts any time soon. The facts just need to be brought out at some point. I experienced the same delimna when we tested the cams. The new build had a ported head and dropped the boost by 1 psi or so. Delimna was whether to test JUST THE PART, or test the part at the same boost level (which of course was more airflow due to the volume of air). Some parts just need to be retuned, to take advantage of their new capabilities of making more power. Sometimes, you have to ASSUME that the earlier part was maxed to begin with based on WHO the tester is. Then make another assumption that the new part should be pushed to get the max out of it. The end results will yield the NET difference. I've read previous posts concerning the tune vs the part and it's not a fair comparison.

 

I completely understand this, I thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt that I grasp at least a little bit

I know that DB is very particular about his testing and procedures, and luckily for us shares his information with us, however if the tune was not changed then the gains/losses can only be attribute to the parts, where as if they were tuned it might be hard to tell if the gains came from the part or a combination of the part and the tune.

Dave I believe what you post, and what you say I just always want more information! I don't get what you have to lose by posting the information being that you are going through the trouble to test two minimally different components to see if they offer more performance, find that there is a very very tiny difference in performance, then leave out some of the data!!!! I can understand if you don't want to make it public, but if that is the case why post the graphs period? If its a case of you just logging the data and not wanting to post it ok, but if its not proprietary to how you make power it would just shed an extra bit of light on what the changes you performed on the car made to the tune and package as a whole

Scorke