Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

Another day of dyno testing with Buschur's RS.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 11:13 AM
  #1  
David Buschur's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (53)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Likes: 32
Another day of dyno testing with Buschur's RS.

Hello all. Well I took a few weeks off on my RS while we were working on the EVO X.

In the meantime we had built some new parts for it as I wanted to continue the testing on the car.

Here are some quick points I want to touch on. First off I have caught some misc. flack here and there from some guys who "think they are in the know" about our Deluxe FMIC design, which would also spill over to our DSM FMIC design as they are the same. This particular design I am referring to has the inlet (coming from the turbo to the intercooler) on the face of the inlet tank. So the inlet faces the engine, rather than coming in from the end. Little did these critics know that we have tested this design in the past and found it to change nothing. I did not have the proof of this as we didn't save logs/dyno graphs of this testing in the past as it was for shop R&D and not really public knowledge.

Anyway, when I built the new headers for my RS I dropped the turbo low enough to make it possible to run the turbo directly into the face of the intercooler. This is how our black drag EVO is and that was the last time we had conducted testing such as this (again, with no saved logs/dyno plots).

Today I set out to test 3 things. First was the new header I built with shorter runners than the others I had built. 2nd was the new FMIC with the inlet on the face of the intercooler and the last was a full 3" upper i/c pipe with 3" outlet on the intercooler.

Here is a print out of the dyno runs with an explanation of what you are looking at and the stats of the testing for each run:



Test #1 is my baseline run with the new header. This is with our Race FMIC kit, just like we sell. 2.5" inlet outlet and our lower i/c pipe that is shaped like a candy cane. 2.5" upper i/c pipe.

639 whp and 504 ft lbs of torque
20 psi was reached at 4895 rpm
33.68 psi was peak boost reached at 5648 rpm
Boost at 8,000 rpm was 31.54 psi
AIT increase was 1.8 degrees
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test #2 is my second test. We changed the Race FMIC to the inlet on the face and a 3" outlet. We then used a 3" to 2.5" coupling on the outlet so the outlet size stayed the same, 2.5" upper i/c pipe.

645 whp and 506 ft lbs of torque
20 psi was reached at 4914 rpm
34.18 psi was peak boost reached at 5754 rpm
Boost at 8,000 rpm was 31.52 psi
AIT increase was 1.8 degrees
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test #3 is my last test. We changed the upper i/c pipe to a full 3" pipe, at this point the FMIC also had a full 3" outlet and it all matched up to 3" throttle body.

638 whp and 500 ft lbs of torque
20 psi was reached at 4973 rpm
33.74 psi was peak boost reached at 6012 rpm
Boost at 8,000 rpm was 32.13 psi
AIT increase was 3.6 degrees
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I sit here and wonder why I post these results and development with all the critics out there trying to outrun us or make more power etc. I really have no idea and it truly becomes harder and harder to press the enter button with each new test.

As you can see the dyno charts even with all these changes make the testing darn near a draw on the results. The numbers from best to worse only vary by 7 whp and 6 ft lbs of torque.

Also, NO part of the tuning was touched for any of these and there was NO change to the boost controller. I also did two runs for each test and took the highest of each of the two pulls for the comparison. 7 whp was the largest difference on any two baseline pulls.

Before anyone asks what will end up on my car. I am going to use our Race FMIC with the face entry inlet and a 2.5" outlet and our standard 2.5" upper i/c pipe.
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 11:28 AM
  #2  
jrsimon27's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,574
Likes: 6
From: C.A Honduras!
nice test
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 11:35 AM
  #3  
gamebred26's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
From: NJ
so by switching to a 3" you lost spool..hp and tq?
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 11:39 AM
  #4  
robertrinaustin's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,858
Likes: 0
From: Work - New York, Alaska, Mexico or the Caribbean. -Home - Tx Hill Country
Wow, no gains with the 3" uip and it looks like it hurt spool up some.

As always, thanks for taking the time to test and post the results.
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 11:45 AM
  #5  
StreetThisEvo's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (48)
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,660
Likes: 1
From: Barbertucky, OH
I don't feel 3" I/C piping is needed until you are making 800+ whp on a 4g63.

I'm glad my Buschur Racing Race FMIC is the best there is. Thanks once again David for taking the time to test and post your results for everyone else to see.
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 11:49 AM
  #6  
Mellon Racing's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
interesting test David thanks for sharing
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 11:52 AM
  #7  
Wicked E's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (26)
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,989
Likes: 0
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Thanks for sharing David as always. At least I and a select few appreciate your contributions to the community. I know you have beer in that cooler under your desk, grab one, chug it and keep on trucking...

Cheers-
Erich
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 11:53 AM
  #8  
nos51's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (30)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
From: miami
thanks dave for posting up this info!!like you said you dont need to do it and you still do,much apreciated!!
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 11:58 AM
  #9  
mdsevo06's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (41)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 1
From: San Diego
Nice info. Thanks for taking the time, for such a test.
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 12:03 PM
  #10  
BigBadQuattro's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Interesting results dave, it seems like your an honest guy with your testing. i give you props for sharing your results regardless of outcomeryone. your hard work and persistance is 2nd to NONE in this community. Now i see why you are the best!
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 12:14 PM
  #11  
crcain's Avatar
Evolved Member
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,788
Likes: 1
Dave I have to believe Buschur Racing is benefiting from this full disclosure policy of test data. Yes you will make sales from having the fastest Evo's at your shop. But I think your continued particpation at EvoM and all your contributions are what really help your business tremendously.

Thanks for the test info.
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 12:27 PM
  #12  
DeiPro's Avatar
Account Disabled
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
From: Akron, Ohio
I just wanted to thank David as well for the Excellent test results.

I had a chance to spend sometime @ BR on tuesday with David while he was reassmbeling his RS for this test. After spending a few hours with Dave, I have a completly new respect for all that he does and his contrabutions to the community. He is extremely thorough with everything that he does with his own car, and rest assured this is transmitted to each of his customer cars. Every kit and every Item he sells and markets goes through the same process until it meets his approval.

The thing that I appreciate the most about Dave is the fact that he is very forward and is extremely honest. You can rest easy knowing that his reports of testing are just that, reports of exactly what he witnessed, exactly as they happened. If someone else built a better IC than BR does, I have no doubt in my mind that Dave would test it and report it honestly. If he found that it was actually better, I am sure that he would make the appropriate revisions to his own design.

Don't worry about the critics Dave, you are the better man for doing what you do, and doing it with complete integrety. For this I thank you. You are critical of yourself, and that is why your parts work so good. If its not good enough, you make it good enough. Heck, I use to be a critic of you, but through a few hours with you and a few phone conversations, I have come to know you for who and what you really are, which is honest, forward, and full of integrity.
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 12:38 PM
  #13  
kmcconn9's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (33)
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,044
Likes: 3
From: Hagerstown
thanks for the testing dave. Can you post up a picture of how the inlet pipe looks going into the face of the fmic?

I found this data while searching for a pic of the new setup...

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...1993093676.pdf
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 12:43 PM
  #14  
RazorLab's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,092
Likes: 1,090
From: Mid-Hudson, NY
Originally Posted by gamebred26
so by switching to a 3" you lost spool..
If you have the opportunity to look at a WRC car, you will notice all the IC piping is very short and small diameter.

Nice testing Dave.
Reply
Old Feb 27, 2008 | 01:12 PM
  #15  
Mike.p's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (34)
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
From: atlanta
like stated above dave could you post pics of how you did the inlet on the ic.... i might have to change it..lol and damn i wasted money on 3" piping..lol
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:30 PM.