I went within 1 tenth of Fathouse when I was on 93 octane, going to e85 I have way more power but spin and bounce uncontrollably, it'll be fixed eventually. I can drive just fine

 

i just called and they do not make a power steering pulley for the evo. maybe another company makes it? anyways i think its worth a try dave to do the alt and water pump. they are actually alot lighter then stock.

 

Not to bust bubbles but lightweight pulley's were some retarded honda fad. You know why you dont see anyone ever buying them USUALLY, its cause there aren't gains worth the money to be had.

Even tested on honda's they have seen maybe 3hp DJ! lol

 

It is not so much that that make power, but the fact that they allow for less parasitic drag and less rotational mass. The engine will rev faster. The engine won't have to work as hard to get moving.

Cam pullys + alternator pully + Water pump pully + Aluminum fluidamper = quite a few lbs of rotational mass.

 

I am not testing transient response on the dyno, it's some scarey **** in a car like mine. I've one or two 1/4 mile runs on the dyno and it was the day they installed it. I think someone has to be high on crack to do 1/4 miles runs on the dyno, in my car you'd have to be addicted to crack or have lost a bet! I do pulls from 2500 to 8,000 or so with my car. Running it that low from the start you can bet an excellent idea how the transient is going to be.

I'm not personally the least bit interested in lightweight aftermarket pulleys of any type. The gains if any would be so minor I'm just not interested. You can take 20+ pounds off the clutch assembly and maybe notice some. The OEM stuff fits correctly and is reliable, I like that.

Something ticked me off on the internet this weekend, maybe more than just one thing. I was debating on just not contributing anymore at all but think instead I will do what I have been doing since coming back on here and just stick to the threads I start and laugh at all the dumb asses in the other ones.

With that said, last week I started having some problems and was dismissing them as something they ended up not being. Today I put the car back on the dyno, big tube header, HTA86, BF272 cams to try to trouble shoot the problem. As I worked through it the problem persisted and got worse by the pull. Finally I seem to have tracked it down......atleast I pray I did cause I can't sleep when this stuff happens.

So I finally got probably 6 high boost pulls in a row in that were very good. I spent a few minutes with the boost, AFR's and timing. The car layed down the most power it ever has, 712 whp and 584 ft lbs of torque. Peak torque at 6,000 rpm, that is stellar.

The car is off the dyno now and I guess as much as I hate to, I'm going to do the cam swap again. The results from last week made absolutely no sense at all and I am 95% certain the cam we had ground should gain atleast 25 whp over what I have. Looking back at Friday over the weekend it all started bothering more and more. Plans are tomorrow to swap the big cams back in the car and put it back on the dyno.

I should just leave it alone because it's pretty bad *** now.......that isn't my style I guess.

 

goodluck =)

 

Dav , wht kind of cams u'll Test either the BF 272's ?

 

That thing should be a beast!

 

Alright, thought it would be interesting to post a dyno sheet for comparison.

The three runs are mine, an EVO9 and Mike at AWD's. #2 and #3 are the two highest T3 numbers ever produced on this dyno. I am not the record holder for a T3 turbo on our dyno. I don't care to be either and that is kind of the point of this post and this entire thread actually. I am not trying to build a car with a lot of top end and then sacrifice low end. That is not my goal. My goal as I have said is to build a car that will run 8's but keep as much low/mid range as possible and that is the hard part.

Here is how the sheet is layed out:

#1, (solid red line) my car the way it is today, BR 2.1, BR head, BF272 cams set at 0, HTA86, BR fabricated intake manifold 42.40 psi peak boost.
#2, (small dashed line)EVO9, MIVEC, BR 2 liter, BR head, BR FMIC, BR COP, AEM, 5R cams, Wilson V2.3, HTA86 turbo at 42.46 psi peak boost.
#3, (large dashed line)Mike's car, BR 2 liter, BR head, custom cams, PTE6765, Driven Innovation intake, peak boost at 44 psi

Something to keep in mind is the #1 and #3 runs were after our dyno re-calibration so both of those appear to be even laggier than they would have before the recalibration. The recalibration shifted the graphs about 400 rpm laggier than they were.

OK, for some reason I am losing my train of thought on this.

Here's the dyno sheet:



OK now here is where it gets very interesting and you will all see how much difference working the crap out of a combination helps.

First thing to look at is the power over the RPM band, this is the average number located on the far right at the bottom.

#1, my car averages 284 ft lbs and 293 whp from 3,000 to 8,000 rpm.

#2, EVO9, averages 214 ft lbs and 222 whp from 3,000-8,000 rpm.

#3, Mikes, averages 188 ft lbs and 190 whp from 3,000-8,000 rpm.

Now let's look at some seperate rpm points.

Numbers are compared as FT LBS/WHP:

My car at 3000 rpm makes 22/7 more than the EVO9 and 47/28 more than Mikes.

My car at 3500 rpm makes 38/25 more than the EVO9 and 33/22 more than Mikes.

Go up to 4,000 rpm and my car makes 52/40 more than the EVO9 and 44/34 more than Mikes.

4500 rpm my car makes 96/81 more than the EVO9 and 124/106 more than Mike's.

5000 rpm my car makes 95/84 more than the EVO9 and 222/212 more than Mike's.

5500 rpm my car makes 70/57 more than the EVO9 and 243/250 more than Mike's.

6000 rpm my car makes 46/34 more than the EVO9 and 166/182 more than Mike's.

From here the gap closes so let's skip to 7900 rpm where I get whooped by both cars:

7900 my car makes 7 more FT LBS but 18 less whp than the EVO9 and 57 less ft lbs and 97 less whp than Mike's.

So as you can see there are some substantial numbers in there. Rather than giving up more and more low end I will continue to concentrate on minimal losses in the low/midrange when I find something to gain power up top.

 

Amazing Numbers and Graph ...
Cant believe that the spooling of the 6765 is Barely Close to the GT42R ? :O ... and you aren't so far Dav ... Nice Torque till top end ... Amazing Job ... '' KING '' ...

 

excellent data David, very interesting stuff. The gap might have narrowed if the boost were the same vs Mike's car up top.

 

excited for today's vid

 

I cant imagine all the thought and time you put into the parts you choose let alone the ones you design you are doing a good job of sticking to your goal keep up the good work ok im done being a groupie

 

Great analysis David! Thanks for putting all that together for us here at EVOm!

 

No one does testing like BR...No wonder you cant sleep at night those wheels in your head are always turning The TQ graph looks like a 2.4L