419wHP EvoVIII on pump gas dyno graph
#17
Evolved Member
Originally posted by Evo11V
cant wait to see AL's 93 graph.... good job
cant wait to see AL's 93 graph.... good job
I want to see what comes out running straight Genuine Draft...
If what he said is right, then the charts will be similar, and I will find that reassuring.
Similar cars with similar mods running the same motion lotion getting similar results - that's the kind of consistency I want to see. Wouldn't like it if some of these results were just one-off non-repeatable events.
Gives hope to us regualr folks...
Mike's dad
#18
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ft. Laud, FL
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by joeycoates
I would pay for more power from a turbo setup that is well engineered with a smaller turbo, although bigger than what I have now and would still be responsive.
Maybe hit the torque a little earlier and peak the hp earlier, say a max of 430-450 wheel, to where it starts to fall around 8000.
I would pay for more power from a turbo setup that is well engineered with a smaller turbo, although bigger than what I have now and would still be responsive.
Maybe hit the torque a little earlier and peak the hp earlier, say a max of 430-450 wheel, to where it starts to fall around 8000.
Although there have been advances, the general rule of more hp = bigger turbo + less spool still seems to hold true. I went from T3 to T3/T4 to straight TO4. Trust me full boost on my car hits quite a bit later than John's - if lag is a concern, I would stick w/ the stock turbo, maybe clip it but leave it at that.
$0.02
#19
Originally posted by mikesevo8
Me too. Al was making more ponies with the malt liquer, which is to be expected.
I want to see what comes out running straight Genuine Draft...
If what he said is right, then the charts will be similar, and I will find that reassuring.
Similar cars with similar mods running the same motion lotion getting similar results - that's the kind of consistency I want to see. Wouldn't like it if some of these results were just one-off non-repeatable events.
Gives hope to us regualr folks...
Mike's dad
Me too. Al was making more ponies with the malt liquer, which is to be expected.
I want to see what comes out running straight Genuine Draft...
If what he said is right, then the charts will be similar, and I will find that reassuring.
Similar cars with similar mods running the same motion lotion getting similar results - that's the kind of consistency I want to see. Wouldn't like it if some of these results were just one-off non-repeatable events.
Gives hope to us regualr folks...
Mike's dad
Mikes dad I cant see why you would think there would not be similar results with similar setups (within some varience)
#20
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Originally posted by mikesevo8
Me too. Al was making more ponies with the malt liquer, which is to be expected.
I want to see what comes out running straight Genuine Draft...
If what he said is right, then the charts will be similar, and I will find that reassuring.
Similar cars with similar mods running the same motion lotion getting similar results - that's the kind of consistency I want to see. Wouldn't like it if some of these results were just one-off non-repeatable events.
Gives hope to us regualr folks...
Mike's dad
Me too. Al was making more ponies with the malt liquer, which is to be expected.
I want to see what comes out running straight Genuine Draft...
If what he said is right, then the charts will be similar, and I will find that reassuring.
Similar cars with similar mods running the same motion lotion getting similar results - that's the kind of consistency I want to see. Wouldn't like it if some of these results were just one-off non-repeatable events.
Gives hope to us regualr folks...
Mike's dad
Here is my dyno sheet - not the most powerful one I have made - but just a regular - rich safe tune at 23.5 psi - its done on the same dyno so you can make a decent comparison - the power is very comparable -as it should be with all the same parts. As you can see at these low power levels there is no differnce between the reflash as on my car and the AEM - if anything, my dyno sheet is broader and smoother
I will be posting up some more dyno sheets with 93 octane very soon
#21
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: South Florida
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this can be a good learning experience for all the tuners and fans and potential customers alike...Im pretty sure with all of als dyno time, and someone like buschur, frank at sfp and vishnu....they can all analyze whats happenign here to get the most out of these engines without grenading them....so for the next guy he has a proven setup thats spot on...sort of like the supra setups which are pretty damn impressive...Im so amazed at these japanese cars...a couple years ago you would have never caught me near one..I always admired them but never thought id get one...I was a pure muscle car american iron type...then i had a terrible experience after many years with my buick t type...and decided let me try the evo...Im impressed... those subaru stis are pretty nice too....but it looks like u can squeze a little more out of the evo in all categories....Im just amazed at how well informed and the vast knowledge of all the people in these circles for the japanese car aftermarket...keep up the great work
#22
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: South Florida
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Alfriedesq
HKS is all about consistant - one of the best manifold / turbo combinations you can find anywhere - (just a bit costly - but its been my experience that you get what you pay for)
Here is my dyno sheet - not the most powerful one I have made - but just a regular - rich safe tune at 23.5 psi - its done on the same dyno so you can make a decent comparison - the power is very comparable -as it should be with all the same parts. As you can see at these low power levels there is no differnce between the reflash as on my car and the AEM - if anything, my dyno sheet is broader and smoother
I will be posting up some more dyno sheets with 93 octane very soon
HKS is all about consistant - one of the best manifold / turbo combinations you can find anywhere - (just a bit costly - but its been my experience that you get what you pay for)
Here is my dyno sheet - not the most powerful one I have made - but just a regular - rich safe tune at 23.5 psi - its done on the same dyno so you can make a decent comparison - the power is very comparable -as it should be with all the same parts. As you can see at these low power levels there is no differnce between the reflash as on my car and the AEM - if anything, my dyno sheet is broader and smoother
I will be posting up some more dyno sheets with 93 octane very soon
#23
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding earlier spool, if my memory serves me correctly, the good 'ole original Gruppe B 205T16 had two turbos - one big and one small to minimize the lag and have the power on tap at all times. I can't even fathom the plumbing involved, but whatcha guys think?
#24
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Originally posted by Pesto360
not to disagree...and ruin another thread..but thats on race fuel with more boost...cant really compare them....but its very impressive none the less
not to disagree...and ruin another thread..but thats on race fuel with more boost...cant really compare them....but its very impressive none the less
#25
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ft. Laud, FL
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
difference of opinion
Originally posted by Alfriedesq
Not much of a diiference at all condsidering I was running super rich a/f's and the race fuel was there mostloy for a margin of safety - but in any event - I will be testing it on 93 - maybe as soon as tommorrow - I plan to go out and tune a map for it tonight - should be almost the same power as on yours - we'll see
Not much of a diiference at all condsidering I was running super rich a/f's and the race fuel was there mostloy for a margin of safety - but in any event - I will be testing it on 93 - maybe as soon as tommorrow - I plan to go out and tune a map for it tonight - should be almost the same power as on yours - we'll see
But to forgo any argument - you're right we'll see - post that bad boy up there.
#28
Hello everybody, This is my first time on this forum, and I would
like to read and hopefully, post on this forum. There is a lot of
controversy about this 419hp car owned by John ( pesto360. )
Maybe I can shed some light on this. First my objective is definately not to argue back and forth with anyone, only to state the facts to the best of my knowledge.
For starters both AL & John have a lot to be proud of, they both
have impressive cars with impressive hp#'s. And I am sure that
they have some similar parts, such as hks turbo kit and a few
other small similarites. But as for the head porting, custom
ferrea valves, intercooler, intercooler piping, ecu, injectors, t-bodie
I think there a bit different. I know the goal that John has with
his car is to get as close to 500whp with pump gas. But more
importantly reliability. And I assume that Al is trying to get as much whp as he can but feels that to keep reliability he has to
run race fuel. Well it is pretty clear that using race fuel gives you
the ability to run more boost, ignition advance which all equal
more power. And if that is what AL feels he needs to do, than
so be it. As for John's car, well thats a little more complicated
the window for error becomes much smaller, which means
you really have to be right on target or it could be pretty ugly.
Johns car is back at sfp this week for more tweeking, in hopes
to find 450-500hp on pump gas (no easy task). But with all that
said, I know that with the proper timing curves, & a/f ratio
it can be accomplished. Johns car was only base tunned to
get an idea of what it would take to accomplish to ultimate
goal. The a/f was at 11.7 from start to finish, the boost 21 peak,
and as far as ignition, it only had between 6-9 degrees above
12 psi, egt was 560c (in d/p). With those values the car saw
o knock on the datalog. And as for knock sensor values, they were set pretty sensitive. (knock map was set under free rev,
not load.) Will it reach the goals? I guess we will see this week,
but if it cant make 500whp on pump gas without knocking, then
I guess we will just have to turn on the water injection. I know
we can make 500+whp with that. I have built plenty of buicks
with water injection that run 26-29 psi on pump gas with no problems. AS soon as its done we will post dyno sheets, data
logs, and for anyone who is intrested tunning maps. (please
note that those maps are specific to this car & does not mean,
they will work in any application.)
I will keep you posted
Frank@sfp
like to read and hopefully, post on this forum. There is a lot of
controversy about this 419hp car owned by John ( pesto360. )
Maybe I can shed some light on this. First my objective is definately not to argue back and forth with anyone, only to state the facts to the best of my knowledge.
For starters both AL & John have a lot to be proud of, they both
have impressive cars with impressive hp#'s. And I am sure that
they have some similar parts, such as hks turbo kit and a few
other small similarites. But as for the head porting, custom
ferrea valves, intercooler, intercooler piping, ecu, injectors, t-bodie
I think there a bit different. I know the goal that John has with
his car is to get as close to 500whp with pump gas. But more
importantly reliability. And I assume that Al is trying to get as much whp as he can but feels that to keep reliability he has to
run race fuel. Well it is pretty clear that using race fuel gives you
the ability to run more boost, ignition advance which all equal
more power. And if that is what AL feels he needs to do, than
so be it. As for John's car, well thats a little more complicated
the window for error becomes much smaller, which means
you really have to be right on target or it could be pretty ugly.
Johns car is back at sfp this week for more tweeking, in hopes
to find 450-500hp on pump gas (no easy task). But with all that
said, I know that with the proper timing curves, & a/f ratio
it can be accomplished. Johns car was only base tunned to
get an idea of what it would take to accomplish to ultimate
goal. The a/f was at 11.7 from start to finish, the boost 21 peak,
and as far as ignition, it only had between 6-9 degrees above
12 psi, egt was 560c (in d/p). With those values the car saw
o knock on the datalog. And as for knock sensor values, they were set pretty sensitive. (knock map was set under free rev,
not load.) Will it reach the goals? I guess we will see this week,
but if it cant make 500whp on pump gas without knocking, then
I guess we will just have to turn on the water injection. I know
we can make 500+whp with that. I have built plenty of buicks
with water injection that run 26-29 psi on pump gas with no problems. AS soon as its done we will post dyno sheets, data
logs, and for anyone who is intrested tunning maps. (please
note that those maps are specific to this car & does not mean,
they will work in any application.)
I will keep you posted
Frank@sfp
#29
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Pesto360
not to disagree...and ruin another thread..but thats on race fuel with more boost...cant really compare them....but its very impressive none the less
not to disagree...and ruin another thread..but thats on race fuel with more boost...cant really compare them....but its very impressive none the less
#30
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Originally posted by Fsmith
Hello everybody, This is my first time on this forum, and I would
like to read and hopefully, post on this forum. There is a lot of
controversy about this 419hp car owned by John ( pesto360. )
Maybe I can shed some light on this. First my objective is definately not to argue back and forth with anyone, only to state the facts to the best of my knowledge.
For starters both AL & John have a lot to be proud of, they both
have impressive cars with impressive hp#'s. And I am sure that
they have some similar parts, such as hks turbo kit and a few
other small similarites. But as for the head porting, custom
ferrea valves, intercooler, intercooler piping, ecu, injectors, t-bodie
I think there a bit different. I know the goal that John has with
his car is to get as close to 500whp with pump gas. But more
importantly reliability. And I assume that Al is trying to get as much whp as he can but feels that to keep reliability he has to
run race fuel. Well it is pretty clear that using race fuel gives you
the ability to run more boost, ignition advance which all equal
more power. And if that is what AL feels he needs to do, than
so be it. As for John's car, well thats a little more complicated
the window for error becomes much smaller, which means
you really have to be right on target or it could be pretty ugly.
Johns car is back at sfp this week for more tweeking, in hopes
to find 450-500hp on pump gas (no easy task). But with all that
said, I know that with the proper timing curves, & a/f ratio
it can be accomplished. Johns car was only base tunned to
get an idea of what it would take to accomplish to ultimate
goal. The a/f was at 11.7 from start to finish, the boost 21 peak,
and as far as ignition, it only had between 6-9 degrees above
12 psi, egt was 560c (in d/p). With those values the car saw
o knock on the datalog. And as for knock sensor values, they were set pretty sensitive. (knock map was set under free rev,
not load.) Will it reach the goals? I guess we will see this week,
but if it cant make 500whp on pump gas without knocking, then
I guess we will just have to turn on the water injection. I know
we can make 500+whp with that. I have built plenty of buicks
with water injection that run 26-29 psi on pump gas with no problems. AS soon as its done we will post dyno sheets, data
logs, and for anyone who is intrested tunning maps. (please
note that those maps are specific to this car & does not mean,
they will work in any application.)
I will keep you posted
Frank@sfp
Hello everybody, This is my first time on this forum, and I would
like to read and hopefully, post on this forum. There is a lot of
controversy about this 419hp car owned by John ( pesto360. )
Maybe I can shed some light on this. First my objective is definately not to argue back and forth with anyone, only to state the facts to the best of my knowledge.
For starters both AL & John have a lot to be proud of, they both
have impressive cars with impressive hp#'s. And I am sure that
they have some similar parts, such as hks turbo kit and a few
other small similarites. But as for the head porting, custom
ferrea valves, intercooler, intercooler piping, ecu, injectors, t-bodie
I think there a bit different. I know the goal that John has with
his car is to get as close to 500whp with pump gas. But more
importantly reliability. And I assume that Al is trying to get as much whp as he can but feels that to keep reliability he has to
run race fuel. Well it is pretty clear that using race fuel gives you
the ability to run more boost, ignition advance which all equal
more power. And if that is what AL feels he needs to do, than
so be it. As for John's car, well thats a little more complicated
the window for error becomes much smaller, which means
you really have to be right on target or it could be pretty ugly.
Johns car is back at sfp this week for more tweeking, in hopes
to find 450-500hp on pump gas (no easy task). But with all that
said, I know that with the proper timing curves, & a/f ratio
it can be accomplished. Johns car was only base tunned to
get an idea of what it would take to accomplish to ultimate
goal. The a/f was at 11.7 from start to finish, the boost 21 peak,
and as far as ignition, it only had between 6-9 degrees above
12 psi, egt was 560c (in d/p). With those values the car saw
o knock on the datalog. And as for knock sensor values, they were set pretty sensitive. (knock map was set under free rev,
not load.) Will it reach the goals? I guess we will see this week,
but if it cant make 500whp on pump gas without knocking, then
I guess we will just have to turn on the water injection. I know
we can make 500+whp with that. I have built plenty of buicks
with water injection that run 26-29 psi on pump gas with no problems. AS soon as its done we will post dyno sheets, data
logs, and for anyone who is intrested tunning maps. (please
note that those maps are specific to this car & does not mean,
they will work in any application.)
I will keep you posted
Frank@sfp
As for the Ferrea valves and head porting , etc - of course I have those as well - and you may not know it was our head and cams that Ferrea used to proto type the valves for the evo 8 in conjucntion with ferrarokid
While it may be possible to make a few more whp than you had in the last dyno sheet on pump gas - its not rational to go much further
While you may have a lot of buick experience - the 4g63 has a very long history here in the states and its boundries are well known
To me trying to make 500 whp in a 2.0 L 4 banger ON PUMP gas w. 93 octane is like trying to kill a raging elephant with a .22 short. Sure you might do it - but why **** around when you have the elephant gun at hand????
Blowing $30,000 on a full engine build up to make a measily 419 whp and then being too cheap to spring a couple of dollars a gallon for the right fuel to run the car safely is irrational
I guess I can summarize by saying my hats off to you and more power but what you are doing makes no sense at all - unless you are a super rich guy with lots of money to waste on blown engines