US vs Italy: How can you guys achieve so big power figure?
Sep 2, 2014, 05:07 PM
#31
The AWDs in the southern hemisphere really aren't comparable to the AWDs here. You guys are big on tube chassis setups where the AWD guys here stick to unibody builds. The only 4G63 really built like that in the US is also the fastest 4G63 in the world, so we must know how to do something right. 
I don't buy the dyno argument though. Buschur ran 9.0 and like 159mph with 680WHP. If all you look at was dynojet or hub dynos, then compared to your mustang or similar dyno, I could see it. Compare apples to apples from respected shops though and the US cars end up matching the HP claims.
Further, how are you claiming "crank HP?" Unless the motor was actually out of the car and on an engine dyno, please don't say jack about engine HP...
I don't buy the dyno argument though. Buschur ran 9.0 and like 159mph with 680WHP. If all you look at was dynojet or hub dynos, then compared to your mustang or similar dyno, I could see it. Compare apples to apples from respected shops though and the US cars end up matching the HP claims.
Further, how are you claiming "crank HP?" Unless the motor was actually out of the car and on an engine dyno, please don't say jack about engine HP...
Sep 2, 2014, 05:43 PM
#32
I'm no guru but if you're looking for a remote tuner the only one I know of that tunes overseas remotely is TSCOMPTUNED.
Also I haven't seen a stock turbo that made 500hp so I don't know where you saw that. Maybe an inflated VirtualDyno run but nothing legit that I know of. Again I am no guru though.
Good Luck.
Also I haven't seen a stock turbo that made 500hp so I don't know where you saw that. Maybe an inflated VirtualDyno run but nothing legit that I know of. Again I am no guru though.
Good Luck.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...92-octane.html
Hi, this is below 500 hp at the crank but for sure well above 450 (crank). I would say closer to 500 than 450.
Best fuel you can find here in Italy is 100 Octane RON, 98 is also quite common (RON), 95 octane RON is the base fuel. I go half of the times 100 Octane RON and half 98 Octane RON only based on the luck (if I find 100 Octane I always go for it)..
I googled the conversion and should be:
95 RON = 91 AKI
98 RON = 93 AKI
100 RON = 94ish AKI
Hi, this is below 500 hp at the crank but for sure well above 450 (crank). I would say closer to 500 than 450.
Best fuel you can find here in Italy is 100 Octane RON, 98 is also quite common (RON), 95 octane RON is the base fuel. I go half of the times 100 Octane RON and half 98 Octane RON only based on the luck (if I find 100 Octane I always go for it)..
I googled the conversion and should be:
95 RON = 91 AKI
98 RON = 93 AKI
100 RON = 94ish AKI
That car has a big intake manifold and big TB along with cams. I didn't see you mention anything about your cams above but that would account for a lot of the difference right there. Most people see about 30whp gain going that route over stock, so convert that to crank and there you go.
I can't say enough about the tune either. There are a couple shops over here that could remote tune for you. I think at one time English themselves even offered it. Get in touch with them and find out on a level field how your car compares.
I can't say enough about the tune either. There are a couple shops over here that could remote tune for you. I think at one time English themselves even offered it. Get in touch with them and find out on a level field how your car compares.
Sep 2, 2014, 05:55 PM
#33
Hi everybody,
I'm a Evo IX owner from Northern Italy.
My car is currently running:
- 3.0 full straight exhaust
- O2 dump housing
- Tubolar exhaust manifold
- Polished and ported stock intake manifold
- 70mm s90 TB
- Bigger intercooler
- HKS cone filter
- Boost driven by AVCr
- OEM mapped ECU
Boost:
- 1.6bar mid range (3.000 - 5.000)
- 1.5bar at 6.000
- 1.4bar at 7.000.
- Rev limit at 7.700 with c. 1.3bar.
Everything else on the engine is stock (turbo evo IX, MAF, injectors, fuel pump, cams, etc).
This is a rather common set-up in Italy for a step 1 lancer evo.
Power figures we achieve usually on the Evo IX turbo (series 80) with such mods are in the range of 360-380 hp at the crank (!!!).
Whilst you guys achieve such power figure at the wheels! This is of course a massive difference.
In order to better understand power gains, we usually dyno the car before and after the tunes and stock cars (Evo IX) usually put down c. 280-290 hp at the crank when they are completely stock so the gains are c. 80-100 hp which is a very good gain.
I was wondering how can you achieve + 150hp over stock figure, in US, on stock turbo and stock engine?
Just few final comments:
- I'm on stock injectors and stock fuel pump because given boost levels, AFR levels (mid 11 or even lower to stay safe) and EGT (hardly above 900 C°) there is no need for an upgrade to fuel system in my opinion. On the opposite side I read that in US many of you go bigger injectors and uprated fuel pump even with stock turbo set-ups (series 80), but the question is how can you get stock turbo to blow such high amount of air to open the need for more fuel (and therefore change fuel pump and injector)?
- For sure I'm missing a good set of cams (GSC S1 perhaps) but here in Italy this produce c. +10hp (max +15hp) and we're still far away from the figures you can achieve in US.
The answers I'm guessing are:
- Speed density mapping can result in higher performance than stock MAF mapping
- You guys reached a better overall knowledge of 4g63 ECU and your electronic tuning is better then ours
I've seen really some outstanding result from English Racing.. I can't even understand how it's possible to put down 5xx HP figure on a series 80 which should flow a max of 44lb /min.
I'm opening this topic just to understand what your opinion is and if you think it could be possible to have one of the top guys in here to remotely map my car since I recently bought a 2.0 tactrix cable and have ecuflash on my laptop (but no idea really on how to map a car!).
Cheers.
I'm a Evo IX owner from Northern Italy.
My car is currently running:
- 3.0 full straight exhaust
- O2 dump housing
- Tubolar exhaust manifold
- Polished and ported stock intake manifold
- 70mm s90 TB
- Bigger intercooler
- HKS cone filter
- Boost driven by AVCr
- OEM mapped ECU
Boost:
- 1.6bar mid range (3.000 - 5.000)
- 1.5bar at 6.000
- 1.4bar at 7.000.
- Rev limit at 7.700 with c. 1.3bar.
Everything else on the engine is stock (turbo evo IX, MAF, injectors, fuel pump, cams, etc).
This is a rather common set-up in Italy for a step 1 lancer evo.
Power figures we achieve usually on the Evo IX turbo (series 80) with such mods are in the range of 360-380 hp at the crank (!!!).
Whilst you guys achieve such power figure at the wheels! This is of course a massive difference.
In order to better understand power gains, we usually dyno the car before and after the tunes and stock cars (Evo IX) usually put down c. 280-290 hp at the crank when they are completely stock so the gains are c. 80-100 hp which is a very good gain.
I was wondering how can you achieve + 150hp over stock figure, in US, on stock turbo and stock engine?
Just few final comments:
- I'm on stock injectors and stock fuel pump because given boost levels, AFR levels (mid 11 or even lower to stay safe) and EGT (hardly above 900 C°) there is no need for an upgrade to fuel system in my opinion. On the opposite side I read that in US many of you go bigger injectors and uprated fuel pump even with stock turbo set-ups (series 80), but the question is how can you get stock turbo to blow such high amount of air to open the need for more fuel (and therefore change fuel pump and injector)?
- For sure I'm missing a good set of cams (GSC S1 perhaps) but here in Italy this produce c. +10hp (max +15hp) and we're still far away from the figures you can achieve in US.
The answers I'm guessing are:
- Speed density mapping can result in higher performance than stock MAF mapping
- You guys reached a better overall knowledge of 4g63 ECU and your electronic tuning is better then ours
I've seen really some outstanding result from English Racing.. I can't even understand how it's possible to put down 5xx HP figure on a series 80 which should flow a max of 44lb /min.
I'm opening this topic just to understand what your opinion is and if you think it could be possible to have one of the top guys in here to remotely map my car since I recently bought a 2.0 tactrix cable and have ecuflash on my laptop (but no idea really on how to map a car!).
Cheers.
You are being held back by a few things in your combination, but that word is the key. Combination is everything.
For maximum power the right set of larger camshafts is needed. I have tested all of them and have yet to see a stock turbo make more power with anything other than S2s. An O2 dump is the next modification that is necessary, even though Lucas didnt use one when the car made 522whp. That number for reference allowed his full weight SSL with cage (3450 empty) to run a best of 10.80 and a best trap of 129. Taking the dyno number out of the equation other than comparing to a domestic, the numbers are VERY comparable.
The stock 8 fuel pump is about done at 320whp which is also the most I have seen from a verified set of stock cams. 305-310whp is the normal at 26psi. SD accounts for 8-12whp peak on a stock turbo but can make more in certain parts of the powerband. AFR is minimal between an 11.5 and 12.0 but in order to get the most out of the fuel system (375whp) a pump and fresh filter housing assembly are needed.
No cats, a good straight intake, the ETS LICP, and a good free flowing 3.5" intercooler. All the small details add up quickly. The car that made 402whp on 92 octane had an EGR delete in the cylinder head as well as the Magnus intake manifold. Not all cars we do make 380whp. Most of them are 355-365 all said and done but there are factory freaks that make more. I did a car just recently that made 389whp in the heat on a stock intake manifold, so there is mechanical differences in the engine that account for some of this as well.
Sep 2, 2014, 07:59 PM
#35
Evolved Member
The AWDs in the southern hemisphere really aren't comparable to the AWDs here. You guys are big on tube chassis setups where the AWD guys here stick to unibody builds. The only 4G63 really built like that in the US is also the fastest 4G63 in the world, so we must know how to do something right.
I don't buy the dyno argument though. Buschur ran 9.0 and like 159mph with 680WHP. If all you look at was dynojet or hub dynos, then compared to your mustang or similar dyno, I could see it. Compare apples to apples from respected shops though and the US cars end up matching the HP claims.
Further, how are you claiming "crank HP?" Unless the motor was actually out of the car and on an engine dyno, please don't say jack about engine HP...
Further, how are you claiming "crank HP?" Unless the motor was actually out of the car and on an engine dyno, please don't say jack about engine HP...
Sep 3, 2014, 12:42 AM
#36
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its more this - Dyno Dynamics are basically the lowest reading dynos I know of, and Australians predominantly use Dyno Dynamics dynos. In the US E85 is very heavily used, so numbers are often higher than other countries which are stuck using petrol (like us in NZ, and Italy/UK by the sounds of it).
The US have no magic, otherwise - all the dyno and strip results make sense to me... just compare drag results for similar setups and fuels, they all add up. The quickest AWDs in the world are still in the southern hemisphere with lower dyno numbers
The US have no magic, otherwise - all the dyno and strip results make sense to me... just compare drag results for similar setups and fuels, they all add up. The quickest AWDs in the world are still in the southern hemisphere with lower dyno numbers
but you will notice that ALOT of the people that have put out 335whp - 348whp in the USA are actually in fact, running 93octane (98 RON)
Sep 3, 2014, 12:49 AM
#37
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah I keep reading posts on US forums that all the cars down here are tube frame - I've only seen one full tube AWD down here, that I can recall anyway and it hasn't raced yet. There were a couple of tube front early EVOs which raced about ten years ago but the currently world's quickest isn't any more extreme than STM's RS in that respect. The fastest 4G63 that I know outright is in Oz, and has trapped at over 220mph (does mid 6s) - is there faster in the US? Heat Treatments, RIPS and Godzilla Motorsport GTR are all original chassis and have done mid 7s, Heat Treatments has just about cracked 200mph.
I'm assuming you aren't referring to me here, I'm not talking about crank hp?
I'm assuming you aren't referring to me here, I'm not talking about crank hp?
Sep 3, 2014, 08:34 AM
#38
Wowzers, he was talking about drag racing. Mid 6 second quarter mile at over 220mph. Jett just ran really fast in their 2.2 didnt they? Rau's old car had only ran 202 here, not sure what the Rigolis have managed to get out of it but I am pretty sure its not 220.
Sep 3, 2014, 03:34 PM
#39
Evolved Member
Nah Rigoli weren't going that quick, Jett I hadn't really heard of until around a year ago when they showed up here in NZ (they are from Australia) and ran way quicker than we are used to seeing with the kind of setup they ran the times with, and I started paying more attention. Usually Australians (and others) come here and flounder, our tracks are pretty sub par 
There was an event called Jamboree that was held last weekend in Australia where there was a whole pile of records and generally impressive times run, the outright sport compact record was set by Rod Harvey (from NZ) in what once was the Stranton Celica from the US but has now had extensive changes.... 6.12 @ 238mph!
I digress, the main thing I am saying is you can't easily compare dyno results between cars using different fuels and different dynos - but there is no magic, with good tuning and the same amount of air and the same fuel cars should make similar power, anyone who can't are doing it wrong.
Sep 3, 2014, 03:43 PM
#40
I digress, the main thing I am saying is you can't easily compare dyno results between cars using different fuels and different dynos - but there is no magic, with good tuning and the same amount of air and the same fuel cars should make similar power, anyone who can't are doing it wrong.
That is the main thing I was trying to say in my initial post is why I/We focus on combination so much. The tuning takes care of itself when all the parts are correct.
Sep 3, 2014, 04:28 PM
#41
Evolved Member
Agreed on that too, I count the parts combination as part of tuning to a degree as well - I guess when I started commenting I was possibly addressing the broader picture of how if or how US make more power than a lot of us, partly directing at where it was made out that the US are just better at making it happen.
A lot of the results which people outside of the US go "HUH?" in response to are where they're not realising what having awesome ethanol blends available at the pump allows you to get away with, and a couple of posts in here suggest people in the US maybe take that for granted. I can't imagine you guys would love going back to doing all your cars on exclusively 91/93 octane - and I'm frustrated we're not looking likely to ever get away from having to run exclusively those kinds of fuels as a pump fuel
Glad you guys are taking advantage of it though, I love seeing the results!
A lot of the results which people outside of the US go "HUH?" in response to are where they're not realising what having awesome ethanol blends available at the pump allows you to get away with, and a couple of posts in here suggest people in the US maybe take that for granted. I can't imagine you guys would love going back to doing all your cars on exclusively 91/93 octane - and I'm frustrated we're not looking likely to ever get away from having to run exclusively those kinds of fuels as a pump fuel
Glad you guys are taking advantage of it though, I love seeing the results!
Sep 4, 2014, 08:29 AM
#42
The trick to pump fuel like anything is minimizing backpressure. That is the main key in any turbo combo but obviously smaller housings suffer faster at the boost we need to run to make power. A 10.5cm 16G runs 2.3:1 at 8k, so anything we can do to get that to lower is best. Good exhuast, cam profiles, letting the air flow in as freely as possible with a good intake, etc. Thats how we get 389whp on a stock IX turbo on 92 octane, how I made 648 on 92 with my IX, how Dave has done the equivalent dynojet number of 670 on 93.
The actual electronic side of tuning these cars has one or two secrets, but basically there is no magic. SD on the stock ECU was initially trial and error, posting what was working, maps getting shared whether we wanted them to or not, and then different sets of eyes looking at the same problem. The basics of AFR and timing vs octane hasnt changed since physics were created, knowing what we can get away with and why on a 4G63 or 4B11 is the only variable.
The actual electronic side of tuning these cars has one or two secrets, but basically there is no magic. SD on the stock ECU was initially trial and error, posting what was working, maps getting shared whether we wanted them to or not, and then different sets of eyes looking at the same problem. The basics of AFR and timing vs octane hasnt changed since physics were created, knowing what we can get away with and why on a 4G63 or 4B11 is the only variable.
Sep 9, 2014, 10:25 AM
#43
I've seen several tube chassis AWDs from down that way, but you are right, they are older cars back when Rau just broke into the 6s.
I don't keep up on drag racing any more so if there are front halved 4G63 powered AWDs running 6s@220+ then... Good lord...
I don't keep up on drag racing any more so if there are front halved 4G63 powered AWDs running 6s@220+ then... Good lord...
Sep 9, 2014, 03:50 PM
#44
Evolved Member
I don't keep up on drag racing any more so if there are front halved 4G63 powered AWDs running 6s@220+ then... Good lord...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
AutoMotoSports
Automotosports - Illinois
33
Oct 9, 2010 04:53 AM
Strictly Modified
Midwest Region
22
Apr 5, 2009 08:29 AM