Gen 2 gtx3076r vs. gtx3576r help
We are finishing up some details we like to do right now, so I can't say the car is done and ready to go but it's done on the dyno. We cut the oil filters open on most full builds and inspect for any type of metal/debris, put a new filter on and send the cars down the road. Car is on the lift now and being inspected. It's HOT right now so it will be a few minutes for final results and to know if it's leaving tomorrow.
As for the dyno..........haters are gonna hate so all I can say is, whatever. I can assure you that regardless of the car, when it hits our dyno I put everything I can into it to ensure that the tune and power it the best it can be and I did so on this too.
For reference, the short block in this car is IDENTICAL to my car, the head is IDENTICAL to my car, the cams are IDENTICAL to my car, the FMIC and BOV are IDENTICAL to my car. It has our double pumper in it too.
As soon as I opened the other map that was in the car I had a feeling after I was done the ignition he chose (which of course I do not like) was going to work fine and not misfire. I was correct. I ended up just using one of my maps as there were way to many things I didn't like about the other. The car starts, idles, runs and drives very good. Surprisingly well given the fact it has RC1600's in it and I HATE how those run. Dan did an excellent job as usual, not a single i/c pipe blew off, not a single leak or problem.
**OK, I interrupt this to say I just inspected the filter and it is 100% absolutely clean and free of anything! I am going to actually post a picture of it and the water bottle catch can (not ours doing) to show how clean it all is and that in 17 dyno pulls not so much as a drop of oil is in the catch can.
Onto more details. The car has a 3.5 bar map sensor, so dyno'ing above 35 psi was going to be something I wasn't going to do. I did run the car all the way to 34.80 psi for one pull in 3rd gear. The car did not like it. 20 psi hit at 4305 rpm. 34.8 psi hit at 5488 rpm. By 8,000 rpm the boost had dropped to 27.96 psi. Power up top, was terrible, falls off quick just like it did on the Dynapak. On that pull the car made 580 whp and 498 ft lbs.
The higher the boost went the worse the top end got. I am fighting knock the higher the boost tries to stays up top. My opinion is that it seems like a back pressure problem. For example at 27 psi around 8,000 rpm the AFR's dip into the 10's. Holding only 22 psi at the same RPM keeps the AFR's in the 11.3's. When tuning on speed density if the car is dialed in to run 12:1 AFR's at XX boost and you turn the boost up or down from that point and the AFR's go richer or leaner you get a real quick idea what the turbo is doing and what it likes.
In the case of this turbo the best graph I could get was at about 28.3 psi peak boost, this let the boost fall down to about 22.8 at 8,000 rpm and the power stays flat out to 8,000 rpm.
At 28 psi in 4th gear the car makes 539 whp and 480 ft lbs of torque. 20 psi in 4th happens at 3863 rpm. 27 psi happens at about 4379 rpm and by 7898 rpm it is down to 22.27 psi.
I can see by the map from the last tuner that he was experiencing the same thing, the fuel after about 5700 rpm on his map and mine are both nose dived to keep the car running close to 12:1. I thought before the car came here it was probably the camshafts, now it has the same cam as my car, so that's not the case.
Dynosheet and pictures of the misc stuff coming in a few minutes.
Let the hate begin.
As for the dyno..........haters are gonna hate so all I can say is, whatever. I can assure you that regardless of the car, when it hits our dyno I put everything I can into it to ensure that the tune and power it the best it can be and I did so on this too.
For reference, the short block in this car is IDENTICAL to my car, the head is IDENTICAL to my car, the cams are IDENTICAL to my car, the FMIC and BOV are IDENTICAL to my car. It has our double pumper in it too.
As soon as I opened the other map that was in the car I had a feeling after I was done the ignition he chose (which of course I do not like) was going to work fine and not misfire. I was correct. I ended up just using one of my maps as there were way to many things I didn't like about the other. The car starts, idles, runs and drives very good. Surprisingly well given the fact it has RC1600's in it and I HATE how those run. Dan did an excellent job as usual, not a single i/c pipe blew off, not a single leak or problem.
**OK, I interrupt this to say I just inspected the filter and it is 100% absolutely clean and free of anything! I am going to actually post a picture of it and the water bottle catch can (not ours doing) to show how clean it all is and that in 17 dyno pulls not so much as a drop of oil is in the catch can.
Onto more details. The car has a 3.5 bar map sensor, so dyno'ing above 35 psi was going to be something I wasn't going to do. I did run the car all the way to 34.80 psi for one pull in 3rd gear. The car did not like it. 20 psi hit at 4305 rpm. 34.8 psi hit at 5488 rpm. By 8,000 rpm the boost had dropped to 27.96 psi. Power up top, was terrible, falls off quick just like it did on the Dynapak. On that pull the car made 580 whp and 498 ft lbs.
The higher the boost went the worse the top end got. I am fighting knock the higher the boost tries to stays up top. My opinion is that it seems like a back pressure problem. For example at 27 psi around 8,000 rpm the AFR's dip into the 10's. Holding only 22 psi at the same RPM keeps the AFR's in the 11.3's. When tuning on speed density if the car is dialed in to run 12:1 AFR's at XX boost and you turn the boost up or down from that point and the AFR's go richer or leaner you get a real quick idea what the turbo is doing and what it likes.
In the case of this turbo the best graph I could get was at about 28.3 psi peak boost, this let the boost fall down to about 22.8 at 8,000 rpm and the power stays flat out to 8,000 rpm.
At 28 psi in 4th gear the car makes 539 whp and 480 ft lbs of torque. 20 psi in 4th happens at 3863 rpm. 27 psi happens at about 4379 rpm and by 7898 rpm it is down to 22.27 psi.
I can see by the map from the last tuner that he was experiencing the same thing, the fuel after about 5700 rpm on his map and mine are both nose dived to keep the car running close to 12:1. I thought before the car came here it was probably the camshafts, now it has the same cam as my car, so that's not the case.
Dynosheet and pictures of the misc stuff coming in a few minutes.
Let the hate begin.
My car makes 20psi at 4k in 3rd. That's a non-mivec 2.0L, with a turbo capable of making the power this 7670 made. I just don't see the attraction, if my car was a 2.3L it would spool 500-700 rpms faster, which would be faster than the 7670, and I'm sure it would make the same power...
I definitely don't think the EFR is the best option in every single case, and the 7670 is by far the least ideal wheel combo of the family.
There are plenty of great results on the 8374 for an ultra responsive 650whp car, and the 7163 is a great red competitor - mine made 450whp on pump gas at 24.5psi and makes 300wtq before 3500rpm....essentially stock turbo territory. And the responsiveness on the road is really, really impressive. Better than my 71hta.
If you are trying to build a highway pull or drag car there are probably better turbo options.
There are plenty of great results on the 8374 for an ultra responsive 650whp car, and the 7163 is a great red competitor - mine made 450whp on pump gas at 24.5psi and makes 300wtq before 3500rpm....essentially stock turbo territory. And the responsiveness on the road is really, really impressive. Better than my 71hta.
If you are trying to build a highway pull or drag car there are probably better turbo options.
Ultra responsive 650whp car. 300wtq at 3200.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...4-dynojet.html
You're just never going to sell me on an EFR. The cost and packaging difficulties don't pay off.
You say it's better than your 71hta, but is it $4k better? I kind of doubt it.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...4-dynojet.html
You're just never going to sell me on an EFR. The cost and packaging difficulties don't pay off.
You say it's better than your 71hta, but is it $4k better? I kind of doubt it.
Ultra responsive 650whp car. 300wtq at 3200.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...4-dynojet.html
You're just never going to sell me on an EFR. The cost and packaging difficulties don't pay off.
You say it's better than your 71hta, but is it $4k better? I kind of doubt it.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...4-dynojet.html
You're just never going to sell me on an EFR. The cost and packaging difficulties don't pay off.
You say it's better than your 71hta, but is it $4k better? I kind of doubt it.
That's a Red on the bleeding edge vs. an 8374 at a "run it there all day" level of power.
Also, a BB red is now more than an EFR which includes a BOV and an EBC. If you are buying a lot of your mods all at once the price is not miles apart.
Of course, every situation is different - but the total cost is closer than most think more often than not.
If everyone was hellbent on maximizing their performance for the absolute least amount of money they would all buy a 71HTA...nothing beats it on the hp/$ scale. It's worth it to me though
FP makes some great stock frame turbos. But as great as the MHI housing is, it ends up being a choke point. I think most would agree that better results can be achieved through a full turbo kit, whether its EFR or Precision Turbo based.
If the prices were the same it would be a no brainer. So if cost is not an issue, give FullRace or ETS a call.
If the prices were the same it would be a no brainer. So if cost is not an issue, give FullRace or ETS a call.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
240Z TwinTurbo
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results
49
Nov 10, 2013 09:55 PM
EVO8LTW
Mid-Atlantic Region
2
Feb 17, 2008 12:31 PM
DynoFlash
Evo 'For Sale' External Engine / Power
34
Mar 14, 2005 08:52 PM