SCC's EVO dyno'd
Evolving Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
From: Carlsbad
Originally posted by erikgj
This is not a different dyno situation, all were tested on shivs dyno same location, different cars. The results were very repeatable. The Dynojet vs Shiv's Dyno Dynamics does not enter into this. No one is saying it is underrated yet. Just that the two press cars he tested had more power by a considerable margin. The SCC car had more power across the rev range.
This is not a different dyno situation, all were tested on shivs dyno same location, different cars. The results were very repeatable. The Dynojet vs Shiv's Dyno Dynamics does not enter into this. No one is saying it is underrated yet. Just that the two press cars he tested had more power by a considerable margin. The SCC car had more power across the rev range.
For drag testing.
That is fine but it really does not test engine flexibility except for a band around peak hp. It is not a good test for power differences anywhere else in the powerband or for drivabilty.
proclaimed 271hp @ peak. Or B) to see why the SCC car is more powerful then dealer tested cars. Regardless of the answer it all points to peak hp. Trying to find out what answer A is would make "engine flexibility" irrelevant. We're talking peak numbers here. Which can be discerned to some extent from drag testing.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by erikgj
Claudius-
If you don't believe 190hp at the wheels what would you believe and why? Do you believe Vivid Racing's results, that we have 247hp at the wheel and are much more powerful than the JDM cars. Are you trying to argue that point?
Erik
Claudius-
If you don't believe 190hp at the wheels what would you believe and why? Do you believe Vivid Racing's results, that we have 247hp at the wheel and are much more powerful than the JDM cars. Are you trying to argue that point?
Erik
I never said I dont believe that the US Evo 8 makes 190 bhp to the wheels. If the dyno shiv has is accurate (which to me means 100% spot on) then let's assume that it is. So the US Evo makes 190 bhp to the wheels. OK? WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT IF THE US EVO MAKES INDEED 190 BHP TO THE WHEELS, THEN IT DOESNT MAKE 271 BHP AT THE CRANK. I dont see why that is so difficult to understand.
And then I get people telling me the numbers are not accurate power at the wheel numbers but a reference for tuning.
However, shiv tells me the dyno IS accurate:
Originally posted by shiv@vishnu
To Claude: The dyno is accurate.
To Claude: The dyno is accurate.
Originally posted by shiv@vishnu
No testing so far has indicated that Mitsubishi over-rated the EVO.
No testing so far has indicated that Mitsubishi over-rated the EVO.
There are only 2 possible explanations (if the dyno is accurate):
- the Evo is over rated and makes less than 271 bhp at the crank
- transmission loss has magically increased to 30%
Please tell me you understand what I mean, I'm going crazy here
To quote Shiv earlier,
All the cars we've dyno'd including the SCC car had between 700 and 1000 miles on the clock. The dyno difference between the SCC car and all the other EVOs is so profound that it's almost laughable. It's stronger at all engine speeds, not just above 5500rpm where typical car-to-car, knock control-induced variance has been shown to occur. The torque curve is simply beautiful. It is impossible to dismiss as typical car-to-car variance or standard ECU learning. I'll post up dyno result on Monday comparing it to the other EVOs we've tested.
We have to remember this isn't just 20hp peak, the entire powerband is affected.
On the topic of dynos being "accurate," I think there might be a slight misconception of these terms regarding testing. For one, I don't think chassis dynos are a good indication of hp at the crank to begin with. What chassis dynos are good for, however, are a reliable base whp to work with. Reliable is the key word here. Reliability does not imply accuracy, and that is the key point.
What this means is that Shiv's dyno is reliable, just as any other dyno SHOULD BE reliable, producing consistent results on different vehicles given the same test bed. Hence, we have had multiple Evo's scoring consistently 180whp on his dyno, this is what we call reliable testing. After all, the dyno is a tuning tool, and it better be damn consistent or else you'd never figure out how much net whp you gain from your mods! That's what a dyno does, no more, no less, just using different methods (hence the different types of dynos). Whether this is an accurate assessment of whp or crank hp is something completely different. In fact, I might have to come to the conclusion that knowing your "true" whp is pretty pointless, since it's all relative in comparison. It's about knowing your whp relative to other car's whp, and knowing your whp prior to modding and your whp after modding. With so many dyno and whp standards though, everything's a mess now anyway.
If you are trying to figure out if the Evo does meet the 271hp @ the crank, however, then no matter what chassis dyno you work with you will not always get accurate results. You may get reliable results, which are Evos scoring consistently, but they're not necessarily accurate. For that, you will need an engine dyno.
All the cars we've dyno'd including the SCC car had between 700 and 1000 miles on the clock. The dyno difference between the SCC car and all the other EVOs is so profound that it's almost laughable. It's stronger at all engine speeds, not just above 5500rpm where typical car-to-car, knock control-induced variance has been shown to occur. The torque curve is simply beautiful. It is impossible to dismiss as typical car-to-car variance or standard ECU learning. I'll post up dyno result on Monday comparing it to the other EVOs we've tested.
On the topic of dynos being "accurate," I think there might be a slight misconception of these terms regarding testing. For one, I don't think chassis dynos are a good indication of hp at the crank to begin with. What chassis dynos are good for, however, are a reliable base whp to work with. Reliable is the key word here. Reliability does not imply accuracy, and that is the key point.
What this means is that Shiv's dyno is reliable, just as any other dyno SHOULD BE reliable, producing consistent results on different vehicles given the same test bed. Hence, we have had multiple Evo's scoring consistently 180whp on his dyno, this is what we call reliable testing. After all, the dyno is a tuning tool, and it better be damn consistent or else you'd never figure out how much net whp you gain from your mods! That's what a dyno does, no more, no less, just using different methods (hence the different types of dynos). Whether this is an accurate assessment of whp or crank hp is something completely different. In fact, I might have to come to the conclusion that knowing your "true" whp is pretty pointless, since it's all relative in comparison. It's about knowing your whp relative to other car's whp, and knowing your whp prior to modding and your whp after modding. With so many dyno and whp standards though, everything's a mess now anyway.
If you are trying to figure out if the Evo does meet the 271hp @ the crank, however, then no matter what chassis dyno you work with you will not always get accurate results. You may get reliable results, which are Evos scoring consistently, but they're not necessarily accurate. For that, you will need an engine dyno.
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (20)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,941
Likes: 0
From: Danville/Blackhawk, California
Claudius,
All your assumptions on drivetrain loss have been based upon years of Dynojet familiarity. Would it be a big leap of faith to, even just for a second, think that driveline loss for a stock EVO (and other cars, of course) is indeed that significant. Before you say "absolutely not", I'd encourage you to spin an entire, fully loaded drivetrain, with wheels/tires/brakes, etc,. up to 7500rpm/100mph and report back your findings.
Considering an AC compressor can be parasitic up to the tune of 10 wheel hp, an UD pulley can free up 10 wheel hp, heavier wheels can cost 5-8 wheel hp, and so on... just think what gears, a few differentials, a three-piece driveshaft, four heavy rotors, four axles, lots of frictional losses on the tire/roller interface, etc,. can do when all added up.
Cheers,
Shiv
All your assumptions on drivetrain loss have been based upon years of Dynojet familiarity. Would it be a big leap of faith to, even just for a second, think that driveline loss for a stock EVO (and other cars, of course) is indeed that significant. Before you say "absolutely not", I'd encourage you to spin an entire, fully loaded drivetrain, with wheels/tires/brakes, etc,. up to 7500rpm/100mph and report back your findings.
Considering an AC compressor can be parasitic up to the tune of 10 wheel hp, an UD pulley can free up 10 wheel hp, heavier wheels can cost 5-8 wheel hp, and so on... just think what gears, a few differentials, a three-piece driveshaft, four heavy rotors, four axles, lots of frictional losses on the tire/roller interface, etc,. can do when all added up.
Cheers,
Shiv
Evolved Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
From: Kelowna, B.C., Canada
Originally posted by Claudius
Please tell me you understand what I mean, I'm going crazy here
Please tell me you understand what I mean, I'm going crazy here
Dude, the way I understand you drive your car through the back roads, I'd say you've been crazy for a while. 
Evolved Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 1
Originally posted by shiv@vishnu
PS. And Hor, don't mistake my comments about the DSMLink/Fader to be based upon my lack of understanding. I fully understand how it does (and more importantly, doesn't) work. It's not exactly rocket science. If you want to talk tuning, let's do it.
PS. And Hor, don't mistake my comments about the DSMLink/Fader to be based upon my lack of understanding. I fully understand how it does (and more importantly, doesn't) work. It's not exactly rocket science. If you want to talk tuning, let's do it.
You thought it modified the MAF signal.
Evolving Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
Shiv, would it be possible to post a comparison of the SCC ringer car to the dealer cars? I, for one, would like to compare the discrepancies, not only at peak, but also throughout the RPM range. (i.e. the dyno graphs on 91 octane)
keep up the great work and please ignore the haters,
heff
keep up the great work and please ignore the haters,
heff
Newbie
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
to shapeGSX
This board is too hectic and fast to follow.
I've only read some of what ShapeGSX has written. What's your stand on the USDM EVO again?
I mean are you getting one?
Do you own a tuning shop that's planning to work on the EVO?
How does your DSM tuning knowledge apply to the EVO? 100% compatible?
I'm interested in seeing some results, say a EVO8 tuned by your philosophy. Post up a dyno on it and let us be the judge on it.
I'm not interested in time slip as evidence of tuning supremacy. Hey if 0-60 and 1/4 mile is your thing, that's wonderful. For the avg joe a smooth 300hp ish car will suffice.
Will your tuning methodology be reliable for a street driven car. I'm sure most of the EVO owners would like to enjoy their 30k+ car for long while.
I've only read some of what ShapeGSX has written. What's your stand on the USDM EVO again?
I mean are you getting one?
Do you own a tuning shop that's planning to work on the EVO?
How does your DSM tuning knowledge apply to the EVO? 100% compatible?
I'm interested in seeing some results, say a EVO8 tuned by your philosophy. Post up a dyno on it and let us be the judge on it.
I'm not interested in time slip as evidence of tuning supremacy. Hey if 0-60 and 1/4 mile is your thing, that's wonderful. For the avg joe a smooth 300hp ish car will suffice.
Will your tuning methodology be reliable for a street driven car. I'm sure most of the EVO owners would like to enjoy their 30k+ car for long while.
Last edited by wrx-vs-evo; Mar 18, 2003 at 07:01 PM.
Originally posted by Evilution
This is exactly the point. There's no "other" data or similar tests from different dynos to prove otherwise. Many on here are afraid it's underrated else there wouldn't be any argument about Mitsu's claims. If noone thinks it's underrated then why ***** about it not being the same as the SCC car?
This is exactly the point. There's no "other" data or similar tests from different dynos to prove otherwise. Many on here are afraid it's underrated else there wouldn't be any argument about Mitsu's claims. If noone thinks it's underrated then why ***** about it not being the same as the SCC car?
Originally posted by Evilution
Isn't the point of all this to either A) see why the car isn't making proclaimed 271hp @ peak. Or B) to see why the SCC car is more powerful then dealer tested cars. Regardless of the answer it all points to peak hp. Trying to find out what answer A is would make "engine flexibility" irrelevant. We're talking peak numbers here. Which can be discerned to some extent from drag testing.
Isn't the point of all this to either A) see why the car isn't making
proclaimed 271hp @ peak. Or B) to see why the SCC car is more powerful then dealer tested cars. Regardless of the answer it all points to peak hp. Trying to find out what answer A is would make "engine flexibility" irrelevant. We're talking peak numbers here. Which can be discerned to some extent from drag testing.
Mark
Re: to shapeGSX
Originally posted by wrx-vs-evo
This board is too hectic and fast to follow.
I've only read some of what ShapeGSX has written. What's your stand on the USDM EVO again?
I mean are you getting one?
Do you own a tuning shop that's planning to work on the EVO?
This board is too hectic and fast to follow.
I've only read some of what ShapeGSX has written. What's your stand on the USDM EVO again?
I mean are you getting one?
Do you own a tuning shop that's planning to work on the EVO?
Mark
Evolving Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
From: is everything
What gets me is you guys who are bashing Shiv's tuning abilities with the EVO when he hasn't even released any products for it yet. If it works out like I think it will, his products will end up getting significant gains for the EVO and all of your attaks will end up looking pretty stupid. Must be some underlying resentment or something. Why would you want to drive somebody away from providing products for the EVO. Just means more competition and better prices and options for the consumer. If you've got a problem with him, don't buy his products. I'm sure plenty of people here appreciate what he is working to do for the EVO.
I think if everyone just stayed on topic instead of raining on other ppl's threads, then everybody would be happy. For the haters or disbelievers, just ignore the thread! If we wanted your opinion, then we would have asked. Simple as that!
What a great solution I've come up with.
What a great solution I've come up with.
