SCC's EVO dyno'd
www.pruvenperformance.com saw like 220 HP on thier dynojet dyno Sorry - edited the link
Last edited by Alfriedesq; Mar 16, 2003 at 10:50 PM.
Originally posted by Señor Info
This is beginning to sound like another urban myth. There are 6 refineries in SoCal producing gasoline, each owned by a different company (see http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/carefinery.htm). I guess we're supposed to believe that only one of those refineries is producing California Phase 2 Reformulated Gasoline (RFG), AKA Cleaner Burning Gasoline and all the other refineries are producing gasoline that can't be sold in SoCal? And we're supposed to believe that Unocal is actually selling 92 pump octane gasoline at its stations but chooses to label it as only 91?
This is beginning to sound like another urban myth. There are 6 refineries in SoCal producing gasoline, each owned by a different company (see http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/carefinery.htm). I guess we're supposed to believe that only one of those refineries is producing California Phase 2 Reformulated Gasoline (RFG), AKA Cleaner Burning Gasoline and all the other refineries are producing gasoline that can't be sold in SoCal? And we're supposed to believe that Unocal is actually selling 92 pump octane gasoline at its stations but chooses to label it as only 91?
California has the most uniform gas in the world. Tight standards for quality and shared transportation make it so. That is why the system changed in unison to 91 AKI.
So no one else is confused, the engineer at Unocal consistently tested 96.5 RON and slightly over 86.7 MON. It is a decrease from the 92AKI that they used to sell. It is a little above rating but gas does degrade slightly over time lowering its AKI. So always buy from a station that sells lots of gas. Never fill up if the stations tanks have just been filled.
Erik
Originally posted by Kinmar_X
On his dyno, the only one pulling numbers like that.
Shiv might be a great tuner i dunno, his dyno might be correct dont know that either. but with every other dino out there (even the same kind of dino) puting up more believable numbers its hard to imagine that his is the one that is correct. Yes it would be disapointing if shiv's numbers are correct. But at the moment all i see is a guy that is really good at making people believe that the way he is doing it is the right way.
On his dyno, the only one pulling numbers like that.
Shiv might be a great tuner i dunno, his dyno might be correct dont know that either. but with every other dino out there (even the same kind of dino) puting up more believable numbers its hard to imagine that his is the one that is correct. Yes it would be disapointing if shiv's numbers are correct. But at the moment all i see is a guy that is really good at making people believe that the way he is doing it is the right way.
Shiv has tested numerous Evos over the past week and has posted consistent numbers. Of course his dyno is not in question, it's the hp difference between the Press Evo vs. production Evo.
Mark
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (20)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,941
Likes: 0
From: Danville/Blackhawk, California
Originally posted by Alfriedesq
www.pruvenperformance.com saw like 220 HP on thier dynojet dyno Sorry - edited the link
www.pruvenperformance.com saw like 220 HP on thier dynojet dyno Sorry - edited the link
190x1.15=219. See, it all works out
Still doesn't explain why the pre-production press EVO made 20 more wheel hp (on an AWD Dynojet) running on CA 91 octane which as proven to be less-than-ideal for production EVOs. See the point I'm getting at?
Fun with numbers,
shiv
Last edited by shiv@vishnu; Mar 17, 2003 at 12:11 AM.
Originally posted by Alfriedesq
#1 - your dyno is in la la land and is worthless to compare anything you do to what the rest of the US is doing (mostly everyone uses dyno jets)
#2 - I already posted
has to re-tune the ecu's to get EPA - DOT approval to import the cars - - didn't you notice there was a delay in the shipemnt of these cars
so who cares - - all we have to do is add a super afc and we can make up that 20 extra HP in a quick manner
#1 - your dyno is in la la land and is worthless to compare anything you do to what the rest of the US is doing (mostly everyone uses dyno jets)
#2 - I already posted
has to re-tune the ecu's to get EPA - DOT approval to import the cars - - didn't you notice there was a delay in the shipemnt of these cars so who cares - - all we have to do is add a super afc and we can make up that 20 extra HP in a quick manner
#1 you don't care about the factory warrantee
#2 You don't want to race it in a stock class
I would be willing to bet that Mitsu ended up doing a last minute cam redesign kind of like ford did a last minute exhaust redesign on there 99 cobras that made the hp lower than advertised. I wonder if mitsu will step up and fix the problem like ford did...
And to those people who are all saying that shivs dyno is worthless, how hard is it to understand that shiv dynoed SCC's VIII on the SAME dyno and it came out 20 hp greater. If its the SAME dyno it doesn't matter what the numbers are, its most important that they are REPEATABLE and there is a 20 hp difference between them. I don't understand why people can't understand this.
And to those people who are all saying that shivs dyno is worthless, how hard is it to understand that shiv dynoed SCC's VIII on the SAME dyno and it came out 20 hp greater. If its the SAME dyno it doesn't matter what the numbers are, its most important that they are REPEATABLE and there is a 20 hp difference between them. I don't understand why people can't understand this.
Last edited by edogg23; Mar 17, 2003 at 12:24 AM.
Newbie
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
Not everyone took science or passed lab.
1) Constant=Shiv's Dyno
2) Variables=a) Temperature b) Fuel c) CAR!!!!
Most of us can see what the constant is. Some still don't know what the heck I am talking about....
1) Constant=Shiv's Dyno
2) Variables=a) Temperature b) Fuel c) CAR!!!!
Most of us can see what the constant is. Some still don't know what the heck I am talking about....
Evolving Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
From: Hillsboro, OR
After reading the entire thread I have a few thoughts.
1. It would be interesting to borrow the ECU from the SCC car and dyno it on a 'production' car. Obviously, some of the HP discrepancy may be lurking there. If I was a Mitsubishi engineer, the ECU is the first place I would start to get a little extra HP for a magazine car. On the other hand, a different ECU really is a 'smoking gun'. Slightly higher compression, blue print and balancing can be chalked up to manufacturing tolerances. Different ECU code is harder to explain. Still, it’s a quick and simple test to swap ECU's. There is no question that ringer cars do exsist, I think it would be fun to actually prove it for once. At least open up the ECU and see if has and EPROM that could dumped. I am sure Mitsubishi had some ECU's that could quickly change code for different fuel/timing maps while testing in the US. Maybe the SCC car has one.
2. Japanese motorcycle manufactures have been building ringers for years. An example is the hotly contested 600 sportbike market (Honda, Suzuki, Kawasaki, Yamaha). Parts can be machined to the edge of tolerances when monitored and assembled by human craftsman and not robots. Compression can be raised slightly. Pistons can be weighed and compared to thousands of others before assembly. Bushings can be assembled loosely to reduce friction. Even after perfect assembly of ten motors, there will be dyno testing to select the best of the best. One bad magazine test can incredibly affect sales of a product for the rest of the year. In 1995 one motorcycle magazine tested a 'production' Kawasaki ZX6R that did 10.89 in the 1/4 mile. At the time, this was an incredible number. Was this a ringer???
3. Is it at all possible that the SCC car simply had some 100 unleaded in at the time of the dyno pull? I know I sure would be trying some out if it was my EVO. I have never had any trouble finding it at the 76 stations in California. On the other hand if the US EVO is not detonating on 91, there probably is no big gain to be had unless the US EVO has had some major ECU advances over the 2G Eclipse. (no pun intended)
4. Shiv, if you tested a JDM EVO VII and noticed it pinging badly, why didn’t you just run down to the 76 station and pick up some 100 unleaded? At the very least you could see how much HP a stock motor is capable of under ideal conditions. It’s pretty obvious that if it’s detonating badly two things could be happening. Either the US 91-93 octane fuel is simply not enough to prevent detonation with the JDM spec ECU or there is something wrong with the car.
5. Is anyone familiar with US Emission testing procedures? Do current production cars get tested for emissions through a full RPM and load range or do they just do testing similar to a smog station? (Idle and 3000 rpm with out load) How do US emission requirements compare to Japanese requirements? If the US CARB/EPA requirements do not test under full load WOT conditions, I do not see why the US EVO would loose top end power for any other reason than fuel octane.
1. It would be interesting to borrow the ECU from the SCC car and dyno it on a 'production' car. Obviously, some of the HP discrepancy may be lurking there. If I was a Mitsubishi engineer, the ECU is the first place I would start to get a little extra HP for a magazine car. On the other hand, a different ECU really is a 'smoking gun'. Slightly higher compression, blue print and balancing can be chalked up to manufacturing tolerances. Different ECU code is harder to explain. Still, it’s a quick and simple test to swap ECU's. There is no question that ringer cars do exsist, I think it would be fun to actually prove it for once. At least open up the ECU and see if has and EPROM that could dumped. I am sure Mitsubishi had some ECU's that could quickly change code for different fuel/timing maps while testing in the US. Maybe the SCC car has one.
2. Japanese motorcycle manufactures have been building ringers for years. An example is the hotly contested 600 sportbike market (Honda, Suzuki, Kawasaki, Yamaha). Parts can be machined to the edge of tolerances when monitored and assembled by human craftsman and not robots. Compression can be raised slightly. Pistons can be weighed and compared to thousands of others before assembly. Bushings can be assembled loosely to reduce friction. Even after perfect assembly of ten motors, there will be dyno testing to select the best of the best. One bad magazine test can incredibly affect sales of a product for the rest of the year. In 1995 one motorcycle magazine tested a 'production' Kawasaki ZX6R that did 10.89 in the 1/4 mile. At the time, this was an incredible number. Was this a ringer???
3. Is it at all possible that the SCC car simply had some 100 unleaded in at the time of the dyno pull? I know I sure would be trying some out if it was my EVO. I have never had any trouble finding it at the 76 stations in California. On the other hand if the US EVO is not detonating on 91, there probably is no big gain to be had unless the US EVO has had some major ECU advances over the 2G Eclipse. (no pun intended)
4. Shiv, if you tested a JDM EVO VII and noticed it pinging badly, why didn’t you just run down to the 76 station and pick up some 100 unleaded? At the very least you could see how much HP a stock motor is capable of under ideal conditions. It’s pretty obvious that if it’s detonating badly two things could be happening. Either the US 91-93 octane fuel is simply not enough to prevent detonation with the JDM spec ECU or there is something wrong with the car.
5. Is anyone familiar with US Emission testing procedures? Do current production cars get tested for emissions through a full RPM and load range or do they just do testing similar to a smog station? (Idle and 3000 rpm with out load) How do US emission requirements compare to Japanese requirements? If the US CARB/EPA requirements do not test under full load WOT conditions, I do not see why the US EVO would loose top end power for any other reason than fuel octane.
Evolving Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: Petaluma, CA
To answer the question about the JDM Evo VII, we did add some 103 unleaded to the tank to bring it up to 93 Octane as it was pinging on 91. The horsepower on that stock car went from 212 whp on 91 to 230 whp with the 93 octane gas. A huge improvement with the car much happier with the better gas. The Evo VIII we purchased was also pinging on 91 octane(180 whp), and it picked up 9 whp with 93 octane gas in the tank bringing it up to 189 whp.
Brett.
Brett.
Evolving Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
From: Hillsboro, OR
Originally posted by DSMBRETT
The Evo VIII we purchased was also pinging on 91 octane(180 whp), and it picked up 9 whp with 93 octane gas in the tank bringing it up to 189 whp.
Brett.
The Evo VIII we purchased was also pinging on 91 octane(180 whp), and it picked up 9 whp with 93 octane gas in the tank bringing it up to 189 whp.
Brett.
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (20)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,941
Likes: 0
From: Danville/Blackhawk, California
Originally posted by Turbo442
Have you done any dyno pulls on 95, 97, 100, 100+ octane yet? I would be very interested in those results.
Have you done any dyno pulls on 95, 97, 100, 100+ octane yet? I would be very interested in those results.
Our shop EVO is now up to 370 dyno tuning pulls. We go through 1/2 a tank of gas per day from dyno testing alone. And we haven't even started our roadcourse testing at Buttonwillow yet. Lots of stuff to do over the course of the next few weeks.
Cheers,
Shiv
PS. We couldn't swap ECUs around between different cars due to the immobilizer feature. I would have loved to test the SCC EVO's ECU in our car, and visa versa.
Last edited by shiv@vishnu; Mar 17, 2003 at 02:49 AM.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,312
Likes: 3
From: Birmingham, AL
Originally posted by KK
Man you really have something against him don't you? He's only saying that the production Evos are consistently dynoing 20whp less the what the press Evo was putting down. That to me says something.
Again, this car doesn't suck, but Mitsubishi is using some dirty tricks and they need to learn to stop them.
Mark
Man you really have something against him don't you? He's only saying that the production Evos are consistently dynoing 20whp less the what the press Evo was putting down. That to me says something.
Again, this car doesn't suck, but Mitsubishi is using some dirty tricks and they need to learn to stop them.
Mark
Is dyno testing that much of an exact science? Wouldn't the car that made "20hp more", a JDM VII, and a USDM VIII have to all be at Shiv's shop the same day to really come close settling this?
Last edited by GPTourer; Mar 17, 2003 at 05:11 AM.