New Numbers!!! 384whp/360tq on 20g-9
New Numbers!!! 384whp/360tq on 20g-9
Just finished getting tuned at Bishop Motorsports by Kyle and Paul from East Coast Swappers and the car made some fairly impressive numbers.
Turbo: 20g-9
Gas: 93 Pump
Psi: 23psi
Air Fuels: 10.9-11.2
Knock: 0 counts across the boards
Outside Temp: 82.7 degrees
Final Numbers: 384whp/360tq
Turbo: 20g-9
Gas: 93 Pump
Psi: 23psi
Air Fuels: 10.9-11.2
Knock: 0 counts across the boards
Outside Temp: 82.7 degrees
Final Numbers: 384whp/360tq
Last edited by Sir Lancelot; Aug 28, 2007 at 10:25 AM.
Trending Topics
Definitely good power, but I hate Dynapacks, because you never really know what the numbers mean. I'd like to see if it makes the same power on a Dynojet, since they usually read close to one another.
Also, it's unlikely to make that much peak power on 23psi, however, from your torque curve, it appears that you have a very strange and abnormal boost curve that perhaps is being caused by EBC or stock BCS manipulation? Your torque curve is telling me that your initial spike is only 22-23psi, then it drops slightly, and then it climbs BACK UP and hits your peak of 23.xx at 5400rpm, and finally starts to taper dramatically. So, in essence, this is similar to running 25-26psi, imo, because you're seeing 23psi at 5400, which leads to your peak whp of 384 500rpm later. If you had a normal boost profile, you'd see a higher initial spike of ~25psi, a higher peak torque, and then the boost would have tapered to ~23 by 5500rpm.
Good power for pump gas on that turbo regardless.
Also, it's unlikely to make that much peak power on 23psi, however, from your torque curve, it appears that you have a very strange and abnormal boost curve that perhaps is being caused by EBC or stock BCS manipulation? Your torque curve is telling me that your initial spike is only 22-23psi, then it drops slightly, and then it climbs BACK UP and hits your peak of 23.xx at 5400rpm, and finally starts to taper dramatically. So, in essence, this is similar to running 25-26psi, imo, because you're seeing 23psi at 5400, which leads to your peak whp of 384 500rpm later. If you had a normal boost profile, you'd see a higher initial spike of ~25psi, a higher peak torque, and then the boost would have tapered to ~23 by 5500rpm.
Good power for pump gas on that turbo regardless.
Definitely good power, but I hate Dynapacks, because you never really know what the numbers mean. I'd like to see if it makes the same power on a Dynojet, since they usually read close to one another.
Also, it's unlikely to make that much peak power on 23psi, however, from your torque curve, it appears that you have a very strange and abnormal boost curve that perhaps is being caused by EBC or stock BCS manipulation? Your torque curve is telling me that your initial spike is only 22-23psi, then it drops slightly, and then it climbs BACK UP and hits your peak of 23.xx at 5400rpm, and finally starts to taper dramatically. So, in essence, this is similar to running 25-26psi, imo, because you're seeing 23psi at 5400, which leads to your peak whp of 384 500rpm later. If you had a normal boost profile, you'd see a higher initial spike of ~25psi, a higher peak torque, and then the boost would have tapered to ~23 by 5500rpm.
Good power for pump gas on that turbo regardless.
Also, it's unlikely to make that much peak power on 23psi, however, from your torque curve, it appears that you have a very strange and abnormal boost curve that perhaps is being caused by EBC or stock BCS manipulation? Your torque curve is telling me that your initial spike is only 22-23psi, then it drops slightly, and then it climbs BACK UP and hits your peak of 23.xx at 5400rpm, and finally starts to taper dramatically. So, in essence, this is similar to running 25-26psi, imo, because you're seeing 23psi at 5400, which leads to your peak whp of 384 500rpm later. If you had a normal boost profile, you'd see a higher initial spike of ~25psi, a higher peak torque, and then the boost would have tapered to ~23 by 5500rpm.
Good power for pump gas on that turbo regardless.
I thought i never say it. But i agree with the man.
