OK .... so what facts should I check Shiv?

Do stock evo's typically put down 190-205 whp on a dynodynamics dyno?

Did the Works modified car with Aperture TB, axle back exhaust, and chip put down 210 whp on your dyno?

 

Please find the post where I mislead you.

Also, we attempted to dyno another similiarly modified car to back up the numbers but he backed down. It's all in the original thread. Give it a read.

That's what it made. Accept it.

shiv

 

Shiv-Shiv ... c'mon now. I'm saying that I've seen an evo dyno stock, and then witnessed a 33 whp gain a month later on the same car, same dynopack dyno, but with the Works mods. Now why would I need to be able to reflash a computer on the dyno to see this? And why is this not apples vs. apples. Same car, same dyno .... first set of pulls = no mods. Second set of pulls = Works mods, different day.

 

Two different days, with two different testing conditions with the possibility of two different testing procedures (dynopacks are the most user-intensive dynos one will likely ever see) does not equate to holding all things constant.

Also, please find the post where you accuse me of trying to mislead you or anyone else.

Shiv

 

No need to find the post Shiv ... u just said the same thing right here. My point exactly .... I think it's wrong to publize something like this, when it's obvious that the adverse results appear to be skewed for some other reason. Shiv, we've all seen evo's w/ the Works flash dyno now ... and they all seem to put down about the same amount of power improvment. But now u come along and publisize something different ... didn't u think this through? Eh ... that just maybe you could have been more professional, and held off on publicizing this until you had all of the facts? But then again ..... that's what reporters/writers/journalists do I guess.

 

evo1 you should read over the original post again because it was not posted by Shiv and I don't see anywhere in the post where Shiv was trying to mislead anyone.

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...shnu+and+works


I was there when the Works car was dynoed and the owner was sitting in the car when it was dynoed with about 25 other people watching.

 

Look, here's a good example. A friend of mine was running mods similar to myself -- HKS EVC and full exhaust. He ran consistent 13.4's quater mile times at the track ....

Then he decided to go w/ a Stage 0 Xede. Hooked it up, and run after run, he couldn't seem to run better then 13.3's.

But did we decide to post all over the internet that the Xede sucks and is only good for one-tenth improvement in the quarter mile? After all, both of us drive it many runs, and neither of us could better 13.3. No Shiv ... we didn't, because we are smart enough, as well much more professional than that. Nope ... a day later we detected a very small vacuum leak ... and his car wasn't holding boost like it should have been.

Now, sure your testing on the dyno may be more conclusive ... but that can also make it sound more misleading Shiv ... and u need to be aware of the statements u make personally.

 

I hear ya about Honky's post, but there is another one out there directly from Shiv. I'll find it ... and besides, he just claimed it again like it is a post er two ago anyway ... c 4 yourself ... he said "that's what it put down, accept it." Look, I'm sure Shiv is your buddy ... no need to defend him ... I'm just trying to say that he needs to be careful of what he publicizes because it can be misleading.

Dude it's obvious, that from ALL of the other Works cars that have been dynoed, that there had to be something wrong with this Works-modified car on the dynodynamics dyno, but I never saw anything posted about that.

 

Actually, reporters/writers/journalists tend to report all the fact they can and then rely upon the abilities of the reader to arrive at his/her own conclusions. Needless to say, expecting everyone to arrive at the same conclusion isn't going to happen. Especially when some people are more prone to attacking the facts than his/her ability to digest them.

Dude it's obvious that you still don't get it. As many will attest to, 210 wheel hp on a Dyno Dynamics dyno is roughly equivalent to 240 wheel hp on a Dynojet. That means the car that made 210 wheel hp on our dyno will make ~240 wheel hp on an AWD Dynojet. So, there is little that suggest that the car was functioning incorrectly.

FWIW, in front of lots of people, we've had pre-boost control Stage Zero and Stage Zero w/dp cars make 250-275 wheel hp on Pruven Performance's and Altered Atmosphere's AWD Dynojets before. Those same cars will never generate those kind of numbers on our Dyno Dynamics dyno. Again, this is fact and I cannnot change it (as much as I would like to)

shiv

 

I know ... I was being a smartass. Did I mention that my sister is reporter for the San Francisco Times?

Not attackiing any facts Shiv .... just stating that u FAILED to explain that there could have been another problem with the Works-modded car, and that you did not have a baseline # on the car either ......... yet you were quick to publicize the tiny 10 whp, weren't ya.

 

Shiv, dude .... what is there not to get man!

210 dyndynamics = 240 dynojet ....

Okay, so if the Works-modded car made 210 whp on your dynodynamics dyno, and say .... the Works mods (TB, exhaust. and chip) are good for 30 whp improvement, worst case scenerio .... then one could say that this same car would have baselined at 180 whp on your dyno Shiv. Now doesn't that seem low to you? Now it is possible that this particular evo may just be one of outliners (in the less power direction), but 180 at wheel seems low, EVEN on a dynodynamics. AND THIS EXACTLY why I believe it is NOT COOL to post results like this unless you have some sort of baseline # 's , or you are explaining all of the facts and the important possibilies that could potentially skew the results in one direction or the other. Can we at least agree on that Shiv? I would just appreciate more professionalism, and less biased attitudes and heuristic thinking .... thank u very much.

 

Again, I and others have presented the facts. Pls feel free to make your assumptions and arrive at your own conclusions. Clearly, they are different than mine.

Cheers,
shiv

 

Hey at least I explain my assumptions and conclusions very well. All I've heard from u is ......... garbage about what u think I don't understand.

............. 'as he dodges another bullet' Whoooooooo-weeee!

No ... cheers to u Shiv

 

First of all we would like to know about these findings. So your saying Xede is quicker .1 tenths to stock or EVC full exhaust combo?

Stage 0 has catback and xede.
HKS evc with Downpipe, offroad or hi-flow with catback ran .1 slower. It seems that Xede is faster and more superior with less mods?

The stage 0 also runs on factory boost and I have no idea if he ran factory boost with his evc either?

You guys running 91 octane? Must be crappy track conditions since 13.3-13.4 is slow since my car ran 13.5-13.6 stock on warmer and cooler days. What were the trap speeds? Mine went down from 101.7 on cooler days to 99.7 on hot days.

 

NO! NO! NO! GTR ... u probably didn't read the entire post. I was making an example about something ... and read that post again and you will see that the small improvement in quarter mile times the the result of a vacuum leak and not the Xede ... yet I did not jump the gun thinking it was the Xede since the leak occured the same time as we installed the Xede, and was very easy to point fingers. Read that post again, as well as out posts leading up to and you will understand. Dam people ..... please read these things through .... thanks.

Oh and what are u talking about 'u guys are running 91 octane? I'm in Florida, a looooooooooooong ways away from Cali and 93 octane is abundant.