Notices
Evo X Dyno Results Discuss vendor and member dyno tuning techniques, results and graphs.

Buschur Racing Dyno comparison, stock, mod stock, Blouch Dominator

Old Jan 26, 2009 | 11:26 AM
  #1  
David Buschur's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (53)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Likes: 32
Buschur Racing Dyno comparison, stock, mod stock, Blouch Dominator

Below is a dyno comparison of our EVOX. All testing was performed here on our Mustang Dyno, AWD500SE dyno. For power comparison the power was 10% higher when put on a Dynojet, making a current peak power of 443 whp. All testing was on 93-94 octane pump fuel. No alky, no race gas, no octane boosters.

The red line solid line is stock boost, horsepower and torque. I know it gets hard to read.

The green smaller dashed line is BR Stages 1-3, stock turbo, boost, HP and TQ.

The blue larger dashed line is BR Stages 1-3, Blouch D2 turbo, Cosworth cams, boost, HP, TQ.



We have gained 196 peak whp over stock at this point.
We have gained 105 peak ft lbs over stock at this point.

We have gained 208 whp at 6900 rpm over stock at this point.
We have gained 156 ft lbs at 6900 rpm over stock at this point.

Peak boost stock was 22.5 psi.
Peak boost with Stg 3 stock turbo was 25.8 psi
Peak boost on Blouch turbo is 24.7 psi.

The car bone stock made peak boost of 22.5 psi at 3700 rpm
The car modified with the stock turbo made peak boost of 25.8 psi at 3700 rpm
The car with the Blouch turbo and Cosworth cams makes peak boost of 24.7 psi at 4100 rpm. Compared to stock it makes 23.2 psi at 3700 rpm.

At 6900 rpm the stock car/stock turbo had 13.4 psi, loss of 9.1 psi
At 6900 rpm the Stg 3 w/stock turbo had 17.4 psi, loss of 8.4 psi
At 6900 rpm the Stg 3, Dom/Cos had 22.1 psi, loss of 2.6 psi
Reply
Old Jan 26, 2009 | 11:36 AM
  #2  
Ultimate CC's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (122)
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 6,876
Likes: 0
From: Peekskill NY
those are some impressive gains, 208whp gain is like night and day difference from stock...
Reply
Old Jan 26, 2009 | 12:20 PM
  #3  
dafunk630's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,447
Likes: 0
From: USA
very impressive!!!
Reply
Old Jan 26, 2009 | 12:25 PM
  #4  
Jrod@Buschur's Avatar
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (101)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,487
Likes: 1
From: York, PA
I was in the car the other day and that was the first time since probably June when I had taken it on a road trip and at that time it was just our basic stages. The car was fun to rip around in and drive.

I can tell you that the X now.... feels like an Evo.
Reply
Old Jan 26, 2009 | 12:35 PM
  #5  
Guerillah's Avatar
Evolved Member
20 Year Member
Photogenic
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 760
Likes: 1
From: Tucson, AZ
Thats bad ***, no loss in low end/spool and a crap ton of gains.
Reply
Old Jan 26, 2009 | 12:55 PM
  #6  
scheides's Avatar
EvoM Moderator
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,827
Likes: 13
From: Minneapolis
Just shy of double stock WHP. That is when you know your car is mega quick/fun! I can't believe how low the torque is on the stock setup up top, just so weak!
Reply
Old Jan 26, 2009 | 02:44 PM
  #7  
David Buschur's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (53)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Likes: 32
Overlooking these graphs today it is easy to see why the car feels so damn good now. I was going to load the car on the dyno today but it's just so freaking cold here, I think around 12 degrees today.

Now that all the drivability is sorted out and it is running awesome I need to get it back on the dyno for a final WOT tune. I'm certain it is going to make even more power.
Reply
Old Jan 26, 2009 | 05:27 PM
  #8  
CBRD's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (60)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 7,363
Likes: 8
From: york, pa 17402
awesome david!

cb
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 03:14 AM
  #9  
Mojito's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
From: Moscow, Russia
Great results!
Originally Posted by davidbuschur
Now that all the drivability is sorted out and it is running awesome I need to get it back on the dyno for a final WOT tune. I'm certain it is going to make even more power.
Can you please elaborate on this? Was there a problem with idle or drivability in general? How did you fix it?
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 07:30 AM
  #10  
STi2EvoX's Avatar
Evolved Member
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,849
Likes: 1
From: USA
Great results David! I wish my X was that fast .
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 05:56 PM
  #11  
David Buschur's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (53)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Likes: 32
It's easy, put the right parts and tune on the car.
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 07:27 PM
  #12  
GST Motorsports's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,366
Likes: 2
From: Hayward
Great stuff David,

Loving the overlays, they really let people see the gains way more than just individual charts can do.
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 07:47 PM
  #13  
Tigre's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Florida
nice layout on the dyno charts
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 11:45 PM
  #14  
Mean TT's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, TX
How come no one has raised the limit on RPMs significantly? I know a few have made small increases, but with a graph like this it looks like there is a lot more HP to be had with a higher limit, especially with cams and a bigger turbo. As far as I know there has been no one to cause a motor failure from a failure related to an 8500 RPM limit. I know there are some issues with the lighter valve springs, but it seems like an "easy" way to get even bigger gains provided the motor will not self destruct. Any thoughts?
Reply
Old Jan 28, 2009 | 06:58 AM
  #15  
Mad_SB's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,138
Likes: 0
From: Georgia
Originally Posted by Mean TT
How come no one has raised the limit on RPMs significantly? I know a few have made small increases, but with a graph like this it looks like there is a lot more HP to be had with a higher limit, especially with cams and a bigger turbo. As far as I know there has been no one to cause a motor failure from a failure related to an 8500 RPM limit. I know there are some issues with the lighter valve springs, but it seems like an "easy" way to get even bigger gains provided the motor will not self destruct. Any thoughts?
Early on when I was shopping for cams (before any were released) I was told by a few manufacturers that the stock valve springs are so week on the X that they could not even do a mild cam that would work with the stock springs. Add to that the dramatic increase in boost in the higher rpm ranges that would come with an upgraded turbo and you now have an additional 8 - 20 psi of pressure on the back face of the intake valves.........

Personally I think Mr. Buschur was very brave to run the cosworth cams with the stock springs and bump the rev limit by 200 rpm's. No way in heck I would bump it to 8,500 rpm without serious work on the head and a very reliable way to monitor oil pressure.

But hey, if you want to donate your motor to the cause I'm sure someone would be willing to spin it till it fails.

Last edited by Mad_SB; Jan 28, 2009 at 07:01 AM.
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:20 AM.