Notices
Evo X Engine Management / Tuning Forums Discuss the major engine management systems.

EvoX + WORKS x P2Flash = :-))

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 12:07 AM
  #1  
fast_bloke's Avatar
Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area, SF, CA
EvoX + WORKS x P2Flash = :-))

Just wanted to proclaim that WORKS know how to make the EvoX behave as it should.... Stock Car - Works Drop In Air Filter Only (Before and After runs).

I will let the data tell the story, courtesy of WORKS Dynapak Dyno and my Race-Technology DL1 Data Logger:









The really impressive thing is how well the car holds on to the boost - much better than any post of boost vs RPM that I have seen on these forums. Holds above 20psi to nearly 7000rpm with essentially the same peak boost as stock, finally tapering down to ~18psi at the limiter. Unfortunately I dont have a screen shot of this to hand.

Driving the car it feels how it should have from the factory now.

I would thoroughly recommend this upgrade as immense value for money! Way better than money spent on exhaust, intercooler, hard pipes, etc.... I know this because a man who has all these mods but no tune drove the car post tune and now desperately wants a tune!
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 01:23 AM
  #2  
RazorLab's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,094
Likes: 1,092
From: Mid-Hudson, NY
Originally Posted by fast_bloke
Something has to be wrong with the math here as that would be saying you basically made a 14.0 flat car a 12.0 flat car. Or a 13.5 car a 11.5 car, or whatever it would have done stock.

Unless I am missing something here, but 2 secs gain in acceleration rate with 70whp gain doesn't add up. Of course, I could be wrong, I always kind of sucked at math.

Last edited by razorlab; Jun 11, 2008 at 01:29 AM.
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 04:22 AM
  #3  
EvoX_SA's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
From: Honolulu, HI
Once again inpressive numbers from a tune that **** me off beacause there isn;t anyone close enough to me to get a tune, but congrats those are some nice numbers. Have you taken it to the track yet?
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 06:28 AM
  #4  
evostang's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh, NC
Originally Posted by fast_bloke
I think Razorlab has made a valid comment.

I would also like to understand the last graph. It says two car lengths difference, however, the curves show a difference at seven seconds of approximately 32 ft - 30 ft, which is only a 2 ft difference. Is the graph wrong, or what am I missing?
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 07:25 AM
  #5  
GSXR's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
From: NorCal
Originally Posted by razorlab
Something has to be wrong with the math here as that would be saying you basically made a 14.0 flat car a 12.0 flat car. Or a 13.5 car a 11.5 car, or whatever it would have done stock.

Unless I am missing something here, but 2 secs gain in acceleration rate with 70whp gain doesn't add up. Of course, I could be wrong, I always kind of sucked at math.
Nah, you're just bad at math.

What you're looking at is a 4th gear pull from 60 mph to 100 mph. At 60 mph in 4th gear you're at about 4000 RPMs. If he had started from 3000 RPMs, he would've seen a much larger gap.
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 07:34 AM
  #6  
GSXR's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
From: NorCal
Originally Posted by evostang
I think Razorlab has made a valid comment.

I would also like to understand the last graph. It says two car lengths difference, however, the curves show a difference at seven seconds of approximately 32 ft - 30 ft, which is only a 2 ft difference. Is the graph wrong, or what am I missing?
He just did the runs 4 times - two before tune and two after. What you're looking at is a gap of 30-32 ft between the before tune and after tune. So 30ft is about 2 car lengths.

Yeah, and I'm the guy who test drove his car and it pulls much better than mine which has a catback, UICP, FMIC, drop-in filter, and manual boost controller. I think the only saving grace with my setup is that it spools faster than his - HA HA.
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 10:36 AM
  #7  
STi2EvoX's Avatar
Evolved Member
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,849
Likes: 1
From: USA
how come this guy made more power on his X with just a drop in and a tune from works than that other guy that has all that plus a bolt on muffler? Works tuned both of them, so wtf? If you compare the numbers you'll see that not only is this guy making less power but it's a messy curve. https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=348593. I will say this though; in the first post I guess Bill does say that the flash is producing better results as it gets further refined.

Last edited by STi2EvoX; Jun 11, 2008 at 10:41 AM.
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 11:09 AM
  #8  
evostang's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh, NC
Originally Posted by GSXR
He just did the runs 4 times - two before tune and two after. What you're looking at is a gap of 30-32 ft between the before tune and after tune. So 30ft is about 2 car lengths.
OK, makes sense, I missed that it was a differential measurement. Maybe update the excel chart to show that?
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 11:28 AM
  #9  
RazorLab's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,094
Likes: 1,092
From: Mid-Hudson, NY
Originally Posted by GSXR
Nah, you're just bad at math.

What you're looking at is a 4th gear pull from 60 mph to 100 mph. At 60 mph in 4th gear you're at about 4000 RPMs. If he had started from 3000 RPMs, he would've seen a much larger gap.
He still "gained" 2 secs of acceleration with 70whp either way. It just doesn't add up to me.

2 secs is a huge gain with a 3500lb car with only those power gains.

Last edited by razorlab; Jun 11, 2008 at 11:32 AM.
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 11:29 AM
  #10  
Mightygnu's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,262
Likes: 1
From: Redondo Beach, CA
Originally Posted by razorlab
He still gained 2 secs of acceleration either way. It just doesn't add up to me.
I am just as confused as you..
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 11:33 AM
  #11  
evostang's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh, NC
Originally Posted by razorlab
He still gained 2 secs of acceleration with 70whp either way. It just doesn't add up to me.
Maybe the inertia/power consumption of the dyno is significantly less than the actual inertia/drag of the vehicle itself? It could give skewwed numbers in that case.
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 01:37 PM
  #12  
nj1266's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 13
From: USA
On the last Evo 9 I tuned the car gained 1.29s in acceleration when tuned. I compared acceleration runs from 28.58 mph to 75.80 mph between the tuned and untuned runs and the difference in acceleration was 1.29s. The car made 35 hp from the tune. If 35 hp gain gave 1.29s faster acceleration, then it is ver plausible that a 70 hp gain would give 2s faster acceleration.
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 01:41 PM
  #13  
evostang's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh, NC
nj1266, 1.29 seconds on the dyno rollers or the street?
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 01:42 PM
  #14  
nj1266's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 13
From: USA
Originally Posted by evostang
nj1266, 1.29 seconds on the dyno rollers or the street?
On the street.
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2008 | 04:39 PM
  #15  
spdracerut's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Photogenic
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,331
Likes: 39
From: Hermosa Beach, CA
Originally Posted by razorlab
He still "gained" 2 secs of acceleration with 70whp either way. It just doesn't add up to me.

2 secs is a huge gain with a 3500lb car with only those power gains.
Makes perfect sense to me. How about this, go do two 4th gear pulls in your car from 50-110 mph with your current boost level and a reduced boost level (~5psi which should be roughly 50whp) and see what the time difference is.

Also, it's two seconds to reach a speed, not two seconds to reach a distance. Like a 14.0 is a 100mph car whereas a 12.0 is a 120mph car. Heck, just look at the distance graphs. At 7 seconds, there's only a gap of 30ft and a mph difference of about 8mph. 30ft is only a couple tenths of a second at those speeds.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:27 PM.