EVO 8/9 FP Red vs. EVO X FP Red - Less power, why?
. DC_TypeR - sorry to hear you're selling your car. On to bigger and better things I hope.
At 32psi I think I'll be in love too! I still find it crazy that there were no gains at 30psi. Now I'm just hoping not to be the first to do a 34psi money-shift...
Last edited by Tractionlimit; Aug 18, 2009 at 07:49 AM.
So I've been in contact with the Robert and Scott at FP, and both have been quite responsive and helpful so far. I feel better about the turbo, but still think there is something holding it back either in the tune, mechanically in the engine/manifold, or as an electronic limiter.
From Robert @ FP regarding changes made to the X turbo and differences from the IX :
From Robert when asked about the 'dead spot' from 25psi-30psi:
From Scott @ FP on the 'dead spot':
It seems to me they have a point and maybe there is something else being overlooked. If anyone has any logs of this, please post them up and I will make sure FP gets them.
I'm hoping someday we'll see this kind of torque from the Red in an X :
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...-hks-280s.html
From Robert @ FP regarding changes made to the X turbo and differences from the IX :
There has only been the one configuration of the turbo built to date, it features a 67mm turbine and 76HTA wheel, same as the EVORed for the EVO9 application. The real difference in the two apps is that the EVOX gets the advantage of a 12cm housing where the EVO9 is limited to a 10.5cm housing.
Seeing the power go up with really high boost is indicating that there is a restriction in the system that CAN BE overcome with extra pressure head. More that likely it could also be overcome with a mechanical modification and less pressure as well, but like I said, many of the subtle mods that need to be done have not become fully resolved at this early date in the EVOXs life. Figure it out and lead the way in EVOX tuning!
There is NO mechanical reason that a Red for a X and a Red for a 9 should make different power other than the turbine housing on the X is larger and free-er flowing. Both compressor housings have practically identicle flow areas and diffuser plates. Both turbos have the same exact turbine and compressor aeros and dimensions. The real difference in the two cases lies in some of the other 1500 parts under the hood.
There is NO mechanical reason that a Red for a X and a Red for a 9 should make different power other than the turbine housing on the X is larger and free-er flowing. Both compressor housings have practically identicle flow areas and diffuser plates. Both turbos have the same exact turbine and compressor aeros and dimensions. The real difference in the two cases lies in some of the other 1500 parts under the hood.
My guess is there is some form of 'torque management' happening inside the ECU within a range of loads, and nobody has noticed it or overcome it. What about cars with aftermarket ECU's? Do they experience the same phenomenon?
Send me logs. TPS, throttle body position, MAF, ign timing, cam timing, calc load, actual boost pressure, baro etc.
Send me logs. TPS, throttle body position, MAF, ign timing, cam timing, calc load, actual boost pressure, baro etc.
I'm hoping someday we'll see this kind of torque from the Red in an X
:https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...-hks-280s.html
Anyone know how the ECU would be able to sense torque on a manual transmission car? I'm all for a conspiracy therory, like torque management, for why my car isn't making any torque 
E-85 is win, just wait until you get the E-85 and high boost on the Red, should really open it up!
I am making like 200wtq over what I was stock, but 31psi helps too
Like I said e-85 ftw.
My guess is there is some form of 'torque management' happening inside the ECU within a range of loads, and nobody has noticed it or overcome it. What about cars with aftermarket ECU's? Do they experience the same phenomenon?
Send me logs. TPS, throttle body position, MAF, ign timing, cam timing, calc load, actual boost pressure, baro etc.
Send me logs. TPS, throttle body position, MAF, ign timing, cam timing, calc load, actual boost pressure, baro etc.
I don't know about the whole stock ECU theory.
Prior to the red, I was making 350 whp/ 349 lbs of torque, on 91... with the stock turbo, and no cams @ 24.5 psi of boost.
with the red, and cams (cossie mx1) on 91 octane @ 25 lbs of boost, I am barely hitting around 360-370 and it is laggy compared to the stock turbo.
If anything, I think that the larger 12cm housing is hurting lower boost (25-30 psi) on the stock frame turbo as compared to the 10.5 cm housing of the 8/9 red normally shinning @ that boost range. (IF they are the same exact turbo that Robert Young is saying they are). Once boost is increased past 30psi ~... that's when it overcomes the housing difference and is able to flow all that air out? Could be pissin in the wind with that theory... but that's the only one to make sense so far.
I don't think it would be an "ecu" factor.... as an EVO X MR and mine both hit this wall, same tuner..
Plus I think some other socal guys with a different tuner hit this wall, along side of a handful of other guys around the states that have hit this wall
Just my .02
-Chris
I don't know about the whole stock ECU theory.
Prior to the red, I was making 350 whp/ 349 lbs of torque, on 91... with the stock turbo, and no cams @ 24.5 psi of boost.
with the red, and cams (cossie mx1) on 91 octane @ 25 lbs of boost, I am barely hitting around 360-370 and it is laggy compared to the stock turbo.
If anything, I think that the larger 12cm housing is hurting lower boost (25-30 psi) on the stock frame turbo as compared to the 10.5 cm housing of the 8/9 red normally shinning @ that boost range. (IF they are the same exact turbo that Robert Young is saying they are). Once boost is increased past 30psi ~... that's when it overcomes the housing difference and is able to flow all that air out? Could be pissin in the wind with that theory... but that's the only one to make sense so far.
I don't think it would be an "ecu" factor.... as an EVO X MR and mine both hit this wall, same tuner..
Plus I think some other socal guys with a different tuner hit this wall, along side of a handful of other guys around the states that have hit this wall
Just my .02
-Chris
Prior to the red, I was making 350 whp/ 349 lbs of torque, on 91... with the stock turbo, and no cams @ 24.5 psi of boost.
with the red, and cams (cossie mx1) on 91 octane @ 25 lbs of boost, I am barely hitting around 360-370 and it is laggy compared to the stock turbo.
If anything, I think that the larger 12cm housing is hurting lower boost (25-30 psi) on the stock frame turbo as compared to the 10.5 cm housing of the 8/9 red normally shinning @ that boost range. (IF they are the same exact turbo that Robert Young is saying they are). Once boost is increased past 30psi ~... that's when it overcomes the housing difference and is able to flow all that air out? Could be pissin in the wind with that theory... but that's the only one to make sense so far.
I don't think it would be an "ecu" factor.... as an EVO X MR and mine both hit this wall, same tuner..
Plus I think some other socal guys with a different tuner hit this wall, along side of a handful of other guys around the states that have hit this wall
Just my .02
-Chris
The problem isn't the new Red is smaller, it's actually bigger in essence. We know low boost sucks, but I wonder how very high boost levels (35-40psi) will compare with the previous gen.
Wait for traction limit's results with E-85, I really think the Red will shine then finally. I think it's a good turbo, it just needs the higher boost like always. This has always been the story with the red's, just that with the 8/9's you didn't need as high of boost for the awesomeness.
I'd hold off on the cams too until everything is more proven. So many variables right now. I should have done E85 first and then started messing with everything else. Then again, that's uncharted water on the X too.
Wait for traction limit's results with E-85, I really think the Red will shine then finally. I think it's a good turbo, it just needs the higher boost like always. This has always been the story with the red's, just that with the 8/9's you didn't need as high of boost for the awesomeness.
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
From: queens
yea but the thing is I kind of want a turbo that can make good power on pump also and not rely on meth and racegas....35r sounds more tasteful because the 30r has failed I think..I will be honest with you my car is making crazy power now and close to fp red numbers on lower boost so why change it. The stocker falls off on power this is why I wanted something different. Hopefully the cams and a wga help a little. Here is my graph on a low reading dyno dynamics....car is def blessed. Has only megan racing single drift turbo back stock 02 housing and just cone filter for intake with a ecuflash....85 degrees 85% humidity stock intercooler. Thanks
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/spikey77/dyno.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/spikey77/dyno2.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/spikey77/dyno.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/spikey77/dyno2.jpg
yea but the thing is I kind of want a turbo that can make good power on pump also and not rely on meth and racegas....35r sounds more tasteful because the 30r has failed I think..I will be honest with you my car is making crazy power now and close to fp red numbers on lower boost so why change it. The stocker falls off on power this is why I wanted something different. Hopefully the cams and a wga help a little. Here is my graph on a low reading dyno dynamics....car is def blessed. Has only megan racing single drift turbo back stock 02 housing and just cone filter for intake with a ecuflash....85 degrees 85% humidity stock intercooler. Thanks
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/spikey77/dyno.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/spikey77/dyno2.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/spikey77/dyno.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/spikey77/dyno2.jpg