AGP Turbo's EVO X
Evolving Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
From: Chicago, IL
HAHA Yea I know its funny isnt it. Its like they view the car as a foreign country with global control of oil. Soo funny to hear the stupid asumptions people are making like the dude a couple posts ago that said, oh the X's ecu is already good, since it already has advanced timing, so there wont be much to gain out of it. WHAT?!!??!?!?! Yea your right, the aspect of advanced timing is all that gets tuned when your tune an ecu. Not a/f, gain, injector duty cycle...nothing, just timing, which acording to that guy, will not be able to advance anymore since its sooo far advanced. Got asumption is the mother of a f ups.
Youre assuming the X ECU is much more tuned than the IX ECU. Quit making assumptions. There is a lot to be gained just through the air fuel ratio alone and if indeed the car is knocking on 91 there is good power to be gained there as well. These are two things that we know now as fact, and can be fixed and show gains. Did the evo ix knock on pump gas with simple mods?
AGP mentions that the timing was pretty aggressive. The boost already peaks at 23psi. The IX's turbo boost stock was barely peaking 19psi in most cases - plenty of room for power. If you think you've reached your boost max, how much more power do you think you can extract from the car with just timing and AFR without causing knock and not adding race/meth? Probably not as much as you'd think/hope.
Last edited by BOOSTEZ; Jan 25, 2008 at 01:48 PM.
Better is subjective.. Take the car to the track and see what it can do with full bolt-ons and the added weight that it comes with.
Evolving Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
From: LA
HAHA Yea I know its funny isnt it. Its like they view the car as a foreign country with global control of oil. Soo funny to hear the stupid asumptions people are making like the dude a couple posts ago that said, oh the X's ecu is already good, since it already has advanced timing, so there wont be much to gain out of it. WHAT?!!??!?!?! Yea your right, the aspect of advanced timing is all that gets tuned when your tune an ecu. Not a/f, gain, injector duty cycle...nothing, just timing, which acording to that guy, will not be able to advance anymore since its sooo far advanced. Got asumption is the mother of a f ups.
Evolving Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
From: LA
Eviloution310,
Are you stupid?
Look at the dyno I posted of the ix... It drops down to 13psi. Use your eyes and brain before you start trying to talk ****. As far as the dynos being different no ****. Did I ever mention numbers? All I stated is when peak occurs on each sheet. I'm not comparing numbers so get a damn brain before you trying saying I have no idea what im talking about. Comparing peaks between these two dynos is fine as they both put the car under the same type of load.
Are you stupid?
Look at the dyno I posted of the ix... It drops down to 13psi. Use your eyes and brain before you start trying to talk ****. As far as the dynos being different no ****. Did I ever mention numbers? All I stated is when peak occurs on each sheet. I'm not comparing numbers so get a damn brain before you trying saying I have no idea what im talking about. Comparing peaks between these two dynos is fine as they both put the car under the same type of load.
Former Sponsor
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
From: Chandler, AZ
No I think your pretty stupid trying to compare different dynos on different days you just look like an a.s.shole. Did you take things into consideration like load(which is different between a dynapack and mustang like your comparing) On a dynapack you take the wheels off and dyno at the hub where as a mustang you dyno wheels on, what about ambient temp? which could make all the difference in the world. Do you see what im getting at? you cant compare 2 things that are wildly different and expect not to get called out about it.
Temp affects POWER YES, I never compared power directly between the two. All I compared was when each peaked, at what boost, never did I say ohh well the X makes this much hp vs the IX making this much power. If I made power comparisons then yes I would agree with you but I never did. I was pointing out curves. The only reason I even posted that IX dyno sheet is because someone was on here saying the IX doesnt taper the boost like the X does which it clearly does.
Laps are good. But quarter-mile times is what people are really interested in. Sorry but on the street (where most racing occurs), people won't be trying to race around corners unless they are foolish.
@ PIR
Both dynos are LOAD BASED, do they make the same exact load, no, but the mustang puts more load on the car (hello heavy *** wheels it has to spin?!) which favors spool up for the IX.
Temp affects POWER YES, I never compared power directly between the two. All I compared was when each peaked, at what boost, never did I say ohh well the X makes this much hp vs the IX making this much power. If I made power comparisons then yes I would agree with you but I never did. I was pointing out curves. The only reason I even posted that IX dyno sheet is because someone was on here saying the IX doesnt taper the boost like the X does which it clearly does.
Temp affects POWER YES, I never compared power directly between the two. All I compared was when each peaked, at what boost, never did I say ohh well the X makes this much hp vs the IX making this much power. If I made power comparisons then yes I would agree with you but I never did. I was pointing out curves. The only reason I even posted that IX dyno sheet is because someone was on here saying the IX doesnt taper the boost like the X does which it clearly does.
