What I meant is that we have no idea where this power claim came from. Was the car dynoed in the past? Is it based on 1/4 times? Is it an estimation based on feel? What? Last time I checked, the word of a vendor is not the word of God.

 

Thats parts of being a good mod, but what about being supportive. Sometimes your opinions aren't always constructive.

 

Do you want me to hold people's hands and tell them everything will be OK as they walk in front of traffic? When support is suitable, I give support but when it's purely a matter of facts, I provide facts.

 

Lol. How is that the same thing as supporting somebody in what they want to do? Than prove this guy wrong.

 

If somebody wants to make their car more powerful, I'm not doing them a favor by telling them to do whatever they want (which is generally bolt-ons), I'm effectively letting them make a mistake I know is a mistake. I'm holding their hand as they walk into traffic.
How can I prove him wrong? Drive to California, steal his car and dyno it?

 

your dyno is still questionable when you had the lancer. you never had your car tuned when you installed aftermarket high comp pistons.

 

:facepalm:

Not this again. I compared the two plots, my car and the stock lancer, and they were virtually identical in terms of AF ratio thus my mods didn't throw that off. Timing should have been the same as well as that hadn't been changed. Yes tuning could have more power but it's not going to work miracles. The compression increase was only 0.5:1 anyways, hardly a big leap.

 

tuning still would help though and be beneficial.

 

Yes but it's not like I would go from 87 WHP to 100 WHP. Moreover my results match up with the results Blacksheep acquired when he dynoed his car.

 

Just cause your car never made power from bolt-ons means noone elses car will make any power? Do you know that as a fact? How much power does 22 psi actually make. Someone give me facts.

 

And as you always stated adding bolt-ons will need tuning.

 

With bolt-ons? No. Unless I had a magically special Lancer that didn't make power while everyone else has the normal model that makes power, it's pretty same to assume that if another Lancer follows my mod path, they'll get the same results. This is a fairly fundamental principle of science. I have said over and over and over again that when you turbo the car, it's a completely different story. You can make decent power quite easily with a turbo. On topic however, we've gone through what, 10 pages now and we still haven't gotten an answer as to where the 420 WHP number came from. That's all I want to know but apparently that makes me a hater and requires some massive discussion about me as a person and as a moderator and necessitates digging up my results from 2 years ago.

 

Well, it's the same type of car and will respond the same way to NA mods. So NA mods didn't prove to be cost-effective.

 

When did I state they need tuning? Tuning does help but for an NA car, it's not a necessity (a turbo car is a different story). Given the design of the 4G94, all of the mods I did shouldn't have caused any ECU/tune issues. The intake was fine (MAF housing was separate thus unaffected), the ported TB was fine, the ported IM was fine, the ported fuel rail was fine and all the exhaust work was fine. As I said, my AF chart was virtually identical to the stock lancer so any tuning would be the same between the two cars (ie. both could be leaned out). My car would probably have gained more but it wouldn't have been a power house.

 

those are not facts+ you still didnt get a tune so how would we know what your numbers really were.

this was blacksheeps, his mods were different than yours.

Date: June 22, 2004
Max HP: 93.2hp @ 5750rpms
Max TQ: 95.8tq @ 4250rpms
Dyno Used: Mustang
Facility: Mustang Dynamometer - Twinsburg, Ohio
Temperature: 75
Octane: 87

Modifications: Buschur SRI, downpipe, high flow cat
RRM axleback
Magnacor wires

Notes: Pull was done in 4th gear. Exhaust leak could have affected numbers.