Fp green 73hta
hi everyone from the east coast, just wanted to stop in here and clear a few things up about the two turbos in question.
1. if you are talking just pump gas numbers the hta green has not proved it can destroy or even beat out the bbk full. from the one pump gas graph we have seen, it only made 431/369 on a dynojet and the car had head work and an aftermarket ecu at 25 psi. my car made 400/337 on cbrd's mustang dyno and i know for sure it will put down more then 431 on the local dyno jet when i go. if you guys are interested ill post my results in this thread. my car is just bolt ons and s2 cams.
2. from looking at that same pump graph the power falls off at the top after it reaches peak power. the bbk made its max power at redline and never fell off. here is a link to my graph
the 397 graph is on the second page https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...bbk-ftmfw.html
3. the graphs on the fp website at 24psi on a mustang dyno that are making great numbers are on a 2.3 stroker which definately is not a fair comparison to to a 2.0, if some one can point me to a bbk full graph on a 2.3 i would like to see it. im still waiting for numbers to come out from a 2.0 on a mustang dyno.
4. once again (like the red) if you want to compare high boost numbers on racefuel or even e-85 i think the green will produce better numbers then the bbk (just like the red), just due to the fact that the bbk is produced to be a pump gas turbo. ive seen pump gas tunes where the bbk outperforms or matches the red numbers.
1. if you are talking just pump gas numbers the hta green has not proved it can destroy or even beat out the bbk full. from the one pump gas graph we have seen, it only made 431/369 on a dynojet and the car had head work and an aftermarket ecu at 25 psi. my car made 400/337 on cbrd's mustang dyno and i know for sure it will put down more then 431 on the local dyno jet when i go. if you guys are interested ill post my results in this thread. my car is just bolt ons and s2 cams.
2. from looking at that same pump graph the power falls off at the top after it reaches peak power. the bbk made its max power at redline and never fell off. here is a link to my graph
the 397 graph is on the second page https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...bbk-ftmfw.html
3. the graphs on the fp website at 24psi on a mustang dyno that are making great numbers are on a 2.3 stroker which definately is not a fair comparison to to a 2.0, if some one can point me to a bbk full graph on a 2.3 i would like to see it. im still waiting for numbers to come out from a 2.0 on a mustang dyno.
4. once again (like the red) if you want to compare high boost numbers on racefuel or even e-85 i think the green will produce better numbers then the bbk (just like the red), just due to the fact that the bbk is produced to be a pump gas turbo. ive seen pump gas tunes where the bbk outperforms or matches the red numbers.
I have made 424whp with small cams on a IX on a Dynojet at 25psi with a stock head and stock intake manifold. I operate a dyno daily and have seen more than a few combos so I speak from experience and not solely internet opinion. Before you get a burr in your saddle and start assuming just state a question, no sarcasm is needed.
I dont think you understand how much 5-7 lbs min is. The old rule of thumb is that 1 lb/min is 10whp on a Dynojet and it really seems to hold true. All of the sudden your idea of "almost the same" is off by 50-70whp. The afore mentioned IX that made 424 is about 60 or so ahead of a normal IX on our dyno with those mods. I would expect that the next 5-7 (this is all the BBK is rated over stock) lbs/min will be at least another 60 or so.
I am not badmouthing anyones turbos, I sell both and sell the turbo based on the needs of my customer and their upgrade path. I am simply stating facts much as Chad did that they are different turbos with different things in mind. I still think the HTA will make more power at any given boost level though based purely on math.
i think there are some virtual dyno number comparisons taking place now... until we see these turbos on the same dyno's its hard to compare...
we've tuned, red's, green's etc..... bbks....
GST has done red's greens... etc.... bbks... and they just did a 2.3 that made 460whp/460 wtq on E85 on their mustang dyno, which is pretty impressive...
W can all speculate what will work better.... FP just released a new product, they do a nice job..... its hard to see how they compare until we get them on the same dyno, on all but identical cars.
each of these turbos finds it own fit....
cheers
cb
we've tuned, red's, green's etc..... bbks....
GST has done red's greens... etc.... bbks... and they just did a 2.3 that made 460whp/460 wtq on E85 on their mustang dyno, which is pretty impressive...
W can all speculate what will work better.... FP just released a new product, they do a nice job..... its hard to see how they compare until we get them on the same dyno, on all but identical cars.
each of these turbos finds it own fit....
cheers
cb
Yes I would definatly like to see this! I would like to know more about the spool!
The friendly competition is good! but the fact is:
BBK Pros:
Awesome pump gas turbo
Turn around time
Better prices
FP green:
Awesome pump gas/meth/race/e85
Seems to have more under the curve power
Both have their advantages, both great turbos. Some people would never run anthing but pump gas because it complicates things and they want to maintain the DD image.
Cheers!
I dont who you are or what your agenda seems to be, but the subject is HTA Green Vs BBK and this is what I am talking about. Charlie made 431 on CBRD's on pump with a Hypertune intake and Stage 3 head an 28psi. Bryan made the same on their dyno on E85 with a stock or stockish head.
I have made 424whp with small cams on a IX on a Dynojet at 25psi with a stock head and stock intake manifold. I operate a dyno daily and have seen more than a few combos so I speak from experience and not solely internet opinion. Before you get a burr in your saddle and start assuming just state a question, no sarcasm is needed.
I dont think you understand how much 5-7 lbs min is. The old rule of thumb is that 1 lb/min is 10whp on a Dynojet and it really seems to hold true. All of the sudden your idea of "almost the same" is off by 50-70whp. The afore mentioned IX that made 424 is about 60 or so ahead of a normal IX on our dyno with those mods. I would expect that the next 5-7 (this is all the BBK is rated over stock) lbs/min will be at least another 60 or so.
I am not badmouthing anyones turbos, I sell both and sell the turbo based on the needs of my customer and their upgrade path. I am simply stating facts much as Chad did that they are different turbos with different things in mind. I still think the HTA will make more power at any given boost level though based purely on math.
I have made 424whp with small cams on a IX on a Dynojet at 25psi with a stock head and stock intake manifold. I operate a dyno daily and have seen more than a few combos so I speak from experience and not solely internet opinion. Before you get a burr in your saddle and start assuming just state a question, no sarcasm is needed.
I dont think you understand how much 5-7 lbs min is. The old rule of thumb is that 1 lb/min is 10whp on a Dynojet and it really seems to hold true. All of the sudden your idea of "almost the same" is off by 50-70whp. The afore mentioned IX that made 424 is about 60 or so ahead of a normal IX on our dyno with those mods. I would expect that the next 5-7 (this is all the BBK is rated over stock) lbs/min will be at least another 60 or so.
I am not badmouthing anyones turbos, I sell both and sell the turbo based on the needs of my customer and their upgrade path. I am simply stating facts much as Chad did that they are different turbos with different things in mind. I still think the HTA will make more power at any given boost level though based purely on math.
charlie was on a JMfab manifold, with ported 65mm stocker...
---------------------------------
in general:
his car made around 430whp/350wtq on our dyno at 27psi.... i think 454whp on the mustang he used...
i have done a couple of BBK cars with bolt ons that have made over 400whp on our dyno..... at 25-27 psi...----------
in response to the highest RED turbo ive done on pump, i think it was 389whp..... i had one on E85 make 448whp i believe.... at 29psi....
ive never done one on race gas, or on a built block (since most of our clients are on stock block)
----------------------
i think the idea of holding boost will be dependant on the controller used... its obvious that using an rpm dependant ecu controlled boost setup will work superior over a mbc (which we used to almost exclusively do.... now we do lots of ecu based control)...
anyway, food for thought....
cheers
cb
those numbers seem low for a red.... my non HTA green made 407whp at 29psi on pump gas with a very conservative tune, and holding all that boost with a mbc..... with s2's and e85, I hope to be well over 448......
i recently switched a bbk car from another companies fmic to one of our garrett core fmic's and retuned it, picked up 20whp.... every part of the puzzle makes the difference.
cb
I dont who you are or what your agenda seems to be, but the subject is HTA Green Vs BBK and this is what I am talking about. Charlie made 431 on CBRD's on pump with a Hypertune intake and Stage 3 head an 28psi. Bryan made the same on their dyno on E85 with a stock or stockish head.
I have made 424whp with small cams on a IX on a Dynojet at 25psi with a stock head and stock intake manifold. I operate a dyno daily and have seen more than a few combos so I speak from experience and not solely internet opinion. Before you get a burr in your saddle and start assuming just state a question, no sarcasm is needed.
I dont think you understand how much 5-7 lbs min is. The old rule of thumb is that 1 lb/min is 10whp on a Dynojet and it really seems to hold true. All of the sudden your idea of "almost the same" is off by 50-70whp. The afore mentioned IX that made 424 is about 60 or so ahead of a normal IX on our dyno with those mods. I would expect that the next 5-7 (this is all the BBK is rated over stock) lbs/min will be at least another 60 or so.
I am not badmouthing anyones turbos, I sell both and sell the turbo based on the needs of my customer and their upgrade path. I am simply stating facts much as Chad did that they are different turbos with different things in mind. I still think the HTA will make more power at any given boost level though based purely on math.
I have made 424whp with small cams on a IX on a Dynojet at 25psi with a stock head and stock intake manifold. I operate a dyno daily and have seen more than a few combos so I speak from experience and not solely internet opinion. Before you get a burr in your saddle and start assuming just state a question, no sarcasm is needed.
I dont think you understand how much 5-7 lbs min is. The old rule of thumb is that 1 lb/min is 10whp on a Dynojet and it really seems to hold true. All of the sudden your idea of "almost the same" is off by 50-70whp. The afore mentioned IX that made 424 is about 60 or so ahead of a normal IX on our dyno with those mods. I would expect that the next 5-7 (this is all the BBK is rated over stock) lbs/min will be at least another 60 or so.
I am not badmouthing anyones turbos, I sell both and sell the turbo based on the needs of my customer and their upgrade path. I am simply stating facts much as Chad did that they are different turbos with different things in mind. I still think the HTA will make more power at any given boost level though based purely on math.
If you want to voice yourself about a HTA Green vs BBK Full go to this thread:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...en-vs-bbk.html
It took you 3 posts to throw some actual numbers at me which I appreciate. Like in my first post I asked "how does 5-7lbs/min make that much of a difference?", and now you have answered that. So thank you.
You should really knock off your pre-defensive attitude and stop reading into posts for emotion especially since you represent a shop. Quit taking things so personally. In no way am I biased toward one or the other. If the HTA Green turns out to be better than the BBK, I'd pick one up in a heartbeat. I just want some professional answers for my questions.
You also claim that there aren't any 400-450whp evo's with BBK Full, when that statement is entirely farse(granted that statement was unspecific eg. what type of dyno, fuel, etc).
I understand very well how much 5-7lbs/min is. In the real world 1lbs/min=10whp is an estimate for a very efficient setup on race fuel.
So according to these flow rates.....
stock 8 ???
stock 9 44lb
FP green 47lb
Tomie 48lb
BBK 51lb
FP red 57lb
....I should have gained 70whp going from at least a IX turbo to a BBK full, even though I didn't even gain that going from an VIII 9.8 turbo to a BBK full on pump gas. That may hold true on a dynojet, but apparently no where near that on a mustang(especially GST's).
The only one who has shown composure and professionalism the whole time in this thread so far has been CBRD. Try to follow their example.
^ and it's because of CBRD's professionalism that I'll be getting a BBK if I upgrade my turbo. They're always happy to help email, PM, phone whatever. Sorry doesnt really help the threads subject tho hehe.
Also I forgot to mention that there are cars with a BBK full putting within 20-25whp of a FP Red on the same dyno, in the same conditions, with the same mods, all on 91oct.
They have a difference in flow rates of 6lbs/min. Shouldn't the Red be 60whp more than the BBK Full in these cars then?
They have a difference in flow rates of 6lbs/min. Shouldn't the Red be 60whp more than the BBK Full in these cars then?
I am clearly aware of all the things that affect dyno numbers and thats why this has become such a long and debated topic......No harm meant or taken on any of these comments... It was my fault for assuming some variables... I just assumed that most people upgrading from a stock turbo would have a pretty good list of supporting mods. but not everyone works the same...
All numbers are Dynojet:
stock 8 42-44 Personally Observed 433whp on E85 34psi spike
stock 9 44lb personally Observed 438whp on E85 34psi spike
FP green 47lb Personally ran 123 in a full weight car estimate 460whp based on IDC also on E85 32psi
Tomei 48lb AWDMotorsports dyno'd one at 481 I believe on a Dynojet
BBK 51lb Unknown on a dynojet
FP red 57lb 9sec9 saw 565 out of his, Most Wanted saw even more
Its not abnormal to exceed the lb/min rule when you start adding higher compression, head porting, turbo porting, cams that match the combo, etc.
I reread my post and dont gather anything of what you said I did. I state facts as best I can and stand corrected on what aftermarket intake manifold was on the car but I know Charlie has told me had a Buschur head on it and I got calls about his headgasket woes so I believe something went on it. It seems it might be more a case of pot meet kettle here, but either way I apologise for not seeming professional.
Last edited by JohnBradley; Jun 29, 2009 at 05:23 PM.
I cant say on the 20-25whp difference. I didnt tune either of them so I cant say one way or the other. If I see a Red on pump with S1s in the near future on a IX I could compare that data at 25-26psi on our 92. Sometimes its not just the same mods, its what mods and what fuel. Airflow is power, but at some point it has to have the timing to be able to take advantage of it or nothing happens...literally. My car hit a wall at 566 regardless of boost changes. Added 1* and then the power started climbing again.
All numbers are Dynojet:
stock 8 42-44 Personally Observed 433whp on E85 34psi spike
stock 9 44lb personally Observed 438whp on E85 34psi spike
FP green 47lb Personally ran 123 in a full weight car estimate 460whp based on IDC also on E85 32psi
Tomei 48lb AWDMotorsports dyno'd one at 481 I believe on a Dynojet
BBK 51lb Unknown on a dynojet
FP red 57lb 9sec9 saw 565 out of his, Most Wanted saw even more
Its not abnormal to exceed the lb/min rule when you start adding higher compression, head porting, turbo porting, cams that match the combo, etc.
stock 8 42-44 Personally Observed 433whp on E85 34psi spike
stock 9 44lb personally Observed 438whp on E85 34psi spike
FP green 47lb Personally ran 123 in a full weight car estimate 460whp based on IDC also on E85 32psi
Tomei 48lb AWDMotorsports dyno'd one at 481 I believe on a Dynojet
BBK 51lb Unknown on a dynojet
FP red 57lb 9sec9 saw 565 out of his, Most Wanted saw even more
Its not abnormal to exceed the lb/min rule when you start adding higher compression, head porting, turbo porting, cams that match the combo, etc.
This is what I was looking for. You don't have any BBK's on your dynojet though? Would like to see those numbers for comparison. More so for one particular car to progress from one turbo to another. Can you post results if you ever get a BBK full to a HTA Green plz?
I cant say on the 20-25whp difference. I didnt tune either of them so I cant say one way or the other. If I see a Red on pump with S1s in the near future on a IX I could compare that data at 25-26psi on our 92. Sometimes its not just the same mods, its what mods and what fuel. Airflow is power, but at some point it has to have the timing to be able to take advantage of it or nothing happens...literally. My car hit a wall at 566 regardless of boost changes. Added 1* and then the power started climbing again.
. They two cars had similar power productions within 20-25whp with the BBK dropping off in the higher rpms in comparison to the red(which was expected).