400HP, 300TQ W/Just a $750 Flash???
There was an error. 400hp is attainable by an exhaust and flash. Not just a flash alone. These days, crank HP is no more of a guess than WHP considering everyone uses different dynos and some, like AL, even use big fat correction factors to make them read higher.
-shiv
-shiv
There was an error. 400hp is attainable by an exhaust and flash. Not just a flash alone. These days, crank HP is no more of a guess than WHP considering everyone uses different dynos and some, like AL, even use big fat correction factors to make them read higher.
-shiv
-shiv
Your page (http://www.vishnutuning.com/xflash%20evo%20IX.htm) says not a damn thing about exhaust and claims 100-130hp. It implies it will adapt for varying octane levels of fuel - automatically by fill-up? And what is a "passive boost solenoid emulator"? Elsewhere on your site you call it a "380HP" package. That dyno graph has one run just over 270hp only with what looks like the equivalent point stock running just over 210hp (can't tell which run due to resolution/size issues, sorry). This is a far cry from the 380HP page's claim of 100-110hp over stock.
Thanks for taking the time to clarify for us.
Perhaps if some of you took your hate blinders off and learned basic website navigation, you'd see the exhaust is clearly listed in the v400 package: http://www.vishnutuning.com/evoIX_Stage1_v400.htm
A stock 2003 VIII makes 205whp on the Dyno Dynamics I use in Georgia. A stock IX makes around 225whp. Post flash and an older, quiet exhaust (TaipanXP), my car made exactly 300whp.
That's a 75whp gain, and that's not in dispute. That 75whp is obviously more than that in crank horsepower.
With a freer flowing exhaust than I have, I don;t think its a stretch to call that 100 crank HP over stock at all.
Its pretty simple- If you don't want to buy it, don't. Most everyone in here accosting the Vishnu camp are running a different vendor's reflashes anyway, so its obvious those people are just here to stir the pot.
A stock 2003 VIII makes 205whp on the Dyno Dynamics I use in Georgia. A stock IX makes around 225whp. Post flash and an older, quiet exhaust (TaipanXP), my car made exactly 300whp.
That's a 75whp gain, and that's not in dispute. That 75whp is obviously more than that in crank horsepower.
With a freer flowing exhaust than I have, I don;t think its a stretch to call that 100 crank HP over stock at all.
Its pretty simple- If you don't want to buy it, don't. Most everyone in here accosting the Vishnu camp are running a different vendor's reflashes anyway, so its obvious those people are just here to stir the pot.
Ohhh okay, I understand now.. Thanks for the clarification... 
Perhaps if some of you took your hate blinders off and learned basic website navigation, you'd see the exhaust is clearly listed in the v400 package: http://www.vishnutuning.com/evoIX_Stage1_v400.htm
A stock 2003 VIII makes 205whp on the Dyno Dynamics I use in Georgia. A stock IX makes around 225whp. Post flash and an older, quiet exhaust (TaipanXP), my car made exactly 300whp.
That's a 75whp gain, and that's not in dispute. That 75whp is obviously more than that in crank horsepower.
With a freer flowing exhaust than I have, I don;t think its a stretch to call that 100 crank HP over stock at all.
Its pretty simple- If you don't want to buy it, don't. Most everyone in here accosting the Vishnu camp are running a different vendor's reflashes anyway, so its obvious those people are just here to stir the pot.
A stock 2003 VIII makes 205whp on the Dyno Dynamics I use in Georgia. A stock IX makes around 225whp. Post flash and an older, quiet exhaust (TaipanXP), my car made exactly 300whp.
That's a 75whp gain, and that's not in dispute. That 75whp is obviously more than that in crank horsepower.
With a freer flowing exhaust than I have, I don;t think its a stretch to call that 100 crank HP over stock at all.
Its pretty simple- If you don't want to buy it, don't. Most everyone in here accosting the Vishnu camp are running a different vendor's reflashes anyway, so its obvious those people are just here to stir the pot.
Who is the moron in your question?
well i have the same mods that they have on the car in the article and i have 320whp (which approximates to about 400hp at the crank), so i can assure you it's completely accurate. i'm blown away by the performance of the vishnu tune. don't let cheap imitators fool you, vishnu is the best. i've used other products, and they're complete crap! you get what you pay for!
Also, Shiv made a great point just the same by saying that using WHP is almost as useless, because there are so many dyno types and so many correction factors. In the end, it's just a bunch of numbers, so randomly saying "400HP" is just something to make uneducated magazine readers drop their jaws in awe. The only thing that really matters and that is SOMEWHAT universal is gains over stock in WHP.
Last edited by Warrtalon; Mar 24, 2007 at 05:04 PM.
I believe Warrtalon hit the nail on the head. Alot of numbers now a days are becoming useless, I mean you can manipulate anything on a dyno (hint: Al's Case Studies 
) Side note 400HP does seam high with just an exhaust and a tune, we all know Evo's dont have 20% drivetrain loss.
) Side note 400HP does seam high with just an exhaust and a tune, we all know Evo's dont have 20% drivetrain loss.
Evo's have much higher than 20% drivetrain loss. Using Noize's example, a 2003 Evo 8 puts down 205whp on the DD at Dyno4mance. Using Mitsu's 271 for crank hp, the result is 24.4% loss ([271-205]/271). And, from what I've seen, 205whp for a 2003 Evo 8 is on the high side. I highly doubt the drivetrain efficiency has improved from the 8 to the 9, which means the 9's power is underrated.
Czubaka, that's using a DynoDynamics as the baseline. If you go with a Dynojet, then it's completely different, since 03s put down 225-235\. Who's to say which one is right or wrong? No one. You can't determine drivetrain loss based off what Mitsu chooses to publish and what is actually put to the wheels on a <choose your brand> dyno. There's too many dyno types, too many correction factors, too many weather factors, etc etc. Also, we don't even know where Mitsu comes up with their published numbers. How does the IX only make 15 more crank HP, but we consistently see 30-40 more whp in stock form? It's because the numbers Mitsu publishes really don't mean anything.
Actually, regardless of the dyno, the crank hp #'s will come out "relatively" similar; as long as you use the % drivetrain loss from each dyno. I realize the loss isn't linear; however, this will provide conservative crank numbers.
For example:
An 03 Evo 8 on a DD putting down 205whp is 24.4% drivetrain loss. Say you add 50 whp through mods, using the same drivetrain loss gets you 337 at the crank.
An 03 Evo 8 on a DJ putting down 235whp is 13.3% drivetrain loss. Adding the same mods giving you 50 whp, and using the same drivetrain loss gets you 329 at the crank.
As for all the variances that exist, well, the weather factor is minimized (not eliminated) by using STP correction factors. For all other factors, those are uncontrollable, so I agree, trying to nail down exact numbers is not possible.
For example:
An 03 Evo 8 on a DD putting down 205whp is 24.4% drivetrain loss. Say you add 50 whp through mods, using the same drivetrain loss gets you 337 at the crank.
An 03 Evo 8 on a DJ putting down 235whp is 13.3% drivetrain loss. Adding the same mods giving you 50 whp, and using the same drivetrain loss gets you 329 at the crank.
As for all the variances that exist, well, the weather factor is minimized (not eliminated) by using STP correction factors. For all other factors, those are uncontrollable, so I agree, trying to nail down exact numbers is not possible.
Czubaka, that's using a DynoDynamics as the baseline. If you go with a Dynojet, then it's completely different, since 03s put down 225-235\. Who's to say which one is right or wrong? No one. You can't determine drivetrain loss based off what Mitsu chooses to publish and what is actually put to the wheels on a <choose your brand> dyno. There's too many dyno types, too many correction factors, too many weather factors, etc etc. Also, we don't even know where Mitsu comes up with their published numbers. How does the IX only make 15 more crank HP, but we consistently see 30-40 more whp in stock form? It's because the numbers Mitsu publishes really don't mean anything.
The point is, you're missing the point.
Every car is going to dyno a bit differently, and the v400 is just the name of the upgrade package that states it gives the car approximately 400 crank HP. The magazine car had an exhaust on it, and they misprinted that. That certainly isn't Vishnu's fault.
Some of the IXs will in fact make about 400 crank HP, some less or even a little more.
http://www.ktrperformance.com/dyno_t...php?id_num=143
Here's another independent Dyno Dynamics who also doesn't correct their data. This is an AWD Porsche 996 TT, and box stock it made 323whp. The car makes 415 HP at the crank stock. Obviously, a Porsche and a Mitsubishi don't have identical driveline losses (the engines aren't even located in the same place), but it helps to have a stock vehicle to compare.
Pull my TaipanXP and replace it with a less restrictive (read: LOUD that won't work for my 14 month old daughter) exhaust, and my car will easily pick up 10-12whp. How do I know? Well, I had the same exhaust you have on my VIII prior, but chose to pull it due to volume and a couple other things. I know it makes good power.
The current Vishnu Standard exhaust is also freer flowing than my 4 year old TaipanXP. Put a proven exhaust like that on your car and you have 310-312whp. Hmm, not too far a cry at all from that 323whp 415 crank HP Porsche, is it?
Cliff's Notes: Troll elsewhere. Your regurgitations are beyond old, and if you spent the time that you waste subjecting EvoM to your dismal blathering on something that is actually useful, you might actually accomplish something meaningful in life.
Wow, Noize, not sure why you felt that nasty insult was necessary, especially when I've done nothing in this thread that was trolling nor dismal nor blathering. It doesn't matter if Vishnu calls it the v400. The point is no one knows what the real crank HP is. Shiv knows this, and so does anyone else who has a clue. They made an estimate and stuck with that pattern on all the packages. It works fine, and I have no problem with it. I have not regurgitated anything, and I wish you'd get off this kick. I've certainly accomplished much in life both with the Evo and outside the Evo. Why would you say something like that? Can't we be adults here? I get along fine with the Vishnu crowd and give as much advertisement to the Ohlins package as anyone just because of all the racing I do. Please get beyond whatever hangup you have with me.
Czubaka, that's yet another mistake. Drivetrain loss is NOT linear - that's a common misconception. There is no percentage that can be used for all cars and all power levels. Hell, even the same car doesn't have the same drivetrain loss % as power increases, so you can't use that to make crank HP estimations.
Also, correction factors _do not_ account for weather properly and certainly not for altitude. Once again, a very common misconception, not to mention the fact that people don't use the same correction factor as others - there's at least 6 to choose from on a Dynojet alone.
Czubaka, that's yet another mistake. Drivetrain loss is NOT linear - that's a common misconception. There is no percentage that can be used for all cars and all power levels. Hell, even the same car doesn't have the same drivetrain loss % as power increases, so you can't use that to make crank HP estimations.
Also, correction factors _do not_ account for weather properly and certainly not for altitude. Once again, a very common misconception, not to mention the fact that people don't use the same correction factor as others - there's at least 6 to choose from on a Dynojet alone.