New dyno video with 91mm Turbo, CS 8.8 etc
09-17-2013, 12:10 AM
#1
New dyno video with 91mm Turbo, CS 8.8 etc Ran out of waste gate spring at 15PSI, would of taken it to 20, but I will hold off for now.
AFR's at a consevative 10.2, Timing at 17degrees
870/815 bone stock engine internals & heads
AFR's at a consevative 10.2, Timing at 17degrees
870/815 bone stock engine internals & heads
Last edited by B_ROCKS_IT; 09-17-2013 at 12:26 AM.
09-17-2013, 01:08 AM
#3
You have a 1.23 SAE correction factor in there, despite Vmapper explaining (at great length--and you agreeing with him) why uncorrected numbers are more accurate for your application. The dyno readings are totally unstable above 5250 RPM. Throw out everything above that. Looks like you're making approximately 650/658 (800/810 "corrected" divided by 1.23).
Oh, and since nobody else will say it--product advertisement and music in those videos are not helpful.
Oh, and since nobody else will say it--product advertisement and music in those videos are not helpful.
09-17-2013, 01:28 AM
#4
You have a 1.23 SAE correction factor in there, despite Vmapper explaining (at great length--and you agreeing with him) why uncorrected numbers are more accurate for your application. The dyno readings are totally unstable above 5250 RPM. Throw out everything above that. Looks like you're making approximately 650/658 (800/810 "corrected" divided by 1.23).
Oh, and since nobody else will say it--product advertisement and music in those videos are not helpful.
Oh, and since nobody else will say it--product advertisement and music in those videos are not helpful.
Thats funny you say that, to the contrary; all of the companies mentioned in the video have sponsored me, and I have saved many thousands of dollars because these companies want to spotlight this car and/or show what their products can take as far as serious above the normal mods power.
What, you dont have anyone approaching you to prove their products for them? oh yeah thats right you only make 422WHP
09-17-2013, 01:42 AM
#5
Great power, about what I expected as far as lag though on the stock motor which I dont see lasting much longer lol so youll get that straightened out. Full boost at 5k leaves about 1200-1500rpms to make the power before you have to shift.
How does it feel?
How does it feel?
09-17-2013, 01:52 AM
#6
for instance: "Single Digit Member, Senior Member, Certified Tech Expert Join Date Jan 2005 Location San Diego, California Posts 9,514 Trader Score 10 (100%)
Re: Dyno Correction factors and turbocharged engines Pressure maintained, mass is still less.
Even if a turbo speeds up, it cant make up for a density loss. A blower will loose more at altitude because it's fixed. But speed it up and it would probably loose similar to the turbo because of density loss. When we tested two corrected dyno pulls at two different alttitudes the correction only read 3% high when compared to sea level numbers. Correction was 1.17-1.19 at 5000ft."
Additionally, when my buddy who dynoed on the same dyno as this video is shot on, using approximately the same CF's, then was at a dyno for an event in TX netted an uncorrected number within 20ish whp.
Bottom line, with everything ive seen combined with the fact that i am one who is driving the car, and having been in plenty of cars in the 600-1100whp range I am leaning towards beleiving these numbers are accurate.
I am disagreeing to agree with you, I will have a dyno at sealevel soon enough and we will all see what the case is with this particular car.
In the end its just numbers and a video
09-17-2013, 01:56 AM
#7
It feels pretty ridiculous, thanks, yeah, it will spool a lot faster with a built 434, not to mention spinning a lot more rpm's. But as of now I am more than happy, it is mean as **** even on the 8 psi its making at 4k rpm, even though its lower boost the turbo is flowing a ton of air.
Trending Topics
09-17-2013, 02:20 AM
#8
It feels pretty ridiculous, thanks, yeah, it will spool a lot faster with a built 434, not to mention spinning a lot more rpm's. But as of now I am more than happy, it is mean as **** even on the 8 psi its making at 4k rpm, even though its lower boost the turbo is flowing a ton of air.
09-17-2013, 07:40 AM
#11
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really trying to keep it stirred, but accurate numbers are helpful in determining if a setup is running properly. I can understand the SAE corrected numbers, but skewing the numbers due to altitude seems kinda wack.
I mean, when I run 11.0@ 123 in 3200DA I dont post a 10.6@128mph. Cause I didnt run that.
And when you run at sealevel and post numbers we cant really be sure those are accurate either.....
I will make my videos how I please and post the numbers that I please, if you dont like it then dont watch my videos.
Keep it real, Keep it classy.....
09-17-2013, 09:22 AM
#14
There was a guy on corvette forum with a C5 ls6 that kept upping the boost until the motor let go and he made it to 900Hp for like 6 weeks and it finally threw a rod. For the budget friendly builder the LSX crank is awesome. Use stock crank (handles 900 whp all day) forge rods pistons and boost on!
09-17-2013, 10:38 AM
#17
hats awesome and good to hear. My only suggestion would be to turn that downpipe away from the front tire should the motor pop at speed and leave a nice oil slick right on your tires. Just a little turndown at the end would be better.
VERY impressive. How does it feel compared with your twin setup?
Not really trying to keep it stirred, but accurate numbers are helpful in determining if a setup is running properly. I can understand the SAE corrected numbers, but skewing the numbers due to altitude seems kinda wack.
I mean, when I run 11.0@ 123 in 3200DA I dont post a 10.6@128mph. Cause I didnt run that.
And when you run at sealevel and post numbers we cant really be sure those are accurate either.....
I mean, when I run 11.0@ 123 in 3200DA I dont post a 10.6@128mph. Cause I didnt run that.
And when you run at sealevel and post numbers we cant really be sure those are accurate either.....
As I stated above soon enough we will see firsthand who is right on this my prediction is my corrected numbers will be within a few % of uncorrected numbers at sea level.
Post up the uncorrected numbers.
Last edited by B_ROCKS_IT; 09-17-2013 at 10:45 AM.
09-17-2013, 11:14 AM
#18
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats a good point, we originally were going to dump out the bumper, but I dont really want to do that for various reasons... decisions decisions...
It feels like its being yanked down the road by an f-16 lol, A LOT faster, but apparently my twin setup was only making 500WHP on 13psi and now im only making 610WHP on a 91mm at 15psi. Its just weird how it feels like its pulling (under boost) similar to the procharged vette ive drove in that makes 904WHP, and is a lot lighter guess im just biased and stupid.
I understand what a few of you are getting at, BUT I have stated my reasons for believing that these numbers are accurate, I have first hand knowledge of a car off this same dyno posting almost exactly the same uncorrected numbers near sealevel. THat chimes in with other things I have read (see above) and the bottom line of the power this thing pushing me in the seat with.
As I stated above soon enough we will see firsthand who is right on this my prediction is my corrected numbers will be within a few % of uncorrected numbers at sea level.
Well then like fuzzy said, I am only making 610WHP on this setup LOL... Maybe you guys can find some cars in that power range that I can run for money, should be perfectly fair...
It feels like its being yanked down the road by an f-16 lol, A LOT faster, but apparently my twin setup was only making 500WHP on 13psi and now im only making 610WHP on a 91mm at 15psi. Its just weird how it feels like its pulling (under boost) similar to the procharged vette ive drove in that makes 904WHP, and is a lot lighter guess im just biased and stupid.
I understand what a few of you are getting at, BUT I have stated my reasons for believing that these numbers are accurate, I have first hand knowledge of a car off this same dyno posting almost exactly the same uncorrected numbers near sealevel. THat chimes in with other things I have read (see above) and the bottom line of the power this thing pushing me in the seat with.
As I stated above soon enough we will see firsthand who is right on this my prediction is my corrected numbers will be within a few % of uncorrected numbers at sea level.
Well then like fuzzy said, I am only making 610WHP on this setup LOL... Maybe you guys can find some cars in that power range that I can run for money, should be perfectly fair...
Its refreshing to see your reponse is not one that is directly defensive.
I agree on the racing some cars in your power range to see how it stacks up. I need to do that too, if you were in the DFW area i'd be more then willing to get drug by that caddy. 465rwhp+ 200shot
Im considering a single turbo also, but more then likely will go YSI.
09-17-2013, 12:52 PM
#19
There was a guy on corvette forum with a C5 ls6 that kept upping the boost until the motor let go and he made it to 900Hp for like 6 weeks and it finally threw a rod. For the budget friendly builder the LSX crank is awesome. Use stock crank (handles 900 whp all day) forge rods pistons and boost on!
09-17-2013, 05:36 PM
#20
I'm going to watch the vid in a sec, can someone fill me in on what has you guys going back and forth in regards to the correction factor? I missed what brought that about.
