Dyno Results: Remote Mount Turbo Lt1
04-03-2011, 03:14 PM
#1
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dyno Results: Remote Mount Turbo Lt1 so my club had a dyno day yesterday so i took the car out so i could finally see what it's putting down.
unfortunately the dyno day got pushed back and it ended up being 99 degrees here yesterday while i was dynoing
after i got the car and put on a custom intake, headers, and true duals the car put down 268whp and 299 ft/lbs. 2.73 gears and ~130k miles
now it has a homemade remote mount turbo set-up i'm running at 7psi. 3.42 gears, 58mm tb, 42lb injectors, 255 pump, intercooled, pcmforless tune. internals are COMPLETELY stock with 147k miles. heads haven't been touched at all. and the motor could use a rebuild. (this july the car will have been turbo'ed for 2 years)
but regardless it still put down 396whp and 405 ft/lbs.
400's are definitely in reach, car was knocking bad and it pulled 7 degrees of timing. so i need to tweak the tune, or run some race gas! also if you look at the dyno graph you can see the hp go up to 395 with a 11.6 AFR. then it goes back down to 385 as the AFR goes to 12.1 then builds back up to 397. i think if the AFR had held steady at 11.6 and i didn't get that drop it would've kept pulling into the 400's instead of dropping 10hp. probably wouldn't have pulled 7 degrees of timing either.. lame. but oh well.
wish i had dyno'ed the car a month sooner when it was still in the 60's.. :/ definitely would've loved 40 degree cooler air! there's always next year.. if it's still running!
video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMK8aOYIrDM
dyno chart:
unfortunately the dyno day got pushed back and it ended up being 99 degrees here yesterday while i was dynoing
after i got the car and put on a custom intake, headers, and true duals the car put down 268whp and 299 ft/lbs. 2.73 gears and ~130k miles
now it has a homemade remote mount turbo set-up i'm running at 7psi. 3.42 gears, 58mm tb, 42lb injectors, 255 pump, intercooled, pcmforless tune. internals are COMPLETELY stock with 147k miles. heads haven't been touched at all. and the motor could use a rebuild. (this july the car will have been turbo'ed for 2 years)
but regardless it still put down 396whp and 405 ft/lbs.
400's are definitely in reach, car was knocking bad and it pulled 7 degrees of timing. so i need to tweak the tune, or run some race gas! also if you look at the dyno graph you can see the hp go up to 395 with a 11.6 AFR. then it goes back down to 385 as the AFR goes to 12.1 then builds back up to 397. i think if the AFR had held steady at 11.6 and i didn't get that drop it would've kept pulling into the 400's instead of dropping 10hp. probably wouldn't have pulled 7 degrees of timing either.. lame. but oh well.
wish i had dyno'ed the car a month sooner when it was still in the 60's.. :/ definitely would've loved 40 degree cooler air! there's always next year.. if it's still running!
video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMK8aOYIrDM
dyno chart:
04-03-2011, 03:34 PM
#2
Cool build man, Numbers seem a bit low but it seems like you know why.
rear mounts are cool anyways, 350rwhp 400rwhp 450rwhp....it all sounds cool when you hear that turbo spool
rear mounts are cool anyways, 350rwhp 400rwhp 450rwhp....it all sounds cool when you hear that turbo spool
04-03-2011, 03:56 PM
#7
Staging Lane
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Mishicot, WI
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
im sure he means spark knock. boosted applications like anywhere between 11.6-12.0.. 11.8 usually seems to be the sweet spot. how much timing are you going for at wot exactly?
Trending Topics
04-03-2011, 04:01 PM
#8
Running that rich is just lazy tuning. A lot of people incorrectly think running a boosted setup overly rich cools the intake charge and is therefore "safer". What's actually happenin is the rich condition slows sown the burn rate in the cylinder and effectively retards timing.
An engine will run better when ran near the same air fuel ratio as a max power N/A setup, and then having the CORRECT amount of timing.
Tuners run FI and Nitrous setups overly rich all the time and justify it many many ways but its simply laziness and lack of education.
The engine will live longer and happier with the proper tune, not a hacked tune that has too much timing, and too much fuel to make up for it.
An engine will run better when ran near the same air fuel ratio as a max power N/A setup, and then having the CORRECT amount of timing.
Tuners run FI and Nitrous setups overly rich all the time and justify it many many ways but its simply laziness and lack of education.
The engine will live longer and happier with the proper tune, not a hacked tune that has too much timing, and too much fuel to make up for it.
04-03-2011, 04:13 PM
#9
Staging Lane
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Mishicot, WI
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so your really trying to tell me that i should have been shooting for 13.2 afr's at wot with all my boosted vehicles? man, what have i been doing all these years tuning 500 hp v6's wrong???
Last edited by 03impala9c1; 04-03-2011 at 04:23 PM.
04-03-2011, 04:28 PM
#13
That would be around 12.5-12.7...... Not 13.2, dont know where you got that.
and yes, I'm telling you that you have been doing it wrong, if you have been lazy and dumping fuel at it to compensate for a shitty tune.
04-03-2011, 04:34 PM
#14
04-03-2011, 04:34 PM
#15
Staging Lane
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Mishicot, WI
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lol ok. find anywhere that tells me that n/a applications need to be that rich and find me anywhere that tells me that 12.7 is acceptable for boosted applications. i understand not every kind/type of vehicle will need the same afr's. it all depends on boost volume and pressure or compression value depending on which vehicle. im not here to argue but i will say that theres NO WAY ill tune to that spec. 13.0-13.2 is more than acceptable for n/a normal compression vehicles and 11.6-12.0 on boosted applications. tell innovate, hptuners, dhp, etc that im wrong... there are people out there that get away with 12.2-12.3 on boosted applications but your usually talking about lower timing values than your target value there.
04-03-2011, 04:44 PM
#17
lol ok. find anywhere that tells me that n/a applications need to be that rich and find me anywhere that tells me that 12.7 is acceptable for boosted applications. i understand not every kind/type of vehicle will need the same afr's. it all depends on boost volume and pressure or compression value depending on which vehicle. im not here to argue but i will say that theres NO WAY ill tune to that spec. 13.0-13.2 is more than acceptable for n/a normal compression vehicles and 11.6-12.0 on boosted applications. tell innovate, hptuners, dhp, etc that im wrong... there are people out there that get away with 12.2-12.3 on boosted applications but your usually talking about lower timing values than your target value there.
Watch this video and pay attention to 3:44
http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/v...r_content.html
Straight from the horses mouth buddy. He says the same damn thing I just said.
BTW, you just got ******* owned.
04-03-2011, 04:48 PM
#18
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
haha no need to fight guys 
me and lswho are gonna work on the tune, well.. i guess just him since i dont really know **** about tuning..
it was just a mail order tune so i didn't expect it to be perfect, now that i have the ability to fine tune it i will. this car has been my daily driver for over a year and a half on the current tune and hasn't blown up yet so i'm happy with that. hopefully i'll run better once we fine tune it. i did do some changes after the tune which could have thrown it off, so i'm in no way saying bryan @ pcmforless didn't do a good job on the tune.
i didn't think to throw on my salad shooters for the dyno, those tt2's weigh in at ~55lbs a piece vs my salad shooters with et streets weighing in at ~32lbs
for what's done to the car and the fact it's my daily driver i'm happy with the numbers, its not a crazy set-up.. yet.
once i graduate and have a job the car will no longer be my dd and the whole car will be torn down and completely re-built with a front mount set-up
thanks for the comments everyone
me and lswho are gonna work on the tune, well.. i guess just him since i dont really know **** about tuning..
it was just a mail order tune so i didn't expect it to be perfect, now that i have the ability to fine tune it i will. this car has been my daily driver for over a year and a half on the current tune and hasn't blown up yet so i'm happy with that. hopefully i'll run better once we fine tune it. i did do some changes after the tune which could have thrown it off, so i'm in no way saying bryan @ pcmforless didn't do a good job on the tune.
i didn't think to throw on my salad shooters for the dyno, those tt2's weigh in at ~55lbs a piece vs my salad shooters with et streets weighing in at ~32lbs
for what's done to the car and the fact it's my daily driver i'm happy with the numbers, its not a crazy set-up.. yet.
once i graduate and have a job the car will no longer be my dd and the whole car will be torn down and completely re-built with a front mount set-upthanks for the comments everyone
04-03-2011, 04:54 PM
#19
We're not fighting. This is me. Winning...
Congrats on the numbers BTW.
I just hope you might be able to learn something to help you out with your car. The tune obviously needs some work. It will run better if you back the timing off, get to a proper air fuel ratio, and then start feeding the timing back in. READ THE PLUGS.
Congrats on the numbers BTW.
I just hope you might be able to learn something to help you out with your car. The tune obviously needs some work. It will run better if you back the timing off, get to a proper air fuel ratio, and then start feeding the timing back in. READ THE PLUGS.
04-03-2011, 04:57 PM
#20
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mb sc
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lol ok. find anywhere that tells me that n/a applications need to be that rich and find me anywhere that tells me that 12.7 is acceptable for boosted applications. i understand not every kind/type of vehicle will need the same afr's. it all depends on boost volume and pressure or compression value depending on which vehicle. im not here to argue but i will say that theres NO WAY ill tune to that spec. 13.0-13.2 is more than acceptable for n/a normal compression vehicles and 11.6-12.0 on boosted applications. tell innovate, hptuners, dhp, etc that im wrong... there are people out there that get away with 12.2-12.3 on boosted applications but your usually talking about lower timing values than your target value there.