My First Mods: Muffler Delete and Cold air intake

B6/7 S4/RS4
#61

Well 557whp is a classic example of why the car guys laugh at dyno sheets. sure maybe the car made 557whp but the MPH tells the story and the car has a power delivery of a 375whp car. This car is the rolling example of why people dont do single turbo or rear mount turbo cars. Not that there wasnt some already.

Still credit where its due it still seems like its a fun car and with more boost and more time the car should be able to go faster. Im not a fan of turbo cars for the exact reason of loosing a big part of the rpm range waiting for the turbo to do work. but Im spoiled my car makes instant power off the starter motor as im a JHM nitrous car.

Also when you look at the motor limits of 450whp you have to remember this is from actual testng and then having a repituable company say 450 is as far as they would be willing to push the cars before rods start to bend. They have several low 12 second 115+ mph cars running out there for over 5 years now so that seems to be a good safe spot.

IF any of us build a car we can go as far as we want and damage our motors without care. If a company like JHM sells something and it destroys peoples motors then thats a completly different story. So rule of thumb would be 450.

But with turbo cars its different. You get punished with less down low but you have more room to make more hp up top.with the turbo cars having a smaller power band that is further up in the rev range they can make more power as they use less of the RPM band for power. Think of it like this. If you have a car that makes 400whp or tq for 4000 rpm or you have a car that makes 500whp for 2000rpm the lower hp car will have more of the load over time over rpm. Or as its called a larger area under the curve.So there is a good chance that he there can be some more turbo power squeezed out with some more boost before the over all load starts to do damage

#62

Justin, Mr.Wrong is quoting numbers from my other thread which i made some changes to the tune over the last week.

Anyway, people don’t go remote turbo because of an inherent fear of boost lag. It’s not completely unfounded however it can be mitigated. There’s a reason i made use of twinscroll. I make positive pressure (1psi) by 1900, 5 by 3200 and so on with full boost coming in around 4k (3rd gear). Insulation helps further. Even centrifugal SC have “lag” and furthermore they make their max boost by redline as such they merely amplify the power curve of the base engine whereas a turbo tends to change it for better or for worse (see attached).

So what does that mean? It means a turbo car will typically have a much stronger midrange and matched topend. Centri SC have a way around that however and thats actually thru the use of a turbo wastegate. You run a much smaller pulley so you make more boost earlier and then the WG pops open to hold whatever boost it’s sprung for. Pretty ingenious idea really. That’s not the case or comparison here however but it’s a possibility. Cetri blower will make peak power for all by 100rpm whereas a turbo car can make and hold peak power for 500+rpm

Digressing back on topic, yep my car trapped 115, a far cry from the “500whp” range it was sitting in the week before the track day. Every project has it’s issues. I had one that day but it did well regardless even with my “terrible driving”

Hell just look at the 1/8th mile video of a SC car running 8.4@87
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0s9VKZ9FX8

Or Axel running 12.5@113

They both can run faster at the same boost as seen by JHM themselves and so can i.

#63

ok attachment feature is being a pain. website coding issue clearly.

anyway

here it is.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/qballc/NAvsBoost%20ECUx_zpsstgzd5zg.jpg

#64

I dont understand why you would bring up a the JHM kit or the C fuge blower what does that have to do with your kit…

But since you did. You just proved how big of a fail your prject is if we are doing a compare one to the other…And here is why. The JHM stage 1kit runs 1/2 the boost your car did and the JHM kit closes the throttle at just after 5 k to keep the motor safe. The stage 1 not intercooled kit has the same mph and faster et with less everything including money…

Again your wrong with the c fuge power curve. In tuning you can pulley up the blower and blow off the extra boost as needed though cam phase or throttle control as JHM and many other companys do with C fuge blowers. So you can get peak hp and hold hp for a much bigger curve. or you can let the hp and tq climb as you wish.

Again you made 12psi you posted that your run was on 12psi through an intercooler. well the JHM kit on 9 psi through an intercooler runs 130mph about 15mph faster than you. So you would get passed like you were tied to a tree if you were racing a JHM car running the same boost

3 years later and a laughable amount of graphs and pointless street races later you continue to prove why people dont waste there money on a rear mount turbo or even twin turbo kit for these cars. as I have watched you work to try and convince people how fast you car is only to time and time again you get called out on some of your BS. I suggest you just keep to your project and dont try to compare to anything as this is different.

I always enjoy something different. But again not when people like you come on and tell people just how nieve they are and how easy this stuff is only to again prove what was already known is correct. All the while covering up things each step of the way trying to make things look rosy. Almost none of what you say makes sense why would you post a dyno information on how your car makes over 500whp and then go run at a lower hp… That makes no sense unless your full of shit…I am all for cheering and supporting your project I would never do it and i frankly. I just dont like the BS that seems to come from most of what you post and say

#65

I brought it up because you brought it up, albeit indirectly. The blower uses a 76mm compressor to my turbo 64mm compressor, of COURSE i have to run more boost pressure. ::slight_smile:

#66

OMG your a moron. I never brought anything up… not even indirectly. I did comment on my nitrous car but nothing to do with anything outside of and nothing to compare your work to anything outside of that. and did you really just post that because of compressor sizes you need to run more boost. OMG you really are that stupid…WOW it all makes sense now…I think its best we just move on…

Lets get back on topic with your car. This is your thread so no need to derail it with a VS rant or an education on how things work

I wasnt trying to be mean in my first post. I was pointing out there are a lot of compromises and you can see them in the power curve to hp output. It wasnt meant to be a slam it was just saying hey this is one of the draw backs. Time and boost with some more seat time will get the car on better footing.

#67

What the hell Justin? Ok maybe i read you wrong, but when you talk about about a reputable company making low12 115mph cars over the years only one is going to come to mind at least with this platform so i made an assumption. Sorry about that. I’m not attacking them i’m making comparisons.

Am i a moron and stupid? Was what i said WRONG? You’re not stupid or a moron, you know a larger compressor will have a much greater volume of flow at a given pressure so why attack me on it or make it seem it has zero relevance???

Anyway, sure ok, lets not derail the thread.

I’ll be back to the track in a couple weeks, hopefully the hurricane didnt ruin anything.

#68

Just to be clear you read into that wrong I was not doing a Vs thing. More just saying rule of thumb 450 is about where the line has been drawn and it appears to be safe as there are cars out there still alive in that range.

I encourage you to share. If you go to the track at a lower boost or lower hp after you post a big dyno number maybe say something before hand not after. It can look shady. There have been so many bullshitters over the years its hard to tell who is legit and who is not. You have been caught in the dyno sheet and log trap. We have seen it for years and everyone in the past that does the same thing usually is covering up or trying to cover up bigger underlying issues. Usually that the cars are slow and posting big logs or dyno sheets will hopefully throw people off. Thats why no one cared about your dyno sheet or logs. But again its hard to not see a trend… Now to say your doing that just letting you know… you have to admit you did come in saying how dumb everyone was by not getting excited about the one turbo car in europe that was kinda a fail at the time. You also said just how easy all this was and as several of us mentioned to you ahhhh no its not just that easy…your seeing that now.

My one post was never meant to be a slam. It was putting everything into perspective as I try to do that for everyone. Not everyone is tech savy or understands things.

like i said feed the car some more boost get some seat time and let it rip.

#69

so now we’re not even showing dynos…we’re just showing microsoft excel spreadsheets?

amazing

the car makes about 380-400 whp
the car should be able to run 12.0 @ 116

I watched the video but I can’t see where you’re losing time. You didn’t destroy teh launch. You didn’t botch shifts. I guess we’ll just have to assume there’s something really wrong with power delivery and the tuning is terrible.

When someone runs 5 tenths slower than their MPH would suggest (you can’t fool MPH but your ET can be all over the map if something’s not right) then it’s usually driving. But the video would suggest it wasn’t terrible. The car is. Your 1/8 MPH is PERFECTLY in line with your 1/4 mile MPH so you didn’t lose crazy time in the first half and then make it up in the second half. The car just didn’t accelerate well for most of the RPM range.

Basically it looks like a big turbo small displacement car where it makes boost but it takes ages and the lag kills acceleration everywhere but the top top end. These are the cars that lose races and want to run 60-130 mph so they can stay in the top end forever and not get killed.

For the record, your MPH won’t change much. Your ET will.
You can’t fool the trap speed measurement. You can’t take a 380 whp car to the track and trap like a 500 whp car. But you can on Microsoft Excel/the dyno/logs. That’s why nobody here is kissing your ass the way they are on audizoo

Hope you get it sorted.

#70

sakimano. With a 2.0 60foot wouldnt that raise the mph possibly. Would you expect to see the trap go down if the 60foot went down…

#71

Typically a lower 60ft would result in a lower trap however thats on a traction related 60ft. RWD/FWD spinning etc… I’ve found with AWD cars if they arent spinning a lower 60ft will lower et and trap stays relatively the same.

Saki, The tuning is no terrible but not perfect either. There is an issue with knock retard. That is the reason i put E85 in the car in the first place, to weed out real vs phantom knock. I’ll be making det cans to get a better idea.

#72

Dig against a modded C5 Z06 tonight

https://youtu.be/1-jvJBU98Ns

Door to door the whole way lol

#73

40 Roll against a fast EVO.

https://youtu.be/jXv6qAQIRRs

#74

Rear view of first run with z06

He left low. I gave it the beans lol. I put a solid two to three cars on him.

https://youtu.be/DV1Syl20UCU

#75

Lil CLS63 AMG action :slight_smile:

https://youtu.be/UlO3mJ90SQw

#76

Been waiting for it for the last 20k miles but I FINALLY blew her up tonight! ;D ;D

#77

Cars kaput?

#78

#4 connecting rod is gone lol. But she’ll have a new heart soon.

#79

Building the new engine? Or at least beefing up the rods?

#80

both