it was the pump. i was following the clubgp thread for a while now. he swapped in the racetronix unit and some 60# injectors and he is back at 70% IDC.
|
|
11-15-2011
it was the pump. i was following the clubgp thread for a while now. he swapped in the racetronix unit and some 60# injectors and he is back at 70% IDC.
11-18-2011
Got on the dyno today and put down numbers that weren't bad... but not everything I wanted.
The blue line is the 3rd/final/best run from today, the green line is the best pull on the M90 in both SAE and STD correction factors.
Some details about the dyno runs today...
The guy who owns the shop went out of his way to get me on there today. He's got paying customers waiting for me and I wasn't paying for the runs.
RPM pickup wasn't working, I still haven't had a lot of time to nail down the tune... Anyway, the first pull the tires were still wet and the car was straight off the highway. It spun the tires on the dyno and made 327. We ran dyno #2 about 5 minutes later, the tires didn't spin but I wasn't able to adjust the tune, it made 334. Run 3 I bumped the timing up 2 degrees, still saw no knock and it made 339.xx. I jumped off after thaat. I wasn't able to compare the bigger pulley, or drop to a smaller pulley.
I'm happy with the numbers, I would have liked 350whp SAE today but it just wasn't going to happen in 3 pulls where one of them was botched. I picked up just about 17% peak power, and picked up an even 50whp during the entire pull, any point of the graph shows 50whp gains.
What's the bottom line? I spent under a grand and picked up 50whp on a tune that had almost no time into it. Had I gotten the chance to drop to the 2.7'' pulley and tune that I would have had no issue breaking 350whp SAE.
Smaller blower, more power.
Thanks for the laughs GPF.
11-18-2011
Nice....I was actually really interested in your thread. I had faith in ya.
11-18-2011
Pix of the setup?
Last edited by matt5112; 11-18-2011 at 10:53 PM. Reason: Why would you need to quote that?
11-18-2011
wow im actullay impressed, nice job
11-18-2011
im not overly impressed with the costower ratio made. i never said it wouldnt make more power. the blower is clearly better designed as a whole and will produce better numbers, but i just dont see the cost weighing out in the end. im really one to push the idea of new and different ways to make the power, but this one seems to be a step in the wrong direction based solely on the money.
11-18-2011
Anybody know when/if there will be a R1650 kit?
11-18-2011
I have been looking and e-mailing and calling. Unless a car manufacturer says that they want to put the 1650 on a new car they are building I doubt we will ever see it.Originally Posted by EJOUIE
11-18-2011
So if you skip a gen V, its two grand.
Plus the cam, and injectors.
For 340-350 WHP.
Easy three grand.
Pure, you need to fix the whole lack of flow in that motor.
11-19-2011
You act like $3,000 in mods to make double the power of a stock car and basically have a 12 second car capable of 11s on the right tires is a bad thing... all while running 93 octane gas and keeping near stock drivability.
You guys crack me up. You'll say anything to try and detract from the fact that I was hated on so hard by the smart guys on this board who all said it wouldn't work, then they all said it wouldn't make good power, now they're all saying what a GenV swap costs 2 years ago isn't worth 4x the gains of a GenV swap today.
11-19-2011
good work for making it run. decent numbers, but not really impressive in my eyes. that is all.
11-19-2011
What do you mean?
11-19-2011
Pure, 1.9's < cam.
A used turbo kit and a cam would do the same thing.
I do appreciate the idea that you wouldn't have to give up the instantaneous throttle response however.
Last edited by matt5112; 11-19-2011 at 08:09 PM.
11-20-2011
So basically a E85 car could easily make the same #'s or better with less mods?
11-20-2011
oh snap.
11-20-2011
Looking at the bigger picture, he accomplished what he wanted so far and may have opened up other options. He sourced a $300 adapter for possibly other TVS blowers. Some people have spent twice that on other blower adapters. I may be alone, but I like the look of the TVS over many of the blowers that have been rigged up on top of a 3800. The $ amount may not be there right now, but unless it's 400whp gains for $500 the 3800 community will always be unimpressed.
276~ = gen3
291 = genV +5% increase
339 = tvs 1320 +23% increase
tvs 1650 = ????
11-20-2011
1650 isn't in production.
1900 is only in production for LSx motors, Audi's, and GM I5's, among other things.
2300 is too much blower.
1900 is ideal if you're doing heads/cam.
1320 is ideal if you're sticking with stock heads.
I've never been impressed with the gen V numbers period.
Seems like a side step to me.
11-20-2011
Thanks, I did exactly what I set out to do. IMO the TVS swap should give someone looking to go from a GenIII to an inter cooled GenV a serious choice. It's not for everyone and clearly not for the majority of the people in this bargain basement shopping community.
As for your % increases, the 1650 won't do much over a 1320 at this power level. It's when you start stringing the blower out that you'll see better gains. Also a 1650 isn't even in production yet, and if/when it is, the unit itself is gonna be like $3000, lol.
With the proper supporting mods the TVS1320 will support ~500whp on our engines. If you want more than that... look into a 1900.
11-20-2011
Consider the following:
You're spinning your 1320 to about the end of its performance map, and the 1900 would be right in its sweet spot.
Charts you've provided show the 1900 and 1320 use the same power for the air they flow.
The 1900 is $2200 from magnuson.
11-20-2011
I figured from the 40 pages between forums that I've read that I didn't need to state the 1650 isn't in production yet, i was just throwing a blower out there and saying there are future options.
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
