Back From the Dyno
11/26/07, 12:07 PM
#1
V6 Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: April 26, 2007
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back From the Dyno
I have a TT setup, running twin GT28 turbos @ 7.4 PSI. The car has a vey safe tune on it. The car put down 381 RWHP and 437 RWTQ. The car sits at about 11.4 to 11.3 air/fuel and at the top end the boost creeps down to about 5.5 PSI.
Also my torque curve hits 400 RWTQ at 2500 RPMs and doesnt drop below 400 until about 5500 RPMs
We calculated that about every pound of boost will give me about 20 RWHP.
Where should the air/fuel curve be and still be safe? How much boost can you put into the engine and also be safe?
Whats do you guys think? Thanks for the input
Also my torque curve hits 400 RWTQ at 2500 RPMs and doesnt drop below 400 until about 5500 RPMs
We calculated that about every pound of boost will give me about 20 RWHP.
Where should the air/fuel curve be and still be safe? How much boost can you put into the engine and also be safe?
Whats do you guys think? Thanks for the input
11/26/07, 03:02 PM
#3
Legacy TMS Member
Not knocking you at all, so don't take this the wrong way- but you're running twins with <8 psi and <400 rwhp?
I'd say describing your tune as very safe is putting it lightly LOL!
Sounds like you got alot of potential there for when you decide to turn it up. 
I'd say describing your tune as very safe is putting it lightly LOL!
Sounds like you got alot of potential there for when you decide to turn it up.
11/26/07, 06:48 PM
#5
V6 Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: April 26, 2007
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here are some pics of the car. The picture that is under the car is off of the prototype car. I dont have any current pic under my car. As you can see the turbos are mounted right by the trans. The engine bay pic shows everything looking stock except for the air to water intercooler that took the air box location.
11/27/07, 12:28 PM
#7
Bullitt Member
Join Date: July 24, 2005
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems that people worry too much about peak numbers. What I find impressive about this setup is the low rpm where he is getting that 400 ft lbs of torque. That is what is going to get his car moving.
I'd really like to see what this setup does on the track. Assuming it hooks up I'd bet it does better than some cars making higher peak numbers.
I'd really like to see what this setup does on the track. Assuming it hooks up I'd bet it does better than some cars making higher peak numbers.
11/27/07, 12:53 PM
#8
Legacy TMS Member
It seems that people worry too much about peak numbers. What I find impressive about this setup is the low rpm where he is getting that 400 ft lbs of torque. That is what is going to get his car moving.
I'd really like to see what this setup does on the track. Assuming it hooks up I'd bet it does better than some cars making higher peak numbers.
I'd really like to see what this setup does on the track. Assuming it hooks up I'd bet it does better than some cars making higher peak numbers.
I bet it doesn't...... at the track you'll be shifting at high rpm, so not much matters regarding torque at 2500rpm. BUT, it will be fun on the street I'm sure!
11/27/07, 05:48 PM
#9
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool! I like the location of those turbos, and the air-to-water IC!! So was that a realtively easy install? Any chance that will be available to the public? Any other turbos located in this location? Seems like this one really cuts down on plumbing. That is some SICK torque
11/27/07, 09:20 PM
#10
V6 Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: April 26, 2007
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool! I like the location of those turbos, and the air-to-water IC!! So was that a realtively easy install? Any chance that will be available to the public? Any other turbos located in this location? Seems like this one really cuts down on plumbing. That is some SICK torque
The install is a bit of a pain just because it uses every inch of open space under the car so when you look under you dont see anything therefore making it look like a sleeper.
Im not to sure about the kit being sold to the public to mail order but i do know he has one guy shipping him his car to build him a kit. He is very hands on and would rather install it himself rather then you running into problems and needing tech support.
Thanks again guys,
11/28/07, 07:19 PM
#12
V6 Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: April 26, 2007
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well i think i got a great deal on this kit... I was charged 5000K for the kit, install, road and dyno tuning. This is just because i was the first to put the kit on, so i did some R&D for him as well. Ill find out what he might charge and let you know.
11/29/07, 05:14 PM
#14
Member
Join Date: November 27, 2007
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11/29/07, 06:41 PM
#15
Bullitt Member
Join Date: October 8, 2007
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air to air on a street car is where its at. Those numbers do seem a little low but it could be the dyno not the car.
11/29/07, 07:32 PM
#16
Member
Join Date: November 27, 2007
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11/29/07, 07:38 PM
#17
V6 Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: April 26, 2007
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to sure where the numbers were supposed to be with 7.4 PSI. Everyone keeps saying these numbers are low and the tune is very conservative which it is, but when reading other threads like 89trooper and his turbo install, everyone is all about it and his numbers. Not trynf to take anything away from him but I know i didnt max out its capability and its still running rich on the top end, and im sure i can get the car to 400 RWHP with just messing with the timing and fuel, but just looking at the numbers. I've never seen a kit that hits over 400 RWTQ at 2500rpm with 7 PSI while my max HP is coming in at 5 PSI at the top end. Granted everyone is all about peak numbers and 381 @ 5PSI is nothing compared to other kits. I must be the only crazy person to think that these numbers are good with a very conservative tune. Just my 2 cents
11/29/07, 07:49 PM
#18
Bullitt Member
Join Date: October 8, 2007
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to sure where the numbers were supposed to be with 7.4 PSI. Everyone keeps saying these numbers are low and the tune is very conservative which it is, but when reading other threads like 89trooper and his turbo install, everyone is all about it and his numbers. Not trynf to take anything away from him but I know i didnt max out its capability and its still running rich on the top end, and im sure i can get the car to 400 RWHP with just messing with the timing and fuel, but just looking at the numbers. I've never seen a kit that hits over 400 RWTQ at 2500rpm with 7 PSI while my max HP is coming in at 5 PSI at the top end. Granted everyone is all about peak numbers and 381 @ 5PSI is nothing compared to other kits. I must be the only crazy person to think that these numbers are good with a very conservative tune. Just my 2 cents