I guess I've got the 2nd install in the Northeast...

Click here for pictures and Dyno graphs

 

Nice!!!.... Questions

>1 Why the Thermal Coating?

>1 Did you use the stock 91 MAP?

>Do you have a stock Bottom end?

> What kind of Dyno?

I wouldn't mind a pic of the FMIC with the nose on, I'd like to see how it sits when all button Up

Again Congrats! I can't wait till I get mine done!


Rob P

 

Congrats on the kit! Was your car tuned or did they just ran it on the base map?

 

nice numbers and setup.

 

Very Interesting your IMG-29

I was looking at the Stock HP and Torque and they were what we saw on a DynoJet last summer.

I see the Dyno is a four wheel Dyno.. What brand Dyno? ?

My compliments to the mechanic's as they are as careful as masking down the intake during assembly.

Did you calculate the "total numbers of Hours" for the install?

Inquiring minds - want to know...

Cheers Amy -

Very nice...

 

looking good jeff!

who/where did your install? do you think you might be able to be the person that brings the world a dynojet graph for the APS kit? Lots of us would love compare the details of the graph to other systems.

Over the next few weeks you should become more and more obsessed with your car. How exciting. Thermal coatings get a thumbs up from me... you would have regret'd not doing them if you didnt.

congrats on a successful install!

 

Nice Job Jeff
Even my APS is going on to installtion
take me 2days for installtion of Manifold and Turbo >>>>
i'm done on intercooler today.
tomorrow i will put some pipe and air filter
but way i looked at is more worse than Ex. Manifold and turbo.
I will post of PICs. tomorrow.........
any way what is your Boost MAP ?? (91 Octane MAP)

 

What thermal coating is that exactly? Isn't there some concern about coating the intside of the manifold, if the coating flakes off, then it will hose the turbo??

Thanks

Chris

 

Here is my APS

 

are you changing the APS exhaust as well? or you going to keep the Borla exhaust?

Good luck with the installation

 

Looking great. Those are awesome numbers, but also curious to what dyno you are running on. Keep up the good work.

 

Here's the dyno his tuner offers, taken off their website....

Introducing a radically different approach to chassis dynamometer testing...

The Dynapack!

What makes us better then the other dyno guys. The first and most obvious difference is the elimination of the tire to roller interface on a conventional roller dyno. The Dynapack eliminates this variable by using a hub adapter that provides a direct coupling to our Power Absorption Units. There can be no tire slip, no rolling resistance, and no chance of the vehicle coming off of the dyno at high speeds. Notice that we call this a variable. Sometimes it may be a problem area, other times it may not. Tire temperature, pressure, traction, etc, are all variables that can change - not only from run to run, but during the run as well. Throw an unknown variable like this into the equation and your data has now become subject to a potentially high margin of error. It is obviously better if these variables could be eliminated - which is exactly what we have done. There are other associated problems with the roller method as well. Take tie-down straps for example. Most roller dynos use ratcheting tie-down straps to attempt to hold the vehicle in position while being tested. If the straps are cinched down tightly, the tire has become loaded even further, in an unpredictable manner. While this may be good for enhancing traction, it changes the rolling resistance of the tire - skewing the data further. Since these tie-down straps aren’t perfect, the vehicle squirms around on the rollers - dramatically changing the tire drag during the run. If the vehicle is tested in two different sessions, the straps can’t be set exactly the same way twice in a row. Again, the data will be inconsistent. We have heard of cases where the ratcheting tie-down straps were loosened by two clicks and the measured power increased by ten horsepower. What if the straps stretch - either from run to run, or during the run itself? Wouldn’t it be great if all of these problems could disappear? With a Dynapack, they were never there in the first place.

Our Dyno runs are repeatable to better than 0.3%. Other dyno might claim to be repeatable, but no other chassis dyno is even close to the level of repeatability our Dynapack can achieve. One large reason for this because we have eliminated the largest variable of all - the tire to roller interface. Rubber tires don't hold traction against a steel roller very well. Add a year or so of use, and the rollers become polished by the tires and traction decreases further. When you have this variable link in your data chain, you cannot have guaranteed repeatability - PERIOD. Sure a roller dyno itself may be repeatable, but as soon as you put a car on it, all bets are off. Many people think that this slippage only occurs in high power situations, but we've seen it happen with 250HP Hondas - ask some of the import tuners who have had guys sitting on the hood and fenders trying to get the tires to hook up. With the Dynapack, we use a direct mechanical coupling to make absolutely sure that there is no loss, no slippage, and no inconsistencies in this area. We have virtually no inertia to mask small details and we use hydraulics for the ultimate in sensitivity and precision. The Dynapack is absolutely the most consistent and repeatable chassis dyno in the world. We can reliably measure minute differences not seen on other machines.

 

That looks identical to the chrome ceramic coating that was used on my Greddy manifolds. It basically prevents the manifolds from getting all rusty and crappy looking and does insulate some of the heat from the exhaust to increase spool up and maintain exhaust velocity. Looks Great !!

 

Yumnnnn delicious.

 

yea we all know the dynapack is so much better for all the BS reasons I have read on their website... most of which do not exist. The dynapack is definatly a better tuning tool... but they talk like interia dynos are reading several HP different from run to run, which mine sure as hell does not.

The only thing that makes the dynapack worth anything EXTRA to the tuning society is the ability to hold load. Other than that its nothing special, a hassle to mount a car on (they might even scratch your rims), and then you loose the ability to compare your HP with everyone else in the US.

I sure wish I had an eddy current brake or something of the like, but when I bought my dynojet it wasnt an option. Now you can get dynojets up to 1000hp with eddy current 2wd or 4wd and mustang dynos have had them forever. Dynapack is left with no TRUE or useful advantage other than portability.

That being said, its a very high quality machine... they just use a lot of marketing BS to make their customers feel better about their purchase. Oh yea... if you cant get a 250hp honda to hook up on the dyno you got some issues. The only car I ever had a problem with getting to hook up on the dyno was a twin turbo viper that flatlined the thing at 10 psi.

Sorry for off-topic rant.

 

Ah...great work.

But for heaven's sake...will someone finally post up a dynojet? I know they suck for tuning, but they are better for comarison purposes, since most people with F/I have dynoed on a dynojet. I am guess these numberrs would be about 10% lower on a dynojet....right?

Why does it say flywheel trq?

 

yea i dont get it there are 3 dynojets in every town and one dynapack in every state yet no APS car ever finds a dynojet?!?

 

Phunk I think the reason is that most of our APS dealers have true load based dynos (with eddy current ratarders) as dyno jets (inertia dynos) are useless for tuning cars as they can't hold engine load which is required for mapping/tuning engine management.

Just communicated with one of our dealers in the US who has a Dyna pack dyno and at around 7 PSI boost pressure the APS TT system is producing around 405 to 410 WHP.

Not sure if this power figure would be higher or lower on a dyno jet though unless the cars have the identical size tires and tire pressures the power readings won't be consistent in any event.

Thanks

Peter

 

Thanks for the compliments everyone.

Answers to some of the questions:

XXTuning did the installation. The car is not using the 91 base, but is setup for 93 @ 9lbs. The bottom end is still stock, although perhaps next winter I'll upgrade. I will be getting the APS exhaust installed eventually, but for right now it is stuck in customs.

Jeff

 

Peter: You must have watched too many dynapack info-mercials

i tuned my car on a dynojet... http://www.cj-motorsports.com/91psi115af.jpg

not bad for a POS dynojet, eh?

If this wasnt someone elses thread of glory I would go off on why all those negative things that dynapack says is all BS. But I would gladly dominate a seperate thread

-Charles