JWT TT dynos at 5800ft corrected and uncorrected
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
Thats right Sharif,
My car made 369rwhp in California
5800 ft above sea level it made 296rwhp
With the correction factor it makes 363rwhp
My tuner said every turbo or blower car he's seen go to California and dyno will make within 5-10 hp of the corrected number here in Albuquerque, and that all cars no matter what setup (turbo,blower,NA)will lose power at this altitude.
My car made 369rwhp in California
5800 ft above sea level it made 296rwhp
With the correction factor it makes 363rwhp
My tuner said every turbo or blower car he's seen go to California and dyno will make within 5-10 hp of the corrected number here in Albuquerque, and that all cars no matter what setup (turbo,blower,NA)will lose power at this altitude.
Last edited by PORTUGEE; Apr 17, 2007 at 07:56 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
From: NJ
Originally Posted by PORTUGEE
My car made 369rwhp in California
5800 ft above sea level it made 296rwhp
With the correction factor it makes 363rwhp
My tuner said every turbo or blower car he's seen go to California and dyno will make within 5-10 hp of the corrected number here in Albuquerque, and that all cars no matter what setup (turbo,blower,NA)will lose power at this altitude.
5800 ft above sea level it made 296rwhp
With the correction factor it makes 363rwhp
My tuner said every turbo or blower car he's seen go to California and dyno will make within 5-10 hp of the corrected number here in Albuquerque, and that all cars no matter what setup (turbo,blower,NA)will lose power at this altitude.
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
I'm curious myself to see if unplugging them made me lean. I'm pretty sure it did as it would put more oxygen in the motor instead of spent exhaust.
I plugged them in again and the car is still showing the SES light.
I'de have to make damn sure I wasnt a 14:1 afr before I jumped on the dyno again. My tune happens friday so maybe then.
I plugged them in again and the car is still showing the SES light.
I'de have to make damn sure I wasnt a 14:1 afr before I jumped on the dyno again. My tune happens friday so maybe then.
Last edited by PORTUGEE; Apr 18, 2007 at 02:07 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,658
Likes: 1
From: Colorado Springs, CO
I don't get the whole Turbo kit at altitude either. The turbo'd STI seemed to destroy the Z NA for power in Denver, so I assumed the Turbo was compensating for the altitude. But every Denver Dyno I have seen shows the same 18% power loss for altitude from sea level, with or without turbo.
So why the STI at altitude seems so much more powerful than a Z when SAE numbers aren't that much different(300 / 287) I don't know.
When I drove the Z at sea level last year it reminded me of how the STI felt at altitude, so it seemed the STI stayed close to the 300 HP in denver while the Z only felt that way at sea level.
So why the STI at altitude seems so much more powerful than a Z when SAE numbers aren't that much different(300 / 287) I don't know.
When I drove the Z at sea level last year it reminded me of how the STI felt at altitude, so it seemed the STI stayed close to the 300 HP in denver while the Z only felt that way at sea level.
Last edited by Starchecker; Apr 18, 2007 at 04:12 PM.
I drove ab FX35 in colorado back in February, and at 10,000 feet......it couldn't get out of its own way. back in denver at 5000 feet, the FX felt alot better......and at sea level, the FX is pretty quick (for an SUV.)
all the local evo/sti/supra guys use corrected hp. I never gave it second thought.When I drove my car up to 8-9k feet on some of the cruises in the mountains I defnitely could feel the power loss even TT'd.
Lol. All of this talk about altitude makes me look forward to the Pikes Peak Hill climb coming up this year and our Porsche 928. That hill is good at turning a fast car into a dog by the top of the hill.
Originally Posted by Quamen
Lol. All of this talk about altitude makes me look forward to the Pikes Peak Hill climb coming up this year and our Porsche 928. That hill is good at turning a fast car into a dog by the top of the hill.
M
Thats a beautiful car you bought Joel. Pimpin right out the box. Believe me I consider myself lucky on our little run.
Can't wait to see that badboy after you clean out the bugs. Congrats!
Can't wait to see that badboy after you clean out the bugs. Congrats!
Originally Posted by Sharif@Forged
So if I am reading this correctly, your car made the same corrected power at GTM in Los Angeles, vs. the corrected power at 5800ft elevation? Doesnt this re-open the elevation correction debate??
I wont go any further. I promise.
Originally Posted by Quamen
Lol. All of this talk about altitude makes me look forward to the Pikes Peak Hill climb coming up this year and our Porsche 928. That hill is good at turning a fast car into a dog by the top of the hill.
Oh you have a shark huh? I love those cars .The GTS is phenominal. There will be a twin turboed shark sitting in my 1500sq.ft garage, at my house one day
I have a 1500 sq.ft shop at home for all my goodies. He he.
Originally Posted by PORTUGEE
So I bought a car with the JWT TT kit installed. It's a 2006 with 5k miles stock block and stock cats with Injen ses dual exhaust. Kit was installed and tuned at GT motorsport. It came with defi boost gauge and EGT.
I live in Albuquerque which is about 5800 feet above sea level. The car dynoed at 370 rwhp in LA from the charts done at GT motorsport.
The only change I've made was unplugging the cam motors at Jim Wolf's recommendation because the car would not accelerate if I tried a pull from under 3k rpm. The car runs great now without cam motors.
Check out the dyno. Its very lean between 3000 and 5500 rpm which I thought it would run richer at this altitude. Power is also sucking at the uncorrected numbers which suprised me because I read that turbo cars dont suffer from altitude because 7 psi at sea level is the same as 7psi at 9000 feet.
Anyway if this is a debate about boost and altitude so be it, I just need some suggestions on how to get this car to at least 380 rwhp at this altitude.
I live in Albuquerque which is about 5800 feet above sea level. The car dynoed at 370 rwhp in LA from the charts done at GT motorsport.
The only change I've made was unplugging the cam motors at Jim Wolf's recommendation because the car would not accelerate if I tried a pull from under 3k rpm. The car runs great now without cam motors.
Check out the dyno. Its very lean between 3000 and 5500 rpm which I thought it would run richer at this altitude. Power is also sucking at the uncorrected numbers which suprised me because I read that turbo cars dont suffer from altitude because 7 psi at sea level is the same as 7psi at 9000 feet.
Anyway if this is a debate about boost and altitude so be it, I just need some suggestions on how to get this car to at least 380 rwhp at this altitude.
so what you should do is dyno the car again with out the cam actutors connected and take exhaust samples before the cat and see what is really going on. If the car is running different than the map when it left the shop then you need a retune.sam
GT Motorsports
Out of the Box, running out of the fuel at redline:
Bigger injectors and retuned, solid 11.5 a/f reading BEFORE the cat
Last edited by Sam@GTM; Apr 24, 2007 at 08:45 AM.
Originally Posted by rocks
I talked to Jim Wolf about the revup cams. Unplugging the exhaust cams prevent s the egr function on them. With it on it causes to much overlap, way to much. With them unplugged it puts them in a fixed position like the 287hp engines.
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
Thanks for posting my dynos Sam.
Here is a dyno without cam actuators and overlayed with cam actuators. We did'nt make a full run because of the lean condition. I was mainly seeing if unplugged actuators was causing a lean condition. It does'nt look like it changes the AFR much but power is stronger with them plugged in.
Here is a dyno without cam actuators and overlayed with cam actuators. We did'nt make a full run because of the lean condition. I was mainly seeing if unplugged actuators was causing a lean condition. It does'nt look like it changes the AFR much but power is stronger with them plugged in.
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
Originally Posted by Sam@GTM
) Secondly you should NOT disconnect the exhaust cam actuators and I can't beleive someone at JWT suggested that . so what you should do is dyno the car again with out the cam actutors connected and take exhaust samples before the cat and see what is really going on. If the car is running different than the map when it left the shop then you need a retune.
sam
GT Motorsports
]
so what you should do is dyno the car again with out the cam actutors connected and take exhaust samples before the cat and see what is really going on. If the car is running different than the map when it left the shop then you need a retune.sam
GT Motorsports
]
Sam,
With your tune the cam actuators were plugged in and the car would not accelerate from below 3000 rpm in 4th, 5th or 6th gear on the street. When I tried to accelerate from under 3k rpm the car would start studdering and shaking. In 3rd gear it did the same thing but would overcome it eventually and start accelerating. It seemed like the higher the gear the worse it got. This was a pain in the *** driving back to Albuquerque because its common to drop below 3K rpm in 5th, and 6th gear on the freeway. The car would not accelerate and always forced me to down shift.
Jim Wolf himself asked me to unplug the cam actuators based on him experiencing this on other revups and it completely solved the studdering and shaking but lost power in the lower rpm's.
My tuner here tried to tune the car with them plugged in and did'nt have any luck either.
So if you have any suggestions on how to make it run right with them plugged in I'm all ears.
Last edited by PORTUGEE; Apr 25, 2007 at 01:03 PM.
