Notices
Forced Induction Turbochargers and Superchargers..Got Boost?

FI on Stock Engines Data (Consolidated)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-07-2010, 10:57 AM
  #21  
Majestik Møøse
New Member
Thread Starter
 
Majestik Møøse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by wizard
Based on the 42whp per pound optimum?
Be careful, I didn't say that was optimum, I just said below that is where things start to get shaky. Obviously we would like to make to most power on the least amount of PSI possible.

The big point is that there seems to be a correlation, but it's important to remember that correlation is not causation!

I think we need to look more at the torque numbers down low from everyone's dyno sheets; maybe we can pick a sample RPM and gather some numbers to analyze from there. FI gurus please chime in and feel free to throw BS flags as required!
Old 09-07-2010, 11:33 AM
  #22  
derekinthez
New Member
iTrader: (32)
 
derekinthez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Got data? I like this thread
Old 09-07-2010, 12:20 PM
  #23  
binder
New Member
iTrader: (8)
 
binder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

I want to point out an observation. These cars are NOT making 42hp per lb of boost. You have to have a baseline of the n/a engine and then you only count the horsepower you GAIN above that to determine how much hp per lb of boost you get.

Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
Old 09-07-2010, 12:44 PM
  #24  
Threads
Registered User
iTrader: (13)
 
Threads's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 329
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by binder
I want to point out an observation. These cars are NOT making 42hp per lb of boost. You have to have a baseline of the n/a engine and then you only count the horsepower you GAIN above that to determine how much hp per lb of boost you get.

Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
Great Point. I was wondering how everyone was coming it with 4Xhp at XXpsi. I was saying to myself, "I need to get the kit they are running".
Old 09-07-2010, 01:29 PM
  #25  
binder
New Member
iTrader: (8)
 
binder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Threads
Great Point. I was wondering how everyone was coming it with 4Xhp at XXpsi. I was saying to myself, "I need to get the kit they are running".
ya, give or take 20hp per 1psi is good. I think some people have gotten 22hp per 1psi and that's a great hp gain.

Mine was putting down about 20hp per 1psi on the DD dyno.
Old 09-07-2010, 01:40 PM
  #26  
djamps
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
djamps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: MD
Posts: 4,492
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

22whp/psi here, dynojet

I wanna know how someone can get 4x/psi?? church's dyno?

Last edited by djamps; 09-07-2010 at 01:41 PM.
Old 09-07-2010, 01:54 PM
  #27  
binder
New Member
iTrader: (8)
 
binder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by djamps
22whp/psi here, dynojet

I wanna know how someone can get 4x/psi?? church's dyno?
ya, 22hp/psi on a DJ would be right in line with 20hp/psi on a DD. Good hp/psi.

40hp/psi comes from the magical dyno. You need to climb the beanstock to get to the dyno though...
Old 09-07-2010, 02:36 PM
  #28  
- bigc -
New Member
iTrader: (18)
 
- bigc -'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,014
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by binder
I want to point out an observation. These cars are NOT making 42hp per lb of boost. You have to have a baseline of the n/a engine and then you only count the horsepower you GAIN above that to determine how much hp per lb of boost you get.

Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
very good point sir
Old 09-07-2010, 03:13 PM
  #29  
djamps
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
djamps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: MD
Posts: 4,492
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

So from everything I heard, peak TQ is the stock VQ killer.

Do you really think it's just the TQ alone, or is it detonation at those levels given pump gas + stock compression + so-so tune?
Old 09-07-2010, 05:45 PM
  #30  
twitch579
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
 
twitch579's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I think the stock rods are just crap and were taking this way to seriously. The engine is only as stong as the weakest link...and the rods are crap combined with the high compresion.

I would really like to just see someone lower the compression of the motor without changing a single part and then boost the crap out of the motor. I bet it would hold up fine.

Last edited by twitch579; 09-07-2010 at 05:47 PM.
Old 09-07-2010, 07:36 PM
  #31  
GT-ER
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
 
GT-ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I've been tempted to just swap out the rods and keep the oem pistons. Don't here too many of those going bad.
Old 09-07-2010, 07:53 PM
  #32  
binder
New Member
iTrader: (8)
 
binder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by GT-ER
I've been tempted to just swap out the rods and keep the oem pistons. Don't here too many of those going bad.
ya, sad thing is when you have it torn down you might as well put better pistons in it so the engine is fresh. It's a violent cycle since the engine is open you save time and money just doing it all. That's why nobody has experimented with it.
Old 09-07-2010, 09:58 PM
  #33  
GT-ER
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
 
GT-ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by binder
ya, sad thing is when you have it torn down you might as well put better pistons in it so the engine is fresh. It's a violent cycle since the engine is open you save time and money just doing it all. That's why nobody has experimented with it.
Yeah, but I'm not one to really care if I have to tear it down again. I do these kind of things for fun and thankfully I've had pretty darn good luck...lol. I dunno...maybe I'll just get everything in one shot....but I may just stick with the rods alone....just because I can.
Old 09-08-2010, 01:46 AM
  #34  
Majestik Møøse
New Member
Thread Starter
 
Majestik Møøse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by binder
I want to point out an observation. These cars are NOT making 42hp per lb of boost. You have to have a baseline of the n/a engine and then you only count the horsepower you GAIN above that to determine how much hp per lb of boost you get.

Obviously if you only use 1lb of boost and you're gettin 273hp then you're saying you are getting 273 hp per 1lb of boost. wow....definitely not how it's calculated.
The figure used for HP/PSI is not literal. I figured everybody understood that already. It's the ratio that matters; we simply don't have enough data to subtract 250 (or whatever the baseline is) from everybody's numbers. If we did I suspect the ranking will stay nearly the same. The significant numbers we have to work with are total horsepower, peak torque, mileage, type and PSI. I'd love to have mid-range torque numbers and baselines, but that's about 169 more data points that will be hard to get.
Old 09-08-2010, 08:15 AM
  #35  
streetzlegend
New Member
iTrader: (2)
 
streetzlegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Miami FL
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Excellent thread majestik. In my opinion part reason why turbo setups are more prone to have problems is not only because of torque, but because of how they are tuned at those higher torque numbers (compared to SC). More torque usually requires a good ear for knock, and good timing, there is alot of good tuners out there, but there are also alot of not so good tuners that dont pay 100% attention to some things. I personally think its the tune that causes issues and not the boost (well upto a point ofcourse).
Old 09-08-2010, 10:53 PM
  #36  
Sylvan Lake V35
Registered User
iTrader: (23)
 
Sylvan Lake V35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,108
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

......

Last edited by Sylvan Lake V35; 09-08-2010 at 11:07 PM.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
liqalu04
Engine & Drivetrain
31
01-02-2022 12:58 PM
Fixxxercask
Engine
6
11-09-2015 11:10 AM
hajwoj
Autocross/Road
27
11-01-2015 05:25 PM



Quick Reply: FI on Stock Engines Data (Consolidated)



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:51 AM.