Jason Judd

Fellows,

I've just come back from shop (Paddock Performance) and we've corrected an existing A/F problem that previous shop didn't fix...and did a few other things.

Mustang dyno runs done at 18.5 lbs of boost now produce 424 HP at 5,667 RPM and 391 lbs/ft of Torque!

When the boost is turned down to a more modest 15.5 lbs, the resultant numbers drop to 371 HP and 336 lbs/ft of Torque...Plenty of oomph
for me; while maintaining a bullet-proof monk!

All the while maintaining an A/F of around 12.1 to 12.4.

And we're using 93 pump gas, too...no more need for race fuel...Hoo Hoo!

So, what would those numbers be if they were translated to flywheel HP and TQ figures?

Jason

pozican

I think the generic loss figure to the rear wheels is either 10% or 30% I don't remember...

That isn't specific to the 9xx cars though.

RolexNJ

Jason: Thanks for stopping by and congrats with the car too! So, do you think you could provide us with some more specific information:

- Is this a 3.0L 16V engine or what
- MAF set up or EMS (which one?)
- How long did this project take?
- Did you build this yourself, if not, who was the builder?
- Do you have a "complete" build-out sheet on the car?
- Is this going to be a daily driver, DE car, or full-time track?
- Do you have some pics of the car and the dyno charts too?

I think everyone would love to learn more the your car, what it looks like, and to see other things too. But thanks for the post and we're looking forward to hearing from you on these things. Lastly, you can add back into those figures about 15 - 18% for the drive train loss too.

Cheers.

ivai

424 rwhp == 500 crank hp at ~ 15% drive train loss. 15% is pretty low, many cars are closer to 20%

+1 on Rolex's questions, more info!

toddk911

I was always told the 951 was about 12-15% loss, but not sure about 968. Or is this 968 motor in a 951 ?

Jason Judd

OK,

I'll answer the specs on the car as best as I can...I guess right there, that answers the question of whether I built the car myself!

My car is a 1995 M030 968 coupe which was built to Turbo RS specs by Deman Motorsports back in 2004...Haltech was used along with Turbonetics; Carillo rods and Mahle pistons. Bilstein Cup suspension was installed all around instead of keeping the torsion bars. The brakes are Big Reds up front and stock 968 M030 Big Black in the rear...the portioning valve was switched, too.

Since it was built to Turbo RS spec, all the major stuff is from 951's...except that the head is an 8-valve from the 944 2.7. We also put in a Porsche Motorsport LSD in place of the Torsen unit to handle the added power...and got some shorter gears from PowerHaus ll for 3rd~6th to keep it in the zone a bit better.

In late 2006 the car was diagnosed with high A/F numbers. I switched to Paddock Performance and they replaced the Haltech with Autronix (sp?) and the Turbonetics, which had a small leak, was replaced with a Lindsey Super 75.

Most of my time is spent instructing for Metro NY or just doing DE's. I do have a full cage and such...But, if I raced it I can't imagine that I would be in anything other than GT1-S...and those are some really big dogs!


I'll try to get some images of the dyno runs; but I don't know how to post them...a little help would be appreciated!

Jason

333pg333

Hi Jason,
No wonder you're after some large Toyo R-888's! You'll need nice and sticky just to get the power down. Nice car!
Patrick

Jason Judd

Patrick,

Still can't get a decent answer from Toyo...They say "Should be in the Spring" I may just go to the Hoosiers and worry about the Toyos later on.

Jason

RolexNJ

Jason, now I remember you a little bit. You originally had that car built by Deman Motorsports as you said, which isn't far from me too. Please feel free though to elaborate more on the car, and if you can, to show us your new dyno sheet too? Anyway, you have a beautiful car my friend, sorry I forgot who you were.

Click Here For ---> Jason's 968 Turbo Car

Jason Judd

Rolex,

How'd you do that?!

Thanks,

Jason

Porschefile

Standard and widely accepted drivetrain loss percentages are 15% for a manual car and ~20% for an auto. Of course, it's going to vary from car to car. There is no reason whatsoever that our cars should have significantly more than a 15% drivetrain loss (definitely not 20%+). That is, unless you want to artificially increase your horsepower. It's possible to see a bit less like 10-12% on a modded car with l/w flywheel, lightened crank, etc or other mods that reduce rotational mass/drag on the drivetrain.

424whp / 391wtq @ 15% loss = 487.6fwhp and 449.65fwtq

dime1622

From what I've heard over the years on this site, it's accepted that our manual drivetrains are very efficient resulting in about at 12% power loss. Automatics like the 4L60E I had in my s10 cause as much as a 25% loss in power.

nick_968

Nice one Jason, sounds like your running much better than before.....wont be long till mine hits the dyno, last exam tomorrow for a month and I will get time to work on the electrics for the Motec and make some ducting to improve cooling and I am ready.

special tool

EXCELLENT at only 18.5!! With an 8 valve head.....facing the challenge!!

Can we see the curve?

RolexNJ

Jason, I used Magical Pixey Dust and it worked, ha! Anyway, I thought I remembered you from sometime before. You were having issues (ouch, I owned one) with that Haltech system? Anyway, glad to see you are sorting things out now. That's why I wanted you to post as much info on the car that you had. And also, to see if you had dyno charts "this time", for I know when you worked with the other builder you didn't. So if you have the dyno charts, would you mind posting them so we can see? And I just confirmed this with 3 top engine builders I know too, the "average" drive train loss for our cars, again average range, is between 15 to 18%. Anyway, give us more info and let's see those chart too! And if I may ask, why did you only go upt to 18.5 PSI, I'm just curious about that too?

Thanks.