JET951

Hi Dave
As Patrick has said in an above post he did send his Chipboard back to john to get images for a Gt30. i cant see why John's tune would be far if at all off for a gt30. of course the cam was an afterthought and was not in the equation when Patrick got the reflash.

I cant agree with you on cost of conversion. Over here Gt30 go for about $1495 you may be a bit cheaper. i cant see the Tial mount being less then $500 but i dont know. Xover mod at least $300. new exhaust down pipe another $400 then we have the oil drain and oil supply hoses, another 200-300? removal of the original DME and installation of the standalone, installing sensors. i would say a days work $800. standalone $2500? is this with a terminated harness and sensors? add in some extra sensors another $500-1000 depending on what the customer wants to log. then the tuning begins. we have seen down here that Tunes do not come cheap. you need to hire someone that you can trust. We have seen set up and base tunes cost around $800. then the real tuning begins then for each map you want to cost about the same or $800 for pump $800 for E85 as you well know you can loose countless hours, even days on the dyno with tuning it perfectly. In my opinion i am being very kind with these figures. im seeing about $10,000. of course this is hiring someone to do the work for you. correct me if i am wrong here, just personal experience.

Of course if your the type of guy that can do all this themselves then it becomes much cheaper. And a loss of half your life playing with your tune,lol. but i am talking about a paying customer.
Sean

fast951

Let's try this one more time... to simplify things: V-FLEX alters ignition based on boost. So when running 10psi boost you get X ignition advance. When you run 15psi boost you get Y ignition advance. DYNAMIC

Non V-FLEX you run 10psi or 15psi you get Z ignition advance regardless of boost.. STATIC

I used the 100rwhp as a example. So I'll be more precise:
- @ 3000 RPM there is a 80rwhp difference (140rwhp vs. 60rwhp)
- @ 3500 RPM there is a 110rwhp difference (210rwhp vs. 100rwhp)
- @ 4000 RPM there is a 50rwhp difference (245rwhp vs. 195rwhp)
RWHP matches up by 4500RPM.


Patrick, at no point I was trying to say that your car is slow, it takes much more than HP/TQ to get around the track. From your videos you are doing great! All I'm saying, that based on the dyno numbers, as listed above, there is a good bit of difference in the performance. As far as the tune for GT35 vs. a GT30, which turbo do you think takes longer to wake up on a 2.5L?

The point is simple. Don't rule out a proven simple bolt on turbo in favor of the GT turbos.. I'm sure there are some other turbos out there that will outperform all 3 turbos tested here... However, based on the limited dyno samples we have here, the results are obvious.

A 17psi, 20psi and 22psi runs will give us more data.

JET951

Sorry about the mis quote Patrick, on a discussion we had i thought your run was on 22psi. We dynoed our cars on different dates. so temperature on the dyno could have on most likely be different. i am assuming that the temp difference would not have been radical. Do dynos compensate for temperature?

I agree your car spools quite early but the pull just wasnt there in those RPM's, its reading 1+ bar boost but didnt have the same Hp in those early RPM. We can see this those Video clips of both our cars. Eastern creek corner 3 i can shift early into 4th gear and i still have pull from lower RPM's where as you find that you cant.

I think we can compare these 2 cars against each other with their own mods if you like. Same dyno, same dyno process, same cars, different mods.
Sean

evil 944t

John, thanks for clearing it up? We will just have to agree to dis-agree. Your comparing cars that are running non ported n/a heads vrs turbo heads, cams, exhausts, etc.. and you can't compare!!

The only thing that is "obvious" is that, they tried a bunch of turbos out and got lots of results. There is no way you can honestly say one clearly out performed another as they weren't tested in the same manor.

Sean, Agree'd. To bring this to a shop will be pricey, bolt on or not. I was just talking about a guy doing it in his driveway. As always, I love your guys video's and results so, keep them coming!!

hmm, good thing I only post here about once a year..

333pg333

Ha, at least this is an enjoyable thread. I take no umbrage at any of it.

John, no I didn't take you as saying my car was slow, no probs. In terms of different ign maps for a GT30 vs a GT35 I don't know how that would work? Turbo for Turbo, sure, a 30 should spool faster on the 2.5L though.
Sean's turbo definitely comes on earlier than mine, but for me 4500rpm wasn't a sticking point as the car mainly lived on the track and we are seldom as low as 4500rpm.

Who knows, perhaps the GT series aren't as suited for a stock motor or are in fact counterproductive with a large-ish cam compared to the VR or KKK based options. I'm still glad I tried them out. The smaller .63 7 blade version I used first was very quick to spool and great fun on the street and tighter tracks. Then going to a large exhaust, cam, and larger turbo might have been all too much in one go to get an accurate account for the various components.

Sean's car does haul *** on that video back a page. To help with the short shifting would have been the slicks and suspension changes but certainly there is the tq to take advantages of those changes. Almost 1.6 bar didn't hurt either hahaha. I think it should be great to see what you get at higher boost levels. I have no fear of recommending the Vitesse product to anyone that asks and I know that many people on this thread have also done so over the years. Dave recommended it to me back when I first started in on the 3L route. To be able to run the Stage V turbo for so long on the 2.5L car was testimony to the spooling capabilities of these turbos. It was great fun too with a nice whack in the upper rpms!

fast951

Dave, ok we agree to dis-agree.

How about Rod? Was he using a NA head as well? Was his ignition off as well? Surely the pro that tuned it can't be that far off..

Patrick, you are a true enthusiast. You enjoy you driving and your car... There is nothing wrong with experimenting, as long as you are having fun. I look forward to seeing new videos next season when your car is where you want it. (BTW. I still don't see how you guys shift gears with your left hand. ).

I'm gone for the weekend, or whatever left of it.

thingo

This is just a comparison done on different days with different dyno operators, the cam is different in all three cars, mine is stock head stock cam,the vitesse turbo has the best curve, patrick's is the quickest car and mine was the most responsive in this earliest incarnation. We all chose our own paths.

333pg333

Thanks John. Some of it's fun, some of it's another word that begins with the same 2 letters!


I actually agree with everyone on this topic. Not to seem non committal, but everyone is making decent and justified points.

As we can only examine what's before us, then that's all we can comment on re these cars. Conversely they're not the same cars with the same objectives so in reality we can but only treat these results at face value.

Lastly, I didn't want to sound full of myself by declaring my car broke lap records, more to make a point. To be totally fair to Rod and Sean, my car is 75-100kgs lighter than theirs and Sean until recently had ancient Konis. Still has all rubber bushings. Rod's car has full (very nice) custom leather and is over 1400kgs from memory, so I have had a distinct advantage in that regard.

jlturpin

This has been a very interesting read. I am shocked by the results as I have a very quick spooling 3076R. I have run many of VR products and know that he sells some very nice products. With that said, I can't imagine that there would be a turbo that would make twice the power on the same car at 3K rpm. I have been wrong many times before, but just don't see this as a real world comparison. Too many things are different?

Thom

Rod, what kind of ignition did you use with the Motec when the run was done?

Thinking back about all this it just doesn't make sense to me that a correctly-tuned engine with a GT turbo won't perform "better overall" than the exact same engine being correctly-tuned for a journal bearing turbo with a KKK-style hotside.
I don't see a company like Garrett designing modern turbos to perform less than KKK hybrids, regardless how much development Vitesse have put into them.

thingo

I think you are thinking along the right line here, the dyno my car is of an early iteration of my set up, it is not representative of the gt3071, and a dyno doesn't always reflect how a car drives.

95ONE

Sorry Jet.. This is not what I observed.. these numbers are.... well I don't know what the hell was going on there with 60whp at 3000rpm. Thats just ludicrous. (Maybe stock computer with bad timing down low?)

I had around 110hp at 3K rpms. So.. ... wherever you got your gt30R power numbers vs RPM Does not represent what I have found on my car.

95ONE

Here is what my 22PSIE-85 run did on the dyno.. a little better comparison. I'd love to see Seans dyno numbers compared.

Vitesse stage 3 3000rpm 140whp
95ONE Garrett 3000rpm 110whp
95ONE Garrett GT3076 3000rpm 60whp
Garrett GT3071 3000rpm 98whp

Vitesse stage 3 3500rpm 210whp
95ONE Garrett 3500rpm 160 whp
Garrett GT3076 3500rpm 100whp
Garrett GT3071 3500rpm 152whp

Vitesse stage 3 4000rpm 245whp
95ONE Garrett 4000 rpm 255whp
Garrett GT3076 4000rpm 195whp
Garrett GT3071 4000rpm 200whp

Vitesse stage 3 4500rpm 255whp
95ONE Garrett 4500rpm 325whp
Garrett GT3076 4500rpm 254whp
Garrett GT3071 4500rpm 225whp

Vitesse stage 3 5000rpm 270whp
95ONE Garrett 5000rpm 380whp
Garrett GT3076 5000rpm 270whp
Garrett GT3071 5000rpm 240whp

Vitesse stage 3 5500rpm 275whp
95ONE Garrett 5500rpm 402whp
Garrett GT3076 5500rpm 285whp
Garrett GT3071 5500rpm 255whp

Vitesse stage 3 6000rpm end-whp
95ONE Garrett 6000rpm 408whp
Garrett GT3076 6000rpm 290whp
Garrett GT3071 6000rpm 270whp

fast951

95ONE, good numbers. However, when running E85, timing can be much more advanced than pump fuel. Still the VR S3 outperforms up to 3500RPM (30 HP @ 3000RPM, 50HP @ 3500RPM), so the results are consistent with what has been said already.
Anything after 3500 rpm cannot be compared as your boost keeps rising up to 22psi, while the S3 boost was capped to 15psi. If the S3 was setup to run 22psi on E85 the numbers would have been much different (higher).

Running the same boost on both turbos makes a more accurate comparison. Comparing a turbo at 15psi vs. 22psi and E85 on a second turbo is not a accurate comparison. Of course, comparing HP/TQ numbers from two different dynos has its own inaccuracies as well.

95ONE

I showed the 22psi numbers down because that's what Sean said he wanted curious about on an E-85 tune. And that was exactly what I had done back then. I did many dynos at 15psi.. . unfortunately i can only remember the max hp.

BUT at 15psi I still made 350hp..Quite a bit more than any of those numbers and is an apples to apples comparison like you asked for above. (we did a good amount of base tuning to 15psi first.) Dyno charts are still on the dyno computer somewhere in the world. I do not have a copy. I might have posted it a long time ago, but I cant find it now. .. . and clearly the turbo size is the trade off. nothing we didn't already know.. It's all personal preference and I applaud what you're doing.. Just didnt' want the "facts" to get outta hand.

I know I had 21 degrees of timing. But I cant remember if it was 15psi or 22. It's been 2-3years now.