Stummel

Thx for the table.

Your 100-250kph is 1.5 seconds faster than a RT12.

If the times prove to be correct you are above 650hp.

What fuel are you running?

Jussi

My car has been tested in dyno with 490kw reading but tires were slipping. I have done road dyno test and got about 500kw and I believe that somewhere there is the truth.
I use normal pump gas, Shell V Power 99+

Edited: according to Long G values from AX, I probably (and unfortunately) have those horsepower levels..
Jean can say what means 0.4g@6050rpm with 5th gear..

Jussi

Jean verified my AX runs today and they are valid.

So that car goes 6.52 seconds from 60 to 130 mph reliable
or for example 10.5 seconds from 100 km/h to 250 km/h.

Testweight was about 1480kg, max boost 1.31 bar, normal pump gas (shell v power), 4wd, outside temp was 15 degrees.

and even better values will be expected when I'll finish all LF and aero mods..

KPG

Congrats Jussi. Looks like thinking outside the box has paid dividends. Good luck in the future.....

Jean

Jussi,

Can you point me to the 0.4G @ 6050RPM in 5th gear that you are referring to ? That's a lot of Gs.

You have a very fast car no doubt about it, but your build is quite typical for these high powered 3.8 ltr engines and therefore your numbers cannot be that far off (boost and weight vs performance)

Some US tuners have been doing these setups for 10 years+ , only now there are newer GT BB versions that are more efficient out there, flame rings, welded heads, Garretts, electronic boost controller and fixed boost setups, carillos, bigger injectors, cross drilled crankshaft, shuffle pinned case, ignition upgrade, etc...except for the stock IC and better MAP breathing I would say Where your heads modified at all other than welding, if so, what modifications do you have?

The only inconsistency that I am seeing is that you cannot be running 1.3 Bar of boost. I think more like 1.5+ based on your torque numbers, and I am not comparing to dynos, but to real life acceleration performance vs. many other cars that I have on my database aircooled and watercooled. When I say boost, I am comparing to stock compression, effective boost is more appropriate, so if you have a 9:0 compression your boost would be higher than 1.3 effective.

Turbokraft customers are known to run very high boost on their engines 1.7 Bar + to get strong acceleration levels, while there is nothing wrong with it for quick stints, other than longevity, it is not 1.3 Bar.

Can you post your dyno sheet that you mentioned please?

Jussi

Jean and Toby: I think, I don't post you anything because of your style to "co-operate" and to way you comment my car&tuning..
Yes, I have thought that I would publish that airport test results (from 0-330 km/h, few times) with
inlet & exhaust temps,
boost & back pressures in both side,
RPM,
time,
OBD & 5Hz GPS & AX speeds,
long G,
timing advance,
incar video,
..etc,
but now when I have seen and got through your attitude, I just have to say no thanks.. And I think many people understand that..

btw. My car has max. 1.310 bar and compression ratio is 1:8.1,
Bod at Mode has done my cyl. heads job.
Complete valve job was done by Turbokraft, there are better springs, titanium retainers etc.

TB993tt

You come onto RL tech forum, ask for help to build a 993tt engine with 520PS/700NM - get plenty of help and advice.
You then decide that you don't want Porsche hp and that you want a US sprint style fixed boost engine which you go ahead and build..... Then you start demanding data from me so you can benchmark exactly how much hp you think you are making to verify some software which you are developing for commercial gain...

So you want me to reveal all the data about my expensive Porsche hp engine so you can accurately calibrate your software - I don't think so

Your tuning is what it is...... I personally am impressed and very interested in results from what you have achieved, but like I am trying to explain to you in previous posts, you haven't created the Porsche hp which was your initial stated aim (on here)

You will post the stuff which you like but there is no way you would ever post unfavourable stuff, your ego is too fragile.....

Felix

Please do post this data; there's people like me who don't wish to get involved with this "scuffle" but are keen to see the numbers. As someone once said "In god we trust, veryone else bring data." It would be a shame for you not to share it; it's under prolonged high loads that the numbers get interesting. And how did you collect the data?

Jean

Jussi, you are the one who asked for my input
So I was simply asking if you could point me to the above because all I can see is about 0.3 Gs at those levels, on the data that I have from you.

From the beginning, you are the one venturing to talk about your data and then I am asking to see it (talking about your dyno run and other), no one is pressuring you to disclose any info without you claiming it/talking about it in advance AFAIK.

I believe I and many others have shared enough info with you since you joined this forum, your current requests have totally different motives in my opinion and since you have one of the best tuners in the world and you know exactly what works and what does not from what I read, there is not much I can contribute to you. My dyno sheet is on Protomotive's main page if you'd like to see it BTW.

Jean

Marty

Here is the jpg of your 1 shift 60-130mph run as requested. Sorry it took so long.

KPG

Jussi, just post your data. No matter what you do it will never be good enough for some. Now that your run is validated the fall back plan of it isnt Porsche HP or it is a US style sprinter will be repeated ad nauseum. That is just the way it is

Jussi

Thanks KPG from support!
My point about these "porsche hps" is that the car has only one real and true hp reading. There are not any Porsche or RS or etc company hp like :
Porsche hp = measured hp * 0.8 or so

Jean look at that picture. I hope it makes thing clear:

Jean

I think I have told you before , I don't own the Race technology company, and if you bought the AX22 and you think it is crap, guess who is the moron.

It certainly is more accurate though than your crappy OBD software that you are trying to sell to Rennlisters in private if you are seeing 6050 RPMs at 209 kph!! With 315 tires you get 5800 RPMs maximum, 6050 RPMs are at the 220 kph mark and at that level you have 0.3Gs. And don't come and tell me that you have 285s back there and any traction.

Go back to the drawing board.

TB993tt

Not true apparently...... Porsche hp is still there at maximum speed, in many many cases (probably the majority) tuner hp is not...

I can't see why you won't/can't grasp this fairly simple concept ?

Here is some reading for you - 5 porsche 996 turbos all tuned by top Euro tuners. 4 of them use K24 turbos and the RS car uses K16 turbos.
http://www.t-t-p.de/T/Wuchtnach.htm
Which car has the highest top speed ?

The one which has the Porsche hp with the hp still available at maximum speed of 205.6mph

The other 520/30/40hp cars have lost their hp through heat soak due to the tuning......
Here is the "dyno" diagramm for the Sportec 540hp car, you can see how it keeps its 540hp right through 7000rpm so it should beat the measily 508hp RS K16 car right ?
The hp are not the same

Jussi

Don't understand me wrong. I just informed that it depends on version how AX analysis software calculates long G values - like in ver.7 it shows 0.335 and in ver.6 it shows 0.40 from exactly same data point. So that was my point because I said about that 0.4g @ 6050 and you didn't find it. I thought you had ver.7...

I have 295/30R18 michelin PS2.
My calculation gives diameter 61.52cm when using 3% compression.
And from that :
PI()*61,5174/100*6050/(0,973*3,444*60)*3,6 makes 209 km/h
0,973 is 5th gear, 3,444 is final ratio
Don't forget that I have 4WD, so I don't have tire spinning problem with 4th, 5th or 6th gear and also don't have problem with 3rd IF the road is dry.