K24madness

Jean not trying to distort your thread with Mustang AWD dyno numbers but I thought this provides usefull information when compairing the larger K24's vs K16s. If we disregard the accual numbers and focus on the shape of the power curve you will see that when combine with a good exhaust the K24's spool up as well as the K16's did in stock form. The benifit on the top end is when the fun is.

Peak HP on the K24's is at 6,250 and the K16's at 5,250.

Kevin

K24, that chart is not apples to apples. AWE is comparing a Stock K16 & stock ECU which is limiting the boost output, vs a K24 program with optimised boost at 1bar and up with K24's...

If you use the K24 programming with the stock K16, the curve will change for the better, (due to the higher boost setting)..

K24madness

Yes I am sure it would change. I doubt there would be a difference below 3,300 RPM's. Above that and the K16's would benifit some from the additional boost. They would just run out of air sooner trying to supply the additional pressure.

My point was that the K24's are not the evil monsters that some make them out to be. When combined with good exhaust and tunning they respond as well as the car did in stock form with K16's.

Kevin

Tom both you and I know that the mentioned graph is a stacked deck.. The K24 program is optimized and timing is advanced... Who knows they might be running 100 octane vs 91 in the base program.

It's not a factual comparison. The stock K16's should have had the same fuel and same programming, and then the chart overlayed. Better yet, take the same compressor wheel and mate it to the K16 use the same program and fuel, then see what the difference is..

Kevin

The chart that is shown is that of my Stage 2 Z/C turbochargers, controlled by your Stock ECU..

The next chart is everything being the same, same engine, same turbochargers, same fuel.. but the ECU is Porsche Motorsports 450HP..



I'll as Jean to overlay them in his actual MAHA software sheets...

K24madness

AWE is a very well regarded company. I would be very very supprised to find out that they did something underhanded like a 100 oct vs 91 oct comparision.

Yes the timing is going to be optimized. Anytime you reduce reversion into the intake chamber you can take advantage of it by increasing the timing.

Based on the outstanding reputation of GIAC and AWE I have to assume that the fuels used were the same. The results came from good tuning and well chosen hardware.

Once again. The K24's when combined with the proper exhaust and tuning have no more lag than the car did in stock form with K16's. The chart from AWE duplicates my own findings with regards to lag on the K24's.

Sorry if you don't agree. Maybe I will dress up some K24's in lipstick and high heels then maybe you will begin to like em.

FWIW I still believe that your stage 2 K16's are the best choice for a mostly stock car.

Kevin

Tom you have said yorself that you only run 100 octane, I have also seen the GIAC programming on 91,93 and 100.. I am not making a statement that says it was intentional, the statement that I am making is that, it takes time to remove headers/heat exchangers, install the new hardware, install new hoses, throw new plugs in, put the turbochargers on, flash and install the new chip, drive the car around the block and break the turbochargers in.. Refill the gas tank and go rip some dyno numbers.. For big HP with camshafts and ported heads you do need larger A/R's and larger turbine wheels, and yes the K24 fits the bill for many engine designs. Many tuners can do it with GT1's similar to Don's latest engine build from Andial..

One of the main reasons why I purchased my Dynapack was to get realistic/repeatable results. So that I can slap a set of stock K24's on my engine with stock programming at 91 octane, 93, and 100 and let the numbers fall where they are. Do the same with the stock K16's.. Same exhaust, same mufflers and so forth.. Go to the next set of turbochargers and post the results..

Jean

Marty
Very friendly of course ! We will take it offline, but just to clarify on the board, Neil@Orton tried to advertise his products for free on Rennlist and was banned by the moderators per the RL charter after having done it a few times. PSI products are great but their marketing should not be based on misinformation, from both 969 and Orton with all due respect to them.

K24, TB started this thread, I just brought some help with the info he posted, thanks for sharing your experience.

Kevin, anything on RUF turbos you can share?

K24madness

Kevin,

Very nice power curve on both. Little supprised by the low peak HP numbers. I can now understand why you did not want to publish them earlier. We need to get a stock 993tt on that dyno and see what the baseline is. I would have expected at least 450 HP out of you stage 2's with the 450 program.

Next time I am in SoCal I will stop by and see Marc. He has always raved about how close he is able to get to factory quoted HP numbers on the MAHA. Maybe its time for a calibration.

K24madness

Kevin,

We have goten way off track. I am responding to a thread about "K24 LAG". I believe and it has been proven that with proper programing and exhaust the "K24 LAG" is a non issue.

Yes I am a race gas junkie. Thats why you have not seem me throw around any numbers for my dyno runs. It would not be fair. But since you mentioned it on the same type of mustang awd dyno my car made 502WHP and 504wtq. Stock baseline from AWE says 324WHP and 402wtq. For those that drive a stock TT (on 93 oct) you can only imagine the fun I am having.

Kevin

The numbers are quite low.. Many US tuners have complained that you cannot control hybrid turbochargers with the factory Motronic.. If you look at the bump at 3500 RPM that is the wastegates opening up.. Boost was/is controlled very well. And you are correct that a baseline stock engine test needed to be introduced. However, if you compare the K16 hybrids to the AWE K24's peak power is higher than the K24's and this car had stock headers/heat exchangers... The K16's made peak power with the stock ECU and the Porsche 450 Motorsport ECU (which optimizes K24's)

Kevin

Jean, you know the truth, I've told you the story before.. For others, my Stage 2 turbochargers share alot of the major components with the Ruf turbo's. However, they like myself add certain options which can vary from car to car. Turbine wheel clipping with different degrees of angles, Porting and polishing and the manipulation of the A/R ratio with the turbine housings. Zero Clearance adds a new equation into the mix.

TB's RS24's share the exact same compressor stage as well. Infact, to TB's surprise when he reads this.. his RS24's are almost finished.. They were in tough shape, but with quite a few new parts.. They now sport new tapered velocity stack and Zero Clearance... These are a mean set of K24's... Anyone that is interested in them contact TB..

Jean

Sorry Kevin, but if you did, I honestly don't recall, was not trying to get you to disclose any info. Thanks.

Kevin

No big deal Jean. From Bill's turbo pictures that he posted, he does have the clipped and ported turbine housing.. I also have tested a stronger wastegate spring, this keeps the turbine wheel spinning longer and faster producing more torque up the RPM ladder..

pstoppani

It seems to me that all these dyno curves tell only part of the lag story. It doesn't seem to address the situation which I find more common where I'm driving at 2500 RPM and step on the gas. I think this scenario is where lag is noticable the most. Seems like you'd need a plot of boost (or torque) vs. time rather than RPM; you want to know how quickly it takes to spool up from a particular steady RPM.

Then you'd want to take the same measurements starting at higher RPMs (hold throttle at each RPM and then floor it). To me, that would be a true measure of lag.