Notices
993 Turbo Forum 1995-1998
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

UMW stage 2 kit - up and running at last :O)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-28-2008, 02:03 AM
  #16  
Kevin
Addict
Rennlist Member


Rennlist
Site Sponsor

 
Kevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northwest
Posts: 9,319
Received 311 Likes on 217 Posts
Default

Stage 2 has the larger compressor wheel, and zero-clearanced. It is the same compressor stage that is in TB's old setup which is MOD's current turbocharger. (compressor>cold side)

ACE's Stage 2 ECU has had the boost tapered back.

I told you that your clutch wouldn't hold... (smile)
Old 03-28-2008, 03:22 AM
  #17  
Felix
Addict
Rennlist Lifetime Member
 
Felix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,748
Received 15 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

And here's a graph of that run:
Attached Images  
Old 03-28-2008, 06:55 AM
  #18  
TB993tt
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
TB993tt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,441
Received 108 Likes on 68 Posts
Default

Phelix
A most impressive display of data aquisition and overlaying A+

What was the ambient temp, around 10DegC ?

It would be interesting to see if the IAT is levelling off at 130mph or if it will continue to climb, at 4X DegC it is beginning to rob some timing - how does it compare to yours (Phelix) - any chance of an overlay of some of your data on top of ACE's so we can see how the boost affects IATs ?

Overall to 130mph this looks a nice package with consistant strong long Gs which I'm sure feel superb on the road
Old 03-28-2008, 08:59 AM
  #19  
WHB Porsche
I'm Still Jenny
Rennlist Member
 
WHB Porsche's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New England
Posts: 5,198
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Can Jean or TB turn the data into a "real world" hp figure? Either way, it looks impressive.
Old 03-28-2008, 08:59 AM
  #20  
eclou
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
eclou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 7,047
Received 1,222 Likes on 598 Posts
Default

9.9 s 60-130 is faster than an F430 (~10.5s)
Old 03-28-2008, 09:20 AM
  #21  
ACEparts_com
Pro
Thread Starter
 
ACEparts_com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Kent, England
Posts: 744
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Also worth bearing in mind the car has done a good 50K miles now. I'm very pleased with the performance. Looking at the numbers it would appear i don't need to buy a hat

I've managed to have a look at some more data
I managed 2mph to 60 and 90 (I let the car ALMOST come to a complete stop before launching it again):
2-60 4.0s and 4.5s
2-90 7.23s and 7.6s
Old 03-28-2008, 09:34 AM
  #22  
Felix
Addict
Rennlist Lifetime Member
 
Felix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,748
Received 15 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

cheers tb993tt but it's the Race Technology SW that does all the hard work. Not sure if I can overlay the data; I may have to export to excel or the like.

I thnk Alan said ambient was 6-8 deg C

here's a graph of my 60-130 time from last year.
Attached Images  
Old 03-28-2008, 10:04 AM
  #23  
TB993tt
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
TB993tt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,441
Received 108 Likes on 68 Posts
Default

Thanks for that Phelix - now I am a little confused, are you guys running the same components apart from ECU mapping ?

ACE's long Gs seem better all the way despite being heavier ? Is more boost = timing pull and less performance ?
Old 03-28-2008, 10:11 AM
  #24  
ACEparts_com
Pro
Thread Starter
 
ACEparts_com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Kent, England
Posts: 744
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TB993tt
Thanks for that Phelix - now I am a little confused, are you guys running the same components apart from ECU mapping ?

ACE's long Gs seem better all the way despite being heavier ? Is more boost = timing pull and less performance ?

Same components; YES.

I had my cats made some time ago so they may differ very slightly to Phelix's, and I also have Miltek exhausts, oh, and 50K miles vs. Phelix's fresh motor.

Edited to add. Although it sounds odd my car dyno'd the same as 3 others some years ago yet has always been 'quick'. I'm sure I've recorded a standard 60-130 at the track of around 11.5 seconds and it's only just pulled away from by a 996 GT2 at the same circuit. Strange.
Old 03-28-2008, 10:58 AM
  #25  
Felix
Addict
Rennlist Lifetime Member
 
Felix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,748
Received 15 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TB993tt
Is more boost = timing pull and less performance ?
That's been my pet theory for a while and Alan's data would seem to underscore this. In fifth Alan was showing 0.54 tailing to 0.45 g and I'm showing 0.44 tailing to 0.34 g. That seems like a huge difference to me.

Over the same periods Alan's IAT starts from 33 and goes to 42 whereas mine starts from 37 and goes to 47.

And interesting that during his boost spikes in the top end of 4th and 5th there appears to be a corresponding drop in g.

I'll be the first to admit that it's easy to try to make scenarios fit the available data.
Old 03-28-2008, 11:49 AM
  #26  
malcolmd
Racer
 
malcolmd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

At the risk of raising the obvious, I assume both ACE and Phelix used fuel with the same RON. It has been stated before that the higher boost of Phelix's ECU program (compared to ACE's) and the inherant heat soak from sustained WOT, could result in timing being pulled in the higher boost engine - diminished however by a higher RON fuel.

Phelix's and ACE's experiences are a great read. Isn't it always the case that the more information you have, the more questions you find need an answer? Still, I for one (as a potential UMW Stage 2 buyer) will be watching and waiting for you clever guys to extrapolate the merrits of the "standard" versus "lower boost" ECU porgram. Thanks so very much for sharing. Perhaps Kevin's soon to be released multi-Flash Programing for the 993tt will permit both programs for sequential testing in the one vehicle thus eliminating a whole bunch of other vehicle to vehicle variables.

Great work guys.

Malcolm.
Old 03-28-2008, 11:59 AM
  #27  
Felix
Addict
Rennlist Lifetime Member
 
Felix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,748
Received 15 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Hi Malcolm, thanks for your kind words - sharing info and experiences is what this place is all about.

I can confirm we were both running the same fuel - Shell V Power 99 Octane MON - equal to 93 or 94 octane in the US (RON+MON)/2. Not sure what method and octanes are used in Oz.
Old 03-28-2008, 12:00 PM
  #28  
TB993tt
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
TB993tt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,441
Received 108 Likes on 68 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by phelix

And interesting that during his boost spikes in the top end of 4th and 5th there appears to be a corresponding drop in g.

.

Yes I had noticed that

I guess you guys would both have been using the best stuff we get around here ie 97-99RON, Optimax/Super unleaded ?

I agree that the difference in Gs are quite big and Jean will be able to tell you how much hp the difference represents - next course of action would be trying ACE's program in your car Phelix ?
Old 03-28-2008, 12:14 PM
  #29  
Felix
Addict
Rennlist Lifetime Member
 
Felix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,748
Received 15 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TB993tt
next course of action would be trying ACE's program in your car Phelix ?
Alan's already been put on notice!

Between that and Colin's IC it'll be a busy day!
Old 03-28-2008, 12:22 PM
  #30  
TB993tt
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
TB993tt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,441
Received 108 Likes on 68 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by phelix
Alan's already been put on notice!

Between that and Colin's IC it'll be a busy day!
Minivmax part deux


Quick Reply: UMW stage 2 kit - up and running at last :O)



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 06:26 PM.