Speedaddy

We ran a coulple of cars on an independent dyno,
Same conditions, same test procedure on a Mustang AWD dyno.
PSI 550 car and a stock car for comparison, both on 91 octane.

Woodster

Pretty amazing torque between 3000 and 6000 RPM,
Could you please explain which turbos are part of the
PSI 550 kit? 91 octane is like bunny ****, I would like
to see the results with 93 or 100!!
thanks for sharing!
Marty Kaye

PorschePhD

That map is all over the place. Something is wrong with the car or the dyno. The curve on the dynos should be smooth. Looks like the frequency valve is all over the place or the car is closing the TB for some reason. Mustangs put a huge load on the car so it is not like a dyno set over spinning the drum. It is similar to a Maha in load characteristics.

sharkster

It should be smooth like this one... This is a 2.5 year old dyno from KPV's stage IV (he since put down 504AWHP and 487TQ 1.5 years ago) on the same Mustang AWD dyno. Obviously this is from 2.5 years ago and an ooooold file but still to give you an idea. Bear in mind this is just with an exhaust, stock K24 turbos (not fancy hyrbids or anything)...

It'd be interesting to see the Upsolute guys and their GT1 K16/K24 turbo guys chime in but if I remember right they put down in the high 400s also?

wross996tt

That is pretty poor for the PSI 550 I'd say (something wrong here). Should be calling it 450?

Speedaddy

"That is pretty poor for the PSI 550 I'd say (something wrong here). Should be calling it 450?"
My mistake, the numbers "at the wheels" or "to the ground".

Speedaddy

That's weird, here is a stage 4 dyno. Judging form other close to stock cars tested on the site, the results still seem optimistic.

http://www.ktrperformance.com/servic...t_Evo_stg4.htm

Also, not all dynos are calibrated properly:

http://forums.audiworld.com/s4/msgs/2186231.phtml

Streetwerke dyno is calibrated properly. Also, running the car in 2WD and 4WD form will change the numbers.
Always test a stock car using the same procedure for accurate results.

rmrmd1956

Isn't it all relative? Given the stock dyno number and assuming Porsche's reported stock engine HP is correct, I calculate the PSI car at 567 engine HP! I always thought it was pointless to compare results from different dynos in different locations even if they were all the same type?

rmrmd1956

PHD,
Is it the 'bunny ****' that is causing the timing to be pulled at 4500RPM?

Speedaddy

You are correct, it is all relative to the baseline. The cars were done on 91 octane to simulate the performance on any given day, not everyone has access to race fuel at their local pumps.

Kevin

I agree with Stephen, at 4700 the wastegates are getting cranked open, and stahling the turbine wheel thus the dip in the torque..

sharkster

Also the turbos do look more laggy to me... Sorry guys

PorschePhD

Since this is a spam cross link from 6speed I am going to post my response over here too.

We are looking at a Mustang, not a DynoDynamics. Two totally different dynos. Bottom line is the comparison being made here is on a Mustang. We know what they read. I know just a little about them. You need to compare apples to apples.

As far as being calibrated. All Mustangs are done so before they leave the factory. If they print screen the parasitic page I can tell you if it is in the ballpark.


Regardless of the numbers that run has something wrong. The chart is all over the map. If I had to make a guess I would say the frequency valve is closed for too long then is overshooting to compensate for the overshoot.. Hence the hump then the dip and the hump and dip again. This is the valve modulating when it is requested to do something beyond its limit. You could test the valve with the proper equipment and see what it is doing. Bottom line here is when you simply bolt things on rather than tune or build these are the issues you run into. You have to know what you are looking at to recognize an issue. This is clearly not being done. Personally I would have spent the day on the dyno fixing this issue before I posted anything. Numbers are not everything and the car is not happy. The chart shows that.


We run 91 octane on most of our stuff and this does not happen. The issue here is the request and the physical ability to control that request. It is not able to do that.

Jean

Speedaddy, it seems so obvious that you are Neil@ Orton and still trying to push your products on this forum for free. You are breaching the charter again and you have no respect to the rules on this board.

You have been banned before and you still refuse to pay your sponsorship fees. It would be great to have you here and be able to debate your numbers, but all in total transparency and as a tuner, not with a sales pitch on the tech forum with no technical value whatsoever.

I will leave it to the admins to investigate but you are definitely not doing any favours to PSI Motorsports with this approach.

Itzkirb

oh brother, Speedaddy is not Neil. He's not the only one who carries PSI Motorsport Products.