Stock 2002 Gt2 Dyno Results
10-03-2006, 07:39 PM
#31
Pro
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Woodster
9Eleven,
be patient
TB's stuff does make perfect sense (and has proven many wrong time and time again).
You have an awesome car and will not require much to tweak it. Keep asking good questions
and we all learn from the answers. When I chipped ("480" ECU) my car gained (or lost)
1.5 seconds from 60mph-130mph. What did my seat of the pants tell me...
I thought it would be more but I did about 10 runs on two separate days.
This is now my BASELINE for further mods and I will know if I am getting somewhere.
Good Luck,
Marty
be patient
TB's stuff does make perfect sense (and has proven many wrong time and time again).
You have an awesome car and will not require much to tweak it. Keep asking good questions
and we all learn from the answers. When I chipped ("480" ECU) my car gained (or lost)
1.5 seconds from 60mph-130mph. What did my seat of the pants tell me...
I thought it would be more but I did about 10 runs on two separate days.
This is now my BASELINE for further mods and I will know if I am getting somewhere.
Good Luck,
Marty
I am waiting for Marty's new numbers with his next round of upgrades with much anticipation, if for no other reason I know he will post them. You have a very nice, strong GT2, Congrats. Try to post some 60-130 numbers in the future and do it at the drag strip so you dont lose your license. Kevin
10-03-2006, 08:04 PM
#32
Rennlist Member
9Eleven,
Driving a toyota with an uprated engine (the one they now put in the Elise) or a Honda S2000 will make the point very clear about area under the curve and acceleration.
Those engines make lots of horsepower (for their size) way up in the rev range, but down a bit lower, they are just flat. What happens is that acceleration is slow, then speeds up, then you shift and it happens again. While you are below the steep part of the curve, acceleration is negatively impacted, despite the high dyno numbers. The effect would be minimized by an ultra-close ratio box that always keeps the car in the upper part of the power band, but this is not realistic on street cars.
Still, your numbers are excellent. I always thought my X50 was slightly underrated as well. AS
Driving a toyota with an uprated engine (the one they now put in the Elise) or a Honda S2000 will make the point very clear about area under the curve and acceleration.
Those engines make lots of horsepower (for their size) way up in the rev range, but down a bit lower, they are just flat. What happens is that acceleration is slow, then speeds up, then you shift and it happens again. While you are below the steep part of the curve, acceleration is negatively impacted, despite the high dyno numbers. The effect would be minimized by an ultra-close ratio box that always keeps the car in the upper part of the power band, but this is not realistic on street cars.
Still, your numbers are excellent. I always thought my X50 was slightly underrated as well. AS
10-03-2006, 08:48 PM
#33
Originally Posted by Alexander Stemer
9Eleven,
Driving a toyota with an uprated engine (the one they now put in the Elise) or a Honda S2000 will make the point very clear about area under the curve and acceleration.
Those engines make lots of horsepower (for their size) way up in the rev range, but down a bit lower, they are just flat. What happens is that acceleration is slow, then speeds up, then you shift and it happens again. While you are below the steep part of the curve, acceleration is negatively impacted, despite the high dyno numbers. The effect would be minimized by an ultra-close ratio box that always keeps the car in the upper part of the power band, but this is not realistic on street cars.
Still, your numbers are excellent. I always thought my X50 was slightly underrated as well. AS
Driving a toyota with an uprated engine (the one they now put in the Elise) or a Honda S2000 will make the point very clear about area under the curve and acceleration.
Those engines make lots of horsepower (for their size) way up in the rev range, but down a bit lower, they are just flat. What happens is that acceleration is slow, then speeds up, then you shift and it happens again. While you are below the steep part of the curve, acceleration is negatively impacted, despite the high dyno numbers. The effect would be minimized by an ultra-close ratio box that always keeps the car in the upper part of the power band, but this is not realistic on street cars.
Still, your numbers are excellent. I always thought my X50 was slightly underrated as well. AS
For the important accellerative markers, area under the curve is very important, as it is in a track-related car, but I think I would to to interject here that after the top of 1st gear, as you mention, if the car is kept in a certain band of rpm, the only part of the curve that is important is that part. For instance, you mentioned the S2000. At redline (the 9k car, not 2004s and up), the shift will being up no lower the 6700rpm. So the power from 6500rpm to 9k is the "area under the curve" that is way more important then the "area under the curve" at 3500rpm, where indeed, my wife's sewing machine makes more power.
10-03-2006, 09:34 PM
#34
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
Gentlemen, I appreciate all of the information, knowledge and encouragement. I am getting my ECU back FedEx tomorrow, new tires Sunday, and EVO DV's with a slight wastegate adjustment on Tuesday. I will take her back next Saturday (hopefully) and run her on the same dyno. Then time and weather permitting, mid-October, I will take her to Bud's Creek and get a couple of 1/4 mile runs. The trap speed will tell the whole story. I know I am learning, I hope some forum members are learning also, I think the journey is as much fun as the destination. Man, I love fast cars.
