MR2 dyno results comparison website! *Surrey rolling road only*

[jimGTS]

everyones updated on the site, apart from peters graph, as the rpm and power increments are a nightmare to input the data, ill do this one a little later on in the week.....

[RyanRs]

cheers jimbo

[Moo]

Yes, thanks Jim

[Kongaroo]

Hey Jim, any chance you can put my TD06 and GT28RS graphs up for a little while so I can have a quick comparison for my own interest like you did for MR2nut?

Green is TD06 at 21.2 psi, red is GT28RS at 22psi:

[jimGTS]

Sure

these both on meth?? You td06 one was wernt it?

Ideally I need 2000 and 2500 numbers, some graphs don't give me this but I could easily enough guess, but maybe a little more difficult to guess these numbers on your graph, lol.

I'll try, 4 gear pull again??

Ryan mentioned these 4th gear pulls generally give a little more low and mid at RS than at SRR, but I'll get them on anyhow. Shame RS don't have some sort of smoothing.

[Kongaroo]

Sure

these both on meth?? You td06 one was wernt it?

Ideally I need 2000 and 2500 numbers, some graphs don't give me this but I could easily enough guess, but maybe a little more difficult to guess these numbers on your graph, lol.

I'll try, 4 gear pull again??

Ryan mentioned these 4th gear pulls generally give a little more low and mid at RS than at SRR, but I'll get them on anyhow. Shame RS don't have some sort of smoothing.

Cheers Jim - appreciate it

Yes both running methanol injection and both were done in 4th gear and shootout mode.

All the pulls were started between 2500 and 3000 RPM in each run so unfortunately the 2000 rpm numbers don't exist, but I'm happy if you want to just approximate the curve down to where you think it should be as I don't think people will be too interested in the 2000rpm section anyway seeing as WOT in 4th gear at that sort of RPM never really occurs in real terms, lol.

Regarding the difference between doing runs in 3rd or 4th gear. I think what Ryan is referring to is 2 things:

The first is that 4th gear will place a higher load on the engine which will usually result in slightly better spool up of the turbo - I have read ATS Aaron post several times on the US forum that this would equate to around 200 to 300rpm earlier spool up.

The second is the peak power readings may well be slightly higher in 4th than 3rd due to there being less inertial losses in 4th gear. This is something I suspected to be true as I have done several logged power runs on my Blitz power ID comparing 2nd to 3rd gear at the same boost level and once the difference in aero drag has been accounted for there can be a 10 to 20BHP difference between them. However the car is still making that amount of power in that gear.

There should not be a large difference between power readings from one Dyno Dynamics dyno to another so long as the machines are calibrated correctly and the runs are done in shootout mode which is the entire point of shootout mode.

Obviously to be fair you should only try to compare 4th gear to 4th gear pulls or at least allow for the difference in spool up and power attributed to being in a higher gear. Well that's my take on it

[jimGTS]

Yep agree on all that.
More load in higher gear generally means quicker spool, hense why I mention it's likely to show a very slightly better low and mid figs.



I'll note it's a 4 th gear rs dyno, think I did the same with mr2nuts graph.

I'll try and get em on some point tonight. Or more likely tomorrow for ya

[Kongaroo]

Cool thanks

Was going to mention yesterday (before baby decided she was going to hog the keyboard, lol) that there was a nice 2003 350Z at RS tuning on the dyno just before me - close to standard I believe.

That car before remap made 268 flywheel BHP IIRC. That's pretty close to what they are rated at which is 276 flywheel BHP when new, so it's a good idicator that the RS tuning dyno is reading accurately

[jimGTS]

kongaroo

done...

hard to know what to make of those, as mr2nuts dyno, same or extremely similar spec turbo, low and mid is WAY different to yours.

[mr2nut123]

kongaroo

done...

hard to know what to make of those, as mr2nuts dyno, same or extremely similar spec turbo, low and mid is WAY different to yours.

Could be a number of things. I guess low and high rpm is the cams and possibly my standard manifold? Meths too?

[jimGTS]

Who knows, but that graph shows it anialating every other graph in the table till 4-4.5k, lol.

Didn't think it was possible to be making 300lb at 3.5k rpm, lol.

[mr2nut123]

Hey Jim, any chance you can put my TD06 and GT28RS graphs up for a little while so I can have a quick comparison for my own interest like you did for MR2nut?

Green is TD06 at 21.2 psi, red is GT28RS at 22psi:

Image Replaced With URL For Quote http://i716.photobucket.com/albums/ww16 ... verlay.jpg

Come on Kongaroo, what's the mod list for the GT28RS? That torque at that rpm is ridiculous!!

I also thought that the GT28RS was very similar or even the same as the GT2878r but clearly not. It must having something special hiding away inside it

[GTS GAV]

its the cams i reckon

[Kongaroo]

Simple answer is: My mapping Kung fu is strong

I'm joking of course but that's not say I didn't spend quite a while experimenting with the map in a number of ways to improve spool up. My TD06 map was also the result of many months of tweaking and experimenting too before going to the dyno for the final adjustment and power figures. The number of different map save files and experimental mapping notes saved on my laptop from my road mapping is now quite sizeable after the last couple of years. I think if both maps hadn't performed as well as they did I would have been disappointed in myself after all that effort, lol.

My mod list is listed in my garage but the answer comes down to a number of things.

At around 3K RPM I already have around 16psi boost if you look at my boost vs power graph. Assuming the relevant load cells have been mapped appropriately having 250ftlbs flywheel torque at 16psi on a GT28RS is not difficult. Especially when you consider what the flywheel torque of a bog standard rev 3 car to be at just 13psi (can't remember the exact figure but I believe it is over 200ftlbs at flywheel).

Part of the reason why the GT2876r sort of gets owned all across the rev range by the GT28rs is down to it having a poorly matched turbine to compressor wheel. This results in poor turbine efficiency that kills spool. Effectively you end up with the similar restrictions in peak power of a GT28rs but without the fast spool.

Another reason you guys have already answered which is I am running upgraded cams and intake manifold which give me more top end.

In fact my 250ftlbs at flywheel at 3K rpm is very similar to what Bruce achieved years ago on his Gen 2 in the US. I believe he achieved 200ftlbs at the wheels at around 2900rpm with far less VE mods than I have now.

Regarding the differences in my TD06 results vs MR2nut's GT2876r - read post 54 on this thread:

http://www.mr2oc.com/showthread.php?t=381850&page=2

I summarised ATS Scott's findings on his car between the GT2876r and his TD06 and then noted my own which were very similar. It's due to results like this that the Americans have been saying the GT2876r is a mismatched turbo for many years now.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to criticise your choice of turbo but just trying to answer your question. Hopefully this won't turn into a slanging match, lol.

[mr2nut123]

Simple answer is: My mapping Kung fu is strong

I'm joking of course but that's not say I didn't spend quite a while experimenting with the map in a number of ways to improve spool up. My TD06 map was also the result of many months of tweaking and experimenting too before going to the dyno for the final adjustment and power figures. The number of different map save files and experimental mapping notes saved on my laptop from my road mapping is now quite sizeable after the last couple of years. I think if both maps hadn't performed as well as they did I would have been disappointed in myself after all that effort, lol.

My mod list is listed in my garage but the answer comes down to a number of things.

At around 3K RPM I already have around 16psi boost if you look at my boost vs power graph. Assuming the relevant load cells have been mapped appropriately having 250ftlbs flywheel torque at 16psi on a GT28RS is not difficult. Especially when you consider what the flywheel torque of a bog standard rev 3 car to be at just 13psi (can't remember the exact figure but I believe it is over 200ftlbs at flywheel).

Part of the reason why the GT2876r sort of gets owned all across the rev range by the GT28rs is down to it having a poorly matched turbine to compressor wheel. This results in poor turbine efficiency that kills spool. Effectively you end up with the similar restrictions in peak power of a GT28rs but without the fast spool.

Another reason you guys have already answered which is I am running upgraded cams and intake manifold which give me more top end.

In fact my 250ftlbs at flywheel at 3K rpm is very similar to what Bruce achieved years ago on his Gen 2 in the US. I believe he achieved 200ftlbs at the wheels at around 2900rpm with far less VE mods than I have now.

Regarding the differences in my TD06 results vs MR2nut's GT2876r - read post 54 on this thread:

http://www.mr2oc.com/showthread.php?t=381850&page=2

I summarised ATS Scott's findings on his car between the GT2876r and his TD06 and then noted my own which were very similar. It's due to results like this that the Americans have been saying the GT2876r is a mismatched turbo for many years now.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to criticise your choice of turbo but just trying to answer your question. Hopefully this won't turn into a slanging match, lol.

Nah it's cool, there's ALWAYS a faster car and ALWAYS a bigger/better turbo, it's life. There sure ain't much faster than this around my neck of the woods though, that's for sure

I'll be upgrading down the line to a 3071 or 3076 possibly but for now it's ridiculously fast anyway. I think the only reason you have earlier spool and better top end is quite simple and it isn't down to the turbos imbalanced wheels (although this plays a slight part, I do agree..).

The manifold you have will flow far better due to longer and equal runners. Also, cams can be heavily adjusted to give excellent all-round power where as the standard cams I have just 'work' the best that they can. I honestly believe that if my tuner had spent the hours and time that you have spent perfecting the map rather than it just being 'another customers car', along with the manifold, better cams and meth, I don't think there would be any mentionable difference in all honesty. It's a perfectly capable turbo for this power and I doubt i'll ever go for more power than this anyway.

Running 200bhp per litre is enough power for any engine to handle, whoever the manufacturer and costs spent. It's easy to fall into the trap of boost and end up being stressed over an unreliable car rather than enjoying it..

[Kongaroo]

That's cool - I agree the power you are running is plenty enough to see off most cars

For myself I wouldn't mind maybe another 30 to 40BHP or so just to give the car the edge against some of those big V8 cars

[mr2nut123]

Who knows, but that graph shows it anialating every other graph in the table till 4-4.5k, lol.

Didn't think it was possible to be making 300lb at 3.5k rpm, lol.

I've just had a real comparison with mine and it not only destroys mine bottom end, but just about every other turbo going on 2bars graphs There must have been a LOT of time with the tuner and the perfect combination of parts such as cams here. Excellent run! I thought the spool on mine was good but this is just insane

With mine plotted against a lot of the 30 series turbos, it outspools them right up to around 5 to 5.5k by quite a difference, but then it tails off quite a bit top end. I really do think that 264s would make a ha-uge improvement, definately my next upgrade for sure. Can spend some more time on the dyno tweaking for even better spool too which would be good to see.

I'll keep people posted anyway

[Peter Gidden]

For myself I wouldn't mind maybe another 30 to 40BHP or so just to give the car the edge against some of those big V8 cars

What about those 1000Kg V6 twin turbos?

[Ryan.g]

If Kong did a run in 3rd like all the other graphs are then i think he will be surprised at the difference in midrange on the graph but where he would loose mid range im sure it would make more power top end.

Its not a fair compairson at all when running cars in different gears espically on a DD Dyno.

Ryan

[GTS GAV]

hey ryan just emailed you lol, could you pm your number please