Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Serdar-S60T5

Dyno Results

Recommended Posts

I saw to my first time at the dyno,I saw 235hp and 348nm.After a chip from SCT AB tuning(SAM knows the story),I saw 268hp and 448nm.I had an argument with them(SCT) and they send me another chip.I haven't been to the dyno yet,but the car is much stronger despite of the problems.Is that the small turbo and the 2300cc engine responsible for too much torque?I believe it is too much,for a car with chip free silencer and filter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well 450 NM are nice for the mods you have ! Hp is not that important because it's only a "product" of torque and rpm. The longer you have much torque, the higher your hp numbers. If you have torque from low rpm to high rpm you have a fast car :lol: For a manual no problem in my opinion. Get a race clutch and enjoy the power.

Sam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen other cars,most of them have about 300hp and less torque than 450nm.As I remember from the first dyno the power line goes to the top at about 4500rpm and stays until 6000rpm,very confusing concerning the improvements.I believe that the 15G limits the power,although the numbers are quite good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure a 19T would perform better up top than a 15G but it has also a bigger lag. That's the major reason why i still have my 16T. I have about 270 ft.lbs. from 2000 rpm to 6000 with 295 peak at about 4100. Here in the mountains early torque is important.

Sam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a friend he is one of the best mechanics here in Athens.We are talking to find and match a turbo-TURBONETICS.I had in mind something from Garrett,but I want something more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a friend he is one of the best mechanics here in Athens.We are talking to find and match a turbo-TURBONETICS.I had in mind something from Garrett,but I want something more.

Hey KIM.... nice #'s... how fast can you do 80-180 km/h run?

why don't you just get an 18T turbo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hello guys... thanks for your supportive comments :)

well i have the graph scanned but unfortunately my company's firewall won't let me access any of the sites on which i can host the darn thing... so it's here on my computer but i can't post the pic without hosting it somewhere. i guess i'll have to do this from home this weekend... unfortunately we have this stupid firewall to stop employees from uploading confidential company info to wrong places. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hello guys... thanks for your supportive comments :)

well i have the graph scanned but unfortunately my company's firewall won't let me access any of the sites on which i can host the darn thing... so it's here on my computer but i can't post the pic without hosting it somewhere. i guess i'll have to do this from home this weekend... unfortunately we have this stupid firewall to stop employees from uploading confidential company info to wrong places. :angry:

Well,we'll have to wait then to see the nice results :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

with wich gear?

well.. I was thinking the gears that would get your car from 80-180 the quickest... so would that mean starting the roll on in 2nd gear or 3rd?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

with wich gear?

well.. I was thinking the gears that would get your car from 80-180 the quickest... so would that mean starting the roll on in 2nd gear or 3rd?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well.. I was thinking the gears that would get your car from 80-180 the quickest... so would that mean starting the roll on in 2nd gear or 3rd?

I made a test for you,about 4 sec for both gears.the difference was very small concerning the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I made a test for you,about 4 sec for both gears.the difference was very small concerning the time.

Kim,

you mean 14 seconds right? you say 4 (four) seconds above??!!!

P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kim,

you mean 14 seconds right? you say 4 (four) seconds above??!!!

P.

I'm sorry I had the thought that you were saying 80-120.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.