EdubT5m Posted October 2, 2009 Report Share Posted October 2, 2009 Really nice numbers you have there. Also nice to see the graph right side up. Anyway, definitely run more boost on her. From the look of the AFs, you could easily get over 300 WHP. shouldn't this be a solution to all problems... but on a serious not. i wanna see the numbers this thing makes with the new actuator. prolly gonna be impressive. keep up the good work rob! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeavyIron Posted October 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2009 Nice figures m8, but i would also go for a/r of 11,5 to 11,8 for more power. What cams are you running? DoC Stock T5 cams Holy HP batman! What turbo are you using that pulls like that to 7 grand? Congrats on good numbers! Surprisingly a 19t is pulling to 7grand. I am as surprised as you are, but man does it sound good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dublin14 Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 Nice HP number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Account_Deleted_T5M Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 Nice numbers man torque seems about 50ft lbs low, but still great numbers, get video next time, you should video a pull for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dublin14 Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 Not according to Dublin. Nice numbers. lol! All i said was I have seen a bunch of "stock" cars that all got numbers within a few HP of the car manufactures claims on a 248H... and that the 248H from what i have seen, proved to me to be accurate. I dont disagree that the Mustang Dyno reads 7% less than a Dynojet and never did, just that the 248H from what i have seen was accurate. I also said "340whp on a 20G at 23psi? Something not right there" and you said "How do you figure? There are a bunch of SRT4 owners who make more" as if i was saying the 20G was not capable of that? When anyone knows that Turbo can push 500+hp. Its not my fault you lack comprehension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCviggen Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 Not according to Dublin. Nice numbers. I don't agree you can use that as a general rule on all occasions either I'm sure you can find high or low reading dynos of pretty much any type, I have seen seemingly exaggerated results from plenty different makes. In this case, taking the 19T limitation and auto trans (?) into account adding 8% would seem a little off. Lets see some videos of how it moves on the road Good work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dublin14 Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I don't agree you can use that as a general rule on all occasions either I'm sure you can find high or low reading dynos of pretty much any type, I have seen seemingly exaggerated results from plenty different makes. In this case, taking the 19T limitation and auto trans (?) into account adding 8% would seem a little off. Lets see some videos of how it moves on the road Good work Thats true. 294whp + 8% would mean around 320whp which is very exciting numbers for 19T :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbor850 Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I am a tad confused, is there something wrong with 340 whp on 20G @ 22.5 psi ? Seems pretty spot on if you compare that to SRT-4 owners with the same turbo. (if i had manual and dynojet and more psi) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dublin14 Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 ame='dublin14' date='03 October 2009 - 07:00 AM' timestamp='1254567607' post='1656674'] I am a tad confused, is there something wrong with 340 whp on 20G @ 22.5 psi ? Seems pretty spot on if you compare that to SRT-4 owners with the same turbo. (if i had manual and dynojet and more psi) No, not if your happy with the number, which is balls out fast on one of these cars. A guy at work has a 20G on his SRT neon and has 400whp with a 20G. He was running 375whp at 23.5 psi so i thought theres some room for improvment at that much boost 23psi with a 20G on a T5 engine. Dont get me wrong, 340whp is really nice place to be in a 850/S70. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeavyIron Posted October 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 When this is said and done, I am hoping for 330whp and 335+tq. We will see in the next few weeks where the chips fall.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbor850 Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 No, not if your happy with the number, which is balls out fast on one of these cars. A guy at work has a 20G on his SRT neon and has 400whp with a 20G. He was running 375whp at 23.5 psi so i thought theres some room for improvment at that much boost 23psi with a 20G on a T5 engine. Dont get me wrong, 340whp is really nice place to be in a 850/S70. 2.4L vs 2.3L, manual vs auto, dynojet vs. mustang, seems like I would have been right at 375 whp @ 23.5 with the right stuff . . . well and a non stock manifold and 2.5'' ipd exhaust read a lot in the SRT 16G and 20G dyno numbers thread, a lot of them have race gas too when dynoing. . . comparing apples to oranges ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
850 LongBeach Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Awesome hp OP, but torque is a little low no? Im hoping for around that on my setup as soon as an M56 is in instead of my autosloshbox Excellent numbers overall! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaitz Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 2.4L vs 2.3L, manual vs auto, dynojet vs. mustang, seems like I would have been right at 375 whp @ 23.5 with the right stuff . . . well and a non stock manifold and 2.5'' ipd exhaust read a lot in the SRT 16G and 20G dyno numbers thread, a lot of them have race gas too when dynoing. . . comparing apples to oranges You have to remember though, mustang dynos generally dont read lower than dynojets... :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Bondo Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Results for any given dyno are based on how that Dyno has been calibrated. A freshly calibrated mustang dyno, calibrated to factory specs, is around 11% lower than a factory calibrated dynojet. Less than that on cars with less than 400WHP. It's very easy to get an idea for what your particular dyno is like- ask the shop. They will be able to tell you what stock STI's, or EVO's or etc normally do, andf then you'll know exactly how things actually measure up. A lot of mustang dyno places are actually re-calibrating their dynos to mimic dynojet numbers for fear of losing customers that are dyning for bragging rights. So you need to know what other vehicles have made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCviggen Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 You have to remember though, mustang dynos generally dont read lower than dynojets... Instead of arguing how dyno's read why don't we look at which numbers would be realistically possible with a particular hardware setup. Over time I've seen so many cars with impressive dyno numbers only trouble was they weren't actually that quick on the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.