So I went to a Mustang dyno today instead of a dynojet dyno. The mustang dyno calculates using formulas that factor in parasitic loss of the drive train and of what you would see actually driving on a road. The dynojet will yield numbers 10-12% higher as it does not factor in the driving parasitics, etc. I have yet to see a supercharged tC run on a mustang dyno so I went with it.

I did a couple of runs with the stock 102 bypass valve and a couple with the 110 sport bypass valve.

Valve comparison:

Bosch 102 Valve
Max boost: 5psi
Max HP: 172HP
Max Torque: 167lb-ft

Bosch 110 Sport Valve
Max Boost: 7psi
Max HP: 180HP (approximately 198 on a dynojet)
Max Torque: 172lb-ft

So the 102 does indeed leak boost and yields a lower HP number as a result. I only have a printout of the high run with the 110.

I found that the biggest problem with the SC design is heat soak. The 180HP run was with the supercharger cold (fans). Immediately following this run, I pulled again and the HP was 173, so I lost 7HP due to heat alone. If TRD would move their **** on an intercooler design it would help tremendously. As soon as the charger gets hot, the HP curve drops when it starts pushing boost.

As far as the power curve goes, it continues to build boost and HP all the way to redline. The tuner there jokingly said all we need to do is raise the redline

Here's the 180HP run.



I know there will be haters, but really I just wanted to post some results I got today. The car does respond a lot better driving with the 110 valve also. Please limit the comments to constructive criticisms and don't turn this into a turbo vs. supercharger battle. I am just offering up some more data for you all.

 

No haters at all man! Dynos are dynos, they are all different. What is important is a baseline, then before and after runs to compare. WIsh you would have got a non supercharged run. I did 137 non and then 200 almost even supercharged on a dynojet. Then with mods 231... But will net more soon for I let off 250 rpm early "my mistake"

Also, yes the sc does heat soak bad. It is noticable.

 

I had planned on doing a baseline before the install, but it was cancelled and the appointment was made. We figured it was stock 160, so HP was probably about 140 on the mustang dyno. So that is a 40HP gain which is 25% of 160. If you look at the TRD site it says that is the approximate gain (up to 25% they say). So I figure I am right about where they claim. A lot of firsts for me with this car. First every FI car, first ever dyno run. It is strange going 105mph and not going anywhere.

 

well, the test shows we need the 110 to get the advertised boost on our sc's.... no way TRD should be telling us not to change that item out...
thanx for posting the results for us all. I for one appreciate the info...

 

yeah, that was the main goal of today, to see if the 110bpv was worth it. I vote yes.

 

nice numbers but why didnt you run it to redline? It makes max boost (and power) at redline, and they didnt go that high.

 

I did, but the dyno stopped recording for some reason. It's all good. Like I said it was my first time so things weren't as smooth as they could have been.

it was definately a learning experience.

 

Very nice job man. It's always good to see new dynos around here. Now do a few mods and go back for more testing

 

It has your max power listed as 180.1 at 5950 rpms. You still have another 300 rpms to go. You are putting out more power than 180.1

 

ok then. So I missed out on 300rpms. what is max power then, like 183HP? I dunno. I was happy with the numbers. I also get nervous running the engine that high. I usually keep it below 5000rpms.

I promise I will do better next time, sorry to disappoint. :D

 

no its not dissapoiting, i was just letting you know you are putting out more power than you think. That is a good thing.

 

I used to be such a knowledgeable person in the cav world for NA. Now I feel like a noob.

My buddy ran his cav today too as a baseline before he puts on the turbo. Impressive run with his partially built motor 156.5HP, 170lb-ft on the GM 2.4L quad 4. He ran a header to 3" exhaust with no cats, no resonator, and a far can. It was loud as hell, but put down pretty good numbers for a cav that had a few mods on it. The torque number was crazy high.

 

Heatsoak is definitely a big issue on the tC. The stock piping can't handle it.

Doc Iso has been working to combat this with his "GFI" (Ghetto Fabulous Intake). He replaces the stock piping with Spectre PowerAdder piping. It combats heatsoak very nicely. I bet you that would help with the power loss.

 

I was thinking of looking into the CO2 cooling system (Cry02). http://store.summitracing.com/egnsea...2&autoview=sku

The dyno tuner also suggested this.

Ghetto Fabulous Intake huh...is there a link to this somewhere so I can see what it is all about?

 

watching this

 

sweet...glad to see you liked the 110s

 

You need some form of Water/Methanol Injection, its cheap and effective. Should work wonders on the TRD.

 

yeah, thanks Simply

I thought about methanol injection too...that would be wild.

 

those arent bad #'s on that dyno. I need to get me the 110 bpv, thanks for showing that its woth it

 

I learned about the C02 last night at the local "street legal drags". This EVO guy showed me his C02, and explained what it did. Sounded like something out a Sci-Fi movie...LOL.

Also, your numbers are very similar to the S/C only tC that was at the past ZPI shootout. I asked what else was done, and he said it just had an upgraded Bypass valve. I want to say it was a 110 also. The dyno used was a Dyno Dynamics (which is low "real world" reading also). He put down 184whp, and I forget the tQ.