Actually if you look at a 3D fuel map, you would have an idea about VE, tuned at a constant AFR the increase of PWI as the rpm goes up decrease.. you would see a near flat map on top when the amount of air an engine can flow get maxed out.. ill try to get a snap shot of a fuel map

 

ok... what are u gonna do about it?

this site is soo funny when it comes to people sharing a personal achievement of their car... even with the dyno sheet, and videos, its still NOT enough evidence for anybody.. there will always be some person the HAS to be the righteous one and claim BS...


exactly.... what does this accomplish? i think its some sad way to rally up the rest of the haters to talk smack.... even tho they wont do it in person...
x2
true story...
damn right they're accurate...

 

^^ and you car was 340 hp at 10.5 psi right on dynodynamics or something like that? Not here to bash on the numbers, just discussing the result he had with some tuning theories

 

^ good memory...dont have the tC anymore tho lol...remember, i had a 50trim w/ .48a/r turbo which btw, Blueturbotc recommended to me to get and is currently on Homerhitta's 2nd gen xB, which blue also did the install for...

while YOUR intentions are not to bash, there are other are blatantly ignorant and will talk trash...but wont do anything about it in person...

 

Honestly I'm not bashing but at 12.5 lbs of boost I don't believe. I do believe he got that much power but at a higher boost level.

 

^i feel as though i agree.. i cant view the dyno sheets at work.. does he have a boost flow chart? that solves the problem instantly??

 

quote from the other forum...

"The 1/4 mile trap speed was 110 and I ran a 12.5 on street tires. I believe the 1/8th mile was 8 seonds flat. No idea where the slip is been a long time for that. I dont really care about 1/4 mile the car is built for road racing and Auto-X."



these numbers in no way translate to 426whp and 440tq on a mustang dyno. m6ar2cel6oTC trapped 110mph and is making 326 at the wheels. sorry but two tc's with a 100whp difference between them do not trap the same mph.


not trying to hate on his car. mid 12's is fast (if he can produce a timeslip that is). but that dyno is not producing realistic numbers.

 

markymarc what are u talking about.. i made the thread to get input already said in 2 previous posts it wasnt to bash but to see if this was legit or not. im willing to bet if i called up chris rado and said i got 426 whp outta 12.5 psi he wud show up to my house and take me onboard his crew lol. and what do u mean i wont do anything in person.. 1) ur across the country and 2) if i did see this car in person i would put my car on my low boost setting and run it to prove it doesnt have 426whp on a mustang dyno. ur sitting here trying to start an e-fight when all wanted was to either verify or dismiss these numbers

 

if you can read further into that thread, he specifically states after that, that he really didnt have a full built motor and a lot of other crap when he ran down the track that ONE time. hes not into just taking the car down a straight path, he does auto-X .. so before you say NO WAY on a mustang dyno... READ !!!!! you people just read half ___ and read what you want to read, but skip the FULL DETAIL and make it look like hes some BS'er, read the ENTIRE thread before you go off saying a bunch of BS

 

I've read the whole thread..

I've asked him all the questions...

Yet it still doesn't add up. And I'm not new to this sort of thing...

As Carb pointed out - mathematically it does not work. Unless there's something he doesn't want to mention - like he wants to keep his build a secret - but even with extreme modifications to the engine with a 60-1 at stock redline the car would need more than 12.5 psi to create 420+whp on 93 octane.

Just as you respect bluesciontc's post, you should also respect the devil's advocate. There are always two sides to a story when it's just a story. There are no full dyno plots, as the ones he shows has been modified manually - and the vids don't show me anything.. my car looks the same on rollers producing 280whp.

 

simmer down girlie girl. i've been at this for a while now. so have most of the people on here calling bs. a stock tc on a mustang dyno will lay down anywhere from 130 to 140whp. to get 426whp on 12.5 psi on a t3-t4 will not happen. it would have to be producing around 23whp per lb of boost. a t3-t4 on a 2.4ltr motor will never ever make that kind of power.

 

The question is how can one tc on stock motor make more than 100hp over another tc?

Key elements of tuning:
AFR
Ignition
Boost
Volumetric Efficiency

with volumetric efficiency and boost remain constant, its only ignition and afr to play with.. let say he is on the most aggressive afr on 93 octane pump gas which around 12.6 afr where flame speed is fastest, then there's only ignition left play with.. seems to me like still a long way to 100hp..

 

what do you mean, "you people"?

 

You're on the right track, Ace.

But there are more variables to consider. Some of the major ones are:

Dyno correction factor
Ambient Air temp
Humidity
Altitude

The best way to compare cars with dynos is if they're both there at the same time with the same dyno settings.. and preferably done around the same time of day so the air temps is relatively the same.

 

hes in coconut creek, right near julio's. they did his car to, 60-1, sleeves, built block, im unsure if the head is done or not but i believe it is but hes stuck with the FIC so stock redline FTL.. going to 7200 feels so awesome .. even with a leaky manifold and fouled stock plugs and a clogged bov haha

 

lmfao!!! lol ive got my doubts but i i still want more info from the OP on CSTC

 

Sign-up there and ask him. That's what I did.

It didn't result to anything.. in fact it resulted in more skepticism for me.

Here are the facts that are lingering in my head:

93oct
8.5:1 compression
Ported head
12.5 psi
Hydra EMS
Timing was retarded - not much - but not advanced
1-step colder plugs
60trim turbo w/ T3 Stage3 hotside
3" exhaust
6200rpm redline
4th gear pull

It doesn't make any sense.

Here's what people don't understand - when you decrease compression, you're lowering your effective VE. The only reason to lower compression is to make higher boost "safer". But he's not even running high boost - 12.5psi is done by many people here with stock motors of 9.6 or 9.8:1 compression. Even with his ported head, he cannot raise the VE back to stock with a 8.5:1 compression. He has stock cams - if he had upgraded cams, it would be another thing.

I think the only thing I didn't ask about was NOS. It would be very possible if he had sprayed in the run to get 420+ whp at 12.5psi.

 

ive been signed up there on the site for over 3 years im pming him now. any questions youd like answered while im at it?

 

Ask about NOS

And ask about cams

 

im a mod on clubsciontc and he has cause quite the ruckussssssss in the past with this and that, that and this.. he actually laid off for the longest sicne we spoke and this came out of left field.. i was skeptical and just said "nice"

theres just too many factors that are like "WTF"

like b real said nitrous in this situation seems very possible.



i remember a while back a vid somewhere of some dudes jsut straight opening a bottle and spraying it directly into the intake i believe and the car was making 40-50whp without touching tuning or anything..

IMHO, its nitrous.

call me a hater.. call me anything you want.. and i wont do shiet to you on this site... but come to clubsciontc and ill BAN THAT ARS!!!!

muuuuahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa