Turbo'd Mazda RX8?
05-30-2008, 11:13 PM
#161
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: I Shoot Flames!
Posts: 671
yea... ur dyno wasn't Ptuning's load dyno. im WELL over 260 by dynojet/dynopack. the wheels turn the load dyno so the hp/tq no.s are the ones hitting the pavement. load dyno is not calibrated for each car. thats why those are the true numbers! my turbo tC pulled 135hp on premium gas (93 octane) b4 it was turbo'd!
so if u think stock tC is 160...
so if u think stock tC is 160...
05-30-2008, 11:35 PM
#164
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: I Shoot Flames!
Posts: 671
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
93 octane won't do a damn thing for a stock tC.
on my 30K service... service techs told me that my car had the least (almost none) amount of carbon they've seen in any car over 5K miles.
also, i dont have carbon shooting out of my car when im gunnin it.
05-30-2008, 11:37 PM
#165
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 3,773
Originally Posted by scionkidd
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
93 octane won't do a damn thing for a stock tC.
on my 30K service... service techs told me that my car had the least (almost none) amount of carbon they've seen in any car over 5K miles.
also, i dont have carbon shooting out of my car when im gunnin it.
05-30-2008, 11:42 PM
#166
my stock dyno on a dynojet with hydrocarbon filter removed was 139whp, after tuning with the turbo setup I layed down 317whp. All that matters is before and after dyno runs when new parts are installed & the recorded difference which should be repeatable.
05-30-2008, 11:45 PM
#167
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: I Shoot Flames!
Posts: 671
Originally Posted by SoFloTC
what are u getting at scionkidd?
05-30-2008, 11:51 PM
#168
ummm.. how would they kno what my desired numbers are? that doesnt make sense? dynos are different . Dynojet tends to read higher than a Mustang dyno... i hit 217 on a mustang dyno which was calculated out to 243 on dynojet..
05-30-2008, 11:53 PM
#169
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: VEGAS BABY!
Posts: 9,061
well, when I get my car back from Todd, I'll see what his numbers are on they dynapack compared to the dynojet that is here in town...I don't have before - after numbers, but at least I can do some dyno difference numbers, not estimated calculation differences.
05-30-2008, 11:54 PM
#170
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: I Shoot Flames!
Posts: 671
Originally Posted by brett561tc
Originally Posted by scionkidd
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
93 octane won't do a damn thing for a stock tC.
on my 30K service... service techs told me that my car had the least (almost none) amount of carbon they've seen in any car over 5K miles.
also, i dont have carbon shooting out of my car when im gunnin it.
05-30-2008, 11:58 PM
#172
93 octain, or higher octain fuel is simply harder to burn fuel to prevent detonation in lamens terms. If anything, it will very very slightly hurt performance on a vehicle that does not require it and is a total waste of money.
On the dyno part, you have been very misled. Before and after numbers are ALL that matters on a dyno no matter what type it is. Load bearing is nice to tune with and that is about it.
On the dyno part, you have been very misled. Before and after numbers are ALL that matters on a dyno no matter what type it is. Load bearing is nice to tune with and that is about it.
05-30-2008, 11:58 PM
#173
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: I Shoot Flames!
Posts: 671
Originally Posted by SoFloTC
ummm.. how would they kno what my desired numbers are? that doesnt make sense? dynos are different . Dynojet tends to read higher than a Mustang dyno... i hit 217 on a mustang dyno which was calculated out to 243 on dynojet..
05-31-2008, 12:10 AM
#175
By the way you keep saying a 500hp m5 only puts out 428 on a so called "heartbreak dyno"
BMW rates the car at 500 crank hp. If the car dynoed 428, then that makes a 14.4% loss through the drivetrane which is actually on the GOOD side of loss which makes those dyno numbers on par with most any dyno and typical loss.
Many tuners call their dyno "heatbreaker" or use terms like that because people always go in with big dreams about how much HP the prized posession will lay down, and when they lay down a lot less hp then the owner thinks, they whine, make up exuses and are generally upset.
This is how the "this and that dyno show more or less hp" claims started flying. People turn a crap number and someone turns a good number, they claim it was the dyno. Like I said, all that matters is a before and after dyno and you have all the info you need pertaining to the modification being tested.
BMW rates the car at 500 crank hp. If the car dynoed 428, then that makes a 14.4% loss through the drivetrane which is actually on the GOOD side of loss which makes those dyno numbers on par with most any dyno and typical loss.
Many tuners call their dyno "heatbreaker" or use terms like that because people always go in with big dreams about how much HP the prized posession will lay down, and when they lay down a lot less hp then the owner thinks, they whine, make up exuses and are generally upset.
This is how the "this and that dyno show more or less hp" claims started flying. People turn a crap number and someone turns a good number, they claim it was the dyno. Like I said, all that matters is a before and after dyno and you have all the info you need pertaining to the modification being tested.
05-31-2008, 01:20 AM
#176
Senior Member
Music City Scions
Scikotics
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 16,747
Originally Posted by SoFloTC
eh i disagree with the 8 psi 260 whp comment.. my freinds dezod s1 pushes around 275 with 8 psi..... im at 245 at 6psi with an AUTO....
Different dyno's, different temps...could easily make up for that.
05-31-2008, 02:14 AM
#177
Senior Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parsippany, NJ
Posts: 16,645
Originally Posted by scionkidd
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
93 octane won't do a damn thing for a stock tC.
on my 30K service... service techs told me that my car had the least (almost none) amount of carbon they've seen in any car over 5K miles.
also, i dont have carbon shooting out of my car when im gunnin it.
05-31-2008, 07:08 AM
#178
Originally Posted by rhythmnsmoke
Originally Posted by SoFloTC
eh i disagree with the 8 psi 260 whp comment.. my freinds dezod s1 pushes around 275 with 8 psi..... im at 245 at 6psi with an AUTO....
Different dyno's, different temps...could easily make up for that.
05-31-2008, 07:54 AM
#179
Senior Member
Music City Scions
Scikotics
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 16,747
Originally Posted by SoFloTC
Originally Posted by rhythmnsmoke
Originally Posted by SoFloTC
eh i disagree with the 8 psi 260 whp comment.. my freinds dezod s1 pushes around 275 with 8 psi..... im at 245 at 6psi with an AUTO....
Different dyno's, different temps...could easily make up for that.
Sure, with turbo's the size of small watermelons that spool at like 4k+ rpm.
06-02-2008, 08:44 PM
#180
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: in your house
Posts: 3,486
Originally Posted by rhythmnsmoke
Originally Posted by 20tCDude05
By the way, my friend has a 588 WHP RX8, so go tell him his car is pathetic. His car is f*cking insane. He did it all himself too.
He should of post that awhile ago when people first started talking about WHP. but it took him like 8 pages to post that. I think he just met the owner of the "WHP 588 RX8" recently on the RX8 forums and now they are friends. lol Just messing with you 20tCDude05 LOL
