Lancer Register Forum banner
1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
We've started on Evo X's now, Sam is just back from doing some in Belguim.

This engine seems to respond really well to tuning.

Mods were only a Miltek exhaust and an HKS air filter.

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,936 Posts
416bhp is impressive with just an exhaust, filter and map. What would you have to do to get the torque from 360lbs/ft nearer 400 lbs/ft? Further mods or fine tune the map?

sorry i'm a novice here :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,216 Posts
A figure of 416bhp is very impressive,however why is the torque so low? 360lbft is pretty poor for a car producing 416bhp.When my X was first mapped the torque figure was higher than the bhp.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
552 Posts
Running higher boost pressure is the obvious way that most engines make more torque.

In this case, the exhaust and air filter appear to be letting the engine hang onto moderate boost pressure at high rpm giving decent torque figures above 6000rpm and hence a power figure in hp that is higher than the torque figure in lb ft. Note how the torque curve is nearly flat between 5500-6500rpm, rather than continuing to decline as it does between 4500-5500rpm.

Power is just torque x rpm. Using hp and lb-ft units, the numbers are the same at 5250 rpm. So according to the dyno figures, this engine is still making 318lb-ft of torque at max power rpm of 6874rpm.

It would be interesting to see a dyno graph for before the exhaust and air filter were fitted.

Rob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,443 Posts
The dyno in the first post has only four data points shown and the graph looks to be a best fit. You can't really imply anything about the spool between 2750 and 3750 RPM because there aren't any data points! Sam (Elassar) doesn't usually let a turbo spool lazily as shown, but often has a nice overboost to give early and high torque. This graph doesn't really let you judge the engine at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Thanks for your comments :)

I own Checkpoint Garage where Sam works from nowadays, I built his 1100bhp Evo among others.

I'm not on here to trade, i'm always booked up for months anyway, there's about 20 odd Skylines, Evo's, Scoobys etc in just now, which is the norm.

If the mods want me to be a trader then fair enough, i was just posting up the results as i thought you might be interested :)

TBH personally i don't like dyno's, they really don't represent how a car performs and none of then have realistic conditions representative of the road or track.
The last Evo VI we put on the rollers had 603bhp on low boost, we mapped it on the road on the way to the dyno but when on the rollers the afr's were miles out..... not something i'll be in a hurry to spend 60k on :)

We should have our own Evo X soon so we can try things out for ourselves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
The dyno operator could have had it ramping up the load sooner, then it would have shown more torque on the graph lower down, as you can see from the logs below when it was mapped on the road it was making full boost by 3000rpm (which would have read more torque) not to mention more torque as well as power at the top end than yours? :)



Some MLR users seem to live by dyno graphs?? They really are not the be all and end all of tuning, if you tune a car on the rollers it will look good on the rollers but not on the road... where you drive it :)

Here's a graph from a Scooby that Sam mapped at the same time for all you number hunters ;)

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,142 Posts
Hi Callum!

These have to be the weirdest graphs ever posted on here - have you been playing with your Spirograph again? :lol:

The EVO X graph, as said above, suggests rubbish boost control, and the Scooby one makes no sense at all :confused:

Cheers ;)

Rog
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
My point exactly ;)

The logs from the road show the boost control was fine making 1.6 bar by 2900rpm and holding it whereas the dyno wasn't ramping up until then (no load - no boost - no torque) and not representing the road conditions.
If Sam had mapped it on the rollers to show the "perfect" curve then it would have needed changed on the road....... if i had a pound everytime i'd heard a customer tell us that their car we had mapped had just out dragged another with a "magical" dyno sheet showing more power or it runs so much better now than when mapped on a dyno. Customers words, not mine ;)

The Scooby graph was what you would expect at this power level on a Dastek dyno.... absolutely no grip, strapped down to death and half the worlds population sitting on it... hardly representative of road conditions unless it was a bus in India.... which it wasn't. And it was an automatic gearbox.


Is this why some of the best tuners don't like posting on the MLR?

We don't spend precious days of our lives perfecting dyno curves (especially on 4-500bhp low power cars) when an hour or so on the road will produce better results ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Ha ha :) I'm always up for a challenge, i don't own an evo at the moment tho and the Cayenne is a bit too big and German to be much use :lol:
I was planning on building an Alfa 156 track car just to be different, weight and power will be there but it will only be front wheel drive ;)

What times do you get on knockhill nowadays? Seem to remember you did 58secs in your old Skyline.

The last Evo we did seems to go quite well, it hasn't recorded any lap times yet as there was too much traffic (slower Evo's ;)) but it is in 5th gear before the bridge if that's anything to go by :) Not sure how it will respond in the slow sections, time will tell :)
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top