|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,676
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,676 |
holy torque!! awesome numbers!! Congrats man. . .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Very nice numbers!
Smooth powerband.
It's coming along nicely...
You won't really see the big numbers until you turn up the boost to offset the lower compression. Then the cams (overlap) will likely be the limiting factor.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by ALIAS Jerk:
your max power was at 3200 RPM's? Talk about low end torque...
That's the spike from using the Secondaries.
It's really unusable in real life driving. Definitely not applicable for performance driving.
I would throw out any data from before the IMRC point. Everything above it shows the true power in the powerband.
I'd say 300FWHP & 300FWTQ are the usable numbers. 
There is even a little more in it as well since the A/F is a bit rich.
I am extremely surprised at how fast the torque falls off though???
It peaks at 4600 rpm and drops quick.
HP peak is very early as well???
Stock cams?
SVT cams??
Oval cams???
The power curve makes it look like stock cams.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,097
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,097 |
Demon (no ofense, I am trying to learn) why do you say that the torque is unuseable? In real life driving it seems that that extra torque from the 2ndaries would be great putting around town. Maybe I misunderstood.
98 E0 SVT with some stuff
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,469
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,469 |
Originally posted by stilov:
Demon (no ofense, I am trying to learn) why do you say that the torque is unuseable? In real life driving it seems that that extra torque from the 2ndaries would be great putting around town. Maybe I misunderstood.
Im gonna guess he ment unuseable bacause at that low rpm. if he gets on the throttle hes just gonna spin the tires. I could be way wrong though.
98 csvt t-red.. sho-shop intake, b&m, fidanza, spec1 clutch, Torsen, DMD,optimized Y& TB, Brullen, rear strut bar,h&r's,17" konig traffik's.
"I say what I mean and I do what i say"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,097
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,097 |
okay...I can see that...
I guess the deal with my "home-made" turbo is that I don't get full torque until 4500 RPM. Which isn't that bad b/c I don't deal w/ wheelspin really, and I still have the 2ndaries, and that helps tremendously around town. It feels like a stock SVT unless I really get on it, then hang on.
98 E0 SVT with some stuff
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,025
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,025 |
Yes, I am running non svt contour cams. I was a limited budget so I stuck with these cams. Chris actually gave me a call after seeing the graph earlier this morning and thinks I should have gone with .82 housing instead of the .63 that i have, since that could be the reason for the quick torque drop off. As of right now, Im just glad its running somewhat well. I do have a hesistation problem about every 3,000 rpm's where it just makes a terrible bucking and then its smooth from there on out. Chris told me a tps sensor could be the culprit so ill be checking that out later on.
Jim Hahn
1996 T-Red Contour SE Reborn 4/6/04
3.0L swap and Arizona Dyno Chip Turbo Kit
364 whp, 410 wtq @ 4,700 rpm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,097
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,097 |
Chris pretty much knows all the problems...mine was a wastegate not closing enough under vacuum...I just stacked some washers in there. That's great for me about the A/R. I will be running probably (like Tom) a 60 trim w/ .82 A/R. Man I am looking forward to it!!!!
98 E0 SVT with some stuff
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,387
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,387 |
Damn, you just keep teasing us with the thought of peak numbers
98 3.0 svt: Sold
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by stilov:
Why do you say that the torque is unuseable?
In real life driving it seems that that extra torque from the 2ndaries would be great putting around town. Maybe I misunderstood.
That's "WOT" numbers.
When are you going be be at WOT and below 3000rpm??? Honestly!
Even if you are you won't be very long (a second maybe in the higher gears) so that brief blip of torque is meaningless because it's followed by a loss of power (dead time) when the secondaries open.
So basically even if you do get that blast of torque for 300rpm you then have 300-400rpm worse of recovery from the secondaries opening. That's time you could be making more "consistent" power.
The IMRC is used for generating extra low end torque so the small 2.5L has decent drivability. It's real forte is part throttle.
It is not there for performance. Also because of the rpm range it boosts the power in and the subsequent power loss from it's operation it is really not part of any true usable performance powerband.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
