Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General General Went and saw the Turbo SVT (Lotsa PIcs, dialup beware)

Me, my inflated toe? Please, I don't bench race nor do I race on the dyno. I go to the dyno to compare before and after mod number and the dyno is strictly use as a tuning tool for me. My racing is done on the track; I don't need to post my dyno number in my sig.

The point of my post was that you quickly jumped on the number is STD not SAE and pretty much said the number is invalid(as in your quote, falesly large number). The fact is that you don't really know the difference between the two; there are only 2%(4% being high) worth of difference if you actually have a SAE and STD number on the same day/same dyno. I have, my first STD dyno number was 284 rwhp while the SAE was 278 couple years ago; that kind of difference stay the same even on my last dyno(over 100 pulls in between). Not sure about where you got the 200 hp but you might want to re-check your dyno plot again. :rolleyes:

Second, there are a lot of variables between dynos. Just a simple 10 psi worth of difference in tire pressure can result in upward to 10 hp on the dyno. Then there is also the different tolerance on each individual dyno. Some are calibrated to spit up higher and others are lower. Shoot, I am sure you have also heard the mustang dyno and the dynojet comparsion. With me being a curious person, I took my car to a mustang dyno in the morning and made a trip to my normal dynojet afterward and found some big difference. Both numbers were SAE but to my surprise there were 8% worth of difference.

So let me ask you, what is the "true" number? The true number should be what kind of difference did it make before and after the install; instead of going to different dynos and trying to obtain the best number.

Anyway, sorry for venting and for such long post. I am done.

On a side note, here is a question that none of you haven't asked. Is the turbo running off one exhaust bank or is it running off both exhaust bank? It would explain why the boost doesn't kick in till 4400 rpm if only one bank is running it. Plus that motor might not last that long if it's running off one bank.

That was my point as well. People were comparing the STD ratings given on this graph to SAE numbers on other graphs.

As for % of difference.

I made 187.2HP SAE rating, 193HP Actual, & 198.6 STD HP

That's a difference of ~6.1% Using that figure and at 290HP that would make an ~18HP difference. Not a ton mind you, but a noticeable difference. With that said...

The difference between SAE & STD is STD also corrects for altitude & humidity - both to 0. Not positive, but I'm fairly certain both correct to 29.92 pressure and 60 degrees. (I know SAE does)

My SAE correction was ~.98, my STD correction was ~1.02
(Which here is over 1000' and 60-100% at best - ~65-70% during run!)
So it can give you significantly higher numbers in some cases! I'm sure the humidity in Florida is normally quite high, though the altitude is likely not to be...

I agree a dyno makes a great tool and an average comparing device. (when using different dyno locations) However to begin to even try to compare; the correction factors must atleast be the same.

I did ask how they managed to route both exhaust pipes to the front corner of the car.
No response.

Also how the poor main engine harnesses and fuse box (since the turbo is mounted directly over the harnesses!) were going to take them & the turbo being so close!
No response.

Warning, dumb questions ahead!

If you run the turbo only off of one bank, wouldn't that totally throw off the backpressure for both banks?

If this wasn't a problem, why would we be putting X-pipes into true duals?

Feel free to enlighten me.

John

A turbo run off only a single bank on a V engine, while far from ideal is not the end of the world, mostly because the scavenging is not really an issue on a forced induction motor. Though it does create havoc for the person attempting to calibrate the car.

Air to water is more efficent for the reason that Chris mentioned and others also. Transferring heat from air to aluminum then from aluminum to water is more efficient then air to aluminum to air. Not to mention in the middle of the summer you can put some ice into the intercooler reservoir and drop the intake temp lower than an air to air setup would allow.

Also what happened to the UIM. It looks like they tried for polished aluminum and then decided they couldn't do it

Thanks Komisar.

WTF.. that man needs to be SHOT. that is by far the ugliest damn contour i have seen.. aside mine... what the hell did he do to the top of the engine? its all scraped up and crap...

Can you re-post the pics, or link them to where they actually work i didnt get a chance to see them.. or drop them to me in an email.. michael@mklaro.com

thanks!

I thought part of the point of this board was to learn. He is asking a question. If you don't want to answer, then fine, but why wouldn't you offer an answer besides "Go do some reading."

His question is coming from false preconcieved notions, so his question cannot be answered directly. If he understood the real differences between the two different types of intercoolers, he would need to ask that question. It is not my responsibility to teach a class on the nuances of the two major types of intercoolers for forced induction applications, nor do I have the time or patience to type a dissertation on the subject, especially not when many many others, who are far better writers than I am have already broached the subject, and covered it quite well. Reading is a good thing, one can learn a great many things through the printed page. Besides, I told him what to go read about to answer his own question, so in a way, I did answer it for him. Heck even when you go to the doctor, they make you take your own medication.

For those particularly interested in turbocharging and intercoolers and much of what accompanies the subject, I highly recommend the book Maximum Boost by Corky Bell. It is a fantastic book on the subject, and is not too technical for the non-engineer types.