Got Torque? Check out what 15psi can do. Dyno/vids inside.

[GG///M3]

Interesting points^

[rt turbo]

im surprised at how quick that 76 is to spool. is that correct? Whats special about it to allow this?

[das Boot]

They mean 15psi from one compressor is not the same as 15psi in another. A more efficient compressor will generate more CFM at the same intake restriction.

pressure does not equal the amount of air being moved.



Nice results, looking forward to your experiments.

Ofcourse they are not the same , it took my 4094r Damm near 20 lbs to make the same HP but with about 50 ftlbs less tq
And to be be honest It feels like the 7675 is spoiling faster least with the mbc connected it is .

[EMC]

im surprised at how quick that 76 is to spool. is that correct? Whats special about it to allow this?

I'd say lack of back pressure from an exhaust housing that is matched well to the needs of the turbo. Smaller exhaust wheels and housings don't always help turbos build boost faster. Sometimes you just get lucky with the perfect combination.

[Colby Colbs]

We would like EMC to take you up on the dyno jet runs
Get a clean pass with NO wheel spin and the tq reading will be accurate

With wheel spin the tq is always shot up like that in MY experience...

YOU GOT NOTHIN TO LOOSE, or do you?

[biglou911]

We would like EMC to take you up on the dyno jet runs
Get a clean pass with NO wheel spin and the tq reading will be accurate

With wheel spin the tq is always shot up like that in MY experience...

YOU GOT NOTHIN TO LOOSE, or do you?

Yes we can help a fellow member get a clean run , we r local

Sent from my iPhone using BF.com

[M3GSX]

Lol I don't need help, some members here do though. Haha

[Colby Colbs]

Not saying you or anyone else needs help man, again just to see more results for our comarison.

[EMC]

Lol I don't need help, some members here do though. Haha

If you made 640rwhp and 640rwtq on a Dynojet, people would want to see what Mustang dyno numbers would be.

You have to expect this sort of thing whether it's on the internet or if you were just telling someone about it.

I know of a Dynojet we can go to if you are ever up for it. The owner of the shop is building a 740il with a twin turbo LSX motor. Maybe you've heard of it?

[Colby Colbs]

Ehhh from what I've seen, this forum likes to see dynojet numbers period! Never herd of someone wanting mustang dynos after a dyno jet maybe with and without SAE correction but hey anything can happen!

If you have experience working on a mustang dyno you will know that the results can be skewd and since we have seen it here more than once we have come to the conclusion that dynojet numbers are more reliable!!

Cam where are you on this one?
I could care less but just trying to clear up why ur getting mixed feelings... this is Nothing to do with YOU M3GSX so that's where the dynojet thing came from

[Captain Bondo]

Ehhh from what I've seen, this forum likes to see dynojet numbers period! Never herd of someone wanting mustang dynos after a dyno jet maybe with and without SAE correction but hey anything can happen!

If you have experience working on a mustang dyno you will know that the results can be skewd and since we have seen it here more than once we have come to the conclusion that dynojet numbers are more reliable!!

Absolutely. You always hear every Mustang dyno guy reference how his particular dyno reads relative to dynojets, and even relative to OTHER mustang dynos. It's kinda silly. You never hear a dynojet guy give references to how his dyno reads relative to other dnyos. A djet is a djet.


The other side of the coin is many shops with MD's intentionally have them calibrated to read the same as the local dynojets, which makes sense. Then you get guys saying their numbers are low because it was on a mustang.

I like djet numbers because "inflated" or not, they seem to be the most consistent from machine to machine simply because djets are so crude (they're crude in a good way) there's not many things that can introduce variances.

[milKt]

At least for this hemisphere.

[M3GSX]

Well, I did not plan on a debate when I posted these results. I honestly figured that the bmw community would be excited to see my results. I have the luxury of an on-site dyno so that is what I utilized. I have the tools to experiment and try different setups and get back to back results. As long as I am making more power, I must be doing the right thing.

We use a Mustang Dyno because of it's superior characteristics for proper engine tuning. It creates a real-world load condition.

When we tune a car on our Dyno, the end result is amazing driveability and performance. Right off the bat.

A dynojet does not put nearly enough load to even try and replicate a real world condition. I have seen AFR's off by as much as a full point when on a dynojet. Which results in the car needing to be "street tuned" after tuning on the dynojet.

We dont play with our dyno numbers. We have a great reputation and ensure to keep it that way.
******
Enough of the drama ,

My motor has always made plenty of low-end torque. I believe that the 87mm bore is helping as well as a little extra compression from milling my head. I've been putting motors together for quite some time so I have a few tricks of my own.

The Turbo is a TC-76, which is a compact version of a T-76. It has a much smaller compressor housing (A bit larger than a "S" Housing). Its rated at flowing ~10% less than the standard housing.

I did my research and from tha data I collected, this turbo came on like a freight train and pulled hard then started dropping power fast after peak power. I thought it would work well considering Our motors make peak power normally between 6500-7000rpm.

For reference; Here is a dyno sheet from the same motor with a SC61 .68 T4 (61mm)

61mm@13psi This was on Alternative Autos dynojet with a MUCH smaller turbo. Notice the Torque. and only 13psi.

[BadBoostedBmwM3]

I'm not calling BS; it's very possible but either way the tune must fairly aggressive to make this much power on pump gas.
I see you said this is the same tune George used for the ICS stage 1 car ,and, back when George released the dyno results, he said there was a little detonation (meaning it was not safe) to run the car with ~18psi (to make ~600whp) on pump gas.

I guess my question is how safe do you think it is?

Are you still using the same tune/ecu from the last turbo setup (pre wreck)?

[Captain Bondo]

That second graph seems totally believable. Eg - on a dynojet, around 470ftlb at 13psi on a 61mm with a relatively small turbine A/R sounds about right. On the healthy side, but still reasonable.

No drama, but the new results are just... suprising... and your old dyno reinforces that.

So to clarify -

You're saying with the new turbo, and 2psi more boost, you made 533ftlb, on a dyno that reads 18% lower than a dynojet. So on that same dynojet dyno as the 61mm run, the current setup would make 629ftlb (533 * 1.18) at 15psi? Equating to roughly 160ftlb more torque with 2psi?

1 bar of boost roughly doubles hp/tq (a little more actually because some parasitic losses remain fixed). Even so, this suggests your motor in NA form would be making around 300ftlb to the wheels.

The point at which "impressive" becomes "unlikely" is a personal call and I'm not saying it is one or the other. Just that this data is atypical and people will likely deem it one or the other. If it bothers you, do a pull on that djet and prove it. If it doesn't, then f*** the haters.

[M3GSX]

That second graph seems totally believable. Eg - on a dynojet, around 470ftlb at 13psi on a 61mm with a relatively small turbine A/R sounds about right. On the healthy side, but still reasonable.

No drama, but the new results are just... suprising... and your old dyno reinforces that.

So to clarify -

You're saying with the new turbo, and 2psi more boost, you made 533ftlb, on a dyno that reads 18% lower than a dynojet. So on that same dynojet dyno as the 61mm run, the current setup would make 629ftlb (533 * 1.18) at 15psi? Equating to roughly 160ftlb more torque with 2psi?

f*** the haters.

I just might throw her on the dynojet when I get some extra time. My goal is to break 700whp on the heartbreaker when I get my hands on a AEM Infinity. oo

More data for reference:

This EVO is Proven 10.5@136mph DSM Shootout 2011.
Certified 570awhp on Bushur Racings Mustang Dyno.

This EVO made 496WHP on Our Dyno with 2psi more boost.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Dyo2V6YzAA[/ame]

[MikeE36]

1 bar of boost roughly doubles hp/tq

No.

-Mike

[BadBoostedBmwM3]

No.

-Mike

I was wondering about that...

[Captain Bondo]

Lol whatever then.

[EMC]

Well, I did not plan on a debate when I posted these results. I honestly figured that the bmw community would be excited to see my results. I have the luxury of an on-site dyno so that is what I utilized. I have the tools to experiment and try different setups and get back to back results. As long as I am making more power, I must be doing the right thing.

******
Enough of the drama ,

I'm not questioning the Mustang numbers. I think that since you made claims about what the numbers would have been on a Dynojet that it's only fair to show them.

We all know that the Mustang will read much lower. I made 403 rwhp on a Dynojet and went to a Mustang and made 360 rwhp one time. Based on that, I'd estimate 600 rwhp for your car on the Dynojet...which puts it really close with a few other cars here that don't have as large of a turbo but run a psi or two more.

Nobody has called you a liar. I'm sure that people aren't used to seeing such impressive numbers at 15psi on pump fuel...so they wonder how the hell you did it.

My offer still stands if you want to meet up at the Dynojet and put this to rest.

[highboostingm3]

...
Cam where are you on this one?...

You rang?

First I would like to congratulate the OP. I mean Holy Shnikolies Batman!

Yes...a turbo I've never seen on a BMW and top mount? Am I a fan? Is Ron Paul going to be the savior of America?


Since you asked...

1) The OP did happen to go out of his way to compare his dyno numbers to what a Dynojet would be. If dyno numbers didn't matter then there wouldn't be any comparison mentioned at all. He opened Pandora's Box with that.

2) I have been physically shown on both a Mustang Dyno and a Dyno Dynamics the same run tweaked to make the difference of hundreds of horsepower.

3) I have asked many Dynojet operators and watched them as they showed me a Dynojet is locked out and cannot be manipulated except by heat or cold. However all you have to do is ask for the person posting the Dynojet graph to post it with all the weather information, etc. to confirm the truth there. Besides...Dynojet software for overlapping graphs, changing the axis sources and lots of other cool things is simply the best in my subjective opinion.

4) Therefore, due to the above information, I myself would never post any dyno sheet from any dyno machine other than a Dynojet if I am doing it for comparison or any other reason UNLESS I have an all else being equal single upgrade change back to back R&D comparison. For example, some day I plan to post such a change to show the difference of before/after for any possible community benefit using a Dynojet. Then for custom tuning I will use a Dyno Dynamics load dyno to simulate the street, then when finished with tune go back to the Dynojet for proper Dynojet/Dynojet/Dynojet comparison.

$.02 take it or leave it. Back in my hole I go.

[MikeE36]

Lol whatever then.

Read maximum boost. I already said this on page 1 to someone else. Surprised you missed it. 1 bar = 2x stock output assumes 100% VE. An FI engine can realistically reach 125-175+ % VE, thus more than double power with "double the air pressure."

-Mike

[M3GSX]

I'm not questioning the Mustang numbers. I think that since you made claims about what the numbers would have been on a Dynojet that it's only fair to show them.

We all know that the Mustang will read much lower. I made 403 rwhp on a Dynojet and went to a Mustang and made 360 rwhp one time. Based on that, I'd estimate 600 rwhp for your car on the Dynojet...which puts it really close with a few other cars here that don't have as large of a turbo but run a psi or two more.

Nobody has called you a liar. I'm sure that people aren't used to seeing such impressive numbers at 15psi on pump fuel...so they wonder how the hell you did it.

My offer still stands if you want to meet up at the Dynojet and put this to rest.

Alright, we can set something up if you truly want to pay for it. I guarantee I do over 600whp but maybe we can even have a gentlemens bet?

[EMC]

Alright, we can set something up if you truly want to pay for it. I guarantee I do over 600whp but maybe we can even have a gentlemens bet?

I'd dyno my wife's CRV if someone paid for it. I would think that a dynojet run would make you a hero if it was 630 rwhp and 630 rwtq.

Tell ya what...I'll buy you a beer if you make the 629/629 numbers at the wheel, but I get to T-in a boost gauge while the car is making the pulls.

Sound fair?

[highboostingm3]

Alright, we can set something up if you truly want to pay for it. I guarantee I do over 600whp but maybe we can even have a gentlemens bet?

On the Dynojet have the boost gauge in the video to show max psi and then go straight to the screen and then you will have instead of

Or even better, have Dynojet operator test for boost and post twin graphs, one smaller below with boost.

Only way to silence the questioning. Afterall...you can't break records to that extent without some questioning. Questioning shows intelligence and critical thinking abilities...it's a very good thing.