1. It includes all our products. Turbo kit, Intercooler, Catback, Downpipe (turbo kit specific).Adam,
1) The 390/390 with the turbo kit.. is that with a stock fmic and catback?
(And yes I understand that upgrading the stock FMIC is a must regardless)
2) To get to the approx. 420/420 plus, what would we need, other than the suggested upgraded head studs and valve springs?
Correct, the commanded EQ went up significantly once we started using the RaceGas additive @405hp. There is lot's of fuel left in the tune itself, here is an example of the car running out of fuel @5000rpms, and me making the necessary adjustments to gain more fuel. You can see I overshot it a little bit as my target AFR was 11.7 at this time, just shows what you can achieve within the tune itself.
Many of you have seen the video I posted of our 5858 turbo kit on the street (if not I will post it below), here is a log from the end of that video where I was racing the GT. I cut out 2nd gear in this pull because it cluttered the graph and it was very short with tire spin included. So the graph below is 3rd and 4th, 2 people in the car, full tank of gas, and even MORE boost with a target AFR of 11.9.
Another thing I wanted to point out is the load comparison of street versus our dyno. The first graph below is on our dyno, and the second graph is on the street. You can see they are both producing ~2.7 load at 5500rpms, so the tables we are hitting on the dyno are the same tables we are hitting on the street. Boost is the same, fuel command is the same, VE is the same, STFT is the same, and the results are the same. POWER!
One trend I have noticed is that most of the people that have posted about fuel issues are running hardware other than Cobb. I think I'm going to reach out to SCT and see if they are willing to send over their software so I can tinker around with it to see if I can produce the same results as I outlined above.
The car has been everyday on the street since last Monday, with tons of abuse and it still hasn't given us a single issue.
And, for the video:
Why the need for 6062 for that power? Not arguing, i'm actually a little confused. I thought you were getting the 420/420 with the 5858.
He said that 420/420 on the 5858 was starting to put mechanical strain on components. Strain on components is ok for race motors but its not what you want on your daily driver.
You asked safely, so I provided you the safest option. Please refer to my statement in my last post; "It will make power at less load, require less boost, and the torque will come in later in the powerband because of the added lag." This all adds to the safety component that you were looking for. 5858 is a hair small for 420/420 but I'm able to produce those power levels with 27-28psi. Which causes more load, which in turn produces more stress.
What's your actual fuel rail pressure (FRP Actual) look like? Do you have any logs and/or graphs of that? I wonder how similar it looks to the FoST/Fusions with bigger turbos. TIA
Utmost professionalism. Thank you very much for your efforts.
.63 A/R!
The 6466 has the .82, If I posted that the 5858 was .82 a/r I was mistaken, sorry!
Because this would potentially show data proprietary to my tuning strategies I don't wish to share at this time. If you want to share the FoST/Fusion data, I can let you know how they compare, however I wish to not show logs showing exact information.What's your actual fuel rail pressure (FRP Actual) look like? Do you have any logs and/or graphs of that? I wonder how similar it looks to the FoST/Fusions with bigger turbos. TIA
