ESS G3X lays down 1104whp with a 6rib belt!

[LSchicago]

Sponsored

 

[andrewtac]

I don't understand the hate that seems to happen in every ESS thread. Would have thought the community would be happy another company would offer products for our cars.

The numbers don't seem way out of line compared to other posts I've seen on the forums:
https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/threads/holy-smokes-951-rwhp-from-p-1x.117328/

That thread has a nearly stock car making 951HP from a 1275CFM blower at 16psi.

This thread has a nearly stock car making 150 more horsepower from a 1600CFM blower at 17.5psi.

The CFM may be higher than 1600 in this case since those are the numbers for the G3 and this is the G3X.

I think those in here making comments are having a hard time understanding how the measured boost is adding up to the measured HP.

It seems is as if the ESS makes more power than turbos, which in theory should be impossible. Maybe they have come up with something that will change how we understand the science and physics (as physics and science is only how us humans understand things to work, and it always changing). But most of us doubt that to be the case, and for the reason that the science is rather developed (but we used to be convinced the earth was flat based on a long history of that belief).

I suspect some of the efficiency is in the intercooler, as I picked up 3 psi and about 80hp going from the vortech to a custom built one. But that only goes so far, it still does not overcome the losses from turning the blower on the crank. Trap speeds will tell.

Regardless, anything new to improve the market is a plus for everyone. Those on here doubting the results (I am one), want to see things improve. Good skeptics only improve the science, when things are blindly followed the science only suffers (plenty of examples of this, even today).

 

[WIST2019GT]

I think those in here making comments are having a hard time understanding how the measured boost is adding up to the measured HP.

It seems is as if the ESS makes more power than turbos, which in theory should be impossible. Maybe they have come up with something that will change how we understand the science and physics (as physics and science is only how us humans understand things to work, and it always changing). But most of us doubt that to be the case, and for the reason that the science is rather developed (but we used to be convinced the earth was flat based on a long history of that belief).

I suspect some of the efficiency is in the intercooler, as I picked up 3 psi and about 80hp going from the vortech to a custom built one. But that only goes so far, it still does not overcome the losses from turning the blower on the crank. Trap speeds will tell.

Regardless, anything new to improve the market is a plus for everyone. Those on here doubting the results (I am one), want to see things improve. Good skeptics only improve the science, when things are blindly followed the science only suffers (plenty of examples of this, even today).

Well said.

I have a G3X myself with basically the same setup mentioned here, but on a 110mm pulley. Based on weight and 60-130 times compared to my old car, Id say my car makes high 700s/low 800s. Do I think dropping 3 pulley sizes will make 300whp more? Absolutely not.

A dyno is a tool that can be manipulated. Track times will tell the truth.

 

[andrewtac]

Well said.

I have a G3X myself with basically the same setup mentioned here, but on a 110mm pulley. Based on weight and 60-130 times compared to my old car, Id say my car makes high 700s/low 800s. Do I think dropping 3 pulley sizes will make 300whp more? Absolutely not.

A dyno is a tool that can be manipulated. Track times will tell the truth.

I don't doubt Brad's car ran the times it did, but it is making more power than it should. However, every once in a while, all the tolerances line up in the good direction. He might have gotten the unicorn for the year. Repeatable results from other users will help validate the data, again with trap times. The dyno is a tool. No doubt it is a great product though, I like several things about it over the other options.

 

[Brad1810r80]

On the 120mm my car trapped 116.6 and on the 115mm it did 119.11 so they do pick up decent amount just going down a pulley size in similar weather. I always try to get the most of my setups. Shallow stage , take all the loose objects out of the car , 1/4 tank of gas or close etc.

All my runs at rev track was great weather 0 to +1000 da . So I’d imagine if I ran now where it’s 3500 plus da those times would be way slower.

I don't doubt Brad's car ran the times it did, but it is making more power than it should. However, every once in a while, all the tolerances line up in the good direction. He might have gotten the unicorn for the year. Repeatable results from other users will help validate the data, again with trap times. The dyno is a tool. No doubt it is a great product though, I like several things about it over the other options.

 

[WIST2019GT]

On the 120mm my car trapped 116.6 and on the 115mm it did 119.11 so they do pick up decent amount just going down a pulley size in similar weather. I always try to get the most of my setups. Shallow stage , take all the loose objects out of the car , 1/4 tank of gas or close etc.

All my runs at rev track was great weather 0 to +1000 da . So I’d imagine if I ran now where it’s 3500 plus da those times would be way slower.

Do you think I will see 120 in the 1/8th on a 110 pulley and a fuel system/E85 setup? The car is 3980 full of fuel with me in it. It'll be 3900 race day so similar to yours. DA here is under 1000 when I go in October.

I don't.

 

[Siege]

I suspect some of the efficiency is in the intercooler, as I picked up 3 psi and about 80hp going from the vortech to a custom built one.

Agreed, and/or the G3X is near its peak efficiency range in this setup so the air charge is cooler than the P1X making 951 at 16psi.

Since Lund tuned it they should be able to provide some data to back up the numbers.

 

[andrewtac]

Agreed, and/or the G3X is near its peak efficiency range in this setup so the air charge is cooler than the P1X making 951 at 16psi.

Since Lund tuned it they should be able to provide some data to back up the numbers.

For comparison my JTB made 860 at 7.3k at 14psi vortech intercooler, 970 at 7k at 17 psi (upgraded intercooler). The 860 is fairly accurate based on 150mph trap, 860 was after bigger exhaust. The 970 at 7k, had I went to 7700 it probably would be 1050 and 18.5 psi based on the rest of the pull. I need to run it, but haven't had time.

 

[Brad1810r80]

You should , wouldn’t see why not.

Do you think I will see 120 in the 1/8th on a 110 pulley and a fuel system/E85 setup? The car is 3980 full of fuel with me in it. It'll be 3900 race day so similar to yours. DA here is under 1000 when I go in October.

I don't.

 

[Torinate]

I think there’s a lot of skeptical people because the blower is doing things that haven’t been done and defy what should occur. Just add up what’s happening. 1100+ whp with 17.3 psi? On a blower! Crazy! I think people generally want this to be true... but there needs to be more “proof”. Let’s get this 1100 hp monster to the track and see some trap speeds. The track is the ultimate test. We don’t race dyno sheets. We race cars. I’m sure we’ve all heard the naysayers about our own cars with what we say the horsepower was until we take it down the strip and prove the dyno sheet. ETs aren’t the judge as a crappy 60 foot will kill the ET. Trap speed tells the hp tale though. Sure, crappy 60 ft will alter it but come on, if the car traps where it should with 1100 hp everyone will be impressed and lined up to get one.

By comparison, what’s a turbo at 17.3 psi running?

I for one would love to see this thing go down the track. Hell I witnessed Kevin’s G2 on the dyno and I’m impressed.

I believe the only way to really dispel the negatives is to run it down the 1320!

 

[80FoxCoupe]

I think there’s a lot of skeptical people because the blower is doing things that haven’t been done and defy what should occur. Just add up what’s happening. 1100+ whp with 17.3 psi? On a blower! Crazy! I think people generally want this to be true... but there needs to be more “proof”. Let’s get this 1100 hp monster to the track and see some trap speeds. The track is the ultimate test. We don’t race dyno sheets. We race cars. I’m sure we’ve all heard the naysayers about our own cars with what we say the horsepower was until we take it down the strip and prove the dyno sheet. ETs aren’t the judge as a crappy 60 foot will kill the ET. Trap speed tells the hp tale though. Sure, crappy 60 ft will alter it but come on, if the car traps where it should with 1100 hp everyone will be impressed and lined up to get one.

By comparison, what’s a turbo at 17.3 psi running?

I for one would love to see this thing go down the track. Hell I witnessed Kevin’s G2 on the dyno and I’m impressed.

I believe the only way to really dispel the negatives is to run it down the 1320!

The hype is part of their marketing, and that seems to be generally working good. If it's the cheapest, lightest and most efficient in the whole wide world, I'm interested. But that has yet to be seen.

 

[Angrey]

The hype is part of their marketing, and that seems to be generally working good. If it's the cheapest, lightest and most efficient in the whole wide world, I'm interested. But that has yet to be seen.

I'm trying to be gracious and assume it's a sensory issue with measuring the boost. What sensor is being used and where? I don't think it's sinister and deceitful. I think it's more likely that they're measuring the boost pressure differently or getting a different reading.

Again, I've already demonstrated where it's nearly impossible to make 1104 to the wheels on that boost pressure unless the car was already making crazy power.

If we assume 100% efficiency, which is impossible, LITERALLY impossible given thermodynamic and kinetic laws, the car would still need to be making North of 500 wheel naturally aspirated. E85 and some cat deletes doesn't get you North of 500 wheel on most "normal" dynos (SAE Smoothing 5) with anything considered responsible tuning.

Is the Dyno "happy?" Are they playing dyno gimmicks to bump the number? Are they lying?

All of those are negative. Perhaps it's just a pressure reading. I'm not doubting one bit that a coyote with a big centri can make 1100 to the wheels. I'm just doubting it can be done on that amount of boost (without changing at least some of the contributing facts).

 

[Tee-Dots79]

Here are the dyno plots from Sunday. We used Elite Tuning, LLC in Bringhurst, IN. They are best known as a sprint car tuner. No tuning was provided by the dyno operator, and contrary to what some people may be saying, they have zero affiliation w/ ESS.

Ryan is a gen 2 coyote w/ intake/headers car. Pump gas.

Here's my plot again. ESS G3 w/ 120mm pulley. Fore level 2. Pump gas.

And Don's car. A gen 2 coyote w/ a paxton, 3.3 pulley, sai li fuel system, and 18 manifold. E85.
The dyno owner already had numbers for Don, so used him to verify calibration.

 

[Brevin@ESS]

I'm trying to be gracious and assume it's a sensory issue with measuring the boost. What sensor is being used and where? I don't think it's sinister and deceitful. I think it's more likely that they're measuring the boost pressure differently or getting a different reading.

Again, I've already demonstrated where it's nearly impossible to make 1104 to the wheels on that boost pressure unless the car was already making crazy power.

If we assume 100% efficiency, which is impossible, LITERALLY impossible given thermodynamic and kinetic laws, the car would still need to be making North of 500 wheel naturally aspirated. E85 and some cat deletes doesn't get you North of 500 wheel on most "normal" dynos (SAE Smoothing 5) with anything considered responsible tuning.

Is the Dyno "happy?" Are they playing dyno gimmicks to bump the number? Are they lying?

All of those are negative. Perhaps it's just a pressure reading. I'm not doubting one bit that a coyote with a big centri can make 1100 to the wheels. I'm just doubting it can be done on that amount of boost (without changing at least some of the contributing facts).

We are not behind any of these numbers. This car was tested independently by a customer on a dyno day hosted by the company that owns the dyno. We have no relation to them at all. They tested many cars that day on that same dyno and from what I can tell the numbers seem to be within the normal margins on the other cars as well.

Another one of our customers was on the same dyno on the same day. He made 736whp on his manual 18 car. G3 setup with 120 pulley as well as many other supporting mods. 93 octane. It showed 9.5 PSI peak. We’ve seen similar results to this on other dynos.

Another car there was a gen 2 with a Paxton. Not sure on all the details on the build but it made 861 @19.7 PSI. Again, from what I can gather that seems about right?

Certainly no tricks being played on our end. It is true that at the end of the day a dyno is a tuning tool. We believe that this car will perform very well at the track. We look forward to seeing the results!

EDIT: It seems he beat me to it! See dyno graphs for the other cars above

 

[Tee-Dots79]

Well said.

I have a G3X myself with basically the same setup mentioned here, but on a 110mm pulley. Based on weight and 60-130 times compared to my old car, Id say my car makes high 700s/low 800s. Do I think dropping 3 pulley sizes will make 300whp more? Absolutely not.

A dyno is a tool that can be manipulated. Track times will tell the truth.

Shawn's got a single shakedown pass on the 100mm pulley, hitting a 10.1 w/ a lazy 2nd gear leave launch. I'll post the slip when I find it. It's a full interior 10r80 car, so he was more concerned w/ whether or not he'd be able to avoid the trans shifting into 7th.

Here's the slip. He was at 12 deg. of timing before the 1/8th. Not a good pass, but yeah... Per Shawn, he spent waaaaay too much time in the staging lane w/ the car running. His fault.

Sponsored