Thinking about going big turbo? Spool Data.

[PRG3k]

I know the 7163 is the spool king. What rpm is the Vargas Stage 2 turbo spooling?

Quite a bit later. Stock location turbo that spools like a big turbo.

Sponsored

 

[i4gains]

Yes sir! I want more power period LOL. Now Adam I just bought the Cobb shelf tune today and had it installed. My intentions are to get the levels IC-----> Adam Tune ;-) --------> full exhaust--------> Adam tune . in between each purchase will be spark plugs, catch can, waste gate. Any recommendations on a down pipe and what's the real deal on cat vs catless? I was thinking of going full borla atak with their downpipe or even a downpipe (CPE, kooks, stainless works, Borla) with a flow master y pipe and Borla atak axel back. As far as adding a turbo after these mods I think for me personally the borgwarner turbo sounds exactly the kind of turbo I'd want.

 

[i4gains]

BorgWarner has the best STREET turbo's period. If you are looking to make Big Boy power (700+) I would look to Precision or Garrett.[/QUOTE]


After reading this, I came to the conclusion that borgwarner would suit me the best.

 

[Tune+]

Yes sir! I want more power period LOL. Now Adam I just bought the Cobb shelf tune today and had it installed. My intentions are to get the levels IC-----> Adam Tune ;-) --------> full exhaust--------> Adam tune . in between each purchase will be spark plugs, catch can, waste gate. Any recommendations on a down pipe and what's the real deal on cat vs catless? I was thinking of going full borla atak with their downpipe or even a downpipe (CPE, kooks, stainless works, Borla) with a flow master y pipe and Borla atak axel back. As far as adding a turbo after these mods I think for me personally the borgwarner turbo sounds exactly the kind of turbo I'd want.

Drop me an email [email protected] to discuss your upgrade path.

 

[eficalibrator]

So all of this data was collected on a 24" Dynojet? Did you also use an eddy current and road load data or was this run in inertial only mode? There can be a significant difference in the results with turbocharged cars...

 

[Tune+]

So all of this data was collected on a 24" Dynojet? Did you also use an eddy current and road load data or was this run in inertial only mode? There can be a significant difference in the results with turbocharged cars...

All data I have is on the same style dyno (424x) with no load, same corrections. Variants have been limited to as little as possible.

I have road data to compare as well just to make sure everything is close to comparing apples to apples as possible.

 

[Full-Race Geoff]

looking forward to your EFR7670 numbers

 

[Tune+]

looking forward to your EFR7670 numbers

Samezies.

 

[eficalibrator]

All data I have is on the same style dyno (424x) with no load, same corrections. Variants have been limited to as little as possible.

I have road data to compare as well just to make sure everything is close to comparing apples to apples as possible.

So you're saying that the load applied to the car/engine is the same on an unloaded 424x as it is on the street where you can have different inertia, mass, grade, tire rolling resistance (road surface), and aerodynamic drag that increases geometrically with speed? I'm not sure that matches what I've seen over the years.

 

[Tune+]

So you're saying that the load applied to the car/engine is the same on an unloaded 424x as it is on the street where you can have different inertia, mass, grade, tire rolling resistance (road surface), and aerodynamic drag that increases geometrically with speed? I'm not sure that matches what I've seen over the years.

No, I didn't say that. Nor would I ever, however you will be VERY surprised to compare load on these cars on the street versus a 424x. Load is almost identical but you don't account for frontal area, drag, resistance.

I'm talking about apples to apples ON THE DYNO.

The car on the street will obviously perform differently, not to mention when are you going to be driving on the street and think that doing a 4th gear pull from 2,000rpms is going to be the best choice for optimal performance.

Again, you are looking at a comparison graph for different turbo's in a controlled environment on the same vehicle (Ecoboost Mustang), all by the same tuner with the same spool strategies.

If you have anything to contribute, please share. However nobody else has this data, not even a little bit and if they did they wouldn't take the time to share. Is it 100% to exactly what you would see on the street? No, but it is going to give you the best idea of what you are going to be achieving. Or you could just take a manufacturers biased word for it.

I'm not a turbo manufacturer, nor a turbo kit fabricator, so I have no benefit in saying one is better than another.

 

[eficalibrator]

I'm talking about apples to apples ON THE DYNO.

The car on the street will obviously perform differently, not to mention when are you going to be driving on the street and think that doing a 4th gear pull from 2,000rpms is going to be the best choice for optimal performance.

I think you're starting to see my point. It's quite possible that your dyno results would not correlate with what a user may see with their actual car on the street. So, saying that Turbo A spools faster that Turbo B on the dyno in an unloaded condition doesn't necessarily mean that the same will be true for them when they actually drive in traffic.

On the other end of the performance spectrum, I have a twin turbo 6.2L that shows identical boost response between an MD-1100 and the street/track, but loses 2PSI (out of 6 total) and 50rwhp when run on an unloaded Dynojet 248 because the unloaded dyno didn't cause the turbos to spool. No changes in hardware, conditions, or calibration between the runs.

Tipping into boost at 2000rpm happens more often than you think. Driving in traffic, this is a pretty regular event, and part of what OEM calibrators critique in their drive quality exercises. It's also a big reason why Ford picked what looks like a small-ish turbo for this application. They want boost response at lower RPM so that they can build torque without requiring a downshift and make the engine feel much bigger than 2.3L to the customer.

I don't have a dog in this fight either. I don't sell turbos or end-user ECU calibrations. I'm just trying to help consumers become educated about how they evaluate performance parts data.

 

[Tune+]

I think you're starting to see my point. It's quite possible that your dyno results would not correlate with what a user may see with their actual car on the street. So, saying that Turbo A spools faster that Turbo B on the dyno in an unloaded condition doesn't necessarily mean that the same will be true for them when they actually drive in traffic.

On the other end of the performance spectrum, I have a twin turbo 6.2L that shows identical boost response between an MD-1100 and the street/track, but loses 2PSI (out of 6 total) and 50rwhp when run on an unloaded Dynojet 248 because the unloaded dyno didn't cause the turbos to spool. No changes in hardware, conditions, or calibration between the runs.

Tipping into boost at 2000rpm happens more often than you think. Driving in traffic, this is a pretty regular event, and part of what OEM calibrators critique in their drive quality exercises. It's also a big reason why Ford picked what looks like a small-ish turbo for this application. They want boost response at lower RPM so that they can build torque without requiring a downshift and make the engine feel much bigger than 2.3L to the customer.

I don't have a dog in this fight either. I don't sell turbos or end-user ECU calibrations. I'm just trying to help consumers become educated about how they evaluate performance parts data.

It is actually instructed heavily to NOT lay into throttle in higher gears when at low speed. This has been the fate of many engines. With bigger turbo cars it really isn't a matter, however I'm not talking about daily driving in my reply I was simply speaking on optimum performance, you wouldn't be in 4th gear at 2,000rpms if you were say do a quick roll race with someone at 40mph.

However this post is intended for educational purposes only on the first half of the graph, not peak power, not driving down the street, not cruising around part throttle, simply 100% APP, Spool Strategies, and results.

I like your 6.2L comparison versus MD and DJ, however if you were comparing different turbo's on that same 6.2L on the same dyno that would give you the information you are looking for right? Again, nothing is 100% nor will it EVER be. Every car is different, every scenario is different, and everything is going to be different, everytime.

If I was in the market for a turbo upgrade and I saw this post I would appreciate the information provided because not a single lick of information is provided elsewhere. This gives you results that you would likely to see if the same turbo kit was installed on their car. Normally when they inquire about a turbo upgrade they would get the answer "peak boost? about 3,500" which is almost never the case. This is real world testing, same dyno, same car, different turbo kits. Variables are always going to be there, but this gets you about as close as you can get without running 10 cars, with 10 different turbos with 10 dyno's in 10 dyno cells, in the same building with the same CO2 content, all at the same exact time. :lol:

THAT would be a hell of a facility right?

 

[smdandb2]

I think you're starting to see my point. It's quite possible that your dyno results would not correlate with what a user may see with their actual car on the street. So, saying that Turbo A spools faster that Turbo B on the dyno in an unloaded condition doesn't necessarily mean that the same will be true for them when they actually drive in traffic.

On the other end of the performance spectrum, I have a twin turbo 6.2L that shows identical boost response between an MD-1100 and the street/track, but loses 2PSI (out of 6 total) and 50rwhp when run on an unloaded Dynojet 248 because the unloaded dyno didn't cause the turbos to spool. No changes in hardware, conditions, or calibration between the runs.

Tipping into boost at 2000rpm happens more often than you think. Driving in traffic, this is a pretty regular event, and part of what OEM calibrators critique in their drive quality exercises. It's also a big reason why Ford picked what looks like a small-ish turbo for this application. They want boost response at lower RPM so that they can build torque without requiring a downshift and make the engine feel much bigger than 2.3L to the customer.

I don't have a dog in this fight either. I don't sell turbos or end-user ECU calibrations. I'm just trying to help consumers become educated about how they evaluate performance parts data.

Greg, nice to see you on here. It was SEMA 2008 maybe when you JimC and myself went out for dinner and other shens with the sweet rental convertible Mustang.

 

[Tamadrummer88]

So all of this data was collected on a 24" Dynojet? Did you also use an eddy current and road load data or was this run in inertial only mode? There can be a significant difference in the results with turbocharged cars...

Strong first post.

 

[PewterCam]

So all of this data was collected on a 24" Dynojet? Did you also use an eddy current and road load data or was this run in inertial only mode? There can be a significant difference in the results with turbocharged cars...

Damn.. I have read your articles and have both of your books. Helped a ton in learning how to Tune My Camaro with HP tuners. :hail:

Welcome aboard! Glad to have you here!

This thread will be spewing tons of mind blowing knowledge with both Tune+ and EFI Calibrator here!

Sponsored