tscompusa

iTrader: (31)

(How to read this thread - Starting from the top to the bottom - The top is all old content & the new is at the very bottom)


Worked all day on my car. Speed density is far superior to the maf.. ill never run a maf ever again.


The car made a max of 570 (553 SAE) on its old setup @ 36psi at redline in 3rd (peak horsepower area)
Shown with the graph below. Below that area the boost spiked as high as 43psi.



Now you can see the car is very different. There is no more spiking the boost to the moon anymore to hold boost. It is now using a 3 port and a mbc combined. (hybrid boost)

Temps were 75F out and this was done on the interstate on a major route near my house. The smoothing used is the smoothing i feel best shows the vehicles true output power level.

Here is what it made tonight:



Due to traffic, I could not load the car up down low to show a better comparison under the curve, but that isn't even the area i care about anymore, but i know others do. Let me just say i cant notice any loss of power down low, if anything it feels more responsive. I had timing loaded in the car and had it aggressive, and it peaked around 570wtq.. but i took it back out. that's not what I'm after. what I'm after is 1/4 track powerband usage.

Here is an overlay of the boost now and the boost ran on that dynojet for reference.



If all goes well ill have time slips for the car by Wednesday.

Here's how the new setup looks:



Changes from the Dynojet Research Graph at the very top were the following:

Map rev 3 intake manifold replaced by an AMS F1i intake manifold
65MM mil.spec throttlebody replaced by a 70mm Full Blown
Map ported exhaust manifold replaced by a ToxicFab Tubular Manifold
Muse upper pipe replaced by an ETS upper pipe for AMS f1i
Forge RS BOV replaced by a Tial Q BOV
FP intake + perrin foam filter + MAF replaced by JMFAB 4" intake pipe + 9" K&N cone filter (SD)

All the above yielded about 40WHP gains at the same boost level at peak horsepower area.
(over 70whp gains throughout the powerband)

The only thing I have to do next is replace the Kelford 272 for GSC s3 which i will document the power changes and show the difference in MPH at the drag strip with the 2 sets of cams. Hopefully my information will help somebody else.. that is why im documenting it all.

Important power mods:

BR 2.3L
BR stage 3 head
Kelford 272
BR Race FMIC
BR double pumper
FIC 2150cc
JMFAB 4" intake pipe + 9" cone filter
Tephra v7 Speed density
grimmspeed 3 port --> hallman mbc
cobb 3" tbe
Toxicfab tubular manifold
Tial Q bov
70MM full blown
AMS f1i intake manifold
Invidia o2 housing
FP Black DBB Ported
Sparktech non cdi

Those are the basics. Will update with timeslips. Any questions feel free to ask.

update: took it to the track and it did a quicker time but the mph was not there yet. ran into some complications.
read here for more information https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/10371516-post47.html

heres some driveability videos of the SD Tune also:


www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z_ZseE-7C8

-------------------------------------------------------------


Track results & Kelford 272 vs S3 comparison:

Final track results here with kelford 272: https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/10388469-post77.html

Kelford 272 vs GSC S3 swap out comparison not 100% 1 on 1 accurate, but the car has picked up quite a bit
of top end https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/10397480-post85.html

-

Final GSC S3 power pull results (195lb passenger onboard):




-

these are the final results after getting the proper weight of the car and doing more pulls.. next update will be with time slips.. after i have a slip of s3 vs kelfords i will share then make my final decision on if the s3 are better then the kelfords.. track approval pending of course.

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/10452979-post118.html

ToxicFab

iTrader: (42)

Nice numbers buddy!

Collin

Steven

iTrader: (19)

Looking good. That fuel line looks good too!

GotWheelHop

iTrader: (39)

Looks good, Tom. Might have to give the hybrid boost a try so I can limit my tq spike and keep building power up top. 138 or bust.

EvoIIIAj

iTrader: (1)

Looking great Tom. I'm interested in doing SD also but not sure how hard it would be for me being my car doesn't come with a map sensor from factory.

fabcas311

iTrader: (58)

i like!!

badev0

iTrader: (74)

Very nice Tom. Car will definitely trap somewhere between 135-138.

prowakeskater

iTrader: (14)

Perfect engine bay. Impressive gains!

Interested in the comparison of the s3's. Will the displacement help the spool lag? or will there even be a difference?

GotWheelHop

iTrader: (39)

I have a similar build to Tom's and I noticed almost zero gain in spool up time when I installed my s3's from Comp 280's. Tom is gonna pick up a bunch out the top probably, and not have to run crazy boost to do it.

RazorLab

iTrader: (8)

I'd be curious to see a before/after on the same measurement tool. Can you do VD overlays of before/after?

This is not a challenge, I'm truly curious.

el.guerrero

speed density 2d or 3d?

94AWDcoupe

iTrader: (125)

wow those are some massive torque losses.
4000 its down 80
4500 its down 130
even 5000 its 70
before it looked fun from 4500-7700
now its looks fun from 6000-8000
two different beasts for sure.
and no tellin which parts are helping or hurting with sooo many changes. so important to make one change at a time and assess.

batty200

iTrader: (3)

The boost is not spiking to 43psi anymore which is causing lower tq numbers. He doesn't want to have to spike the boost so high to hold power out the top. If he spikes 43psi again I am sure a good portion of the lost tq would reappear quickly.

EvocentriK

When you can use a 3-port to tune boost for the entire rev range, why are you using an MBC as well? Your WGDC tables must look real weird.

Good to see youre happy with the new setup, be interesting to see what the S3's do.

94AWDcoupe

iTrader: (125)

sure I saw that. there are a tonne of variables left out. but in short there are at least two parts added that are known torque killers. with only the before and after graphs to look at from here my observation remains. he did state he only cares about 1/4 mile performance so it doesnt matter

.Due to traffic, i could not load the car up downlow to show a better comparison under the curve, but that isnt even the area i care about anymore, but i know others do. let me just say i cant notice any loss of power downlow, if anything it feels more responsive. I had timing loaded in the car and had it aggressive, and it peaked around 570wtq.. but i took it back out. thats not what im after. what im after is 1/4 track powerband usage.