Minnesota - nice to finaly get someone somewhat close to my area. When do you think you guys will get all moved in. Also, new shop, dyno tuneing cars maybe? Could be an option instead of me traveling all the way to texas.

 

MM does all of our tuning, he will be making frequent trips as I already have several cars lined up for him to tune. Dyno is in the future, not right away though. There are other dynos to use in the meantime. Looking to snag a dyno from someone going out of business...

 

Add "restriction" as well....

 

does a different more efficent turbo create the same amount of boost, at a lower temp then the less effective turbo, therefore creating more dense air, more cfm. Therefore making more power?

if not then I guess turblowns tubular manifold is making a gain of 60whp over a log setup?

 

I have done back to backs with logs vs tubular manifolds on Rx-7s, same turbo, same everything but the manifold and downpipe. 30 + ft lbs of torque, and over 1000rpms difference in spool on the older 13Bs...

 

Very nice, wish you could do the same tests with the renisis. Maybe one day still I wish the omp didnt have to be relocated

 

You guys .....

I still find it interesting that the only turbo combination that has strayed from "the norm" as far as boost vs whp goes is the Turblown setup .
Gotta admit that it did (and still does) surprise me how they made so much power with so little boost but when I look at their set-up I see they went all out to design a system with the absolute minimum of restrictions . It obviously paid off.

As far as boost being a worthless variable . I'm still very much at odds with MM over this . I wonder if the next identical Turblown set-up made the same whp but took an extra 5 psi to do it whether he would just dismiss boost as "worthless information".

 

Yes, but where are the Renesis back-back logs? Not to mention that details count.

 

Not that this is a good comparison but the 26th i should be getting a tune with Turblowns Hybrid Gt35 turbo on a esmeril manifold. However there are a couple differnces from the turbo on the original setup everyone is talking about . Mine has a lower A/R and is journal bearing. Anyone else running that original turbo with a log setup yet?

 

about as worthless as still not admitting you are wrong ...

 

While It's true that the Turblown results f'd up my theory a little , I still maintain that boost is proportional to whp for a given setup and if you fall outside of that you look for the cause , You don't just shrug your shoulders and say it is what it is .

Speaking of worthless - wonder what % of your 10000 fall into that category .... maybe I should do a poll

 

98%

 

i can see how temperature is a key facter, perhaps turblown made so much more power because the intercooler was soaking in liquid nitrogen?

only MM has the logs, I would be interested in seeing the g/sec and intake temperatures of both, however I do understand that these are intake temps to the turbo not the throttle body brettus and MM are the only ones that I know have that have done this mod..

Intake temps along mean nothing....
PSI alone means nothing....
CFM alone means nothing....
Restriction along means nothing.....


but all put together it means something so what is the difference between turblowns setup and the others that, so far its only the tubular setup vs log

so does MM, Charles, Turblown believe that the 60whp difference is due to a tubular manifold?

 

damn, didn't expect you to be so generous

I still know the difference between mass and *** ...

 

And that took it to 99

 

let me make it 100, opinions are like ******** ... you got yours, I got mine

 

LOl

 

the intercooler i believe was a garrett core on the car. Now as far as the log and tublar design i think it less restrictive on the note that it better flowing. Example: i could be wrong but when i think about the log design when, the exhaust gases that come out do not flow out evenly yes the turbo stills work but i dont think it is as free flowing. Now on the other hand the tubular design to me just comes off as a better flowing setup alowing the exhaust gases to coming individually giving more power to the turbo.

it very early to be technical about this stuff, the easiest way that i can think of it to get 1 straw and blow out of its kind of hard and doesnt move much air but take 3 straws it moves more air a lot faster giving it more force.

 

I think the discussion there centered around the idea that using "boost" as a reference point requires a few presumptions/calculations while measuring actual air mass is what the final data point one is seeking, anyway, while tuning and etc. (whether consciously or subconsciously). In other words, to use manifold boost levels as a point of reference one must make further mathematical calculations all in an effort to determine incoming air mass anyway, so why not just use measured air mass in the first place. Like is available by using mass airflow sensors.

As regards the comparisons between different turbos while using manifold boost levels as a reference (as opposed to compressor nozzle pressures), those are probably valid as well as long as charge temps are equal.

I think from a functional standpoint MM and I might use our musical experiences to agree on the idea that we use all the objective information that we have in an attempt to understand the "rules", so to speak, only to have such "rules" not matter much when it comes to actual pragmatic execution of a given idea. As musicians, we learned our scales and modes so as to get closer and closer to the prodigal level. Once prodigal levels are achieved the scales and modes are no longer a conscious thought and our ears are directly connected to our hands. Same holds true in martial arts of all kinds.

In short; we can theorize and discuss all this in an effort to become "Beautiful Minds" about the whole thing but Mother Nature is a ************.

In the end, all that matters is whether or not one felt they got their money's worth with whatever endeavor in which they were engaged. I am pretty sure when WantedTwo comes home and drives his car he will feel that he did.

 

lol " No mind" tuning!
OD

 

Take a look at logs from all the turbo cars MM has tuned - a LOT of them flow well over 400g/s , yet they (pretty much)all make less than 300whp .

There is one piece of data that does not add up - combine it with another piece of data like ......... boost , and you get a better picture of what might be going on .

 

Me thinks someone has been drinking from the dyno water...

You still are missing a LOT of what the data means, what the tool is capable of and the relationship between specific power output and mass airflow.

 

SO we will never know why a +60whp..... It must be the tubular

 

apparently (turbo) size doesn't matter then, nor does engine life ... not to say the next one won't, but rather your chickies ain't hatched yet

 

YUp must not