I've been extremely busy these past few months but have finally managed the time to start tuning my latest work of art:

my personal 2008 Evo X Gsr.

I am using E85 as the primary fuel source and never intend switching fuel hence the Fic 2150 c.c injectors and twin external bosch 044 fuel pumps.

I currently maxxed out the stock maf housing (4.9 volts) and am in the process of obtaining a 3.5" or larger maf housing to work in conjunction with Extreme Turbo Systems's 4" Intake. If anyone has some bolt-on options, please leave a comment or p.m in regards.

Max boost seen thus far is 28.5psi producing 517whp/325wtq on a 1.0 correction factor using a dynodynamics awd dyno.

I have included two logs at the end of the video showing 4.9 Volts on the maf as well as common log data. (Ignition Timing, Boost, etc)

I would also like to note that the Mivec mapping is still stock on the intake and exhaust. I basically made 4 or 5 pulls and literally tapped the stock maf housing that quick so I believe there is plenty of spool-up and area under the curve to be gained with custom mivec mapping which I note during the logged portions at the end of the video.

I want to give thanks to my current sponsors Michael and Chris from Extreme Turbo Systems. It has been a long road and I've finally found my number 1 vendor/supplier and they take care of me, period. Awesome turbo kit, manifold coating, and every part always comes well packaged with a flawless fit and finish.

I would also like to thank Ams with providing me a great fuel system. I customized their 500hp fuel sytem with two external bosch 044 fuel pumps which have been working well in my quest to push this setup on E85 to the limits.

Much thanks and praise goes out to all of the ecu guru's including Tephra and Golden. Without you guys no one would be this far in the stock ecu tuning department. Golden and I talk all the time and if I owed him a beer for every time I asked him a question he would be permanantly intoxicated and would not be able to develop new features with ecuflash anymore..

Onto The Car...

VIDEO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSyRzGxvt-I


Extensive Modification List:

DG Motors Spec Bottom End
-9:1 CR (Stock Sleeves)
-Cosworth Pistons
-Cosworth Rods
-Cosworth Main/Rod Bearings
(Fully blueprinted, balanced, polished stock crank, etc,)

DG Motors Spec Cylinder Head
-Complete Port/Polish
-Valve Job (Stock Valves)
-Gsc S2 Camshafts
-Supertech Dual Valve Springs w/ Titanium Retainers
-Cosworth Head Gasket

Transmission(Bone Stock)
-DG Motors Evolution 9 Clutch Master Cylinder Conversion Kit
-DG Motors Billet Aluminum Slave Block
-Exedy Twin HD Clutch/Flywheel
-Buschur Racing Base/Shifter Bushings

Turbo
-Extreme Turbo Systems Billet 67-65 Turbo Kit
-Hallman Pro Manual Boost Controller

Intake
-Buschur Racing 4.5" Intercooler
-Buschur Racing Upper Intercooler Pipe
-Buschur Racing Lower Intercooler Pipe (Tial "Q" 50mm Blow Off Valve)
-Ets 4" Intake

Exhaust
-Buschur Racing Exhaust Tips
-Custom 2-Piece 3" S.S Turbo Back Exhaust/Ets Down Pipe

Fuel
-Fuel Injector Clinic 2150 C.C Injectors
-Ams/DG Motors 750hp Fuel System (Twin External Bosch 044 Fuel Pumps)
-Ams Fuel Rail
-Ams Fuel Pressure Regulator Kit

Ignition
-Stock Mitsubishi Coils/Plugs
-Aem Air/Fuel and Boost Gauge
Suspension-Eibach Pro Drop In Springs

Factory Stock Items
-Stock Block Sleeves
-Intake Manifold/Throttle Body(No Porting)
-Maf Sensor/Housing(4.99 Volts)
-Ecu(Tephra Alt Maps)

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5402/dgdragevoxhp.jpg

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/5786/dgdragevoxboost.jpg

VIDEO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSyRzGxvt-I


09/18/10 -Phase 1.5

Here is an awesome video of Saturday's tuning session.

The car wound up making 670whp/440wtq @ 29psi on E-85.

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/4783/comparisone.jpg
Comparing Baseline From Phase 1 (517whp) DynoDynamics (575whp)Dynojet un-touched tune to (670whp)Dynojet-Final Tune



This is a 2-Part Video all enclusive with dyno footage/street driving:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjQ2QvMT7_A

Holy crap batman!! Nice!!! Congrats!!

Have you maxed a single Bosch 044 on your dyno before? Would be very curious where it maxed compared to a GSS342.

Quite the build you have going there, man that 6765 is laggy but it will really dish out some power when fully utilized.

Cool build :) I bet it will be fun when its all tuned up.

Me and Lomker had a local place fab up a 3.5" intake and it will be for sale through MAP. PM me and I will get you more info if you want. You could just run a 3.5" to 4" coupler if you needed to.

Me and Lomker had a local place fab up a 3.5" intake and it will be for sale through MAP

I haven't seen an ETS close up but if it is similar to the stock housing then a small piece of pipe, a JM Fab flange, and proper couplers should do the trick.

Too early for me to recommend that intake...I have issues that may very well be the intake.

I haven't seen an ETS close up but if it is similar to the stock housing then a small piece of pipe, a JM Fab flange, and proper couplers should do the trick.

Too early for me to recommend that intake...I have issues that may very well be the intake.

Well hopefully we find out soon as my car should be ready in the next week or so.

That is just too laggy for me. Sounds damn good though

e-spec fp black ftw!!!

e-spec fp black ftw!!!

What does that have to do with this thread?

love the sound of ur exhaust.. sick car bro!

Are the pistons stock bore?

Cant wait to see it turned up.

Quite the build you have going there, man that 6765 is laggy but it will really dish out some power when fully utilized.

Cool build :) I bet it will be fun when its all tuned up.

Me and Lomker had a local place fab up a 3.5" intake and it will be for sale through MAP. PM me and I will get you more info if you want. You could just run a 3.5" to 4" coupler if you needed to.

Excellent, p.m sent!

That is just too laggy for me. Sounds damn good though

Thanks, I should be able to make it more responsive by 400-600rpm. I gave up on lag years ago when the old 20g's were a hit:D

e-spec fp black ftw!!!

Some things never change.

Are the pistons stock bore?

Cant wait to see it turned up.

More information on the bottom end:

Stock Bore
Stock Sleeves
9:1 Compression

The tuning can go two different ways for phase 2:

Install 3.5" Maf housing and turn the wick up to the stock map sensors cap of 33ish psi and see what I can squeeze or install an omni 4-bar and shoot for the moon...I'm leaning towards the moon.

The moon...

I sent Tephra a 4 bar OMNI to work out scalings because I knew i would need more than 33psi. He is going to send me some soon for my build, once I test it and it works I will post it.

Nice build. looking forward to some more numbers when everything gets worked out.

Dear god, 28.5 psi 517whp on a dd dyno! This turbo is just getting started at 30psi gotta love it.

Also, just an observation but this 6765 only looks like ~200rpm laggier than the 6262 but with way more potential. The 6262 is a great street/strip/show off turbo so this one might be better.

i would like to know more about your fuel system. how do you have it all installed. plumbing and wiring. do you still have the oem fuel pump assembly un-touched in the tank?

Awesome work so at but REALLY surprised at ETS. They Should know you need a new maf housing. My 3.5 maf housing I sitting here. Totally forgot the new silicone reducer at my fabricator's house. Doh! Guess only pump gas at the strip tonite.

I sent Tephra a 4 bar OMNI to work out scalings because I knew i would need more than 33psi. He is going to send me some soon for my build, once I test it and it works I will post it.

We have successfully installed and tuned an omni 4-bar map sensor on an evo x last summer.

Nice build. looking forward to some more numbers when everything gets worked out.

Thanks, everything is working out excellent. I purposely tuned the car up until the stock maf housing limits for motor, turbo, and clutch break-in.

Dear god, 28.5 psi 517whp on a dd dyno! This turbo is just getting started at 30psi gotta love it.

Also, just an observation but this 6765 only looks like ~200rpm laggier than the 6262 but with way more potential. The 6262 is a great street/strip/show off turbo so this one might be better.

Thanks for the positive comments. I will be improving spool-up and area under the curve with custom mivec mapping tailored specifically for this setup during phase 2 of tuning. I plan on running this setup to its absolute maximum potential which will be no less than 40psi on E85.

i would like to know more about your fuel system. how do you have it all installed. plumbing and wiring. do you still have the oem fuel pump assembly un-touched in the tank?

The oem fuel pump is stock and the fuel pump assembly has been modified with Ams's 500hp fuel system components.

In place of Ams's external in-line walbro 255 fuel pump is a single Bosch 044 feeding another in-line Bosch 044 pump.

I am also using Fic 2150's in conjunction with Ams's fuel rail and fuel pressure regulator kit with a base fuel pressure of 55psi.

Awesome work so at but REALLY surprised at ETS. They Should know you need a new maf housing. My 3.5 maf housing I sitting here. Totally forgot the new silicone reducer at my fabricator's house. Doh! Guess only pump gas at the strip tonite.

Thanks but I was well aware of the stock maf housings limits before this build even started.

Congrats on your build and good luck at the track!

Congrats on your build and good luck at the track!

thank you! You too! 3.5 inch maf should be more than enough I think. Eventually I'm sure Tephra will release a speed density patch for this ecu. That and a 4 bar should be perfect!

Dear god, 28.5 psi 517whp on a dd dyno! This turbo is just getting started at 30psi gotta love it.

Also, just an observation but this 6765 only looks like ~200rpm laggier than the 6262 but with way more potential. The 6262 is a great street/strip/show off turbo so this one might be better.

hmmmm.... i think that GT35R and PTE 6262, makes the same power on 28.5 psi , shouldnt 6765 make more power on 28.5psi?

Not to start a dyno war but 517 on dd is like low 600s dj. I haven't seen any 2.0L, 29psi pump gas 35r do this well. Just saw that he is running E85 but not running E85 level boost so really not taking advantage of the E85.

Not to start a dyno war but 517 on dd is like low 600s dj. I haven't seen any 2.0L, 29psi pump gas 35r do this well. Just saw that he is running E85 but not running E85 level boost so really not taking advantage of the E85.
gt35R and pt6262 is known to make 500+ on pump gas on mustang and dd dyno's on 29 psi , just look it up on the forums , im just saying how come a larger turbo makes the similar numbers on same boost! shouldnt it make more than that?! especially on E85

anyone can clarify this ( btw, i dont have E85 where i live in)

gt35R and pt6262 is known to make 500+ on pump gas on mustang and dd dyno's on 29 psi

An uncorrected DD can read a lot lower than a Mustang. Every dyno is different...yada yada.

As an example, an FP Red or BBX hasn't broken 420hp on the DD that I tune on...I'm talking E85 and cars with every mod you could name.

An uncorrected DD can read a lot lower than a Mustang. Every dyno is different...yada yada.

As an example, an FP Red or BBX hasn't broken 420hp on the DD that I tune on...I'm talking E85 and cars with every mod you could name.

on the OP its stated that a 1.0 CF was used

Not to start a dyno war but 517 on dd is like low 600s dj. I haven't seen any 2.0L, 29psi pump gas 35r do this well. Just saw that he is running E85 but not running E85 level boost so really not taking advantage of the E85.


Mine did on 93! I made 558whp/416tq uncorrected @27psi on a mustang dyno. Corrected it was 585whp/436tq. It kept leaning out up top. After troubleshooting for awhile we found a bad FPR, we replaced it and now just waiting on a retune. It should make over 600 no problem.

17192

Mine did on 93! I made 558whp/416tq uncorrected @27psi on a mustang dyno. Corrected it was 585whp/436tq. It kept leaning out up top. After troubleshooting for awhile we found a bad FPR, we replaced it and now just waiting on a retune. It should make over 600 no problem.

17192

thats the thing im wondring about, isnt a larger turbo(i.e 6765) suppose to make more power on the same boost level, on the same type of gas compared to a smaller one(i.e.6262) ??

hmmmm.... i think that GT35R and PTE 6262, makes the same power on 28.5 psi , shouldnt 6765 make more power on 28.5psi?

There are many other factors that played a role in the tuning of this vehicle.

First and foremost, the stock maf housing is maxxed out which ended the tuning session as expected. The car is running on E85, if you check out the timing advance in the logging notes at the end of the video you will see that it is conservative as well.

A 3.5" maf housing is being processed at this time. For Sh*ts and giggles I will see just how much more power can be squeezed out of the current setup at 28.5psi, with more timing, mivec, etc.

Not to start a dyno war but 517 on dd is like low 600s dj. I haven't seen any 2.0L, 29psi pump gas 35r do this well. Just saw that he is running E85 but not running E85 level boost so really not taking advantage of the E85.

Someone has done their research. I feel the car is making exceptional power as it sits right now. Conservative timing figures for E85 fuel and stock mivec mapping to note.

The ported and polished race head is also flowing some serious air.

gt35R and pt6262 is known to make 500+ on pump gas on mustang and dd dyno's on 29 psi , just look it up on the forums , im just saying how come a larger turbo makes the similar numbers on same boost! shouldnt it make more than that?! especially on E85

anyone can clarify this ( btw, i dont have E85 where i live in)

Maf housing is maxxed out. Can not continue to make power at this time. It would only lead to big problems and the risk of catastrophic failure. The car is capable of making much more power at the same boost with additional timing advance and mivec tweaking.

An uncorrected DD can read a lot lower than a Mustang. Every dyno is different...yada yada.

As an example, an FP Red or BBX hasn't broken 420hp on the DD that I tune on...I'm talking E85 and cars with every mod you could name.

Exactly. Assuming E85 and 30psi average for both the FP Red and BBX, 420whp is hard to achieve. I recall a few cars making more such as a blouch dominator 2.0 on 93/100% meth (430), went 11.4 @ 122. I've also had a BBX make 420whp on the dot on straight 93 but left a bigger margin of error in the event of some knock down the road and settled for 400.

It takes some serious oomph to crack 500whp on a dynodynamics.

on the OP its stated that a 1.0 CF was used

You are correct. No correction factors being used.

Mine did on 93! I made 558whp/416tq uncorrected @27psi on a mustang dyno. Corrected it was 585whp/436tq. It kept leaning out up top. After troubleshooting for awhile we found a bad FPR, we replaced it and now just waiting on a retune. It should make over 600 no problem.

17192

I don't see a larger maf housing listed in your signature. With the data I have on the car in this thread, I honestly can not see that possible on a stock maf housing. If you do have an upgraded maf housing then I can see it possible but far from safe on straight 93 Octane.

27psi will also not make anywhere near 550whp on an un-molested mustang or dynodynamics on plain 93 Octane. Our 2.0 motors are just too small, believe me. I don't want to start a dyno war but the data I just provided shows a stock maf housing being tapped out at just over 27psi......

thats the thing im wondring about, isnt a larger turbo(i.e 6765) suppose to make more power on the same boost level, on the same type of gas compared to a smaller one(i.e.6262) ??

No, boost and fuel are only a small percentage of all the variables that will produce a given horsepower result.

A few other important key variables:

-Volumetric Efficiency (Head Work, Motor Work, Ported vs Stock)
-Timing Advance
-Intake/Exhaust Mivec
-Injector Duty Cycle
-Maf Voltage
-Knock

The list goes on and on when comparing different setups...

Stock MAF housing at 517whp? Just now maxed?

hah

Stock MAF housing at 517whp? Just now maxed?

I'm pretty surprised at that. I had a 3" at 4.9volts at only 410. Maybe it'd make it to 450 but I'm surprised that the stocker can even hit 400.

DG, I figured out the issue with my car so that 3.5" intake that murlo was talking about is working for me. My front o2 is pita so I'm running open loop for now.

I'm pretty surprised at that. I had a 3" at 4.9volts at only 410. Maybe it'd make it to 450 but I'm surprised that the stocker can even hit 400.

DG, I figured out the issue with my car so that 3.5" intake that murlo was talking about is working for me. My front o2 is pita so I'm running open loop for now.
shouldnt a decent turbo kit (non stock framed turbo) come with a 3.5" MAF housing along with the 3.5'' to 4'' intake, they usually come with?!

There are many other factors that played a role in the tuning of this vehicle.

First and foremost, the stock maf housing is maxxed out which ended the tuning session as expected. The car is running on E85, if you check out the timing advance in the logging notes at the end of the video you will see that it is conservative as well.

A 3.5" maf housing is being processed at this time. For Sh*ts and giggles I will see just how much more power can be squeezed out of the current setup at 28.5psi, with more timing, mivec, etc.



Someone has done their research. I feel the car is making exceptional power as it sits right now. Conservative timing figures for E85 fuel and stock mivec mapping to note.

The ported and polished race head is also flowing some serious air.



Maf housing is maxxed out. Can not continue to make power at this time. It would only lead to big problems and the risk of catastrophic failure. The car is capable of making much more power at the same boost with additional timing advance and mivec tweaking.



Exactly. Assuming E85 and 30psi average for both the FP Red and BBX, 420whp is hard to achieve. I recall a few cars making more such as a blouch dominator 2.0 on 93/100% meth (430), went 11.4 @ 122. I've also had a BBX make 420whp on the dot on straight 93 but left a bigger margin of error in the event of some knock down the road and settled for 400.

It takes some serious oomph to crack 500whp on a dynodynamics.



You are correct. No correction factors being used.



I don't see a larger maf housing listed in your signature. With the data I have on the car in this thread, I honestly can not see that possible on a stock maf housing. If you do have an upgraded maf housing then I can see it possible but far from safe on straight 93 Octane.

27psi will also not make anywhere near 550whp on an un-molested mustang or dynodynamics on plain 93 Octane. Our 2.0 motors are just too small, believe me. I don't want to start a dyno war but the data I just provided shows a stock maf housing being tapped out at just over 27psi......



No, boost and fuel are only a small percentage of all the variables that will produce a given horsepower result.

A few other important key variables:

-Volumetric Efficiency (Head Work, Motor Work, Ported vs Stock)
-Timing Advance
-Intake/Exhaust Mivec
-Injector Duty Cycle
-Maf Voltage
-Knock

The list goes on and on when comparing different setups...
true that! , but lets say the MAF housing get upgraded to 3.5'' , further tuning and mivec , how much more whp would be expected from this setup on the same boost level 28.5 psi(given that all the supporting mods are there)

I'm pretty surprised at that. I had a 3" at 4.9volts at only 410. Maybe it'd make it to 450 but I'm surprised that the stocker can even hit 400.



You are surprised because one of those things is not correct, or another, or both. Probably both.

Even 3" MAF housings max at much much lower power outputs....

:nerd:

shouldnt a decent turbo kit (non stock framed turbo)

haha. Who would that be? This is an ETS kit. ETS uses a 4" pipe but necks down to a small MAF. I talked to Michael@ETS about making a bigger one for stock-frame turbos but they were busy and I didn't want to wait on it.

You are surprised because one of those things is not correct, or another, or both. Probably both.

Even 3" MAF housings max at much much lower power outputs....

:nerd:

then y dont companies making those turbo kits , provide a 3.5'' housing with their kits since its pretty sure that the power levels of such non stock framed turbo's are on a level exceding the stock MAF housing capabilities?!

then y dont companies making those turbo kits , provide a 3.5'' housing with their kits

Simple: most of their customers run pump gas and will not exceed the MAF housing that they provide. Us E85 guys may be vocal on the Internetz but in the big scheme of things we're a small percentage of customers.

i see that dg shop car is back in business.....may visit you guys to get a tune soon....

Simple: most of their customers run pump gas and will not exceed the MAF housing that they provide. Us E85 guys may be vocal on the Internetz but in the big scheme of things we're a small percentage of customers.

then i guess it wont hurt to make a 3.5'' MAF housing along with the turbo kit (i.e. 35R)just for the sake of using it for this setup and for enough room for more power when needed

btw,doesnt the stock maf housing gets maxed out at about 400-450 whp , then by using a gt35 kit or similar (making 500+ whp on pump) , the stock maf housing wont be enough?!!

the stock maf housing wont be enough?!!

I didn't think the ETS setup was stock, it just isn't all that big. Michael wasn't sure where it'd max and referred me to tuners (who didn't bother to reply). I'd guess it is 3" or something like that.

Just because the maf voltage is maxed doesnt mean power is done. You can add fuel past when you get to 4.9v to keep afr in check and power will keep climbing.

Stock MAF housing at 517whp? Just now maxed?

hah

I will post much earlier logs showing 4.9 volts. After running the maf through the whole power band at 4.9 volts is when I decided to stop.

I'm pretty surprised at that. I had a 3" at 4.9volts at only 410. Maybe it'd make it to 450 but I'm surprised that the stocker can even hit 400.

DG, I figured out the issue with my car so that 3.5" intake that murlo was talking about is working for me. My front o2 is pita so I'm running open loop for now.

Excellent, please shoot a p.m!

Just because the maf voltage is maxed doesnt mean power is done. You can add fuel past when you get to 4.9v to keep afr in check and power will keep climbing.

Oh I know. I saw 4.9 volts in the mid-high 300's. I decided to call the maf dunzo at 500 dd power!

Just because the maf voltage is maxed doesnt mean power is done. You can add fuel past when you get to 4.9v to keep afr in check and power will keep climbing.
the OP stated that his stock maf housing is maxed , and this prevented more gains to be made by further tuning, how can this fit in?

I didn't think the ETS setup was stock, it just isn't all that big. Michael wasn't sure where it'd max and referred me to tuners (who didn't bother to reply). I'd guess it is 3" or something like that.

hmmmm... well ive read in several threads on stock maf housings , maxxing out on stock framed turbo's .. soo i figured why not to go on to a 3.5 maf housing , when ill go to a non stock framed turbo kit

I will post much earlier logs showing 4.9 volts. After running the maf through the whole power band at 4.9 volts is when I decided to stop.



Excellent, please shoot a p.m!



Oh I know. I saw 4.9 volts in the mid-high 300's. I decided to call the maf dunzo at 500 dd power!
u mean u can still make alot more power even on a maxed out maf housing?

I don't see a larger maf housing listed in your signature. With the data I have on the car in this thread, I honestly can not see that possible on a stock maf housing. If you do have an upgraded maf housing then I can see it possible but far from safe on straight 93 Octane.

27psi will also not make anywhere near 550whp on an un-molested mustang or dynodynamics on plain 93 Octane. Our 2.0 motors are just too small, believe me. I don't want to start a dyno war but the data I just provided shows a stock maf housing being tapped out at just over 27psi......




Sorry the AFI 35r kit comes with a 3" MAF housing. The tune is completely safe...Tuned by Jestr which is known for tuning high hp evos. Im def not trying to get in a dyno war just simply stating what my car made....
I actually bought Gumps old turbo kit which made 500hp on a stock block and a stock head so why would it be far fetched to make 550 on a built engine and built head? I don't know how many 35r kits i've seen make over 500whp with the same setup or less.

Im sure when you start tuning the mivec and get the maf housing setup you will be in the high 600's or low 700's running E85. I know gumps car made high 600's on pump gas with the 6765.

Oh I know. I saw 4.9 volts in the mid-high 300's. I decided to call the maf dunzo at 500 dd power!

peddddlllee back peddddllle back. Wait actually this isn't pedddling back at all.

Does anybody actually read this and believe it?

peddddlllee back peddddllle back. Wait actually this isn't pedddling back at all.

Does anybody actually read this and believe it?

I have nothing to hide. I will be posting the log and dyno sheet in a few.

If I remember correctly, 22psi made about 380 and it touched 4.9 volts.

the OP stated that his stock maf housing is maxed , and this prevented more gains to be made by further tuning, how can this fit in?



hmmmm... well ive read in several threads on stock maf housings , maxxing out on stock framed turbo's .. soo i figured why not to go on to a 3.5 maf housing , when ill go to a non stock framed turbo kit


u mean u can still make alot more power even on a maxed out maf housing?

In the short yes but not efficiently.

"The maf should be calibrated to match the flow rating of the fuel injectors, in conjunction with the PCM (engine computer) being used for the given application. A properly calibrated Mass Air Flow meter will result in a meter that generates an accurate voltage signal vs. the air mass entering the engine throughout the entire RPM range of the engine. If the meter you are using is not properly calibrated, the meter may "peg" (reach maximum voltage output) before the engine reaches maximum airflow, which will result in an inaccurate air/fuel ratio, causing a loss in horsepower, or even potential engine damage. In contrast, it may fall below the PCM's expected minimum voltage input at idle speed, which will result in the PCM entering a "failure mode", which will cause a very rich condition at idle. A properly calibrated Mass Air Flow meter ensures that the PCM receives a correct signal throughout the engine's entire operating range, resulting in a proper air/fuel mixture, maximum horsepower, excellent drivability, and maximum fuel economy."

also, maf max should be determined by the amount of flow, not horsepower. I used the horsepower made as reference to where I personally feel a larger maf housing is needed to properly continue making power even though 4.9 volts was seen much earlier on.

You can continue making power if you keep the airflow (boost) the same thus not creating more flow. Since I am running E85, increased timing, mivec, etc will all contriubute to more power with the same airflow. This is why I backed off from 28.5psi - 27psi. I lowered airflow to lower maf voltage by a small percent.

You can add fuel past when you get to 4.9v to keep afr in check and power will keep climbing.

I'm not a tuner so I won't pretend to understand that. My guy told me that the ECU was pulling timing when the MAF maxed out and that I needed a bigger one...so I got a bigger one.

I'm not a tuner so I won't pretend to understand that. My guy told me that the ECU was pulling timing when the MAF maxed out and that I needed a bigger one...so I got a bigger one.

You did the right thing. Yes you can add tons of fuel to try and compensate but your resolution is shot and playing the guessing game is not ethical when you can upgrade.

Lets not forget that the car also uses the MAP sensor to calculate load. Not that I would want to exceed the MAF sensor's voltage... but Load is a crazy thing in the ECU. Tephra is investigating it right now. Maybe I'll finally get rid of my load dip. :)

Maybe I'll finally get rid of my load dip. :)

Have you tried the PSI boost option yet? I'm running it. Honestly, it feels the same to me. I suppose that's a good thing.

Lets not forget that the car also uses the MAP sensor to calculate load. Not that I would want to exceed the MAF sensor's voltage... but Load is a crazy thing in the ECU. Tephra is investigating it right now. Maybe I'll finally get rid of my load dip. :)

Have you tried the PSI boost option yet? I'm running it. Honestly, it feels the same to me. I suppose that's a good thing.

I believe Golden is running psi based boost and It's a nice option to have thanks to tephra.

You are correct about the map sensor as well. The stock map sensor will be on it's way out since it gets capped at 33.4psi. Re-calibrating a new maf housing for 5psi more would be silly to leave the stock map sensor in at this point.

I will keep everyone posted, hopefully next week I can have some more data and crack well into the 600's with 40+ psi.

No, I'm still load based. If it ain't broke... I have tuned a couple of PSI based ones though and really like it. Maybe I should convert mine over.

PSI based should help with having different PSI peaks in different gears. I had to disable the ASC OFF issue at the track last weekend, because my ~28 psi tune wanted to be ~30 psi coming out of certain corners in 4th.

Im sure when you start tuning the mivec and get the maf housing setup you will be in the high 600's or low 700's running E85. I know gumps car made high 600's on pump gas with the 6765.
well thats great , soo on pump gas the 6765 can make about 100whp more power than compared with smaller turbo's like gt35 or pt6262 ,
but can gump comfirm this? soo i have a peace of mind , to decide upon wich turbo to go for my future 2.3 l build

I believe Golden is running psi based boost and It's a nice option to have thanks to tephra.

You are correct about the map sensor as well. The stock map sensor will be on it's way out since it gets capped at 33.4psi. Re-calibrating a new maf housing for 5psi more would be silly to leave the stock map sensor in at this point.

I will keep everyone posted, hopefully next week I can have some more data and crack well into the 600's with 40+ psi.
great writeup , u mean its no point to increase the maf housing size and do the recalibration , but leaving the stock map sensor as it is. but what if im only gona stay with maximum of 35 psi (pump+meth) , should i change the map sensor here or keep it as is?

No, I'm still load based. If it ain't broke...

Your previous comment suggested that load was 'broke', hence the question. lol.

well thats great , soo on pump gas the 6765 can make about 100whp more power than compared with smaller turbo's like gt35 or pt6262 ,
but can gump comfirm this? soo i have a peace of mind , to decide upon wich turbo to go for my future 2.3 l build


great writeup , u mean its no point to increase the maf housing size and do the recalibration , but leaving the stock map sensor as it is. but what if im only gona stay with maximum of 35 psi (pump+meth) , should i change the map sensor here or keep it as is?


i don't know if gump will chimp in but his car and mine was built at the same shop. I was personally there while they were tuning his car. I was patiently waiting on them to break the record with his car so i could get my car tuned. Also there is a video of his car on the dyno with a stock engine. Here is a quote from gump in another thread.

I can't answer for ETS but I can certainly give you my take on the 6765 spool time. I ran my PT 6765 on the stock 2liter for about 6 months. At the time I was pushing just over 600 @27lbs of boost. The spool on this toy began in the high 4k range but didn't really hit until 5.5k+. ETS can probably provide a hell of a lot more fidelity but for around town stop light to stop light fun I would consider a smaller turbo...especially if your going to stay on the stock block.

also this is a video of his car on a stock block stock head with a 6765. now he is on a 2.3 stroker.

http://www.youtube.com/user/HOLESHOTproductionz#p/u/18/jAs3jFdXFzE

also this is a video of his car on a stock block stock head with a 6765. now he is on a 2.3 stroker.

http://www.youtube.com/user/HOLESHOTproductionz#p/u/18/jAs3jFdXFzE

woow great videoand those numbers were made on a mustang dyno!! whats the spool numbers on his new 2.3 l build?

and is the shep transmission upgrade and shep transfer case upgrade needed to run this setup, or the stock parts are enough??

Your previous comment suggested that load was 'broke', hence the question. lol.

Well, if I don't look at my tune, then it doesn't bother me. :D
I want Tephra to figure this load thing out... and I don't feel like flooring my car a ton trying to tune it. My tune worked awesome at the track. I had my alt-map setup with 2* of timing pulled across the board, just in case, but I didn't need to use it. I logged everything. Logs looked perfect.


And, back to this thread... :)

the load dip:

ECU "essentially" uses the lowest value from the MAF and the 3xMAP tables.

Think about the air flow dynamics/mechanics of whats happening before+at+after peak boost.


edit - we saw the 2.5" MAF housing flatline (5v) the MAF sensor on a ETS GT4088R turbo at ~6000rpm with 25psi boost.. which equated to 350hp (VD)

yes you can keep getting more power out of it, because you can physically pull more air through it, but the ECU wont know about it... and you should get a bigger MAF to remove the restriction anyways..

also this is a video of his car on a stock block stock head with a 6765. now he is on a 2.3 stroker.

http://www.youtube.com/user/HOLESHOTproductionz#p/u/18/jAs3jFdXFzE

the load dip:

ECU "essentially" uses the lowest value from the MAF and the 3xMAP tables.

Think about the air flow dynamics/mechanics of whats happening before+at+after peak boost.


edit - we saw the 2.5" MAF housing flatline (5v) the MAF sensor on a ETS GT4088R turbo at ~6000rpm with 25psi boost.. which equated to 350hp (VD)

yes you can keep getting more power out of it, because you can physically pull more air through it, but the ECU wont know about it... and you should get a bigger MAF to remove the restriction anyways..

2.5" housing i assume is the stock maf housing?? , most turbo kits retain this stock housing i think ? ... soo a bigger housing like a 3.5" would be better?

soo a bigger housing like a 3.5" would be better?

The 3" (like the AMS intake) is good for about 500 Dynojet. I'm not sure where a 3.5" will max out but it'll be more than I need. JM Fab does make a flange for 4" pipes if someone needs to go that far.

http://www.maperformance.com/jm-fabrications-maf-flange-evo-x.html

The 3" (like the AMS intake) is good for about 500 Dynojet. I'm not sure where a 3.5" will max out but it'll be more than I need. JM Fab does make a flange for 4" pipes if someone needs to go that far.

http://www.maperformance.com/jm-fabrications-maf-flange-evo-x.html

Currently my 3.5" maf hits about 4.4x volts @ 7.5k with 30psi boost. I tested a 4" maf as well, and determined that until I max out the 3.5" it was to grumpy to tune at low rpm/flow.

it was to grumpy to tune at low rpm/flow.

There's definitely a point where the car ceases to be a daily driver. 4" maf might be the spot. lol.

There's definitely a point where the car ceases to be a daily driver. 4" maf might be the spot. lol.

yeah i guess more than 3.5'' wouldnt be great for DD

Currently my 3.5" maf hits about 4.4x volts @ 7.5k with 30psi boost. I tested a 4" maf as well, and determined that until I max out the 3.5" it was to grumpy to tune at low rpm/flow.

There's definitely a point where the car ceases to be a daily driver. 4" maf might be the spot. lol.

yeah i guess more than 3.5'' wouldnt be great for DD

I will be testing out a 4" maf housing since I am using Ets's 4" intake in conjunction with their 67-65 turbo kit.

I will see how smooth I can get a 4" housing to flow at low rpm. I need all the restrictions gone anyway, I do not plan to stop making power with anything less than 40psi when I get the chance. I was hoping to crack 50psi with this setup...

I will have more data to report back with mid-week including a 4" maf housing, flange from jmfab, and an omni 4-bar map sensor.

There's definitely a point where the car ceases to be a daily driver. 4" maf might be the spot. lol.

I will be testing out a 4" maf housing since I am using Ets's 4" intake in conjunction with their 67-65 turbo kit.

I will see how smooth I can get a 4" housing to flow at low rpm. I need all the restrictions gone anyway, I do not plan to stop making power with anything less than 40psi when I get the chance. I was hoping to crack 50psi with this setup...

I will have more data to report back with mid-week including a 4" maf housing, flange from jmfab, and an omni 4-bar map sensor.

that would be great! , btw , is the ETS 6765 turbo kit , a t3 or t4 kit?

EDIT: dgmtrs , man since u will be using the omni 4 bar MAP sensor, i belive your gona switch to speed density, y would u need to make bigger MAF housing, i think u dont need MAF anymore!

Great Job! I got your PM, I will have a reply to you shortly :) We are running speed density on our car so we don't have a MAF housing. We can build one, we will just need to get the flange cut.

Michael

that would be great! , btw , is the ETS 6765 turbo kit , a t3 or t4 kit?


ETS T3 PT6765 Setup. - This car is just getting warmed up :)

ETS T3 PT6765 Setup. - This car is just getting warmed up :)

how much whp can be expected from PT6765 with a stroker engine 2.3 L, on pump gas running pump gas boost?

700 or there abouts.

700 on pump gas boost? lmao

Yeah the thing can hit 600+ at like 26psi on a 2 liter. So with a built 2.3L you can run 30psi with pump 93 and be fine. I say 700 on pump 93 with a 2.3L.

Isn't this the same turbo that is hitting 800 with built 2L on race gas. I could be wrong though.

600 at 26psi is even more funnay

This Bryan guy amuses me; not afraid to call bullshit or throw punches!!

I like you sir.

700 on pump gas boost? lmao

600 at 26psi is even more funnay

My thoughts exactly.

http://forums.evolutionm.net/evo-x-dyno-results/477893-ets-makes-615hp-26psi-using-our-pt6765-t3-turbo-kit.html

The other ones I found were on race gas but they were doing like 800+.

My thoughts exactly.

600 at 26psi is even more funnay

soo what whp number am i gonna expect from such a setup on pump gas???
how does this setup compare to a HTA 86 with 2.3L on pump gas?

soo what whp number am i gonna expect from such a setup on pump gas???

Gates is running a 2.2ltr on E85 with the same turbo and he's 740ish. I assume you'd be in the 600's with a 2.3.

The hta 86 is almost the same size as this turbo, maybe a tad smaller. Spools faster too. I think the hta 86 + 2.3L + 93 pump will put you around 650. You can run 30psi with 9:1 compression all day long.

that would be great! , btw , is the ETS 6765 turbo kit , a t3 or t4 kit?

Ets T3 Billet 67-65 Tubular Turbo Kit.

EDIT: dgmtrs , man since u will be using the omni 4 bar MAP sensor, i belive your gona switch to speed density, y would u need to make bigger MAF housing, i think u dont need MAF anymore!

The 4-bar Map sensor is needed to run over 34+psi with the added resolution since the stock map sensor caps out at 33.4psi.

We are not making the switch to speed density.

Great Job! I got your PM, I will have a reply to you shortly :) We are running speed density on our car so we don't have a MAF housing. We can build one, we will just need to get the flange cut.

Michael

Excellent. Forgot you are using an aem. Let me know when everything is ready to roll!

how much whp can be expected from PT6765 with a stroker engine 2.3 L, on pump gas running pump gas boost?

700 or there abouts.

700 on pump gas boost? lmao

:duh:

Yeah the thing can hit 600+ at like 26psi on a 2 liter. So with a built 2.3L you can run 30psi with pump 93 and be fine. I say 700 on pump 93 with a 2.3L.

Isn't this the same turbo that is hitting 800 with built 2L on race gas. I could be wrong though.

600 at 26psi is even more funnay

This Bryan guy amuses me; not afraid to call bullshit or throw punches!!

I like you sir.

Bryan and I build/tune evo's for a living. We know 99% of the time what a certain setup will/can make and exactly how far is too far...

700hp on pump gas is a little extreme in my opinion.

soo what whp number am i gonna expect from such a setup on pump gas???
how does this setup compare to a HTA 86 with 2.3L on pump gas?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=AiResearch;576108]The hta 86 is almost the same size as this turbo, maybe a tad smaller. Spools faster too. I think the hta 86 + 2.3L + 93 pump will put you around 650. You can run 30psi with 9:1 compression all day long.

To everyone I highlighted in bold:

There are TONS upon TONS of variables that allow tuners to make 500+whp on plain pumpgas (91-94) Octane.

First off, the type of octane being used ranges all the time. I will never call any brand of pump gas consistant. I have seen cars knock at 20psi and I have seen cars never knock at 30psi with even more timing.

Volumetric Efficiency plays another large role in the big pump gas numbers everyone sees.

The more efficient the motor, the more power you will make. The more efficient your setup is, the less boost/timing you will need to make power/torque and so on. As the generations of evolutions evolved (heh), these motors fortunately became more efficient, in turn making it even easier to make big power on pump gas.

I would say 700whp is possible on pump gas in a drag application. Al from dynoflash for example made over 780whp on 93 Octane when he was still using a custom Shearer Twinscroll 42R Turbo Kit. That is an extreme example and 99% of the evo owning community in the country will never run a setup like that every day.

600whp is a more reasonable number but still leaving too much room for disaster on 93 Octane alone. This gas is just not stable enough to for me to play russian roulette with my own motor, let alone clients.

500whp seems to be the golden ticket for most evo owners across the boarder. A nice sized turbo and decent supporting mods will almost always grant a stout 500whp build with good tune. My other thread with the Worlds Highest HP Evo X MR is running an Ets T3 3586 Turbo Kit and it made 513whp on 93 octane rather easy with an average of 26psi across the board. I am sure it could of made 550whp but would not gamble a motor in doing so.

Excellent tuners like Bryan(Gst), John Bradley(English Racing), Chris Black(Ams) and David Buschur(Buschur Racing) know what a given setup is capable of, even before they take out their laptop. It's their life: Blood, Sweat, and Tears and they for sure aren't going to gamble a single motor just to make a 600 or 700 hp dyno pull unless It's their own possibly. Reliability, Consistancy, and Longevity allows the bar to be raised day in and day out.

A nice sized turbo and decent supporting mods will almost always grant a stout 500whp build with good tune.

Bryan is always thinking in terms of his own dyno and pretty much everyone else thinks in Dynojet numbers. We know he won't see 600 at GST.

Getting into the 500's on a Dynamics is getting pretty serious. We have a local 42R or two that are over 1k whp but those cars are from another planet.

Bryan is always thinking in terms of his own dyno and pretty much everyone else thinks in Dynojet numbers. We know he won't see 600 at GST.

Getting into the 500's on a Dynamics is getting pretty serious. We have a local 42R or two that are over 1k whp but those cars are from another planet.

Oh trust me I know.

My drag evo 8 went 9.06 @ 164mph with 689whp 1.0CF DynoDynamics.

450-470whp traps 130mph, 3,850lbs Evo X.

I'm going to be doing another dyno comparison for fun Tomorrow at 12 again using my buddies dynojet.

I am still on the stock maf housing and stock map sensor but I am going to see just how much can be squeezed from the 517whp pass on a 1.0cf. I wouldn't be surprised if it pull 600whp just the way it sits.

Hopefully Ets will be sending a JMFab maf flange and some other goodies my way early next week so I can raise the boost into the 40psi range!!!

I'm going to be doing another dyno comparison for fun Tomorrow at 12 again using my buddies dynojet.

I am still on the stock maf housing and stock map sensor but I am going to see just how much can be squeezed from the 517whp pass on a 1.0cf. I wouldn't be surprised if it pull 600whp just the way it sits.

Hopefully Ets will be sending a JMFab maf flange and some other goodies my way early next week so I can raise the boost into the 40psi range!!!

nice writeup, then which setup is better with a 2.3 L an HTA86 or PT6765? in terms of power , on pump gas , n also for a possible meth. application

Good info.

Oh trust me I know.

My drag evo 8 went 9.06 @ 164mph with 689whp 1.0CF DynoDynamics.

450-470whp traps 130mph, 3,850lbs Evo X.

Sounds about right.

Lomker, the 1000+whp dynos were actually in shootout mode I believe, they were still making high 800's or 900ish though, which is insane.

Locals on our DD at 430whp have gone basically 11.0 at 126 or so with the MR six speed (evo 9 though) so 500whp on an X should easily get 130mph traps I'd think and 10's with good driving (or so I am hoping :))

they were still making high 800's or 900ish though

That makes more sense.

nice writeup, then which setup is better with a 2.3 L an HTA86 or PT6765? in terms of power , on pump gas , n also for a possible meth. application

The HTA86 will spool up quicker and make more torque.

The PT6765 will make more top-end.

Both turbos are capable of making over 750whp on a properly built and supported engine.

I would go with the HTA86 on a street car for the quicker transient response, especially with the 2.3 stroker.

I would leave the PT67-65 for the 2.0 engine that needs 9,500rpm to take advantage of the power band.

The only 2.3 I would use the PT67-65 on would be the Ams which is incredible since it will give you spool up, torque, transient response, and incredible top-end as well. 9,500rpm on a 2.3 is insane...

The HTA86 will spool up quicker and make more torque.

The PT6765 will make more top-end.

Both turbos are capable of making over 750whp on a properly built and supported engine.

I would go with the HTA86 on a street car for the quicker transient response, especially with the 2.3 stroker.

I would leave the PT67-65 for the 2.0 engine that needs 9,500rpm to take advantage of the power band.

The only 2.3 I would use the PT67-65 on would be the Ams which is incredible since it will give you spool up, torque, transient response, and incredible top-end as well. 9,500rpm on a 2.3 is insane...

what diffrence that ams gives on their PT6765 kit , comparing to others?!!
it looks fairly the same?!! can you give more info on that , i lthink the ams kit for the evo x is not on sale yet

what diffrence that ams gives on their PT6765 kit , comparing to others?!!
it looks fairly the same?!! can you give more info on that , i lthink the ams kit for the evo x is not on sale yet

I was talking about the AMS 2.3 Liter Stroker Motor...

Which can be found here:

http://www.amsperformance.com/cart/AMS-Mitsubishi-Lancer-Evolution-X-2.0L-Stage-1-Short-Block-(CLON).html

Features


Ductile iron sleeves
Designed for improved head gasket sealing and higher cylinder pressures
Race-proven reliability
Precise, documented hand assembly
Includes


Sleeved AMS block
Precision AMS spec machine work on block & crank
JE Pistons w/ Skirt Coating
Manley I-Beam rods
High performance rod & main bearings
ARP main studs
Available Options


ARP head stud kit
New Head Gasket
New Mitsubishi oil pump
AMS assembled EVO X gasket set
Specifications


Displacement: 2.0 liters
Stroke: 86mm
Compression Ratio: 9:1
The only thing I see in their motor that I have not found a need for is their ductile iron sleeving.

This does add a nice chunk of $ to the bill and I just do not find it necessary just yet and we are going to hopefully achieve 600+whp Tomorrow.

Other than the sleeving, for roughly $3500.00 you have a bullet proof bottom end that gives you the best of all Worlds combined.

ERL

I was talking about the AMS 2.3 Liter Stroker Motor...

Which can be found here:

http://www.amsperformance.com/cart/AMS-Mitsubishi-Lancer-Evolution-X-2.0L-Stage-1-Short-Block-(CLON).html

Features


Ductile iron sleeves
Designed for improved head gasket sealing and higher cylinder pressures
Race-proven reliability
Precise, documented hand assembly
Includes


Sleeved AMS block
Precision AMS spec machine work on block & crank
JE Pistons w/ Skirt Coating
Manley I-Beam rods
High performance rod & main bearings
ARP main studs
Available Options


ARP head stud kit
New Head Gasket
New Mitsubishi oil pump
AMS assembled EVO X gasket set
Specifications


Displacement: 2.0 liters
Stroke: 86mm
Compression Ratio: 9:1
The only thing I see in their motor that I have not found a need for is their ductile iron sleeving.

This does add a nice chunk of $ to the bill and I just do not find it necessary just yet and we are going to hopefully achieve 600+whp Tomorrow.

Other than the sleeving, for roughly $3500.00 you have a bullet proof bottom end that gives you the best of all Worlds combined.
that AMS shortblock is a 2.0 L , not a stroker , the only stroker ams has for the evo x is the 2.2 overbore engine with ERL sleeves.

im confused here , u say the best match for a 2.3L stroker is the HTA 86, but u say that the only 2.3L stroker you will match the PT6765 up with is the AMS(sopposedly they had a 2.3L for the evox) ! ... whats the diffrence?!

in my case i figured i either go all the way with a 2.5L or nothing..loool

You're not going to be able to rev as high with a 2.5 It just depends on where your car is going to spend most of it's time street or track.

You're not going to be able to rev as high with a 2.5 It just depends on where your car is going to spend most of it's time street or track.
2.5 for ERL has same rod ratio and stroke(97mm) as their 2.3 stroker, and same as the jun 2.3 stroker (97mm stroke) , the only diffrence is that the 2.5L has a larger bore 90mm opposed to 86.5(ERL 2.3) and 87(jun 2.3)
it has a benefit also of having a better bore/stroke ratio , than the ERL 2.3 L and the JUN 2.3L yeilding better engine balace
8000 rpm is not an issue at all

Sorry guys, I got confused! I meant to say 2.2 motor. It has the added benefit of displacement plus top end rpm which suits the pt67-65 very well.

I decided to hit my local buddies dynojet again this afternoon to see what I can really squeeze out of this setup by basically maxing out the stock map sensor and maf sensor.

I also thought it would be good to show you guys another accurate dyno comparison as the dynodynamics I use to tune on reads painfully low.

The very first pull on the dynojet was the exact same tune I left off on the dynodynamics with which was 27psi.

DynoDynamics 1.0 CF: 517whp/325wtq @ 27psi

DynoJet Un-Corrected: 575whp/345wtq @27psi

The final pull for Today Un-Corrected on the Dynojet with tuning:

DynoJet Un-Corrected:

670whp/440wtq @ 29psi!

"I ran this car past MBT and simply could not squeeze another hp out of the car with either timing nor mivec at 29psi.

It is done until ETS sends me a 4" maf housing and an Omni 4-bar map sensor.

I am utterly amazed at how well this head flows all 670whp from 7,000rpm all the way to 9,500rpm and beyond..."

I will have an incredible video up Tomorrow along with dynosheets to follow!

Stay Tuned!

Can the Moderator(s) of this section please change the thread title to:

Evo8604's Built 670whp Evo X On E-85 (Video)

I would also highly appreciate it if the moderators allow me to update my opening post with the new dynosheets and videos I will be posting up Tomorrow.

Thank You.

I told you this turbo would do "about" 700 hp on pump gas boost. I know he's running E85 but 29 psi is not E85 boost so really he is not taking full advantage of the E85 yet. This is still with a 2.0 liter, so with the 2.3L that ainawy101 was talking about and 30 psi this thing will make 700hp easy.

I told you this turbo would do "about" 700 hp on pump gas boost. I know he's running E85 but 29 psi is not E85 boost so really he is not taking full advantage of the E85 yet. This is still with a 2.0 liter, so with the 2.3L that ainawy101 was talking about and 30 psi this thing will make 700hp easy.

E85 is not pump gas. There is more to tuning then boost. C'mon now. He even said he hit MBT with it, which you will NEVER do with pump gas, ever.

Have you actually tuned with E85 yet?

No E85 here, just leaded race gas and 93. I haven't really tuned an Evo x to the ragged edge yet. I have only tinkered with tuning my own car. I have tuned lots of cars with Hondata and some MKIVs with AEM and TEC3. I just said 700hp because I remember how good this turbo does on supras and hondas I figured it would be similar.

On the the subject of MBT I totally get that E85 allows for the most timing allowed, on the these engines how many degrees adv are we talking reach MBT 19*?

Cant wait for the 4"inch maf housing and new map, looking forward to reading about big numbers.

I told you this turbo would do "about" 700 hp on pump gas boost. I know he's running E85 but 29 psi is not E85 boost so really he is not taking full advantage of the E85 yet. This is still with a 2.0 liter, so with the 2.3L that ainawy101 was talking about and 30 psi this thing will make 700hp easy.
man i always had faith in this turbo :coffee:
Can the Moderator(s) of this section please change the thread title to:

Evo8604's Built 670whp Evo X On E-85 (Video)

I would also highly appreciate it if the moderators allow me to update my opening post with the new dynosheets and videos I will be posting up Tomorrow.

Thank You.
yeah man , dyno sheets would be great, correcting the dyno numbers would decrease recorded numbers, right?

Sorry guys, I got confused! I meant to say 2.2 motor. It has the added benefit of displacement plus top end rpm which suits the pt67-65 very well.
hmmm... yeah i was thinking that way also , but i guess the lag would be still there. since the PT6765 is ratherly large turbo

I told you this turbo would do "about" 700 hp on pump gas boost. I know he's running E85 but 29 psi is not E85 boost so really he is not taking full advantage of the E85 yet. This is still with a 2.0 liter, so with the 2.3L that ainawy101 was talking about and 30 psi this thing will make 700hp easy.

There are a few points I would like to touch up here so no one thinks 670whp is an easy task at only 29psi.

You are correct about the boost being a pump gas achievable number but the timing and air/fuel ratio being used in conjunction would grenade the most expensive piston/rod combo you can ever dream of.

I ran my car past MBT where there was no more power achievable on the fuel being used, in fact I lost about 6-8 hp in doing so.

I also tried different air/fuel combinations as E-85 likes to be rich in the spool up and peak torque department but can be ran as lean as you want(13:5:1) without ever knocking, atleast on my car during this tuning session. I now have the car tuned to spool at 11:1 during spool, 11:5:1 at peak boost/torque and then I gradually run the car to 13:1 out at the top-end.

(I will be running 12:1 when higher boost becomes attainable to leave a safety margin)

To sum this up I have taken full advantage of E-85 and used and abused it way beyond an aggressive 93 Octane capable tune.

No E85 here, just leaded race gas and 93. I haven't really tuned an Evo x to the ragged edge yet. I have only tinkered with tuning my own car. I have tuned lots of cars with Hondata and some MKIVs with AEM and TEC3. I just said 700hp because I remember how good this turbo does on supras and hondas I figured it would be similar.

On the the subject of MBT I totally get that E85 allows for the most timing allowed, on the these engines how many degrees adv are we talking reach MBT 19*?

Cant wait for the 4"inch maf housing and new map, looking forward to reading about big numbers.

Every setup and fuel may come within a few degrees of each other, there is no set number in my experience but my personal setup tells me that 23 degrees is MBT and 24 and 25 degrees went past MBT.

After setting boost to 29psi:

19 degrees- +13whp
20 degrees- +11whp
21 degrees- +10whp
22 degrees- +9whp
23 degrees- +6whp
24 degrees- -2whp
25 degrees- -6whp

Thanks, hopefully ETS can pull through for me this upcoming week so I can really turn the wick up.
man i always had faith in this turbo :coffee:

yeah man , dyno sheets would be great, correcting the dyno numbers would decrease recorded numbers, right?


hmmm... yeah i was thinking that way also , but i guess the lag would be still there. since the PT6765 is ratherly large turbo

Yes, corrected changed the numbers from 670whp to 655whp.

Yes, corrected changed the numbers from 670whp to 655whp.

the yeah i agree the numbers ur getting is clearly E85 domain!
, since ur going to a 4" MAF housing straight away, dont u think the 3.5" might be just as enough?

how would a 4" MAF housing idle?? i guess too rough for a street car

the yeah i agree the numbers ur getting is clearly E85 domain!
, since ur going to a 4" MAF housing straight away, dont u think the 3.5" might be just as enough?

how would a 4" MAF housing idle?? i guess too rough for a street car

Not sure, It's cheap enough to try both. I will most likely be able to use a 3.5 but I guess we will find out.

Working on the video/dyno sheets now.

Not sure, It's cheap enough to try both. I will most likely be able to use a 3.5 but I guess we will find out.

Working on the video/dyno sheets now.

yeah if u could try both , and have MAF voltage numbers as well as idleing characteristics that would be great:thumbup:

09/18/10 -Phase 1.5

Here is an awesome video of Saturday's tuning session.

The car wound up making 670whp/440wtq @ 29psi on E-85.

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/4783/comparisone.jpg
Comparing Baseline From Phase 1 (517whp) DynoDynamics (575whp)Dynojet un-touched tune to (670whp)Dynojet-Final Tune



This is a 2-Part Video all enclusive with dyno footage/street driving:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjQ2QvMT7_A



Can the moderator(s) of this section please copy and paste this whole post under the last video on my opening post?

Thank You.

Are you not able to log in with the old id anymore?

Are you not able to log in with the old id anymore?

I am logged in. For some odd reason I can not edit my first post.

You are logged in as dgmtrs, not evo8604.

You are logged in as dgmtrs, not evo8604.

Yes, my evo8604 password got screwy. Now I get it...

Mods, please delete these last 4 posts!

exellent video! , amazed on how u managed to extract 90whp on further tuning+ few more psi of boost! and the idling is great for those 2150cc inj.!
how much more power expected from a bigger MAF housing like the 3.5" or 4" , but with same stock MAP sensor?

what about the most suitable injectors for pump gas on this setup?

exellent video! , amazed on how u managed to extract 90whp on further tuning+ few more psi of boost! and the idling is great for those 2150cc inj.!
how much more power expected from a bigger MAF housing like the 3.5" or 4" , but with same stock MAP sensor?

what about the most suitable injectors for pump gas on this setup?

94whp to be exact:p

I made 517whp on a dynodynamics 1.0CF.

First baseline pull on the dynojet with the same exact tune netted 575whp.

Finished tune netted 670whp.

80% of the tuning came from hitting MBT with maximum timing advance, custom mivec mapping, and optimum air/fuel ratio.

20% came from raising the boost another 2.5psi..

I believe I could extract another 30-50whp or so from the added resolution of the larger maf housing while kepping stock map sensor but can not be 100% positive without accurate back to back testing.

If you were to run only pump gas on this setup I would go with the Deatswrks 1,300 c.c injectors as the absolute minimum.

The World Record HP holding MR I finished was on an Ets 3586 Turbo Kit, Deatswerks 1,000 c.c Injectors and 93 Octane.

The car made 513whp @ 26psi/93 Octane.

600whp with the PT67-65 on 93 Octane seems possible with the right supporting mods, motor, and head work.

94whp to be exact:p

I made 517whp on a dynodynamics 1.0CF.

First baseline pull on the dynojet with the same exact tune netted 575whp.

Finished tune netted 670whp.

80% of the tuning came from hitting MBT with maximum timing advance, custom mivec mapping, and optimum air/fuel ratio.

20% came from raising the boost another 2.5psi..

I believe I could extract another 30-50whp or so from the added resolution of the larger maf housing while kepping stock map sensor but can not be 100% positive without accurate back to back testing.

If you were to run only pump gas on this setup I would go with the Deatswrks 1,300 c.c injectors as the absolute minimum.

The World Record HP holding MR I finished was on an Ets 3586 Turbo Kit, Deatswerks 1,000 c.c Injectors and 93 Octane.

The car made 513whp @ 26psi/93 Octane.

600whp with the PT67-65 on 93 Octane seems possible with the right supporting mods, motor, and head work.
absolutely amazing job here!!

on what rpm ur getting the max whp on ur setup?

i belive on pump gas u cant get very close to the MBT or else kabooooom!!:bowlol:

the 600whp on 93 octane is on a dynojet or the DD dyno?

absolutely amazing job here!!

on what rpm ur getting the max whp on ur setup?

i belive on pump gas u cant get very close to the MBT or else kabooooom!!:bowlol:

the 600whp on 93 octane is on a dynojet or the DD dyno?

Thanks a ton!

Peak whp is being reached at roughly 8,250rpm.

The car is efficiently making over 650whp from 7,000rpm to 9,500+rpm.

During Phase 2 of tuning, I will be spinning this motor/setup to see just how far I can keep the power band going. I think It's safe to say this turbo will stay in power at the 10,500rpm level.

I have never tuned this car on straight 93 Octane. I was making a reference to the 513whp World Record holding Evo X MR I built/tuned running an Ets 3586 on 93 Octane.

I believe I can make 600whp on 93 Octane with the PT67-65 and correct supporting mods after comparing log data between the two turbos.

I would love to have a car donated for testing. If anyone wants to be a test dummy for some serious 93 Octane power, let me know and I will work out an incredible offer to make it worth your while...

Thanks a ton!

Peak whp is being reached at roughly 8,250rpm.

The car is efficiently making over 650whp from 7,000rpm to 9,500+rpm.

During Phase 2 of tuning, I will be spinning this motor/setup to see just how far I can keep the power band going. I think It's safe to say this turbo will stay in power at the 10,500rpm level.

I have never tuned this car on straight 93 Octane. I was making a reference to the 513whp World Record holding Evo X MR I built/tuned running an Ets 3586 on 93 Octane.

I believe I can make 600whp on 93 Octane with the PT67-65 and correct supporting mods after comparing log data between the two turbos.

I would love to have a car donated for testing. If anyone wants to be a test dummy for some serious 93 Octane power, let me know and I will work out an incredible offer to make it worth your while...
ohh man i wish i can , but im far away , i live in DUBAI ;)

10.5K rpm thats insane rev! , im too scared to reach 9k only (fear of long term reliability) , btw ur on stock crank i belive?? did u need balancing for the stock crank to rev. past 9k? any vibrations??

i would like to go with a 2.5L stroker engine along with the PT6765 on 93 oct. , im hoping to make 600whp+ on a mustang or Dyno dynamics!
but i cant deside if to go with a 2.2L(AMS) or a 2.5L engine!

ohh man i wish i can , but im far away , i live in DUBAI ;)

10.5K rpm thats insane rev! , im too scared to reach 9k only (fear of long term reliability) , btw ur on stock crank i belive?? did u need balancing for the stock crank to rev. past 9k? any vibrations??

i would like to go with a 2.5L stroker engine along with the PT6765 on 93 oct. , im hoping to make 600whp+ on a mustang or Dyno dynamics!
but i cant deside if to go with a 2.2L(AMS) or a 2.5L engine!

Yes, I had the stock crank balanced, cut, polished, etc...

No vibrations over 9,000rpm.

The 2.5L sounds like a setup I'd have a blast tuning. Figure 30psi between 4-4.5k and 500+ torque...

We need rpm in the 2.0 World, especially to stay in the powerband at the track.

Once Ets comes through I will be tuning the very next day.

Yes, I had the stock crank balanced, cut, polished, etc...

No vibrations over 9,000rpm.

The 2.5L sounds like a setup I'd have a blast tuning. Figure 30psi between 4-4.5k and 500+ torque...

We need rpm in the 2.0 World, especially to stay in the powerband at the track.

Once Ets comes through I will be tuning the very next day.

i always figured that higher rpms would be best suited for top speed
i guess u'll always be in the power band when using the 2.5L enigne

how is the tranny handling the current 9.5K rev limit? any problems shifting??

i always figured that higher rpms would be best suited for top speed
i guess u'll always be in the power band when using the 2.5L enigne

how is the tranny handling the current 9.5K rev limit? any problems shifting??

I installed a fresh Exedy Twin HD Rebuild Kit with this build so shifting is butter smooth.

The car is also equipped with a DG Motors Evo 9 Clutch Master Cylinder Kit and Buschur Racing Shifter Bushings so the clutch pedal is extremely smooth along with nice tight shifting.

I installed a fresh Exedy Twin HD Rebuild Kit with this build so shifting is butter smooth.

The car is also equipped with a DG Motors Evo 9 Clutch Master Cylinder Kit and Buschur Racing Shifter Bushings so the clutch pedal is extremely smooth along with nice tight shifting.

nicee... setup... 9.5K no shifting problems thats awsome!

can u provide some engine bay pics , id like too see the layout of the turbo kit , and how much clearance there is around the turbo and manifold

nicee... setup... 9.5K no shifting problems thats awsome!

can u provide some engine bay pics , id like too see the layout of the turbo kit , and how much clearance there is around the turbo and manifold

Sure, I can have some pictures of the entire setup posted first thing in the morning.

There is more room then everyone thinks back there. Extreme Turbo Systems did a nice job on the turbo kit. The "Fresh Blast" manifold coating is sweet as well, too bad you can't see the runners unless you poke your head over the engine cover...

I will have some freshly detailed shots up in the a.m!

Sure, I can have some pictures of the entire setup posted first thing in the morning.

There is more room then everyone thinks back there. Extreme Turbo Systems did a nice job on the turbo kit. The "Fresh Blast" manifold coating is sweet as well, too bad you can't see the runners unless you poke your head over the engine cover...

I will have some freshly detailed shots up in the a.m!

that would be great

man any pictures commin?

man any pictures commin?

Loading them up right now!!!

Loading them up right now!!!

a question , lets say u had a 2.5L stroker engine in ur same setup, how would it affect the power curve? bottom end and upper end power characteristics, considring ur making an 8k epm instead of the 9.5K?

I still have some wire tucking, etc to do...

As promised:

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/8449/enginebay1p.jpg

http://img814.imageshack.us/img814/1743/enginebay2.jpg

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/5960/enginebay3.jpg

http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/861/bay5.jpg

http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/5433/portedhead1.jpg

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/7514/portedhead2.jpg
http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/1139/timinga.jpg
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/9518/engine2.jpg



http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/6549/engine3d.jpg

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/5565/670whp.jpg

I will post some more pictures when I finish installing the new Maf Housing and Map Sensor.

a question , lets say u had a 2.5L stroker engine in ur same setup, how would it affect the power curve? bottom end and upper end power characteristics, considring ur making an 8k epm instead of the 9.5K?

I would most likely gain a 1,000rpm in response and spool up. I would estimate torque to be up a 100lb/ft or 500+wtq. Since I have a fully built head with gsc s2 cams and a wicked port/polish I wouldn't be surprised if it held top-end power characteristics just as well as it does now.

My exact setup in a 2.5L would be insane. I am in the process on setting up a 2.3/3586 so look for another thread popping up in a few weeks.

Loading them up right now!!!

I would most likely gain a 1,000rpm in response and spool up. I would estimate torque to be up a 100lb/ft or 500+wtq. Since I have a fully built head with gsc s2 cams and a wicked port/polish I wouldn't be surprised if it held top-end power characteristics just as well as it does now.

My exact setup in a 2.5L would be insane. I am in the process on setting up a 2.3/3586 so look for another thread popping up in a few weeks.

thankxx sooooooooooooo muchh man for the pics the install is very clean , i like the layout of the manifold/turbo/dp.
2.3/3586 would be awsome man!! cant wait to see results

thankxx sooooooooooooo muchh man for the pics the install is very clean , i like the layout of the manifold/turbo/dp.
2.3/3586 would be awsome man!! cant wait to see results

No problem. A 2.3/3586 would probably reach full spool in the 4,000-4,400 range. It would be insane for an Evo X!

Sending you an email pete. :)

Sending you an email pete. :)

Thanks!

No problem. A 2.3/3586 would probably reach full spool in the 4,000-4,400 range. It would be insane for an Evo X!
man a question just popped up in my head , since shortly ur gonna work on this new 2.3/3586 setup , what if in the future the owner of this car, decided to upgrade the turbo, to a T3 based PT6765 , can he easily swap the gt3586(already installed) with a new PT6765 on the same ETS kit or modifications is needed?

very nice car!..... thing sounds beast!

cant wait to see this thing when i come down this week!

man a question just popped up in my head , since shortly ur gonna work on this new 2.3/3586 setup , what if in the future the owner of this car, decided to upgrade the turbo, to a T3 based PT6765 , can he easily swap the gt3586(already installed) with a new PT6765 on the same ETS kit or modifications is needed?

It depends on which 6765 you get. They come with two compressor choices. One with three inch outlet and one with 2.5 outlet. The 35r is 2.5" outlet.

man a question just popped up in my head , since shortly ur gonna work on this new 2.3/3586 setup , what if in the future the owner of this car, decided to upgrade the turbo, to a T3 based PT6765 , can he easily swap the gt3586(already installed) with a new PT6765 on the same ETS kit or modifications is needed?

Yes. Ets Turbo Kits can swap many different turbos without ever having to change an exhaust manifold or downpipe, that is one of their best attributes to making a turbo kit. We can still go larger too, I believe all the way up to the largest turbo before a 42r if I remember correctly.

very nice car!..... thing sounds beast!

Thanks, almost ready for phase 2. Got confirmation from Mike yesterday that our 4-Bar Map sensor and 3.5" Maf Housing will be here next Tuesday or Wednesday!

cant wait to see this thing when i come down this week!

Excellent, Hope your ready to try meth for the first time...:freak:

It depends on which 6765 you get. They come with two compressor choices. One with three inch outlet and one with 2.5 outlet. The 35r is 2.5" outlet.
ahaa icc.. if thats the only difference , than it will be a matter of choosing a coupler which will fit to the turbo comp. outlet and the UICP!

Yes. Ets Turbo Kits can swap many different turbos without ever having to change an exhaust manifold or downpipe, that is one of their best attributes to making a turbo kit. We can still go larger too, I believe all the way up to the largest turbo before a 42r if I remember correctly.



Thanks, almost ready for phase 2. Got confirmation from Mike yesterday that our 4-Bar Map sensor and 3.5" Maf Housing will be here next Tuesday or Wednesday!



Excellent, Hope your ready to try meth for the first time...:freak:
yeah thats good about ETS turbo kit! , btw how easy or difficult to scale the new 4 Bar MAP sensor? and using a 3.5" MAF housing any rescaling to be done to the MAF sensor or its just a retune only?

(cuz im planning a future build with a possible HTA86 turbo kit +meth and i wanna go 35+ psi, i already do have a built engine)

yeah thats good about ETS turbo kit! , btw how easy or difficult to scale the new 4 Bar MAP sensor? and using a 3.5" MAF housing any rescaling to be done to the MAF sensor or its just a retune only?

(cuz im planning a future build with a possible HTA86 turbo kit +meth and i wanna go 35+ psi, i already do have a built engine)

We scaled my 3.5" MAF intake, 4 bar and DW1400's today...took some fiddling but they all work awesome!

We scaled my 3.5" MAF intake, 4 bar and DW1400's today...took some fiddling but they all work awesome!
which one was the hardest to scale and which one was the easiest?

which one was the hardest to scale and which one was the easiest?

No idea...didn't take my tuner too long to do them all though...he had the intake done from another car already so that was quick. The injectors latencies weren't quite what they said on the sheet they gave us but were pretty good to tune and the MAP sensor he did before also.

No idea...didn't take my tuner too long to do them all though...he had the intake done from another car already so that was quick. The injectors latencies weren't quite what they said on the sheet they gave us but were pretty good to tune and the MAP sensor he did before also.
ahha iccc... well im planning on going with a 3.5'' MAF housing and a 4 bar map sensor , but im worried about scaling, since im using this email tune service from mellon tuning

I will have pictures up of our new 3.5" maf shortly :) It's on the way to DG for some testing.

I will have pictures up of our new 3.5" maf shortly :) It's on the way to DG for some testing.
yeah that would be great, better than fabricating a new one!
but should that 3.5 maf housing be supplied already with ur ETS t3 kit!, y did u decide to keep the intake option open to costumers and only supplyin a 4'' maf housing?

We only used the stock MAF housing before. We are now going to have the option to upgrade to the 3.5" if you plan to make over 500whp

Michael

As Promised.

http://www.evoxforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=593080#post593080

We only used the stock MAF housing before. We are now going to have the option to upgrade to the 3.5" if you plan to make over 500whp

Michael
thats 500whp on what dyno?

thats 500whp on what dyno?

Dynojet

Dynojet
i guess thats like a fp black or a fp red would max out the stock MAF!
but i guess a 3'' MAf house is enough for a fp red or fp black

but i guess a 3'' MAf house is enough for a fp red or fp black

Maybe on an ETS intake but not in general. The AMS 3" intake maxes at 500.

I have a 3.5" intake from Primo Performance. It's similar to the AMS but .5" larger.

Maybe on an ETS intake but not in general. The AMS 3" intake maxes at 500.

I have a 3.5" intake from Primo Performance. It's similar to the AMS but .5" larger.

Nice!

I look forward to testing this beautiful piece.

Hopefully it comes Tomorrow so I can get some testing this upcoming week!

Maybe on an ETS intake but not in general. The AMS 3" intake maxes at 500.

I have a 3.5" intake from Primo Performance. It's similar to the AMS but .5" larger.
ahaa icc..

Nice!

We've talked about that one before. It can be ordered through MAP. Hollywood bought the first production intake and they've sold quite a few of them since--perfect match for a Red/BBX/Black on fancy fuel.

Extreme Turbo Systems comes through once again!

Earlier Today I received Ets's first production 3.5" Maf Housing and an Omni-4 Bar map sensor.

The maf housing looks incredible with flawless welding btw.

I will be installing both units Tomorrow afternoon, calibrate, scale, and drive.

I feel our fuel system is mediocre. It currently works flawlessly but I honestly believe it will not suffice during Phase 2 of tuning which will be coming up shortly.

I am going to pull the trigger and make the switch to one large External Fuel Pump which will most likely be a Weldon 2035. I will also be ripping out the stock fuel lines both feed and return and replacing with large s.s lines.

We already have a nice Ams fuel rail with their fuel pressure regulator kit so I think the external fuel pump and lines will finalize the fuel system basically forever.

The current fuel system works but I feel three (3) fuel pumps at this power level is just rolling dice with our entire motor/setup. God forbid one of the Bosch 044 fuel pumps burn out at 700+whp.......

Phase 2 of building and tuning is right around the corner guys.

It's 4 a.m Saturday morning and I just got home from work.

It's been a brutal week but am still super excited to get some work done on my personal car Tomorrow afternoon.

Hope everyone has a great weekend.

thats great man , keep us posted!

I am going to pull the trigger and make the switch to one large External Fuel Pump which will most likely be a Weldon 2035.

Are you going to use the Weldon to draw from the stock tank? I'm not familiar with big pumps and am wondering if it'd work efficiently that way.

I actually just re-did my fuel system last night, a single 044 on a BAP and drawing from a 2.5ltr surge tank. I hope that's good for 500whp on E85 but if it's not then I've been eyeballing the MagnaFuel MP-4301.

Are you going to use the Weldon to draw from the stock tank? I'm not familiar with big pumps and am wondering if it'd work efficiently that way.

I actually just re-did my fuel system last night, a single 044 on a BAP and drawing from a 2.5ltr surge tank. I hope that's good for 500whp on E85 but if it's not then I've been eyeballing the MagnaFuel MP-4301.

Gotcha, yea we can make the stock tank work but will most likely make the switch to a nice fancy fuel cell for some bling factor and efficiency.

I forgot how expensive the Weldon pumps were and will most likely be switching over to the Aeromotive A1000 or their newer version of the pump which I believe is rated to flow about 1300hp.

Your single 044 and BAP will flow 500whp easy on E-85.

Do you still have the stock pump in-tank?

Even if you do, you will still make 500whp no problem. I made 670whp on a single Bosch 044 with no BAP, and an Ultimate Racing in-tank 255.

Do you still have the stock pump in-tank?

You get better flow running the Bosch inline with your in-tank pump but surge tanks negate that since they aren't pressurized.

I looked into fuel cells but they aren't safe for E85 and ATL recommended draining the cell after every use. Not happening on my street car!

If I had a big setup then I'd just put a 1gal surge tank in the trunk, Gates-style.

My 2.5ltr tank:
http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae80/mlomker/Car%20Sept%202010/surgetank2.jpg

Gates' 1gal setup with dual 255's:
http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae80/mlomker/Car%20-%20June%202010/gatesSurgetank.jpg