Went to an RR meet today and ran the EVO - 390BHP :)

MikeHiow said:
I'm not sure those making the most power on standard engines are automatically going to be the better mappers - they could just be the ones taking more risks, and pushing things closer to the limit.

I have a friend who built a near 600bhp, daily driver, Evo 7 a few years back (which I believe is still going strong today!), and has had his fair share of 5s and 6s since. I can enquire as to who he recommends for mapping, if you like? If you have a credible initial recommendation, at least you have a basis to do some extensive research.

Edit: after a quick search of our local forum, I think it was Mark Shead / M.A.D. that did it - it would seem he is/they are very popular with evo owners over here. I will still enquire, none the less.
Click to expand...

I should have added those who make high power reliably. The Mustang tuner I choose had cars running big power for over 1-2 years with lots and lots of track time and real abuse. I am not talking just a dyno run to get big power, but a car mapped properly to safe big power and then used and driven hard on a daily basis or raced. :)
 
Yes, I have no doubt there are those who can achieve both (power and reliability).

It is just a shame that some get their business by pushing higher power figures than their competition but at the expense of being riskier/pushing limits.
 
Gibbo mate, did you get any figures for ignition timing before and after? I lot of the extra power in such cars comes from advancing the ignition: a quick and dirty figure is about 10bhp at the fly per one degree advance. It's possible that better exhaust is giving a better burn and thus allowing the ECO to naturally advance a little. The RR usually plots it, but they probably didn't give you a copy.

The torque plot also supports a theory I was told about higher torque figures: later is better. One of the questions I get about my scoob is: "why is the torque so low?" It's about 350ftlb. But mine is mapped to bring on max torque at 4500rpm, which with my turbo is about as soon as you hit full spool. Yours is mapped a little higher generally, and about 1000rpm after the turbo has fully spooled up. This was mine last time it was done to show you what I mean:

STI_RR_20may09_410_800.JPG


Still, not bad.


M
 
I was always told you get torque from boost and power from ignition timing.

Good results Gibbo, the difference of the figures between the rollers is always reassuring that Powerstation gives decent figures.

So that will be what.. 3 RR runs in a month? ;)
 
ScoobyDoo69 said:
I was always told you get torque from boost and power from ignition timing.

Good results Gibbo, the difference of the figures between the rollers is always reassuring that Powerstation gives decent figures.

So that will be what.. 3 RR runs in a month? ;)
Click to expand...

Yep for sure. :)

Seems to me if all three give similar the only thing I can say Powerstations rollers do is under-read on torque figures. As the Mustang only ever read as high as 501lb/ft on Powerstations rollers, yet it should have been around 540-550lb/ft but they got the BHP pretty much spot on, certainly within 10BHP anyway. :)

Is the dyno is Guidlford a single contact patch? If so be interesting to see what it reads. :)
 
Nope it's a two patch contact dyno.

Interesting on the torque results, a lot of people say that Powerstation shows less torque, but could less just mean less optimistic? My Scoob only makes 330ish lb/ft at Powerstation, but sounds about right for the boost I'm running according to most.

Guess we'll wait and see!
 
Last edited:
Powerstation are unusual in that their RR is (IIRC) recalibrated once a month because of the work they do (or at least used to) for Prodrive. I suspect most others are done once a year, if that.


M
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom