TT Stg1 95 m3 vs modded GTO

[LeMansGTS]

In this chart: We have "similar platforms"
The HPF Stage I turbo M3 makes: 414whp
The VF SC Stage I makes: 408whp

Should be close in a race right? Let's give the turbo M3 the edge since it has higher peak numbers.

What about VF Stage II SC against HPF Stage I Turbo?

Here is a VF SC stage II dyno:


The VF Stage II makes 458whp
The HPF Stage I turbo makes 414whp


Since "peak HP" wins, explain these videos of an HPF car trouncing a VF stage II car?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2JX0JiW8Fuo
http://youtube.com/watch?v=c9fA2AKYEu4&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=TnsTzMlVorw&feature=related

[LeMansGTS]

Originally Posted by binh

First off where did you come up with a 450-460 whp figure for my friends car? It doesn't and won't make near that on a dynojet. He's coming back from eastcoastsupercharging today and even with the professional retune he won't make near that kind of power.

Second, theres a thing called torque and I have much more of it compared to the S/C m3. It also comes on much sooner compared to that Centri S/C. I'm putting down roughly 360-380 ft lbs of tq. The S/C m3 probably around 280-300.

Yes sir my SC car makes 297wtq.

[MORB1D]

Originally Posted by binh

Second, theres a thing called torque and I have much more of it compared to the S/C m3. It also comes on much sooner compared to that Centri S/C. I'm putting down roughly 360-380 ft lbs of tq. The S/C m3 probably around 280-300.

tell me how torque matters at the ungodly ricer rolls you are doing?

I'm dying to hear this

and as for the video's, I really think you have rocks in your head if you want to compare a stage 2 supercharged application against a stage 1 turbo application, put them on the highway from a 40+ roll and pretend that is a actual comparison

it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that from the ungodly speeds you are starting from in the first vid it comes down to peak RWHP, you guys are killing me with A) pretending roll racing is actually racing and B) your complete lack of knowing how things work

heres a question, what do you run in the 1/4? do you know? because that's where "REAL" racing takes place

because an LS2 GTO with the mods mentioned can run 11's @ 120+MPH

save your videos, because all they show is 2 idiots speeding together

[LeMansGTS]

Originally Posted by MORB1D

tell me how torque matters at the ungodly ricer rolls you are doing?

I'm dying to hear this

and as for the video's, I really think you have rocks in your head if you want to compare a stage 2 supercharged application against a stage 1 turbo application, put them on the highway from a 60+ roll and pretend that is a actual comparison

it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that from the ungodly speeds you are starting from it comes down to peak RWHP, you guys are killing me with A) pretending roll racing is actually racing and B) your complete lack of knowing how things work

heres a question, what do you run in the 1/4? do you know? because that's where "REAL" racing takes place

because an LS2 GTO with the mods mentioned can run 11's @ 120+MPH

save your videos, because all they show is 2 idiots speeding together

OK, so if peak RWHP matters so much, how come the supercharged with 458whp cannot beat a turbo with 414whp in these ricer rolls?

[MORB1D]

Originally Posted by LeMansGTS

OK, so if peak RWHP matters so much, how come the supercharged with 458whp cannot beat a turbo with 414whp in these ricer rolls?

the OP's setup is totally different than your setup and you even pretending that your car has anything to do with the OP's story is kind of funny

[LeMansGTS]

Originally Posted by MORB1D

the OP's setup is totally different than your setup and you even pretending that your car has anything to do with the OP's story is kind of funny

I'm not pretending anything and our setups are similar in terms of the comparison I was providing:

He has a turbo and I have a centrifugal sc, the cars in the video are the same as well.

My question still has not been answered. As per the videos and dynos I provided, why does the centrifugal sc M3 with 458 whp lose so badly to a turbo M3 with 414whp? You explicitly stated that a car with the highest peak RWHP would win from a roll with comparable setups.

[binh]

My buddy just texted me from EastCoast Supercharging.

399whp/378 tq with a good combination of parts and professional tune- no excuses this time

We'll go at it again and videotape it this time.

[MORB1D]

Originally Posted by LeMansGTS

I'm not pretending anything and our setups are similar in terms of the comparison I was providing:

He has a turbo and I have a centrifugal sc, the cars in the video are the same as well.

My question still has not been answered. As per the videos and dynos I provided, why does the centrifugal sc M3 with 458 whp lose so badly to a turbo M3 with 414whp? You explicitly stated that a car with the highest peak RWHP would win from a roll with comparable setups.

do I really have to explain the difference in power delivery between the OP's TT setup and the large single T76 turbo setup you are trying to push?

[binh]

Originally Posted by MORB1D

do I really have to explain the difference in power delivery between the OP's TT setup and the large single T76 turbo setup you are trying to push?

ROFL. I have a technique tuning twin turbo setup

[MORB1D]

Originally Posted by binh

ROFL. I have a technique tuning twin turbo setup

no sh!t sherlock, that's what I just said

you don't know much do you?

guess I'm going to have to spell it out for you again, you have a twin turbo setup..... to prove a point the guy turned to HPF's large single turbo setup, which is a totally different ballgame considering peak RWHP is available early in the RPM range and builds from there as the RPM increases

I'll give lemans credit, at least he's trying... you obviously don't have enough intelligence to comprehend a sentence, let alone talk tech

[Dtmbmwm3]

Originally Posted by MORB1D

do you even understand the concept as to why a turbocharged car is "usually" faster than a supercharged car?

it's because the peak WHP numbers on a turbocharged car are "usually" higher than a supercharged application, and the supercharged application makes more power down low resulting in more torque and more muscle on the low end of things.... but seeing as his peak RWHP numbers are not higher you would be a faster car from a highway roll like that

it's simple car knowlege, if you are going to race from a roll, the highest peak WHP numbers win... doesn't matter how the power is obtained, it's there where you need it... up top

which is why roll racing is dumb, a real race is from a stop where power and torque curves make a difference and it tests the car on how it's setup

putting two and two together something wasn't adding up looking at the OP's story, but now seeing it's a 5.7L it makes a little more sense, however I think the car lengths are embellished alot

Wow you sound like a typical douchebag GTO owner. You come on here talking shit when you have no idea what you are talking about "real racer." You got your GTO why again? "Because it's faster!" Correct me on this, how would your A4 car do at an Auto-X event? I bet that A4 really helps out.

Again, real races are from a dig correct? I can see how you prove yourself on your "1/4 battleground" with that A4. I bet you're one of those queers that has an overgrown tach to make sure you shift your A4 correctly. Likewise, your one of those people who posts up kills like " I destroyed an M5 from 0-60".

Lastly, and if you had any knowledge of cars, you would know that a 5.7L GTO in the OP's story would make nowhere near 450whp.

Now go have a big cup of STFU.

[binh]

Originally Posted by MORB1D

no sh!t sherlock, that's what I just said

you don't know much do you?

guess I'm going to have to spell it out for you again, you have a twin turbo setup..... to prove a point the guy turned to HPF's large single turbo setup, which is a totally different ballgame considering peak RWHP is available early in the RPM range and builds from there as the RPM increases

I'll give lemans credit, at least he's trying... you obviously don't have enough intelligence to comprehend a sentence, let alone talk tech

The hilarity ensues

TT Stg1 M3= Technique Tuning Stage 1 M3 (single t60-1 turbo)

[bicketybam]

I have had my run ins with Morbid on the Mustang forums, and while he may be stubborn as hell, he knows what he is talking about 99% of the time.

399 rwhp, huh? Nice. I bet that race will be different this time. Get a video!

[axles of evil]

Originally Posted by V8EATR

Awesome.
Should meet up sometime.

Im always down for a cruise.

Originally Posted by Dtmbmwm3

Man i recognize your name from ls2. The 1st thing to do after installing a cam is getting a professional dyno tune.

Also, a cammed LS1 will make nowhere near 415 whp without running the MOST aggressive cam (megadeath).

Lastly, the ONLY way an LS1 (bolt on) can beat an LS2 (stock) is if the driver of the LS2 is incompetent or the ls1 is running slicks and the ls2 is on stock street tires.

13.20s on all season radials with a full tank of gas, jack, spare, stock skid plate (heavy as hell, prob 25 lbs) and a 330 lb driver. the cars dyno about the same (headers and tune vs stock)

Originally Posted by Dtmbmwm3

Headers on an LS1 make it as fast as an LS2

see above...

Originally Posted by binh

First off where did you come up with a 450-460 whp figure for my friends car? It doesn't and won't make near that on a dynojet. He's coming back from eastcoastsupercharging today and even with the professional retune he won't make near that kind of power.

Second, theres a thing called torque and I have much more of it compared to the S/C m3. It also comes on much sooner compared to that Centri S/C. I'm putting down roughly 360-380 ft lbs of tq. The S/C m3 probably around 280-300.

Originally Posted by binh

The hilarity ensues

TT Stg1 M3= Technique Tuning Stage 1 M3 (single t60-1 turbo)

yes the car is a t60-1 single turbo car like binh says , he put the thing together several years ago, so it would make sense that in fact he DOES know what he is talking about in regards to the build...

Morbid, please alter the "tone" of your posts. As you know, the rules of ls1gto.com state that starting an inter forum "war" is a bannable offense. You are also doing a very poor job representing the GTO, even the LSx community, making us all look bad, and making yourself look worse. This is the internet, there are a lot of arguments that can never be won, regardless of who is right or wrong, but in the cases ive seen in this thread, you are wrong... so please stop altogether.

Like binh said, today i went to east cost supercharging. they build some of the nastiest corvettes and LS motors on the east coast, quite possibly in the country. There were about 15 vettes there, all of them were over 600 rwhp and almost all of them ran in the mid 9's in the quarter... the rest are road race cars and have either never been to the strip, or arent properly caged to run that quick.

Doug at ECS does all their tuning, every day all day, tuning is all he does, he has done about 1500 vettes in the past few years, and all of them put out insane numbers and run for years with no problems, so he knows his stuff.

The tune that was in the car prior to showing up at ECS was laughable at best. They showed me the map and then showed me how it "SHOULD" look if all things were ideal,,, i laughed and knew this would be a very well spent 700 bucks. (keep readinig to find out why it costs that much)

Doug spent his whole day working on my car, dialing in idle, part throttle, mid range... a really good speed density street tune basically... the idle took a good chunk of time because of the overlap of the cam (11 degrees), and also beause of the previous tune. We werent starting at ground zero, we were starting at negative 5... ESPECIALLY with idle... it was horrible before ECS fixxed it.

Today was pretty hot, id say it probably was about 90 degrees most of the day, and when we dynoed it didnt get any cooler thats for sure...

so about 90 degree temps and after driving ALL DAY... we put the car on the dynopack, the dyno that mounts to the hubs of the car. The dynopack reads somewhere in between a Mustang (low) and a Dynojet (high/correct)... and its on the low side of that range... so we'll call it a "low average" of the 2 big dynos.

Now, when i was running binh, i was shifting at 6800 rpm, theres another fault in that, because when we hit the dyno, we realized that peak power is at 6100 rpm... so shifing at 6500 would really be key. maybe even 6400.
looking at the graph, it would be better for me to shift at 6200 even than it was to shift at 6800 because of how the cam drops off after 6300 rpm... this is exactly what i wanted , a 6500 rpm shift point. perfect.

Also going through 3.91s which show a little less power on the dyno, the car made 400/380 at the wheels. (rounding up 1 for weather conditions lol)

all in all im pretty satisfied with it. when i saw the number i was a little disappointed, but then i actually got to drive it and see it was WORLDS ahead of where it was ... id estimate that with the original tune i was putting down about 345-maybe 350 MAX... so its logical to think (with the loss of my mid range) that the heads/cam and tune made my car SLOWER... which we found out when i got assraped by a bolt ons only LS1 GTO from a roll...

so. ... with all this said.... binh and i will run again once it dries out and cools down around here. I have a feeling the outcome will be much different... who will win, i still couldnt say, but i know it will be a lot closer than it was...

[bicketybam]

I think Dynopack dyno's read high. I made close to 500 rwhp on one with an intake and a tune. It should have been more like ~475.

In any event, good job by going to ECS. I have heard great things about them. If I stay N/A I am going to the Vette Doctors in LI. If I go FI, I am going to ECS. That Paxton setup is very appealing (600 rwhp).

Did the dyno look like this?

[binh]

Originally Posted by axles of evil

Im always down for a cruise.



13.20s on all season radials with a full tank of gas, jack, spare, stock skid plate (heavy as hell, prob 25 lbs) and a 330 lb driver. the cars dyno about the same (headers and tune vs stock)



see above...





yes the car is a t60-1 single turbo car like binh says , he put the thing together several years ago, so it would make sense that in fact he DOES know what he is talking about in regards to the build...

Morbid, please alter the "tone" of your posts. As you know, the rules of ls1gto.com state that starting an inter forum "war" is a bannable offense. You are also doing a very poor job representing the GTO, even the LSx community, making us all look bad, and making yourself look worse. This is the internet, there are a lot of arguments that can never be won, regardless of who is right or wrong, but in the cases ive seen in this thread, you are wrong... so please stop altogether.

Like binh said, today i went to east cost supercharging. they build some of the nastiest corvettes and LS motors on the east coast, quite possibly in the country. There were about 15 vettes there, all of them were over 600 rwhp and almost all of them ran in the mid 9's in the quarter... the rest are road race cars and have either never been to the strip, or arent properly caged to run that quick.

Doug at ECS does all their tuning, every day all day, tuning is all he does, he has done about 1500 vettes in the past few years, and all of them put out insane numbers and run for years with no problems, so he knows his stuff.

The tune that was in the car prior to showing up at ECS was laughable at best. They showed me the map and then showed me how it "SHOULD" look if all things were ideal,,, i laughed and knew this would be a very well spent 700 bucks. (keep readinig to find out why it costs that much)

Doug spent his whole day working on my car, dialing in idle, part throttle, mid range... a really good speed density street tune basically... the idle took a good chunk of time because of the overlap of the cam (11 degrees), and also beause of the previous tune. We werent starting at ground zero, we were starting at negative 5... ESPECIALLY with idle... it was horrible before ECS fixxed it.

Today was pretty hot, id say it probably was about 90 degrees most of the day, and when we dynoed it didnt get any cooler thats for sure...

so about 90 degree temps and after driving ALL DAY... we put the car on the dynopack, the dyno that mounts to the hubs of the car. The dynopack reads somewhere in between a Mustang (low) and a Dynojet (high/correct)... and its on the low side of that range... so we'll call it a "low average" of the 2 big dynos.

Now, when i was running binh, i was shifting at 6800 rpm, theres another fault in that, because when we hit the dyno, we realized that peak power is at 6100 rpm... so shifing at 6500 would really be key. maybe even 6400.
looking at the graph, it would be better for me to shift at 6200 even than it was to shift at 6800 because of how the cam drops off after 6300 rpm... this is exactly what i wanted , a 6500 rpm shift point. perfect.

Also going through 3.91s which show a little less power on the dyno, the car made 400/380 at the wheels. (rounding up 1 for weather conditions lol)

all in all im pretty satisfied with it. when i saw the number i was a little disappointed, but then i actually got to drive it and see it was WORLDS ahead of where it was ... id estimate that with the original tune i was putting down about 345-maybe 350 MAX... so its logical to think (with the loss of my mid range) that the heads/cam and tune made my car SLOWER... which we found out when i got assraped by a bolt ons only LS1 GTO from a roll...

so. ... with all this said.... binh and i will run again once it dries out and cools down around here. I have a feeling the outcome will be much different... who will win, i still couldnt say, but i know it will be a lot closer than it was...

amen brotha

[axles of evil]

yup, looked just like that pic above (cant post pics yet ...)

Doug was telling me they read somewhere around the middle of the 2 before we started making runs. but as you know, each dyno is different. i could drive up to the one you ran on and run a different number than i did today... dynos are just tools to measure improvements or set backs in a tune IMO. the number is nice to see, but im more concerned with seeing the graph and seeing gains.

the king of the ring when it comes down to it is track times. whether theyre 1/4 mile or circuit lap times.

when i heard 400 i was actually a little disappointed, but after driving it i was happier than a pig in sh--

[bicketybam]

Originally Posted by axles of evil

yup, looked just like that pic above (cant post pics yet ...)

Doug was telling me they read somewhere around the middle of the 2 before we started making runs. but as you know, each dyno is different. i could drive up to the one you ran on and run a different number than i did today... dynos are just tools to measure improvements or set backs in a tune IMO. the number is nice to see, but im more concerned with seeing the graph and seeing gains.

the king of the ring when it comes down to it is track times. whether theyre 1/4 mile or circuit lap times.

when i heard 400 i was actually a little disappointed, but after driving it i was happier than a pig in sh--

Bingo! But I still think they read high because of the lack of rotating mass.

[axles of evil]

Originally Posted by bicketybam

Bingo! But I still think they read high because of the lack of rotating mass.

i think that it would help accelleration, but actual power idk if it matters, becaue the rotating mass creates inertia/momentum

[SergEG]

Originally Posted by bicketybam

I think Dynopack dyno's read high. I made close to 500 rwhp on one with an intake and a tune. It should have been more like ~475.

They dont read high they are probably the most accurate dynos really

Since its at the hubs you dont have to worry about wheel/tire weight/drag skewing the numbers

Also since you can load the car you can get a better real world tune on a dynapack

I think if most RWD cars lose 15% or so to the wheels the dynapack is right around 10-12% loss so the numers can be "higher" by 3-5% over a dynojet that will factor in wheel/tire/drag....then we have the standard differences in dyno setups and the numbers may be off even more due to how that particular dyno was setup

300hp dynapack 270
300hp dynojet = 255

Carry on

[phantom3]

5 cl's.... roflwtf???

[axles of evil]

Originally Posted by phantom3

5 cl's.... roflwtf???

?? what ??