Moderators: eastlmark, BIG_MVS, phildini, Test Moderator, Alpineandy
Non Member
369
Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:16 pm
York,UK
Non Member
2501
Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:26 pm
Cumbria
Non Member
594
Thu Nov 17, 2005 5:35 pm
york
Non Member
2501
Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:26 pm
Cumbria
Non Member
594
Thu Nov 17, 2005 5:35 pm
york
Non Member
3474
Thu Apr 15, 2004 8:10 am
Colchester, Essex
steveatyork wrote:It might be 280BHP on the Motorscope rolling road what a load of crap re´the pigyback re´: the afr readings who´s to say that the reading he is getting are not good for a GTA? my RX7 runs in the 11´s on full throttle-boost, Noble seem to think that the prob with the GTA is the head`s which are restrictive? doeas anyone know? Peters GTA made around 260bhp at a bit less boost, but it didnt last, WHY?
its no good slagging off what no one knows, like i said it might be 280bhp on another rolling road. i can remember taking my 16v tr7 on some rollers and got 180 bhp a week later it was 160 on different rollers
Non Member
369
Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:16 pm
York,UK
David Gentleman wrote:steveatyork wrote:It might be 280BHP on the Motorscope rolling road what a load of crap re´the pigyback re´: the afr readings who´s to say that the reading he is getting are not good for a GTA? my RX7 runs in the 11´s on full throttle-boost, Noble seem to think that the prob with the GTA is the head`s which are restrictive? doeas anyone know? Peters GTA made around 260bhp at a bit less boost, but it didnt last, WHY?
its no good slagging off what no one knows, like i said it might be 280bhp on another rolling road. i can remember taking my 16v tr7 on some rollers and got 180 bhp a week later it was 160 on different rollers
Peters car made 260 bhp for ages and in the Summer peak temps, its only when it went back again cooler weather it was tuned further and made no extra power, but made more torque due to more ignition advanced dialled in....
His turbo was only good for 260bhp, and the injectors are 219cc's, which if you do the math max out at exactly 260bhp again....
Why does no one listen? We are not slagging Steves car, we're trying to help. He has less that the power we expected and the torque has not show the gains that can be met through proper mapping, so either the Dastek isnt capable of it, or the programmers couldnt be bothered to play with the ignition. You have to remember, with a piggyback it very easy to do very little, as you have the original ECU map to rely on, and most piggyback mappers will just add the extra fuel if needed at top end, and maybe just hike the whole ignition map up a few degrees. With a standalone, because you have to start from scratch, you may as well optimise the WHOLE map from the start, fuel and ignition..hence why you see big gains in torque from the off..
Both Peters and Tonys cars running standalone made over 330lb ft torque with low boost. Steves is still at 250 with more boost, and a far bigger turbo and unrestrictive exhaust side, but 250 is standard ECU mapping torque - so its evident that it hasnt been touched..
As for AFR's, 12.5 is around the optimum for the GTA, why, because I say so! I have various graphs of mapping on Peters car for instance, at 12.8, 12.5, 12, 11+, and the lower it goes the more the power drops off.
Comparing a 400bhp RX7 for example.....its not even an 4 stroke internal combustion engine for gawd sake...! Every engine is different....
Non Member
2501
Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:26 pm
Cumbria
Non Member
369
Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:16 pm
York,UK
peterg wrote:I bet GT5 is looking forward to you buying him an Adaptronic!! so it may be a way off yet
Non Member
1514
Tue Apr 12, 2005 12:24 am
Nr Chippenham, Wiltshire
Non Member
369
Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:16 pm
York,UK
Non Member
3474
Thu Apr 15, 2004 8:10 am
Colchester, Essex
steveatyork wrote:My thoughts are, Lets see a GTA (12V) running with a Adaptronic ECU with some good mapping showing a nice power plot maybe 280 bhp + with no internal engine mods cams, headwork etc, and ill buy him one off you Dave
Non Member
3474
Thu Apr 15, 2004 8:10 am
Colchester, Essex
Stunned Monkey wrote: How many engines can you poke your finger in the intake port and touch the back of the valve with no difficulty? It's true the cams in the Z7U are very mild though - I believe I can quote Dave that the x-sec of the intake port is greater than the valve clearance provided by stock cams.
How do they know the chargecooler isn't working well? Have they actually probed inlet and outlet temps? Compared to a stock intercooler?....
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 161 guests