Gearhead - upgraded!

[SM105K]

Yeah I'd say that's probably about right for e30 vs gas. Maybe some others can chime in on that aspect. I never ran 93 long enough to compare.

I made 366 hp and 414 tq to the tire on my 91 octane tune only.

Final revision on my E30 tune only with the stock HPFP was 391 hp and 470 tq to the time. That tune went 12.56 @ 108 full weight.

Final revision with my DP's and Custom Midpipes with my stock HPFP was 391 hp and 494 tq to the tire.

Since then I have added MSD cops, and a FS HPFP. Look for new numbers soon.

 

[High on Ethanol]

I made 366 hp and 414 tq to the tire on my 91 octane tune only.

Final revision on my E30 tune with the stock HPFP was 391 hp and 470 tq to the time. That tune went 12.56 @ 108 full weight.

Final revision with my DP's and Custom Midpipes with my stock HPFP was 391 hp and 494 tq to the tire.

Since then I have added MSD cops, and a FS HPFP. Look for new numbers soon.

I think bpd1151 gave that 23% number somewhere or something.

Then again the drugs really got a hold of me.

 

[SM105K]

I think bpd1151 gave that 23% number somewhere or something.

Then again the drugs really got a hold of me.

I agree with 23%. I was thinking 30% but that would mean my car was making 508 ish to the flywheel and I don't see that with my boost issues with the stock HPFP. 480 ish seems about right.

 

[MHW100]

At 520 then assuming that metric is correct puts my GH gas tune 400 at the wheels. Feels great not that another 30+ wouldnt feel much better.

 

[High on Ethanol]

I think 80hp over stock is the common tune advertising. Ive also seen things like the "440 package"

 

[bpd1151]

I think bpd1151 gave that 23% number somewhere or something.

Then again the drugs really got a hold of me.

The drivetrain loss has been consistent at 23% to 24% across all model years from 2010 to their most recent demise.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[SM105K]

At 520 then assuming that metric is correct puts my GH gas tune 400 at the wheels. Feels great not that another 30+ wouldnt feel much better.

With your mods on 93 octane that seems about right.

 

[SHOthyme]

At 520 then assuming that metric is correct puts my GH gas tune 400 at the wheels. Feels great not that another 30+ wouldnt feel much better.

I don't know, that seems a little light to me, with stock turbos and no GH IC on e30 with catted DP's and the rest of your mods (in a no-pp '18) I put 398 HP to the wheels. I would suspect with GH IC and turbos you should be well into the 400's.

Although, it was this spring with all that great cold dense air we have up nort.

 

[High on Ethanol]

I don't know, that seems a little light to me, with stock turbos and no GH IC on e30 with catted DP's and the rest of your mods (in a no-pp '18) I put 398 HP to the wheels. I would suspect with GH IC and turbos you should be well into the 400's.

Although, it was this spring with all that great cold dense air we have up nort.

It would depend on his tuner, how many revisions and how far they are willing to push it based on their comfort with the datalogs.

 

[SHOthyme]

In his sig it says GH, which is the same as me, and there are no revisions for the AO tune.

 

[High on Ethanol]

In his sig it says GH, which is the same as me, and there are no revisions for the AO tune.

There is a revision for turbos and for intercooler. It would definitely not run at potential if he didn't get it updated for those items.

 

[SHOthyme]

Yes, for sure, but what I'm saying is once you load that tune for mods I haven't had any further revisions.

 

[High on Ethanol]

that could be true. I never ran the AO tune very long. I had about 5 revisions on the e30tune.

 

[MHW100]

There is a revision for turbos and for intercooler. It would definitely not run at potential if he didn't get it updated for those items.

Matt kindly did a ton of revisions from the logs to get everything dialled in. He won't jeapordize safety.

 

[SHOthyme]

Now on the other hand, once you get him some logs on the e-tune, he will crank up the power if it's safe to do so.

 

[High on Ethanol]

Matt kindly did a ton of revisions from the logs to get everything dialled in.

Ask Matt his opinion on how much power you are making. I'd bet he would agree with the #/min x10 hp numbers. Sometimes people forget dyno numbers +/- corrections and dyno having controlled airflow and temps.

 

[SHOthyme]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10218317447828885&set=p.10218317447828885&type=3&theater

If you have the BookFace, he did just recently post, that's the other reason I figured it was a bit light.

 

[MHW100]

Ask Matt his opinion on how much power you are making. I'd bet he would agree with the #/min x10 hp numbers. Sometimes people forget dyno numbers +/- corrections and dyno having controlled airflow and temps.

Matt said 520 is correct as an estimate. The logs were run in 80 degree heat so maybe a cooler ambient would produce a higher number for the estimation metric.

 

[High on Ethanol]

Matt said 520 is correct as an estimate. The logs were run in 80 degree heat so maybe a cooler ambient would produce a higher number for estimation metric.

Don't quote me on this but I believe he was the one that referred me to that method of estimation.

 

[SHOthyme]

Ask Matt his opinion on how much power you are making. I'd bet he would agree with the #/min x10 hp numbers. Sometimes people forget dyno numbers +/- corrections and dyno having controlled airflow and temps.

Where do you get this number? Torque? SCT? Which PID?

Thanks!