Let's do it.

 

If that is absolutely true, then those are incredible numbers.

I for one, definitely need to change my flash, my car wasn't even close to that w K24, GT2 intercoolers, open exhaust, LWFW flywheel (have Bosch Motorsport 5bar FPR) and this was boosting 1.2 bar on racegas + w new coilpacks and NGK7 plugs. Not going to reveal the tune bc don't want to start a bad mouthing contest.

Tuners please chime in, does this confirm no point in upgrading to anything above K24 turbos to reach really close to 600 crank, just get a similar tune as FVD with an exhaust and 5bar?

 

ONLY,,GIAC 93 oct. tune, CARGRAPHICS 200 cell medium sound exhaust and K+N stock panel air filter..

 

Earlier discussions on the forum when K24 was past being interesting and comparisons to billet turbos and K24/18Gs were hot topics and tuners went into great research, they were benched around the facts that a stock k24 has a 30lb compressor and that "...the 996tt engine produces about 9.25hp/lb/min of air, so a stock k24 with 30lbs/min of air times two of course can make about 30x2x9.25=555hp at the crank before it runs out of air and maintains some sort of efficiency."

From there a lot of effort has gone into discussions of solutions to reduce the pressure losses through the entire tubing in addition to just a flash and exhaust, to improve those numbers.

GIAC's own dynochart is here for K24 with a common list of mods below. Now pls notice this dyno might be calibrated low vs OEM/REAL hp and it's on 91 Oct (somebody chime in how big is the 91 vs 93 difference?), but overall it's just a reference of difference to the above graphs and mainly it's used by the tuner for their own advertising.
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...are-996tt.html


But what I find more useful is that GIAC announces that their flash generates a 65hp gain over GT2/X50 (with modifying wastegates and when talking to them it requires a free flowing exhaust to get that gain). That'd be roughly 475hp crank + 65 = 540 crank hp.
As a sidenote GMG announces a 60-70hp gain over GT2/X50 with their flash.

These are both big players and I don't know whom to believe anymore... I also saw first hand what my top notch tuner was able to gain from my K24 setup w racegas referenced earlier.

Since it's Friday and time to go enjoy the weekend I will officially join the OP and ask the same question he posted and let others duke it out bc ppl with long history here and a lot of +rep has posted graphs testifying that their gains to past and beyond 500whp are true, but the vendor supplying the tune says smth else. I guess depending on who you ask, the answer will always be different.

 

470ish AWHP with K24s on a Mustang dyno, on 91 octane gas, sounds about right.

That same car could easily be over 500 if converted to RWHP and using 93 octane and measured on a Dynojet.

 

I saw that GIAC mentioned they had a part on their Dyno sheet ,that I tested on my car back to back that day..Lets just say I put that stock part back on in which those were my best numbers and a better mid/upper power band..I had the stock TB though..
Andrew from GIAC has other guys dyno sheets that did right around the same power and even a little more then me..
When I first got my K24/18gs,EPL tune with his 72 injectors and went to AMS on their rear wheel dyno jet , I was sick because I only made 525 HP and 541 TQ..I then tryed the EVO inlet pipes after that because everyone said that was the reason..Well hate to say it they didnt do anything at that level,,Believe or Not..
But when I changed to the Milltek 100 cell exhaust,,I piked up 30 HP and 50 TQ but it was a gain all thru the powerband and the boost on my dash gage went up also,,,Its all in the combo of parts working together..

 

..Agreed..
Those are great numbers for that dyno and 91 oct.

 

Hey Mark - weren't those K24/26 hybrids from FVD? Or were they really just a run-of-the-mill, OEM K24?

 

That dyno sheet is pretty close to my above one with the K24s..

 

What you really need to look at on the dyno charts is what correction factor is being used. You can play with the altitude in there and do crazy stuff with the numbers, even if it is SAE corrected. If the chart is SAE corrected, then you are looking at real numbers as long as the dyno operator is legit.

The dyno chart posted above is STD correction factor on a dynojet, that is not real HP figures (usually about 2.6% higher than SAE). On a DynoDynamics make sure the readout is not in Shootout mode, this raises the numbers to about the same level as Dynojet STD. Mustang dynos can also use any correction factor.

Another thing to watch is the smoothing correction. It does just like it states and smooths out the chart to make it look nicer. 0= raw data and 5 is usually the highest. Running low correction will usually give you a false peak and most of the time you will see 3-5 being used.

 

Drivetrain friction loss on these cars seems to be about 55hp if stock 415 crank HP cars are on the average putting 360hp to the wheels (I'm assuming RWD measurement with front diff disconnected). I think everyone agrees with that number, give or take. I'm assuming that if you add the FWD friction than you may be looking at a 80HP friction loss for AWD vs. 55HP for RWD. Drivetrain loss is a fixed number (in the RWD case 55HP) which will not change weather your car makes 415hp or 700hp. Why do people keep using this 15-20% number which will artificially inflate the drivetrain losses as crank HP goes up? Thus, if a car is putting 500 hp to the rollers (RWD) than it should be producing 555 crank HP (500 wheel + 55 drivetrain loss) and not the 600+crank HP that some of the posters here are claiming.

 

My car made 338/370 on a Mustang dyno in AWD, stock. That's right at 19% loss...maybe 18.5%

 

Because no one really thinks that drive train loss is a flat number rather than a percentage of the overall hp. If a 900 whp turbo only makes 955 crank that's less than 6% drivetrain loss. And no one is going to buy that. Whatever the standard is it has to apply across the range.

 

Like most, I have wondered about this for many years. It's seems impossible that someone hasn't already tried to prove it one way or another by putting an engine on an engine dyno, then put that engine back in a car and put it on a chassis dyno to see REAL loss for that drive train.

It always seemed to me that DL loss would be a consistant "percentage". As I put more thought into it, it would seem possible (and more logical) that a drivetrain would "soak up" a certain amount of power and thats it.
So in my case above in my last post, I seemed to have lost 77hp from my flywheel down to my wheels in stock form (415-388=77). So no matter the mods thereafter, I would always ONLY lose 77hp from the flywheel to wheels. So if I ever ended up making 850whp, that would equate to 927crank hp, showing a 9% loss, which as you say, NO ONE would believe...but it is what it is...

 

Can you please explain how the same exact drivetrain is going to create more parasitic drag (loss) with just a change in crank HP? I would really love to know and I'm not trying to be disrespectful.