Shootout updates as they happen live from the source!
#91
12-01-2003, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by buddyg
I have to say I am very dissapointed. Yes I have a dyno sheet right in front of me that says 586.7 hp and 563.9 ft lb of torque that we ran yesterday on the same dyno. But when the magazine article comes out the RED BEAST will only be showing 522 hp.
We have a bad turbo boost leak somewhere and Todd with EVO is trying to find it. I hope we can get it fixed in time for the track event tommorrow! The Ghetto machine is next up then SCARGO and who knows what Cargraphic is doing. They were suppose to go before Alex.
Reporting live from GIAC a very dissapointed BUDMAN!
I have to say I am very dissapointed. Yes I have a dyno sheet right in front of me that says 586.7 hp and 563.9 ft lb of torque that we ran yesterday on the same dyno. But when the magazine article comes out the RED BEAST will only be showing 522 hp.
We have a bad turbo boost leak somewhere and Todd with EVO is trying to find it. I hope we can get it fixed in time for the track event tommorrow! The Ghetto machine is next up then SCARGO and who knows what Cargraphic is doing. They were suppose to go before Alex.
Reporting live from GIAC a very dissapointed BUDMAN!
#93
12-01-2003, 04:06 PM
senior member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Jose / Gilroy, CA
Posts: 1,421
Rep Power: 78 
Unless there is a limit on the boost that can be run, what is wrong with anyone / everyone doing whatever they want?
I also agree that knowing that data will make for a more interesting and informative magazine article.
I also agree that knowing that data will make for a more interesting and informative magazine article.
#94
12-01-2003, 04:11 PM
dpblessing:
There is nothing "wrong" with it, it is just that most believe these are not reliable numbers to run and you are in serious jeopardy by doing so. Also, because boost is such a big factor, you need to know it to properly compare numbers.
There is nothing "wrong" with it, it is just that most believe these are not reliable numbers to run and you are in serious jeopardy by doing so. Also, because boost is such a big factor, you need to know it to properly compare numbers.
#95
12-01-2003, 04:14 PM
while they were sorting out Budman's issues - Cargraphic was told to get lunch & they would be worked back into the line up thats all...
#97
12-01-2003, 04:28 PM
I agree that to not publish the boost levels really brings into question the usefulness of the findings. After all, anyone can pump up the boost for this test, use race gas, hope a lot, and look great. I do not see the relevancy of this to street performance driving where you cannot really use a mapping that is set for race gas and you probably want some real reliability and durability.
Just my $.02 worth...
Just my $.02 worth...
#98
12-01-2003, 04:30 PM
John: Sure wish we could have seen a Ruf car there. What dyno #'s do you have and what boost do you run.
#101
12-01-2003, 04:38 PM
Ok here is my read. The reason I did not enter my car was because when my car would reach 1.3 bar at 6100 rpms it would close down the throttle body. Roger had a solution that would of tricked the computer letting it run as much boost as it could possibly 1.4 1.5. I was against this because its not a true representation of what the car can do nor would it be reliable. My car was making 570 to the rear wheels at 6100 rpms before shutting down. I am sure there is at least another 30 posibbly 40 HP to pick up if the software issue was worked out.
#103
12-01-2003, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by Duane
Update was 442 for Sharkster first run with two more to come.
Update was 442 for Sharkster first run with two more to come.
). That can't be right...somthing musta happened...doesn't he have the same turbos, with "better" software then you Duane??Evan
#105
12-01-2003, 04:46 PM
CC...my car is at Weissach Performance in Vancouver getting the Ruf "treatment" as we speak...the Ruf tech arrived from Germany last night and began on my car this morning. I should have it on Thursday. Will dyno it on a Mustang 4wd dyno in Seattle sometime this month and report...not that this means alot given that different dynos read so differently.
I imagine from what I have read here that it will be in the 570 to 600 fwhp range. I am looking for a broad flat TQ curve and quick spool up for backroad useage. It will certainly not be as fast as some of these cars...but it will not need race gas and will not be at 1.4 or 1.5 bar either :-)) It would really be interesting to me to see the shootout cars run a spec 91 octane gas and have to at least report their boost and maybe even be limited to some agreed upon max boost like 1.1 or 1.2 bar. That would level the playing field and would tell us more about the engineering than just pumping up the boost and running race gas...
I imagine from what I have read here that it will be in the 570 to 600 fwhp range. I am looking for a broad flat TQ curve and quick spool up for backroad useage. It will certainly not be as fast as some of these cars...but it will not need race gas and will not be at 1.4 or 1.5 bar either :-)) It would really be interesting to me to see the shootout cars run a spec 91 octane gas and have to at least report their boost and maybe even be limited to some agreed upon max boost like 1.1 or 1.2 bar. That would level the playing field and would tell us more about the engineering than just pumping up the boost and running race gas...