Stock K24's or hybrid K24/18's? Mike/AWE has a AWD dyno showing 503 hp. So it looks like you can have 500 hp to the wheels and even more with the hybrid 24's.

 

hahah I am dazed and confuse of what to get. Maybe I should just break the piggys round up all the quarters and dump it on the protomotive setup or save some cash be satisfy with a tuned k24 setup.

 

What ever you choose do your research because this is not the type of thing you want to do twice. There is a wealth of infomation both here and on other sites. One of the the best things you can do is try and talk with people who have each type of setup and if possible get a ride. Each tuner/shop has many people who post here so you should be able to get a broad range of opinions. I posted this thread a few days ago. Hopefully you will find it useful. https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...ad.php?t=74260

 

Hey Tom. I just wanted your input on the 18G proto hybrids. You claim they are superior to all other hybrids. Since you made a direct reference to Kevin M perhaps you should compare his K16 based 3A hybrid to your favorite 24 based hybrid. Both these kits are priced relatively close so they are a good comparison. Dont even look at the dyno numbers themselves(even though UMW is higher ), just concentrate on the HP line on the graph and see how it trends. The Proto 700 kit plateaus and flatlines around 5K and never recovers power and actually drops off a bit. The UMW K16 based hybrid continues to make power all the way to redline. It would seem your turbo isnt all that efficient around 5K....I am at a loss as to why, since the " small " K16 based turbo keeps gaining ground high up in the rpm band where the 24/18G supposedly claims an advantage. Since the UMW turbo will make more power down low as well, how can you claim the 24 hybrids are the optimal solution? Be good...Kevin G

 

My point is when two builders are trying to establish whose turbos have more lag while using a different dyno,methodology etc, it is pointless.

The second and more important thing is that hardly any of these dyno runs get close to what happens in reality under real load which is precisely where turbo lag is noticeable.

 

How is a quartermile run is any indicator of turbo lag. Or even a 60-130mph time?

 

Jean has a point here, actually a few.
This discussion is really talking about 5 different things which are being interchanged without defining which one is the point.
1. Boost threshold or the engine speed where exhaust flow is sufficient to produce positive intake manifold pressure
2. Turbo lag or the time delay of boost response while the engine is above the boost threshold.
I'd even go further to say the time delay at a specified and equivalent rpm above the boost threshold (the engine's defined operating rpm)
3. Peak horsepower
4. Mean horsepower also known as total HP x RPM area under the curve for a defined operating range
5. Operating environment, conditions and setup

Unless one specifies which point they're talking about, the discussion doesn't resolve or clarify anything. Here are some examples:

Driver A is a 1/4 mi., 60-130mph, big road course type. #4 is his primary concern since he's always above the boost threshold, spooled and in the proper gear.

Driver B is a short road course/auto-x type. He is primarily concerned with #2 and #4 since he is always shifting to stay above #1,
but he is on and off the throttle with the turns so he wants average HP and minimum lag while above the boost threshold.

Driver C is primarily a city driver with low average speeds and many stops. He is concerned with #1 and #4 since he is constantly coming out of the boost threshold rpm and back into it. He'd rather have a lower boost threshold so that he can generate boost closer to idle for all the stops and slow transitions in the city.

Both drivers can't compare their performance to each other unless #5 is taken into account because all of the #1-#4's are affected by density altitude or the local pressure, temperature and humidity of the air during that given time. Add to that idea that many dyno operators don't correct for the local conditions properly with turbocharged engines and you really have quite a few variations to compensate for. Add in software variations for similar setups and you have another variable.

So to talk about #1 or #2 for a drag racer doesn't make sense.
To talk about #3 for an auto-x racer or stop and go driver doesn't make sense.
To not talk about #1 for a person at high density altitudes doesn't make sense.
To compare systems at different #5's has to be taken into account since the outcomes will be affected by it.

My point is that if different systems from different shops are to be compared, the conditions and objective criteria have to be defined clearly to get useful information out of the discussion. And even then, a focused effort has to be made to normalize the variables so that meaningful data is obtained.

$.02 etc.

 

I think I actually have the best 1/4 mile run on stock K16's to date. I ran 11.65 @ 126 with intake, DV's, exhaust, tune, full-weight, AWD and on street tires.

Vid: http://media.putfile.com/1165

 

I always love reading your posts, Andrew.

 

Hey thanks Bro..........

How are you holding up over there?
You must be getting pretty pumped about 1000hp when you get back!

I'd really love to see a trustworthy, comprehensive set of tests done both on the same track and dyno, operator etc. with the same software tuner, fuel, conditions etc. on multiple different combinations of setups with proper controls.....
It would be understandable if some wouldn't want to do it because it might jeopardize part of their product line, but it sure would be interesting.

 

Holding up well bro, thanks for asking. Flying back to the US in 4 days, so I'm pretty excited about that. But I head out to Iraq in September for 6-months...so I won't be home long.

And yes...I'm definitely pumped about my car.

 

Carver, excellent points.So, unless you are specifically building a 1 dimensional car to maximize any 1 of the above points 1,2,3 or 5, shouldnt the general discussion of turbos in a given class/price range shift to avg power and tq across the power band- point #4.The avg forum member here is most likely looking for info on a flexible,multipurpose turbo that has great performance at the 1/4 mile, road course and street work ,but specifically excels at none of those. I know I fit that target market since I track, drag and still need a car that my wife drives 5K miles a year.It now becomes a "power under the curve" debate and some tuning kits excel at that and some dont. If so why would one give away the lower part of the band in a 24/18G turbo? Be good , Kevin

 

Have you driven any cars with those wonderful K24/18G turbos? If so, how do you quantify lag in them vs. what you know? Maybe they are not daily drivers that our wives can drive? Or the benchmark is that if you are in 6th at 20mph and you smash the throttle the car takes 1 more second to get to 150mph?

Is your statement based on what your dyno graph analysis showed you so accurately?

Would you like to see the same car with the same setup however with 20% more torque "under the curve" only because it is being run on two different dynos? So what might be the secret?

We need to hear new selling lines.

 

For some reason I saw a couple people said they only got 500 awd hp out the hybrid package? When Mike posted up that a tuned K24 can put the same horsepower?

 

Jean, my good friend ...for someone who routinely complains about this site...you sure do spend a lot of time here debating dyno sheets etc, but hey you are part of the family. Since you lost the point of MY post to K24 Madness, I will hold your hand thru it one more time...He made a statement , pure and simple, that Proto 24 hybrids are superior to Kevins Hybrids....his words, not mine. Now , like I said previously just forget the dyno numbers and look at the HP line, and only the HP line...His solution shows no additional power being made from about 5K to redline, yet Kevins "inferior" hybrids pulls all the way to redline making power the entire distance. Again, this is just a response to that post and if you have an answer to that I would love to hear it...Just remember, forget all the variables and concentrate on the trend line and on the fact these two kits are making roughly the same power from 2 different tuners at roughly the same price point. Why would you take a solution that stops making power at 5K?

As for the selling line...I am not looking to buy a 3A or an 18G so I am not sure what point...if any , you are trying to make. Be good buddy. Kevin