K24's Anyone?
#47
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.
#48
Originally Posted by digitekkz
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.
#49
Originally Posted by K24madness
Kevin,
Put your K16 hybrids against the Protomotive K24 hybrids and you will be the one shelling out the $$$
Compair stock k16's to stock k24's
OR
Compair hybrid k16's to hybrid k24's
Put your K16 hybrids against the Protomotive K24 hybrids and you will be the one shelling out the $$$
Compair stock k16's to stock k24's
OR
Compair hybrid k16's to hybrid k24's
#50
Originally Posted by Mike/A.W.E.
Jean, why is that so far fetched?
1. Use the same car.
2. Use the same programming.
3. Install the the various turbos.
4. Overlay the graphs.
That has been my point this entire time!
You start throwing in a variable like software and the whole test is a bust.
Are there any other 6speeders out there that agree, or am I wasting my breath?
1. Use the same car.
2. Use the same programming.
3. Install the the various turbos.
4. Overlay the graphs.
That has been my point this entire time!
You start throwing in a variable like software and the whole test is a bust.
Are there any other 6speeders out there that agree, or am I wasting my breath?
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.
#51
Originally Posted by Kevin
I have not seen a K24/18G 60-130 run, or a 1/4 mile slip better than 12 seconds at 124??? Stock fuel injectors, stock throttle body, FPR?? If there is better data, lets see it posted.. The numbers that have been posted that are better is supplied with a larger throttle-body and is running non-stock sized injectors..
#52
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.
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.
Last edited by CARVER; 02-25-2007 at 04:44 AM.
#53
Originally Posted by rafiki
Marski
What do you think is the best 1/4 that can be achieved with the k16s (along with other mods..ported headers/exhaust/flash)?
What do you think is the best 1/4 that can be achieved with the k16s (along with other mods..ported headers/exhaust/flash)?
Vid: http://media.putfile.com/1165
Last edited by Divexxtreme; 02-25-2007 at 09:09 AM.
#54
Originally Posted by CARVER
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.
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.
#55
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.
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.
#56
Originally Posted by CARVER
Hey thanks Bro..........
How are you holding up over there?
You must be getting pretty pumped about 1000hp when you get back!
How are you holding up over there?
You must be getting pretty pumped about 1000hp when you get back!
And yes...I'm definitely pumped about my car.
Last edited by Divexxtreme; 02-25-2007 at 08:02 AM.
#57
Originally Posted by CARVER
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.
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.
Last edited by KPG; 02-25-2007 at 08:04 AM.
#58
Originally Posted by KPG
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
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.
#60
Originally Posted by Jean
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.
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.
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
Last edited by KPG; 02-25-2007 at 10:21 PM.