I helped ya out Craig.

 

I clicked on the scale for the rep. Is that the way to do it?

 

Yes sir, INCOMINGGG

 

Protomotive is a small shop and they do not produce many cars. Therefore, there are not many Protomotive cars available to line up with cars built by other tuners. Moreover, two of Protomotive's best known cars are completely different than anything that we are discussing here. Alex's Protomotive car took two years to build, at an extraordinary cost, and it is not a readily available off the shelf tuning kit (similar to the GT700). Likewise, Markski's forthcoming car is unique in every sense of the word, using a mixture of components that has not previously been accomplished on a 996TT, and which involves an extended tuning program. Therefore, Markski's car also is not appropriate for a side-by side comparison of tuning kits. Scott's car is the best known of the Protomotive built cars that uses something akin to a readily available off-the-shelf "tuning kit." However, even Scott is sending his car back to Protomotive for a more expansive package that includes a full engine rebuild. There are a few other Protomotive equipted 996TTs, including one recently built in Los Angeles, but not many and certainly far fewer than the number of GT700s driving around. Consequently, while I share your desire for side by side comparisons, it is difficult to arrange.

Craig

 

Positive from me to counter

 

"Remember where" he trapped that 137.. It was in crazy heat, humidity in Phoenix so... Also if it was a super quiet exhaust, it may not be the "optimal" way to extrude all of that power. Either way, I would expect it to be slower than the 'ol Supra

 

To address your original question of Evo vs Proto; I have EVOMS tuning and components on my car and have been nothing short of impressed with their R&D, service and quality. Judging by the numbers I have seen from both tuners, it would appear that performance wise they are very similar. The fact that customers of both tuners stand so firmly behind the products and service of each, speaks leaps and bounds about both...either way I don't think you can go wrong

 

Craig

 

 

So with all things being equal then it'd boils down to price.

 

[quote=Divexxtreme]I did a little comparing using some timeslips that have been posted on the board. For accuracy, I only used cars that are either RWD all the time, or ran RWD while at the track:

Cgmeredithjr (Cleve) EVOMS GT2:

Run #1: 1/8th mile = 98 mph – ¼ mile = 133 mph. Gain of 35 mph on the back half.
Run #2: 1/8th mile = 102 mph – ¼ mile = 134 mph. Gain of 32 mph on back half.

RenntechV12 (Joe) EVOMS GT700 GT2:

Run #1: 1/8th mile = 103 mph – ¼ mile = 131 mph. Gain of 28 mph on the back half.

EVOMS GT800, RWD at time of run:

Run #1: 1/8th mile = 108 mph – ¼ mile = 139 mph. Gain of 31 mph on the back half.

Divexxtreme (Scott) Protomotive 700HP TT, RWD:

Run #1: 1/8th mile = 107 mph – ¼ mile = 135 mph. Gain of 28 mph on the back half.
Run #2: 1/8th mile = 108 mph – ¼ mile = 135 mph. Gain of 27 mph on the back half.
Run #3: 1/8th mile = 103 mph – ¼ mile = 136 mph. Gain of 33 mph on the back half.

The average between my 3 runs was 29.3 gained on the back half.

The average between the 4 above-listed RWD EVOMS runs is 31.5 mph on the back half.

Well, I am going to throw some data into this thread. Since we are trying to compare different vehicles with different methods...ie, track and GPS data. I can shed some light on what Jean is trying to get across... the track is only part of the tale. I have both timeslips and GPS data for the same runs so we can compare both types of data at once.
Now I do not have a GT700 or a Protomotive 700, but Kevin's Stage2 ZC with his custom programming and it would appear this setup fares well against the larger kits. As far as MPH gained on the back half of the 1/4 mile run, here are my numbers compared to others in the post

Cleve... 32,35 MPH
Renntech... 28MPH
GT800... 31 MPH
Diveextreme...27,28,33MPH
KPG...28.46 MPH
These numbers compare well with a GT700 GT2, while my vehicle is full weight and AWD

Jean was comparing 103-130MPH and here are my comparison numbers
Jean 103-130MPH... 543ft
Renntech 103-130... 660 ft
KPG 103-130MPH... 647 ft
It is obvious that Jean humbles both our vehicles but the Stg2's are ahead by 13ft on the GT2.

Cleves GT2 according to Jean covers the 1/8 to the1/4 in 3.78sec, while my car did it in 3.97 sec. I think a .19 sec deficit to the fastest GT2 on record says volumes about Ultimate MotorWerks turbos and programming since I am giving up a couple hundred pounds and running AWD. Since we are trying to give a new member choices, I would say the value to performance of this kit(under 10K$) is comparable to anything on the market today. I will post the timeslip again that I used for the MPH gain and the1/8 to 1/4 times as well as Racelogic GPS graphs of 103-130mph run. Thanks, Kevin

https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...ad.php?t=58230 here is the timeslip. There seems to be a problem with the uploading feature on 6speed, so I will post the graph as soon as possible although I can email it to anyone who requests it.

 

[quote=KPG]
This would make it seem that you suffer from front end lag, no?

You have figures that say your car is faster than mine in the 1/8 - 1/4, but I hit the 1/8 at 103 and you only hit it at 99mph. My stage 4 hit the 1/8 at 100 and had an ET of 11.60...here's the slip from that run (with a 60' very close to yours, so it wasn't the launch) The stage 4 beat you to the 1/8 in time and mph (we won't even talk about the 700):

Stage 4




Your Run


GT700:

 

Time out...relax. Comparing apples to apples, I never stated my car was faster than yours, I was posting comparison numbers to the previously posted times. We both did 28MPH on the back half of the 1/4 ... yes you were going faster. As for the times from 103-130 I was using data that Jean had posted, and yes I covered that distance in 13 feet less than you. As for the "laggy front" end ... please you are hundreds of pounds lighter than me with RWD and you will get away better. The whole point of this thread is performance options for a new member. Will your car beat mine at the 1/4... without a doubt... but I have 7K invested in my setup... how does that compare to yours? Cheers, Kevin BTW, I have 4+ mph on your Stage 4 for half price.

 

Kevin,

While your calculations are interesting, the fact remains that your car is a full second slower to the 1/4 mile than the referenced GT700s and Scott's Proto car. Thus, while UM's Stage 2 package is unquestionably a great value, it would not be suitable for someone seeking a 10 second car (or even a low 11 second car). Moreover, notwithstanding your interesting calculations, I would bet money that Joe's GT700 GT2 would cover 103-130 faster than your UM Stage 2 car if ran under the same conditions.

Craig

 

I'm not getting excited, buddy

My stage 4 was AWD, the car already had k24s and exhaust when I bought it.

Cheers!