3.0L 11.1 Compression 1000+ awhp 3/S on stock cams at Altitude

[J. Fast]

I also think it has something to do with the original thread starter and the attitude that will inevitably be brought to the conversation.....

That's just how my typing reads. I'm direct and lack massaging people skills. I saw that little blowout you deleted earlier... apparently you have the same attitude.

You still don't get the correction factor eh? CK conducted the same test as the one I posted on a completely different forced induction car and got same results. It's mind boggling stuff.

[J. Fast]

bla bla....blahhh

Good job on pissing a guy off that was willing to offer something of substance. If negative rep existed you'd be getting it.

[HellBringer]

On the contrary, it's people that are mislead or spout half-truths that take others down the same path who ruin forums. It's obvious that you don't understand all that you think you do regarding turbo sizing if you're still referring to a manufacturer's matrix on sizing recommendations. This carries through to your results in the form of a poor power curve. I don't need to go dig up hundreds of results as "proof", evidence or validation to back anything up - you can do your own research. As for Dynocoms reading high - I didn't mention it before because there was already enough fuel on the fire, but there is plenty if "evidence" available at your finger tips, again - do your own research. That's besides the point, though, and the least of my concerns with this thread...

The simple fact is the power numbers you claim at "27psi" are simply not possible on a 3.0L, and adding 20% correction to the claimed numbers makes them even more laughable. Huff and puff all you want, but these are the facts.

Can you find any other T76 P-trim results on a 3ish L 6cyl that mirror your results..? I think you'll have a hard time - it's a poor match for the engine demands and anyone that's done their research will have chosen a more appropriate turbo from the get-go.

[HellBringer]

Good job on pissing a guy off that was willing to offer something of substance. If negative rep existed you'd be getting it.

Bullshit and conjecture is "substance"...? Nothing lost as far as I can see.

Negative rep... LOL Please..

[75blackray]

This thread minus the bitchassness:

Impressive car and tuning ability/creativity by the owner, with reasonable speculation over what power it will make at sea level with no correction factor. UPPCOS, I'm sorry you didn't get the warmest welcome, but I hope you will continue to share with us, and I think we would all be anxious to see what the car dynos at sea level, should you get the opportunity.

[UPPCOS]

On the contrary, it's people that are mislead or spout half-truths that take others down the same path who ruin forums. It's obvious that you don't understand all that you think you do regarding turbo sizing if you're still referring to a manufacturer's matrix on sizing recommendations. This carries through to your results in the form of a poor power curve. I don't need to go dig up hundreds of results as "proof", evidence or validation to back anything up - you can do your own research. As for Dynocoms reading high - I didn't mention it before because there was already enough fuel on the fire, but there is plenty if "evidence" available at your finger tips, again - do your own research. That's besides the point, though, and the least of my concerns with this thread...

The simple fact is the power numbers you claim at "27psi" are simply not possible on a 3.0L, and adding 20% correction to the claimed numbers makes them even more laughable. Huff and puff all you want, but these are the facts.

Can you find any other T76 P-trim results on a 3ish L 6cyl that mirror your results..? I think you'll have a hard time - it's a poor match for the engine demands and anyone that's done their research will have chosen a more appropriate turbo from the get-go.

Exactly, you can't provide proof of shit. You just spout off and expect me to jump through hoops to back up what I say. Then you expect me to research your crappy comments, sorry but I've got better things to do.

I quoted the turbo matrix, not as the bible or the "go to", but because it's something physically tangible as evidence that I did not create! It's not some BS the I just spout off. It's a physically published chart from mfg, to which you now dismiss as "oh well that means nothing", and "If you use that you know nothing", yet you consistently fail to bring anything to the table in terms of evidence or proof to back up a single thing you've said. You insist that I should "do my own research", well I have jackass. Did you see the dyno comparison? Did you bother to read it? Hell no, you just spout off more BS about Dynocom reading high.

You want an example on the T76 used on a 3.0L platform? How about the supra? Turbonetics used to make a kit (back when they made kits) that was specifically a T76 for your 3.0L engine. Come on man, thought you new all this already, especially since you own the supra!

Here, here's a vid of one pushing 800+:

See, I can bring facts and evidence, you are bring speculation and conjecture.


And as far as the dyno CF. An engine is a pump right? A turbo is a pump right? Both are nothing more than mechanical pumps. So if an engine (n/a) is subject to the laws of physics and effected by altitude to the point that a CF is used, why aren't turbos? If both are pumps, and one is effected by the lack of air supply going in, how is the other not effected? An engine moves CFM, but the density of each CFM is less at altitude. A turbo moves CFM as well, and is effected in the same manner. The only time this is not completely the case is if there are electronic BC methods used that achieve a constant PSIA, therefore not effected (as much) by altitude changes, as the density remains the same and only the efficiency and thermo dynamics are effected.

You expect me to go out of my way to prove what I've done simply because you don't believe it. And quite frankly I could give 2 shits about what you think. I've backed up everything I've done with some shred of evidence, to which of course you dismiss, and yet you again provide nothing.

[HellBringer]

You want an example on the T76 used on a 3.0L platform? How about the supra?

Read slower, comprehend. I specifically stated P-trim. Do you not understand that T76 is a pretty generic and somewhat misused term...? The "T76" car you quoted had a Boost Logic "T76" turbo kit, which utilizes a PTE 76GTS. Coincidentally, that's the turbo I recommended as more appropriate for your setup.

I run a 76GTS with a 9K rev limit fully built and I hit 30 psi at 5200rpms reving to 85K. That's still over 3000rpms of 800+hp with peak tq at 700 just falling off to 650 at 7500rpms.

Source:

Holy FREAKING LAG !!!!!!!!!!


How's that for factual research?

[HellBringer]

And FWIW, the Turbonetics turbokit utlized a cast, log-style manifold. A little something like this: http://i539.photobucket.com/albums/f...C/DSC00086.jpg

[arm0red1]

You guys are acting like children.

Uppcos, congrats on your numbers regardless. They're impressive none the less and if theres naysayers poking holes at it, your litearally a turbo and cam swap away from quad digit numbers.

Hellbringer, I'm confused at this point on why you continue bickering. Let it go and move on with life so we can stop scrolling past the walls of bitchy. That is all

Family man, you yourself are one to talk about "attitude" as that seems to be what you like to bring intk threads lately.

Guys. Just chill out. Make some MODEST requests to verify results (as earliee with the trap speed comments) and let it be at that.

Honestly the last few pages of drivel were just about scrutinizing this guys setup and then ostracizing the poor bastard. Pardon my french, but this thread is getting out of hand and I hope Allen or any of the other mods see this

[J. Fast]

Hey CK, can you post screen shot of your timing map for the base table and the nos table? I was wondering how much more timing you are able to run with the methanol. Chris Hill posted his timing map with a meth/eth injection and I believe his table was in the 20's at 30psi ranges. It would be awesome to see the benefit from fuel to timing.

Thanks ahead of time.