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

[UPPCOS]

How Can We Adjust for This

In this case, it seems really quite simple. Though the dyno operator claims to be using a CF of 1.15, it appears there is, in fact, no correction factor at all being used (based on our analysis of the trap speed calculation). It's really as simple as multiplying in a proper CF. If you measure the temp, pressure, and humidity at the dyno facility (we did!), there are plenty of online automated calculators you can use. In this case with the measured readings we took (66degF, 10 percent Humidity, 24.21inHg) we came up with a CF of 1.23 (or 123 percent). So, if we multiply the 489HP (Dyno #5's average) by 1.23 we come up with 601HP! Now that sounds a bit closer to what it should be, now doesn't it?

Let's for a second entertain the theory that dyno #5's operator was in fact using a correction factor of 1.15. If that was the case, then by dividing the result, 489HP by 1.15, you get an uncorrected result of 425HP. Now, let's multiply that by the accurate correction factor for that specific moment in time of 1.23, and you're left with 522HP. This is still a significant variation from the other four dynos. In statistical mathematics, we call this anomaly an outlier. And what do we do with outliers? We throw the data away because clearly there was either human or mechanical error in the calculation.

If you want the original with all the charts and graphs go here: https://www.facebook.com/UPPCOS/app_203351739677351


Now those of you bitching about the CF factor, honestly there is no perfect CF factor for the boosted world. Unfortunately it's just not that simple. If you again go back to the compressor chart and look at P1vsP2, you can see that by increasing or decreasing the altitude and changing the value of P1, you're changing the ratio of P1 vs P2, and therefor effecting the efficiency of the turbo. And what's worse is altitude can make it go up or down! And it changes with every turbo. So no, it's not completely "perfect", but nothing ever will be. However it is close, and ireguardless of what people think, altitude does play a big roll, even on FI cars.

However that being said, we all pretty much use the same CF period, because it's all we have to go by. Backing up what JFast said earlier, comparing cars up here to down there, and it is pretty close. The car used in the dyno comp testing was dyno'd down close to sea level before he was transferred here, and the results are pretty close to all the tests that were preformed here. (I would be happy to post the graphs of them if you'd like?)


I still for the life of me can't grasp this, why is this so hard to believe? I can build a compound twin turbo/supercharged setup...no problem. I can build a fully custom single setup......no problem. I can tune AEM to run 12 injectors (with only 10 drivers mind you!...yea figure that one out!) with two completely different fuels with seamless transition, nitrous, intercooler water sprayer, high/low boost, anti-lag, rolling anti-lag, NLTS, and decel antilag.... No problem..... But the second I say that I broke 4 digits (even while admitting to using nitrous!), you all freak the fuck out! Amazing....

[JasonY]

Go trap over 150mph.

Jason

[UPPCOS]

^Right......I forgot one of the requirements for posting on this board was to impress you......I'll get right on that.

[JasonY]

Wasn't to impress me but to irrefutably legitimize your numbers.

Jason

[UPPCOS]

I did legitimize my numbers....on a dyno....and then legitimized the dyno by comparing it with all the other dynos in the area..... Quite honestly I don't care whether you or anyone else believes me, I didn't build the car for you! I built it for me, I know what I did, and I'm satisfied. If for some reason this doesn't satisfy you, well I'm sorry....maybe you should stop reading this thread? I'm not even the OP of this thread. Someone else posted then invited me in to answer questions and give input.

And what happens when I post a vid of a 150mph run, then what? We all gonna be friends, hold hands and sing Kumbaya? Am I going to gain "respect" like in the Fast and Furious? Are all the haters going to have a sudden epiphany and understand physics?
......No, you'll just accuse me of making a fake vid....maybe some CGI? Maybe trickery of the timing lights?

If you actually took the time to read the pages above, the data is there. The math supports it, even when based off the claims of the haters (1135hp dyno graph). So either you don't understand physics and basic math, or you're choosing to personally attack me, when you don't really even know who I am nor my abilities. So which is it?

[J. Fast]

Wasn't to impress me but to irrefutably legitimize your numbers.

Jason

LOL, I don't think your validation matters. If it was Ray or Matt doing it you'd be swinging on their nuts about it and hummin and haa-in.

Here's some better questions to answer instead of your own impugn. Why don't you need a compression rod fix at an unarguable number of atleast 800hp? Why isn't the metal from the block or heads warping a that power level? Why are the ARP bolts that 3sTech's said are inferior to OEM bolts keeping the HG clamped? Why isn't the deck compressing? How did he add the extra injector drivers on an AEM V1 box? What is the fuel consumption for each phase and total fuel consumption for a pull?

I think he has some results and explanations for those that might contradict popular belief. A good rhetorical situation is more important than pushing away progress by acting like jackasses.

A slip would be cool, but it doesn't matter. I'm cool with the results and soo is Erron. We actually talked about it for about a 1/2 hour on the phone and came to the conclusion it's just damn brilliant and amazing. There's lots of variables in play and what if's.

Hey CK, can you anwer any of the questions posed?

Why don't you need a compression rod fix at an unarguable number of atleast 800hp?
Why isn't the deck compressing?
Why isn't the metal from the block or heads warping a that power level?
Why are the ARP bolts that 3sTech's said are inferior to OEM bolts keeping the HG clamped?
How did you add the extra injector drivers on an AEM V1 box?
What is the total mass of fuel being consumed for each phase and total fuel consumption for a pull?
What does yourtiming map landscape and injector pulse map in AEM look like?

Thanks for your time and contributions to the platform ahead of time.

[UPPCOS]

Why don't you need a compression rod fix at an unarguable number of atleast 800hp?
Because you don't! Not saying it's going to last forever or anything. I remember the days when people said you can't run more than 8psi on a NA car that's been boosted with stock internals. I ran 28psi on the stock 3S N/A block, just trying to see what it would handle....it never blew up!
Why isn't the deck compressing?
Why would it? I'd assume the deck of the cast iron block is pretty sound. We push those weak aluminum honda blocks pretty far, even past this HP/L when sleeved, and even still I would assume they're weaker than our blocks. You'd be surprised what you can do if you can prevent detonation. I think the sudden spikes in cyl pressure from detonation could be a contributing factor.

Why isn't the metal from the block or heads warping a that power level?
I doubt the block will. But the heads? Maybe? I took out the head gasket on the last setup with the stock N/A bottom end running less boost, but it was old and may have been overheated a time or two. I guess only time will tell. Same with the fact that my trans/t-case/rearend/axles haven't exploded, I'm sure it's just a matter of time!

Why are the ARP bolts that 3sTech's said are inferior to OEM bolts keeping the HG clamped?
I was not aware they're "inferior"? I haven't read any studies, and I'm honestly not a metallurgist, so I can't answer with indefinite reasoning. But as a "consumer", ARP knows their stuff, it's all they do. I've never had an issue to date with any of their products, which is good enough for me. Occasionally on some of the aluminum blocks we'll pull the studs clean out of the block, and go to larger diameter with more surface area studs. But that's more a failure of the block than it is an ARP failure. Mitsubishi builds alot of things, engines, cars, TV's....ARP makes bolts, that's it just bolts. ARP knows bolts. ARP is known for bolts. So when asked if I want a bolt from Mitsubishi (that may not have even been made by mitsubishi), or one from a company that makes bolts.....I'll choose ARP.
How did you add the extra injector drivers on an AEM V1 box?
Since the airflow when the secondaries is high, we batch fire them, run in series. This actually only uses 2 extra drivers and achieves the resistance value without a resistor box.
What is the total mass of fuel being consumed for each phase and total fuel consumption for a pull?
I dunno? Alot! LOL. Over the 2 days of initial tuning we used 3x fills on the 12gal fuel cell (36gal), and aprox 7gal of Meth. Comparative we generally use 1/4-1/2 a tank of fuel doing a normal tune, generally taking 1/2-3/4 days. I would have to look at the logs to get the actual math, but I believe we're ~70%IDC with a 50/50 split on 850cc/1600cc combo.
What does yourtiming map landscape and injector pulse map in AEM look like?
Ign map looks like a normal flowing one, nothing special. But the nitrous map is used to correct the secondary injector math flaws, which pretty much ramps it all in past 3K when meth is active.
Fuel, again looks like a normal map. But the nitrous map is F***ed up! For whatever reason the math on the secondary inj calculator is off, so we used the NO2 map to correct. Low RPM, low load we add fuel (+20% when meth is active), high RPM/high load we subtract fuel (-30% when meth is active).


Some other questions that I over looked:
Yes the down pipe is 3", but only for as short of a period as I possibly could (till the bottom rear of the engine), then it becomes 4". The full 3" exhaust proved to be restrictive, but we tested the 2nd half of the DP to where it is now with the 3" while we still had it on the dyno and it proved fine. May seem restrictive but remember the output of the turbo right at the turbine is only ~2.5", so even 3" is an expansion from that.

The turbo is a 76/102 with a 74/64 turbine. We started with the T72 .81AR, but were seeing WG issues which I assumed were due to the A/R being too small. So when we jumped to the T76 we opted for the .96A/R, which it didn't hardly spool. Making a 3rd gear pass it was still climbing in boost at red-line, and would never go past 25psi. So I double checked on the turbo matrix and figured out that we're on the wrong end of the spectrum, and needed to be ~.68 A/R, which is what we are at now. The WG issues turned out to be solenoid related. So now it spools way faster (than even the T72) with more top end, and past the 25psi mark.

CK

[UPPCOS]

Interesting theories... Sorry, but to anyone that's been around awhile, these numbers are complete horseshit. If there is indeed a 20% or greater correction factor then that answers most of the questions, and very obviously makes these numbers a complete joke. That type of correction on a FI setup is absolutely laughable to begin with, so what was the point?


Tell you what, let's cut all of the bullshit and forthcoming engineering buzzwords... I'll put my money where my mouth is: take this car to the track and make 2 passes on video in the mid 150's; ET is does not matter - should be easily doable with the alleged WHP - and I'll Paypal you or the owner $300. Make it a $600 if you happen to click off a 9 on at least 1 of the 2. That will easily cover your transport, entry fees, etc...

Tell ya what, I got a better idea. Why don't you cram that $300 in your gas tank and drive your happy ass up here to altitude and run your car, since apparently you don't understand how pressure loss works! You shouldn't need any sort of CF for your car, and you should run the same as you do down there right?

CK

[mehrshadvr4]

As long as you keep the Tq in check you can have the engine to last longer. It's the Tq that kills rods not hp.

[GTOJOE]

I read a post somewhere about the ARP head studs/bolts. The manual states to torque to 90lbs IIRC but ARP recommend torquing to 100. And stated that if they are not torqued to the recommended amount they will be no better than stock.