New 16G Dyno Numbers on C16

[tstkl]

say 40*F air temps

so, what, dry ice? like I said? Just want to make sure you realize that IF its 40 degrees outside, IFFFF its 40 degrees, your intercooler would have to be 100% efficent for your intake air temps to be that low.

GOOD LUCK WITH THAT

 

[pboglio]

you do realize that they rate a compressors flow map based on the compressor housing only, right? They don't hook it up to a motor and measure the flow through the stock maf, that would suck dick. A turbo's map is created to show the limits of its flow ratings, both sides of the map, the low and high. part selection is irrelivant to maximum flow ratings.

It was 8* out yesterday (-30*F windchill) in Chicago, measured at the MAF. 40*F manifold temp NO problem with my I.C.

Better look at the compressor maps more closely. They rate at 1 psi compressor inlet depression, gain that back and your flow goes up like I said 5-7%.

Also look at the temp compensation formula at the bottom of your typical compressor map, cold temps alone could boost the compressor flow rate up another 5%.

Part selection is not "irrelevant". That short runner manifold alone could have picked up airflow another 3 lb/min on the high end, a fairly typical gain for a 1g-2g DSM, right where the turbo would start slacking off.

 

[ferruchnuts44]

Man, so much hating on this thread. I've seen the TPG car many times at the track and it is one impressive s.o.b and I've seen curt run that car at the shootout last year with much less power, no link go low 12s all day. I highly doubt Curt Brown and TPG would jeopordize they're reputations to lie about a power record on a small turbo like the 16g. Like I said they're track records are proven and those don't lie..

Congrats guys on the numbers, there are some of us here that still aren't ..

 

[dsm-onster]

Better look at the compressor maps more closely. They rate at 1 psi compressor inlet depression, gain that back and your flow goes up like I said 5-7%

Hmmm, there is no 1 psi inlet depression mentioned on any MHI map. Not the evo8 16gA map, specifically. The evo8 16g and 18g compressor maps show volume flow not massflow. Regardless of pressure or temperature, a compressor at a certain rpm moves a certain volume. This allows one to "calculate out" the inlet pressure depression.

Having a compressor map rendered in volume flow is much better for forecasting what your turbo can do, considering we all operate our cars at different elevations and climates. Considering sea level atmospheric pressure at the compressor inlet of the larger evo8 16g compressor housing, it seams farfetched at best.

 

[pboglio]

Hmmm, there is no 1 psi inlet depression mentioned on any MHI map. Not the evo8 16gA map, specifically. The evo8 16g and 18g compressor maps show volume flow not massflow. Regardless of pressure or temperature, a compressor at a certain rpm moves a certain volume. This allows one to "calculate out" the inlet pressure depression.

Having a compressor map rendered in volume flow is much better for forecasting what your turbo can do, considering we all operate our cars at different elevations and climates. Considering sea level atmospheric pressure at the compressor inlet of the larger evo8 16g compressor housing, it seams farfetched at best.

My bad, Garrett states their inlet depression in their catalog, though I've seen maps that had ALL of the correction formulas' right at the bottom of the map.

My point is that removing compressor intake losses, running colder air temps, and overspeeding the turbo (efficiency below 60%) push the compressor performance WAY past what you would see on a map. I also firmly believe Mitsubishi does some TRICKY stuff with their maps. Maybe not posting incorrect data, but definitely leaving out a high speed curve or two to underrate the turbo a little. Prime example is the 20g map, its completely missing the high speed curve.

Very few guys do ALL these things, and very few just crank the boost knob to 30 psi and completely pin the turbo open. Fewer guys still remove every last bit of pressure loss leading from the turbo compressor to the intake ports, and from the exhaust ports to the exhaust tip. Then on top of all that how many guys slap a short runner manifold onto an EVOIII 16g.

In my opinion, they still haven't used reduction of rotational inertia in their bag of tricks. They could pull another 30 h.p. of equivalent acceleration from going to a lightweight flywheel, lighter accessory/crank pulleys, lighweight wheels, 2 piece brake rotors, removed balance shafts. Then throw in some hyper light weight engine oil, transmission oil, rear diff oil. Then you have turbine clipping which reduces pumping losses. Then maybe some extrude honing of the compressor wheel and compressor housing and a blueprinting of the turbo. It goes on.

Compressor maps AREN'T the bible, they are a tool to properly select a turbo for a given application. A slick tuner can manipulate the map to his advantage without even modifying the turbo itself.

 

[dsm-onster]

My point is that removing compressor intake losses, running colder air temps, and over-speeding the turbo (efficiency below 60%) push the compressor performance WAY past what you would see on a map. I also firmly believe Mitsubishi does some TRICKY stuff with their maps. Maybe not posting incorrect data, but definitely leaving out a high-speed curve or two to underrate the turbo a little. Prime example is the 20g map, its completely missing the high-speed curve.

The evo8 16g map does not leave that 144K curve out. Again, considering the volume flow map allows one to extrapolate the maximum massflow for his/her environment, there's no answer to the hp number there. We're basing calculations on hp per lb/min or brake specific fuel consumption. And we're looking at a map that has more volume flow than an evo3 16g.

Pressure loss post-turbo means nothing. There is zero pressure loss where a compressor map is generated. The volume flow and efficiency is measured at the compressor outlet.

Yes, there are rotational inertia "tricks". But, how much gain in hp does a 9 lb flywheel yield? A lightweight drive shaft? A lightweight PP and rims? 30whp added to 10.5 hp per lb/min does not jive with 450whp.

Compressor maps AREN'T the bible, they are a tool to properly select a turbo for a given application. A slick tuner can manipulate the map to his advantage without even modifying the turbo itself.

How so? How can significantly more than 10.5 crank hp per lb/min be achieved?

This isn't rocket science guys. Intercoolers have come a long way since we all started using 16g's. The new garret cores that Buschur and AMS are using are absolutely AMAZING. One thing that most haven't noticed because they are too busy talking about cryo treating their "junk", is his boost. Many people have dynoed the EVO III 16g over 400whp. From when i've read on the forums, none except Curt Brown here, has held the boost in the upper 20's. They all drop off towards the top end. So, now you have at least 28psi by redline, a great intercooler, a tuner with half a brain, and bam great power. Tuning is NOT that difficult. If the car is set up well, its going to be cake walk for him/her. If the car is a hack full of shit like most DSM's, then sure it won't make any power.

Efficient intercooling... This causes the air to increase in density as it passes through the core. The compressor has to spin faster to compensate. Adding a manifold that induces more aircharge past the intake valves: more flow for the compressor to compensate with higher rpms. The compressor map with enough rpm points demonstrate absolute potential.

The tdo5h cartridge is incredible. . . look at the 14b compressor map. 170Krpms! Take the map to that. Look at the rpm curves demonstrated on the evo8 16g map. Keep in mind that this map is rendered using the larger evo8 compressor cover. . . You're still seeing 0.31 - 0.32 m^3/sec or 650ish cfm. No enough for 450whp, even assuming only FWD drivetrain loss (zero drive shaft and rear rims/axles/beaings/u-joints/viscous-coupling/output-shaft/center-diff/rear-diff) and a lightened flywheel.

Yea, how could he hold such high boost to red line? And I don't believe anyone has mentioned %IDC to reference BSFC.

 

[red91gst]

It made the power, what don't you guys understand? Your bench racing because you have never done it and never will.

Have you ever made this much power on ANY turbo?

Have YOU run 9's yet? How bout 10's? 11's?

I don't give a shit what the compressor map says it "should" do, we proved what it CAN do.

You can throw your "bs" flags all you want, but you'll be eating your words when the car runs 9.80s on a 16g...

You guys keep arguing while your car still runs 12s, its entertaining. I don't have time to, the 2g needs a GT42...

I don't mean to sounds like a pompous asshole guys, but let it go

 

[danl]

Would somebody please post an Evo 3 16g map? I've never seen one and can't find one.

 

[99gst_racer]

Would somebody please post an Evo 3 16g map? I've never seen one and can't find one.

See post #28.

 

[BringBackDSM]

It made the power, what don't you guys understand? Your bench racing because you have never done it and never will.

Have you ever made this much power on ANY turbo?

Have YOU run 9's yet? How bout 10's? 11's?

I don't give a shit what the compressor map says it "should" do, we proved what it CAN do.

You can throw your "bs" flags all you want, but you'll be eating your words when the car runs 9.80s on a 16g...

You guys keep arguing while your car still runs 12s, its entertaining. I don't have time to, the 2g needs a GT42...

I don't mean to sounds like a pompous asshole guys, but let it go

Maybe you shouldn't say your using a actual evo3 16g un altered when your not, then people would not question you. Next time you do this, let someone on the outside go dyno it with to see whats really going on.

 

[danl]

See post #28.

Exactly. We have guys playing scientist with a map that doesen't exists.

On the other hand if we were to catch a three legged squirrel, the
alligator may be able to catch it

 

[sbengineering]

This is pretty damn close.

 

[danl]

This is pretty damn close.

How do you know? Also I've never seen an OEM MHI compressor map in CFM. Also as an engineer you know we can play the PV=nRT games all day long.

 

[2gGSX]

ShapeGSX (Josh) posted this map up a long time ago stipulating that it was the Evo 3 map:

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

[/IMG]

 

[sbengineering]

Obviously, this is not OEM, most older OEM maps look like a drawing on a napkin. The ideal gas law is just for that, ideal situations. As for air, you can only fiddle so much. There will be very few, if zero drastic changes from a map like this.

 

[danl]

As for air, you can only fiddle so much. There will be very few, if zero drastic changes from a map like this.

Really? So air at 0 degrees C has the same amount of oxygen molecules as air at 140 degrees F? If that isn't fiddling "much" I'm wasting my time.

 

[sbengineering]

I have that map as well, the one i posted above is the same, just easier to see and in cfm.

 

[DSM90AWD]

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

These are actually the Evolution IV to VIII 16G.

What's neat is the efficiency rings are still relatively wide at 65% efficiency. It's not hard to imagine what 50% efficiency would look like.

 

[sbengineering]

Really? So air at 0 degrees C has the same amount of oxygen molecules as air at 140 degrees F? If that isn't fiddling "much" I'm wasting my time.

Maps are done at standard. i.e. 20C

 

[danl]

Maps are done at standard. i.e. 20C

I don't see that labeled on the compressor map. That is something I would do if I were in the lab, its standard procedure for me to note things like that when in the lab among other things.

I also don't see any reason those maps couldn't make 450whp and I see no reason they can't make 500+ from my real world experience with Mitsubishi small 16g's and 14b turbos. They have always outperformed their corresponding maps.

 

[sbengineering]

Though to fit an open road in a lab room.

 

[danl]

Also looking at the FP maps which may or may not be correct for the evo 3 you'll notice they stop plotting the chart at the 65% efficiency island. You do realize that you don't have to stop at 65% in the real world do you? I have old 16g maps that they stopped plotting at 60%.

http://vfaq.com/proj-pics/turbo/16g-06_map.gif

Hell even at 55% compressor efficiency we are just starting to become as inefficient as a typical roots blower wound up at high rpm's and only 12-14psi. That and the turbo car has a nice charge air cooler compared to that roots blower mounted directly to the intake manifold unable to recoup the lost density. Hell who needs to pay attention to the ideal gas law. We'll just force air down it!

 

[danl]

Though to fit an open road in a lab room.

Exactly a point I've tried to make over and over again. The lab is a model. Compressor maps are a model. If we listened to models as fact and never did real world testing we'd all be dumber for it.

 

[sbengineering]

You are comparing red to blue. I never seen a turbo mix fuel and air like a roots ever has. I have never seen a turbo make gobs of torque in low rpm's. I have never seen a turbo respond to a ram effect like a roots. And if you think a roots is just for show, then you really are narrow minded.

 

[danl]

You've never seen a draw through turbo setup like a Chevrolet corvair? You've never built a pressure box to feed air into your turbo (or just look at all the fast turbo mustangs like Manny Buginga or even Shepards talon)? You've never seen a big rig with a Detroit Diesel turbocharged inline six-cylinder that makes 1,350 pound-feet of torque at 1,200 rpm. Sounds like I'm not the narrow minded one.