Beretta.net

I found this rather inspirational as this is nearly an identical setup as to what I have now to go on my car.

http://60degreev6.com/index.php?name=PN ... ic&p=65613

Those numbers are rather strong considering how small the T-25 is.  Those numbers in my 2600lb car are making me rethink my need to sell the T-25 for something else.

You want MORE?

Figures.

(1988GTU @ Oct. 26 2005,17:14)Q
U
O
T
EYou want MORE?

Figures.
Actually, no I dont want more.  My goal was about 225whp and 300tq.  However, the T-25 maxes out at about 12psi.  Its not that I want more boost, its that I wanted a turbo that could run 12psi and not be near its maximum efficientcy or have it strained.

Oh ok..  Llike me, I am maxing out mine.  Although, to help it out I am going to have a huge IC and maybe later use a BOV.

(1988GTU @ Oct. 26 2005,17:14)Q
U
O
T
EYou want MORE?
He does.....................he just doesn't know it yet.  

(1988GTU @ Oct. 26 2005,18:06)Q
U
O
T
EOh ok..  Llike me, I am maxing out mine.  Although, to help it out I am going to have a huge IC and maybe later use a BOV.
My intercooler is pretty big.  Its the upgraded 91+ Saab 9000.  Norm had listed a link to the numbers on some intercoolers, the Saab one was one of the better ones, but bottom of the list of those compared, that one was the old style.  The 91+ is seen as a large upgrade, so it would have been seen as one of the more efficient ones.  I think he uses one from a Mitsu Fuzo cab over truck.

All my turbo gunk is mostly comming from a truck too.




I gotta get to work on my pipes now...

(I-GOT-BOOST @ Oct. 26 2005,20:13)Q
U
O
T
E(1988GTU @ Oct. 26 2005,17:14)Q
U
O
T
EYou want MORE?
He does.....................he just doesn't know it yet.  
I already want more and I dont even know the outcome yet of this setup.

(1988GTU @ Oct. 26 2005,18:31)Q
U
O
T
EI already want more and I dont even know the outcome yet of this setup.



Yep, I certainly know the feeling!  I'm already starting to think I may need a bigger turbo again.  And I haven't even really gotten to push this one hard yet.  

You didn't note to every one his sub 10.1 A/F ratio either did you  

That is still pretty impressive,  good luck hooking that up in a 2600 pound car Ribz

I still confused on why he didn't want to dyno past 5000?  It had barely started dropping off then......now if only my damn trans wasn't more than likely screwed I want to dyno mine now

LOL!!! I am the last person to hate on turbo cars, but for a relatively stock 3.1...32X ft/lbs is hard to swallow especially from an anemic turbocharger reaching its max...the HP certaingly looks close however TQ is flagged...badly!! Tq in my HO should be ~25X ft/lb max at that particular PR...

I remember going thru this rigor with a member on another FORUM...it would seem turbocharged cars have problems with Tq numbers especially if been dyno'd by those without the intrinsic knowledge of the aforementioned...
nevertheless the area under the curve looks formidable...  

nocutt, I've actually read the entire thread!..both of them.. . I've seen alot of boosted dyno runs and they all verry. Some with tq numbers beeing different from the hp numbers as close as each other to 10- 150 numbers. Actually the 150 numbers are usually diesel apps. as they make more tq than hp anyways. But "usually" our boosted Gen II engine should produce around equal numbers to each other to 60 numbers in defference. This one on the other hand shows 100 number in difference. This engine was ment for torque..but DAMM. GM shows a TGP to have 205hp and 220tq with 7.5 boost stock. This dyno is only at 11psi. Could be the fast burn chambers and spark timming? Operrator maybe didn't connect the rpm signal right? Many varialbles. Thats why regular dynos are only good for hp readings, and basic tunning ..nothing else.

BTW..the fellow Viper from the other forum actually toped at 410 hp at 45**rpm and 485lbs at 43**rpm on the first graph he posted. The SPIKE AFTER the numbers I show indicate the dyno beeing turned off...and the DYNO computer getting confused. If you look at dyno charts before they turn off..you'll see that spike. So the numbers he claims are not accurate. BUT the other MPH dyno charts he shows are better indicators..and shows 450HP. SO his real power is 450hp give or take 20hp. ÂÂÂ

The rule of thumbe is usually 0-60 numbers for me looking at different dyno charts..but many verables come into play. Turbos do mess with the way the combustion even accures inside the chamber...especially in a fast burn head as you increase the boost/airflow. AND BTW...moded engines tend to have a lower BSFC than that theoredicaly accepted. IE, .6 for turbo, .55 suppercharged, .5 n/a, .4 highly moded race engine. A moded turbo engine will not have a .6 BSFC. More like .5, and really moded ones .45. BUT thats what REAL dynos are for..metering the fuel and airflow. DAM thise basic poor shop wheel dynos. GIVE ME SOME REAL readings!  ÂÂÂ

HAha...I was waiting for you to chime in...I hear you, but sometimes you can't tell ppl the truth...they will ALWAYS claim one is either hating or thinks he knows everything...PHYSICS  don't lie...instruments and ppl do  

This is the 2nd TGP 5spd setup that has shown those very similar HP/TQ values, ~210 HP and ~320 TQ. ÂÂÂ They are both running the same basic chip as well, 2 different dynos as well?  Both operators have their heads in their *****?

Q
U
O
T
EThey are both running the same basic chip as well, 2 different dynos as well?  Both operators have their heads in their *****?


On the contrary...let me rephrase so this is not takin gout of context...turbocharged cars have this inherent problem, especially when ran on certain specific dynos with specific user errors multiplied by owners zeal  

Think about it for a second Z28pwr...we are talking a relatively stock car with less than 200 ci of displacement and even with less engine revolution...12psi of boost is saying the engine is producing almost 400 ft/lb tq @ the crank!!...again this is why I don't like to get into this realm of bench racing...it assumes a lot, but think about it for a second logically before not agreeing...to even put it into a better perspective...the turbobuick displaces what 231ci and have between 12-13psi of boost...formally Tq is in the 32Xft/lb range (don't quote me) and informally it is much higher...relative!!