Come on PG you know that you can't compare one dyno to another. The only way to get a clear and concise result is by dyno testing both cars on the same day, same dyno, SAME fuel, reset adaptations, etc.
Also, I believe this has been explained to you, but I'll do it again. Drew's car is tuned for 91 octane, which means that it wasn't tuned with the meth injection on. I've tuned a number of Evo's and STI's the same way. We tune for 91 octane, and then activate the meth injection to simply decrease combustion chamber temps. This method is really popular among guys that want to push smaller turbos hard up top, as temps get very high when that happens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek
I only care about getting to the truth. I could care less if that proves somebody else wrong -- or proves me wrong. I'm definitely willing to give it a try and remove my filter to find out. My next dyno date is this weekend. I just don't know if they have a boost gauge or not on their dyno. I suppose I can find out without a boost gauge simply by pulling off the filter and seeing if I make more power. +/- 5whp would be in the noise. Drew got 40whp simply by taking off the filter (my apologies if I misunderstood Drew's post and that's not what happened). That's clearly not "in the noise" -- that's some type of demonstrable restriction. But I'll definitely give it a try and report the results (provided the "dyno day" operator will give me the latitude to do this).
Regarding the "similar" dyno results. On one hand you've got a brand new (un-broken in motor) on 94 octane making 580whp @ 7.5 PSI vs. 91 octane + METH making 574whp @ 9.5 PSI. Granted, the 580 result had two things going for it that were uknown about the 574 result: 1) it was apparently running with reset adaptations; 2) it was running with 94 octane. Whereas that same 580 result had something going against it: it was a very fresh motor. Give that motor 10000 miles and it's entirely possible that any gains lost due to adaptation are regained once the motor is fully broken in. The 574 result is running at 9.5 PSI -- a full 2.0 PSI higher on 91+METH. According to every promotor of W/M kits I've seen, and a few articles I've read, the METH is certainly an octane booster -- a rather significant octane booster at that. Does it increase the octane by 3 points? Beats me. So to summarize: 580@7.5 PSI vs. 574@9.5 PSI -- and you say those are equal? I don't have to be a fan boy to realize there is a chasm of difference between those two results -- and it isn't caused by 3AKI points of octane -- even if METH were not involved. Once you add METH to the equation, that chasm might as well be the Grand Canyon of difference. |