View Single Post
      06-08-2010, 01:12 AM   #977
MspiredM3
Private First Class
MspiredM3's Avatar
12
Rep
176
Posts

Drives: Turbo e46 M3
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Encino, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
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.
Why do you always go back to comparing dyno numbers rather than real world results?

Who cares if one car was on 30psi and one was on 5psi. The bottom line is both cars made similar power numbers (supposedly), yet one failed to perform.

Pea, I really wish you would go to an INDEPENDENT dyno rather than back to ESS
Appreciate 0