510six Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 3 Liter stroker N42/N42 with ported head and ported N42 intake and T67 BB turbo. The "low" #`s were my fault as a spacer for the dual kevlar clutches was not removed and the clutch slipped past 17 psi of boost. I was hoping for 500 hp on the pump gas and the methanol. BTW the methanol is the only intercooler due to space limitations and the air temps never went over a 100*. The plan is to pull the tranny and look at the clutch in the next week or so and possibly upgrade one of the discs to a six puck ceramic if there seems to be any problems. Then more dyno time and 22psi and 500 hp on pump gas/ methanol and 600 hp on 100oct and a small shot of N20.I can`t say enough good about Sean Church @ Church Automotive Testing, His knowlege of tuning AEM EMS was very impressive to say the least and part throttle drivability improved drastically. http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2071134 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 fast z Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 So this is CORRECTED numbers and not RWHP, RWTQ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
510six Posted October 1, 2007 Author Share Posted October 1, 2007 Yes, these are corrected #`s I was shooting for 500 fwh on the turbo and 600 fwh on the N20. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 fast z Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 What was the RWHP numbers, as we all know THAT is what matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
510six Posted October 1, 2007 Author Share Posted October 1, 2007 Actually, the #`s are RWH , after speaking with the tuner.The setup on the sheet , just says FWH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 fast z Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 Says corrected on the sheets, but now your tuner is saying, its not corrected? Were talking about a possibe 125 HP difference between the two. You would of thought your master tuner would of made it very clear when you were there which one it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
510six Posted October 2, 2007 Author Share Posted October 2, 2007 Says corrected on the sheets, but now your tuner is saying, its not corrected? Were talking about a possibe 125 HP difference between the two. You would of thought your master tuner would of made it very clear when you were there which one it was. He did, I just had ear protection in when it was being explained( plus I don`t hear worth a crap anyways). This was my first experence with a Dynopack Dyno. I went with a friend who owns Raver Motorsport and all the cars He has final tuned at Church`s are rear wheel horsepower. I shouldn`t have posted before my second cup of coffee. http://home.earthlink.net/~spchurch/churchautomotivetesting/id12.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted October 2, 2007 Share Posted October 2, 2007 Good Numbers. I may go that route with my wife's car. I don't need an I/C for her to drive at 10psi, but when I flip the switch to go to 15+ methanol may make a more reasonable alternative than bothering with an I/C mounting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.