sTOCK hp
 

Okay had the old girl Dyno=ed last night
The car is stock except for the 3 inch exhaust but it has a high flow cat, air pump with a stock air box, has 99 spec twins running in stock configuration

294 with 10 psi
314 with 12 psi

Not bad on pump gas

hmmmm 294@10psi seems kind of high with those mods.... But congrats none the less!

-J

Doc, Great seeing you at the tuning session! And great numbers!

and that was on a dynodynamics too!

Nice numbers!!

I was pleasantly surprised at the numbers myself I was looking for a max of 320 and thought I may get it. I think the red fd behind me got the same at 12 psi.

Seriously, all you have changed on this car is the exhaust?

I put down 292 at 8-9lbs on a dynojet about 5 years ago and everyone on the other forum called B.S. Car ran like 8.3-8.4 at around 84-85mph in the 1/8th on street tires which is pretty spot on for the hp :why:

Good numbers, these cars with just a full exhaust and 10lbs are a blast to drive.

RWHP? Only reason I ask is the FD (in US versions) came at 255hp at the flywheel stock, with a 10-8-10 boost pattern. I have a moderately Modded FD from 94 (PFC etc tuned by Steve Kan) and I am putting out 300rwhp on a dynodynamics tuned at 13PSI on the stocker twins. Check my introduction post, you will see my dyno sheet and mod list out

Not saying BS, just trying to understand the logic here

I would get 15 B.S. posts if I put this on the other forum; the reason for the good numbers are the 99 turbo's and a good tune. The abraded seals make them 10-15% more efficient at the same boost level. I can only guess that at some point some respected person on the other forum posted that the seals didn’t do anything and everyone jumped on the bandwagon, but I can tell you from experience that they do make a difference. I put down 315 rwhp at 10 psi, but my engine also has 9.7:1 compression rotors.

Dan

;) hmmmm I wonder what forum that would be...
That's interesting to hear. I knew the '99 spec turbos were better from a quality perspective, but never read or heard the seals made a difference.
Shoot if that is the case, I will put '99 turbos on the list if/when my stockers go. Much cheaper than BNRs... (of course the BNRs will allow for more mods).

Yes 292 RWHP ;). I have a decent bit of experience in modifying stock twin fds. Most of the bolt ons dont do anything performance wise for you. The exhaust is the big gainer, IC makes a difference in warmer temps but a nice cold day the factory SMIC is actually rather adequate up to around 12lbs on the stockers. I have seen numerous fds with exhaust only run in the 8.2-8.5 range in the 1/8th. We are talking stock filter but with the air pump deleted(8lbs saving :) )

Throw a 3" exhaust on a fd and a pettit remapped ecu and at 12lbs you are pretty much guaranteed 315-325 rwhp on a dynojet. Throwing every bolt on at a stock twin car is pointless. Full exhaust, nice IC, and pettit remap ecu with a $80.00 walbro pump is an excellent setup for anyone wanting a reliable 300rwhp setup that will run high-mid 12s with a good driver. I dont really understand why so many people go PFC that stay at 12lbs or less. I am going to do some testing soon and see how a fd reacts with Strong Apex seals, pettit ecu, meth injection, stock injectors at around 14-15lbs. I imagine around 340 rwhp should be obtain and it "should" be reliable.

[QUOTE=Doc-1;74639]Okay had the old girl Dyno=ed last night
The car is stock except for the 3 inch exhaust but it has a high flow cat, air pump with a stock air box, has 99 spec twins running in stock configuration


Dont forget the Mazdaspeed IC and most important of all "Ray Wilson" tuned.

I find these numbers close. I made 323 at 13-14psi (creep) on a old stock motor with basic bolt ons. And these numbers were on a dynodynamics unit but converted to dynojet numbers.

I agree with Dan and David. I'm more than likely going to have a set of my 99's converted to BNR stage III's and see how they work out for me.

The FD is great in responding to modifications. As you all know, the intakes and exhausts were extremely restrictive from the factory in order to get the FD to pass emissions tests to get into the states. I remember first riding in my FD when it was bone stock and being very impressed with the performance. Another huge plus, as David hit on, you can really feel/get improvements from opening up the exhaust(and intake). I remember modifying other cars prior to owning my FD and I'd drive it and think "maybe it's a little faster?" The first mod's I did to my red FD back in 2002 was Pettit Intake, HKS dp, mp, HKS exhaust, PFC, and a walbro. Holy shit!! could I tell a difference!!!! The clutch started slipping a week later. I ran a 7.9 in the 1/8th with that set up a few times which was good for back then in my local area.

Of course, this is partially the reason for the bad reputation the FD has with reliability. People would open up the intakes and exhausts and not add any addtional fuel, and because the OBD I doesn't adjust the fuel map, it would run lean... and you all know the rest of the story.

So now I am curious, what is the difference between a Ray Wilson Tune and a Steve Kan Tune.

I have a great intake (M2, with an M2 medium intercooler) and a wide open 3" exhaust (racing beat, with a High Flow CAT), a Cosmo Fuel pump with 1200cc secondaries and I am only getting 300rwhp? I am just wondering what gives.

Now don't get me wrong, this car is a BLAST to drive, but as we all know HP in this car is addictive (I want more!)

hmmm I just reread your post, based on the DynoDynamic to DynoJet conversion I would be looking at 320ish as well...

Maybe I do need to spend the $$ on AI and start running a water meth mix to get more.

I think those numbers are reasonable as well. With 10 psi on bolt-ons, stock ports, stock fuel, RP mapped ECU, & stock seq. turbos I dyno'd 300whp uncorrected on a humid 95 degree day with NO FAN, lol heatsoak. The corrected number was 321whp, but the SAE correction isn't really accurate for turbocharged engines. (Dynojet numbers)

I ran at 14 psi occasionally and that car pulled like a raped ape up top. AFR's were solid, although I'm sure I was close to maxing out the injectors.

I never took the car to the track, but on the street I was able to easily run down a few low 12 second cars.

Thats the ticket... Go to the track and get a trap speed, that tells all..


I am trying to go back and find my stock twin dyno. It was 323 at around 13-14psi. Bottom line is stock twins are a blast to drive. I had mine going 7.8's in the 1/8th back 10yrs ago with just intake, exhaust, pettit IC and PFC computer.

i assume everyone with full exhaust also port their wastegates and installed boost controllers?

My wastegate is stock, and I have boost controlled by the PFC through Injector Duty Cycle. In the cold temps boost will push 13.5 psi, but in 60degree + I typicall top out at 12.5psi

Pretty cool. Would you happen to have a better view of the dyno plot? I'd like to see the low end of it as well.

Probably missed it, but I'm still confused. ^From this I assumed Doc was still on a stock ECU, but subsequent posts refer to his "tune" and the fact he has "99spec twins". So it is modified with a programable or reflashed ECU? And wouldn't 10 psi on 99 twins be the same as 10 psi on stock twins?

I'm not certain you'd get all that much of a challenge from the "other forum". I seem to remember some of the established guys there already mentioning serious gains to be made just with a DP, hi-flow cat and cat-back. Can't remember for sure, but the figure of 20 whp as being tossed around.

Here is my car's dyno sheet from last may.

Interesting.

Im making 336whp on a 99 motor, twins, 93 PFC, full 3" exhaust, intakes, and stock intercooler. However I am maxing out my injectors, need to upgrade to a SMIC, and properly duct it. Looking for 360whp ish.

reduced clearances do indeed make a huge flow difference on turbos like rad fans. those 99 turbos flow a lot more air than stock because of those abraded seals. if anyone disagrees tell them to remove their radiator fan shroud and see how little air they move then!

They're more efficient.....yes. Quicker spool...OK. But at a given pressure and at given intake temp...say stock boost levels.....10 psi is still 10 psi isn't it? No difference in max hp at the dyno. Or am I missing something?

Not necessarily. If they flow better, then 10psi is more hp than the one that doesn't flow as good, which is why most singles make more hp at the same boost level as twins. Boost is just backed up flow that can't get through the engine.

Also a more efficient turbo puts out less heat at the same pressure which will add to the HP gains.

The car has a y-pipe, exhaust with high flow cat, RB dual tip, down pipe, commander stand alone ecu, 99 spec turbo's, a careful rebuild on the engine, K&N air filter and Mazdaspeed inter-cooler. I expected about 300 HP to the rear wheels with this setup at 10 PSI and got 294, 12 PSI got me 314, about right. Intake is stock