Close

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 116
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    40
    Rep Points
    61.0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    I don't know is meaningless is fair. He knows how much he is putting down. Obviously he is making much more power than stock.
    I would imagine. Being a tuner myself for many years it is a pet peeve of mine when someone post just a dyno sheet with no baseline or track times to back it up. Regardless of what you want to believe it is extremely easy to manipulate dyno #'s. In no way shape or form am I accusing of this being the case but with all the given variables I just take it with a grain of salt.

    Do I doubt the car is fast? Not at all. Do I doubt this pretentious cock knows how to actually drive it? That is still pending haha
    Click here to enlarge
    11.38@126.1 MHP Stg 2
    C32 AMG 13.6@104 Bone Stock


  2. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    804
    Rep Points
    607.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    It is possible his car does not have the 5 psi pulley but a 6 psi pulley.

    There is no boost reading so we are just speculating.
    Well, we're speculating about boost to the extent that we are currently speculating about what octane was used. The man said his engine touched 6 psi on 91 octane and I take him at his word.

    I doubt there are both 5 and 6 psi pulleys.

    But, I understand the need to be fair-minded, which you are being.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,223
    Rep Points
    31,320.2
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by amgftw Click here to enlarge
    I would imagine. Being a tuner myself for many years it is a pet peeve of mine when someone post just a dyno sheet with no baseline or track times to back it up. Regardless of what you want to believe it is extremely easy to manipulate dyno #'s. In no way shape or form am I accusing of this being the case but with all the given variables I just take it with a grain of salt.
    A dynojet is harder to manipulate at least but I trust Weistec and have no reason to doubt them. They treat me well and take the time to answer my questions when they don't have to. I also know what they did for JRCART so they have earned my respect.

    Baseline would be great, but I think by now we all know the range for M156's on a dynojet, don't we?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by amgftw Click here to enlarge
    Do I doubt the car is fast? Not at all. Do I doubt this pretentious cock knows how to actually drive it? That is still pending haha
    Heh, well, maybe he can drive maybe he can't but either way the car is nice. These are two separate things.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,223
    Rep Points
    31,320.2
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
    Well, we're speculating about boost to the extent that we are currently speculating about what octane was used. The man said his engine touched 6 psi on 91 octane and I take him at his word.

    I doubt there are both 5 and 6 psi pulleys.
    Why couldn't there be 5 and 6 psi pulleys? On 93 octane it would stand to reason they could run more boost safely.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    804
    Rep Points
    607.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Why couldn't there be 5 and 6 psi pulleys? On 93 octane it would stand to reason they could run more boost safely.
    Of course, there can be.

    But, as I've been suggesting, I don't think the boost measurements are consistent. From what I can deduce from the available info, ecampbell's pulley (stage 1 pulley) makes 6.5-7psi on a true stage 1 car (i.e., no LT's and exhaust). So, then the boost measurment of 5 psi on Weistec's website may be inaccurate.

    When a company advertises "stage 1" that's usually for one pulley size.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,223
    Rep Points
    31,320.2
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
    Of course, there can be.

    But, as I've been suggesting, I don't think the boost measurements are consistent. From what I can deduce from the available info, ecampbell's pulley (stage 1 pulley) makes 6.5-7psi on a true stage 1 car (i.e., no LT's and exhaust). So, then the boost measurment of 5 psi on Weistec's website may be inaccurate.

    When a company advertises "stage 1" that's usually for one pulley size.
    I doubt Weistec's measurement is inaccurate.

    If they claim 500 rwhp at 5 psi on 91 octane it is very likely a different pulley is being used here.

    Does the stage 1 pulley really make 6.5psi to 7psi on a stock car? What are you basing that on?

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    804
    Rep Points
    607.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    I doubt Weistec's measurement is inaccurate.

    If they claim 500 rwhp at 5 psi on 91 octane it is very likely a different pulley is being used here.

    Does the stage 1 pulley really make 6.5psi to 7psi on a stock car? What are you basing that on?
    There's no mention of a different pulley being used here.

    Respectfully, you're theory that their may be a different pulley used in this build compared to an advertised "stage 1" build so far is based on less reasoning then my theory, which I tried to build through my logic in previous posts.

    At any rate, I was just theorizing. Without positing that their may be a different pulley used, I would think my logic made sense. Although, when you throw in the possibility of a different pulley, things change.

    It's all good.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,223
    Rep Points
    31,320.2
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
    There's no mention of a different pulley being used here.
    True, they did not specify how much boost or what pulley.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
    Respectfully, you're theory that their may be a different pulley used in this build compared to an advertised "stage 1" build so far is based on less reasoning then my theory, which I tried to build through my logic in previous posts.
    Absolutely but this doesn't seem to be just your standard Stage 1. I'm not sure if it is based on less reasoning as I am going by what Wesitec told me they claim for a Stage 1 which is 500 whp on 91 octane. This being 551 whp means there are significant differences.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
    At any rate, I was just theorizing. Without positing that their may be a different pulley used, I would think my logic made sense. Although, when you throw in the possibility of a different pulley, things change.

    It's all good.
    We could definitely use more information I'm just throwing out possible scenarios, definitely all good.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    804
    Rep Points
    607.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Absolutely but this doesn't seem to be just your standard Stage 1. I'm not sure if it is based on less reasoning as I am going by what Wesitec told me they claim for a Stage 1 which is 500 whp on 91 octane. This being 551 whp means there are significant differences.
    A good set of LT's and free flowing exhaust can easily net over 30 rwhp on this car. So, it's very understandable that with the addition of better exhaust, 500-513 rwhp for stage 1 could increase to 550 rwhp.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,223
    Rep Points
    31,320.2
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
    A good set of LT's and free flowing exhaust can easily net over 30 rwhp on this car. So, it's very understandable that with the addition of better exhaust, 500-513 rwhp for stage 1 could increase to 550 rwhp.
    It certainly is possible. I think we can all agree we would like to have boost graphs to simply know what is taking place for sure.

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    804
    Rep Points
    607.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    It certainly is possible. I think we can all agree we would like to have boost graphs to simply know what is taking place for sure.
    For sure. In time, when more cars are fitted with these blowers, we'll get to see more graphs.

    I'd like to add that I believe ecampbell's claim of peak boost at 6 psi, as I've based my whole premise on that number. Click here to enlarge Click here to enlarge

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,223
    Rep Points
    31,320.2
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
    For sure. In time, when more cars are fitted with these blowers, we'll get to see more graphs. And at some point, a boost line will be included.
    I think so, this is still early in the process so any and all graphs are appreciated.

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,369
    Rep Points
    794.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8



    Reputation: Yes | No
    5.5 - 6 psi was the number for this application.

    amgftw - I don't give a fly fuc about trying to impress you as you are living proof there is no way to please a dumb person Click here to enlargeClick here to enlargeClick here to enlarge .

    And congrats about being a tuner yourself but unfortunately tuning the dial of the radio in your pinto does not count. Click here to enlargeClick here to enlargeClick here to enlarge

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    804
    Rep Points
    607.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ecampbell Click here to enlarge
    5.5 - 6 psi was the number for this application.
    Cool. Thanks.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    4
    Rep Points
    0.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by amgftw Click here to enlarge
    Seriously? You have 3 post all of which you are riding ecampbell's nuts like Seabiscuit.

    Give it a rest troll, you are trying way too hard. We gave the guy a hard time, myself included. So what? He is the one that went out of his way to become the internet equivalent of a fat drunk chick at a bar going out of her way to get some attention. When we asked for proof he acted as if he was piloting some top secret government stealth fighter.

    Congrats on that piece of paper that proves nothing BTW. A dyno is a mere tool for tuning and showing gains. Without a baseline of YOUR car ON THE SAME DYNO it is utterly useless. Man up, take it to the track and post up the results. Then maybe I will be impressed.
    Your mistake is thinking that anyone is trying to impress you here.

    You seemingly rejoiced in a car being stolen.
    Give the guy a hard time all day long for his lack of showing proof. I don't care.
    But don't mock someone when their ride is lifted.

    Full asked for something, got it, then forgot he asked. Acknowledge, apologize, then move on.
    Perhaps you can understand that sensei with your 12 posts (2 of which are in response to me)?

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    151
    Rep Points
    70.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
    A good set of LT's and free flowing exhaust can easily net over 30 rwhp on this car. So, it's very understandable that with the addition of better exhaust, 500-513 rwhp for stage 1 could increase to 550 rwhp.
    The graph posted for Stage 1 kit via weistec on 91 octane is 498rwhp/440rwtq or so UNcorrected. Seems like they're using higher than standard drivetrain loss.

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    151
    Rep Points
    70.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SourceCode Click here to enlarge
    Your mistake is thinking that anyone is trying to impress you here.

    You seemingly rejoiced in a car being stolen.
    Give the guy a hard time all day long for his lack of showing proof. I don't care.
    But don't mock someone when their ride is lifted.

    Full asked for something, got it, then forgot he asked. Acknowledge, apologize, then move on.
    Perhaps you can understand that sensei with your 12 posts (2 of which are in response to me)?
    Can we get past all the petty bashing and again focus on the topic at hand.

    One car with 5psi on 91 octane makes 498rwhp and 440rwtq uncorrected on 91 octane.

    One car with 5.5psi (now maybe 6psi, was originally 5psi) on 91 octane with headers, modified catback, assuming filters can put down 551rwhp and 537rwtq SAE.

    Other car with 10psi or more, C16 race gas tune, Full exhaust, monstrous ice tank in trunk, larger injectors, ported heads and SLS cams makes 22rwhp SAE more?

    Someone please explain this to me?



    Another car

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    151
    Rep Points
    70.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    The 551 whp dyno graph posted below is from a CLK63 Black Series belonging to BenzBoost member Ecampbell. He was kind enough to share his graph after some controversy resulting from a 573 whp graph that we posted for a similar Weistec supercharger setup. The graph you see here is the result of a claimed 5.5-6.0 psi with aftermarket Hennessey headers and an Evosport exhaust. Very strong results for 91 octane pump gas.

    Click here to enlarge
    So i'm kind of wondering why the HP curve dies at 6000rpm when naturally aspired M156s peak at 7000rpm? TQ seems to die off hard and quick too. Looks like ecu dumps fuel at 6850rpm and power/torque die off with it. Actually it looks a lot like the dip in the 640rwhp jrcart dyno that occurred at 5750rpm in his car. Hmmm. One things for sure that ain't belt slip.

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,223
    Rep Points
    31,320.2
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JBond Click here to enlarge
    Other car with 10psi or more, C16 race gas tune, Full exhaust, monstrous ice tank in trunk, larger injectors, ported heads and SLS cams makes 22rwhp SAE more?

    Someone please explain this to me?
    This is why I suggested if the 573 whp graph is JRCART's car there might be an issue with the car. Just might not be healthy...

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,223
    Rep Points
    31,320.2
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JBond Click here to enlarge
    So i'm kind of wondering why the HP curve dies at 6000rpm when naturally aspired M156s peak at 7000rpm? TQ seems to die off hard and quick too. Looks like ecu dumps fuel at 6850rpm and power/torque die off with it. Actually it looks a lot like the dip in the 640rwhp jrcart dyno that occurred at 5750rpm in his car. Hmmm. One things for sure that ain't belt slip.
    You may be onto something. The dip isn't as bad as the 640 whp graph but it is a bit more pronounced than the 573 whp graph:

    Click here to enlarge

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    153
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    0 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ecampbell Click here to enlarge
    Perhaps if we simply ignore him he will go away....he has obviously lost face and has no idea what to do...i actually feel sorry for him (well not really but it sounded good).

    Anyways I say thanks to Steve for all the work he put into the car. I have had a good experience with both Weistec and Evosport and look forward to the next phase of development.
    Look at this guy now, do we really need to outline how many times you have back peddled and contradicted yourself on this forum and others? Do you want some kind of a pat on the back for desperately contacting your builder for a dyno sheet that contradicts your claims after being made to look like the elitist prick and fool that you are. If you post like a Nigerian check fraud scammer expect to be called one. Here is a tip keep your trap shut until you have the data to support your claims how hard is that?. How can you own a car and not know how much power and boost it makes and call yourself an enthusiast. Take your top secret CLK and go fly a kite.
    Click here to enlarge
    2008 Lexus LS600hl
    2006 CLS55 AMG.
    508whp/564tq.
    171mph at The Texas mile 2011.
    Mods Everything.
    Going fast with class!!

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    386
    Rep Points
    580.0
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Thanks for posting the dyno sheet, it's a good start. Any plans on tracking the car? 1/4 mile trap speed will tell us more than dyno numbers, as mentioned in my previous post in the other thread that went south.
    2004 E500 - Eurocharged ECU, VRP headers and E55 exhaust. #1 record holder on dragtimes (13.49@102.5)
    2005 SL600 - OE Tuning ECU/ Speedriven TCU - #1 record holder on dragtimes (11.02@126)

    Click here to enlargeClick here to enlarge
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqKECRhvlf4

    Powered by:Click here to enlarge

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,369
    Rep Points
    794.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Full Throttle Click here to enlarge
    Look at this guy now, do we really need to outline how many times you have back peddled and contradicted yourself on this forum and others? Do you want some kind of a pat on the back for desperately contacting your builder for a dyno sheet that contradicts your claims after being made to look like the elitist prick and fool that you are. If you post like a Nigerian check fraud scammer expect to be called one. Here is a tip keep your trap shut until you have the data to support your claims how hard is that?. How can you own a car and not know how much power and boost it makes and call yourself an enthusiast. Take your top secret CLK and go fly a kite.
    "look at this guy" who are you talking to as no one is listening to you now. You put down someones car and you call yourself an enthusiast?

    I own you hook line and sinker and you can't accept that and do what any person with a below average level of intelligence would do..you lash out. Click here to enlarge

    I truly do feel sorry for you..

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    153
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ecampbell Click here to enlarge
    "look at this guy" who are you talking to as no one is listening to you now. You put down someones car and you call yourself an enthusiast?

    I own you hook line and sinker and you can't accept that and do what any person with a below average level of intelligence would do..you lash out. Click here to enlarge

    I truly do feel sorry for you..
    Thats the spirit.
    Click here to enlarge
    2008 Lexus LS600hl
    2006 CLS55 AMG.
    508whp/564tq.
    171mph at The Texas mile 2011.
    Mods Everything.
    Going fast with class!!

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,230
    Rep Points
    502.1
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by amgftw Click here to enlarge
    Seriously? You have 3 post all of which you are riding ecampbell's nuts like Seabiscuit.

    Give it a rest troll, you are trying way too hard. We gave the guy a hard time, myself included. So what? He is the one that went out of his way to become the internet equivalent of a fat drunk chick at a bar going out of her way to get some attention. When we asked for proof he acted as if he was piloting some top secret government stealth fighter.

    Congrats on that piece of paper that proves nothing BTW. A dyno is a mere tool for tuning and showing gains. Without a baseline of YOUR car ON THE SAME DYNO it is utterly useless. Man up, take it to the track and post up the results. Then maybe I will be impressed.
    I'm really beginning to love this place. Simply because of dumbsh!t idiots like you. First off, since when does post count have any bearing on a members standing or ability to comment ? Second, you have all of 12 posts to you name so you are really in no place at all to be criticizing another member based on his post count. Third, if post count did give him more credibility, then all he would have to do is go make 10 useless posts buried somewhere in this forum and then he'd have more posts than YOU - giving him more credibility and making his posts more meaningful, right ??? WRONG you dipsh!t. Get a clue.
    Regardless of what you think about dynos and their uses really means nothing nor was the graph posted to impress you. The fact that you actually think Earl cares to impress you only further reinforces what a moron you are. He was asked by many to post the graph and he originally said he didn't want to because there will always be doubters, like you, who are never satisfied. Guess he was right and your comments here only substantiate that with resounding effect. You and Full Throttle need to go jerk each other off somewhere else. The guy did as requested and now he's being crucified for it ??? Click here to enlarge Get over yourselves and give it a rest with the negativity - nobody cares to hear it, although it does make life more amusing for me to be able to put you in your place. And if Earl wants to drive his car into a garage and rub it with a diaper, then so be it. It's his car and he can do what he pleases. He did what was asked and posted the graph so others could have a meaningful technical discussion and add to the database of knowledge around here. All you and you buttbuddy Throttle are doing is detracting from it. So piss off already and STFU.

    And PS - if you are such a great tuner with so much experience, then why did you have to BUY an MHP tune ? What, couldn't do it yourself ?? LOL

    Now go get your shinebox little boy, here endeth the lesson.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •