2.0 turbo baby!!
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: 09-30-06
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
From: saddle brook, nj
was nice to meet a fellow cobalt driver as well bro,...haha, the drive home was good, but itll be bettwer after my next trip
Senior Member
Joined: 08-13-05
Posts: 5,733
Likes: 1
From: the glove
sounds like you need to re-think your tuner, "60s were to big" what a statement, sounds like his injector control skills are lacking.
also, look into a larger frame, or larger comp wheel, or larger compressor cover for that turbo (what ever you have) at that boost number (actually i was lower in boost) i was making a solid amount more power.
if you start moving more air then your numbers will jump, untill you have to battle stock head flow rates
once the cars done(again) with my new gm pieces i'll re dyno in hopes of being close to my power goals.
also, look into a larger frame, or larger comp wheel, or larger compressor cover for that turbo (what ever you have) at that boost number (actually i was lower in boost) i was making a solid amount more power.
if you start moving more air then your numbers will jump, untill you have to battle stock head flow rates
once the cars done(again) with my new gm pieces i'll re dyno in hopes of being close to my power goals.
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: 09-30-06
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
From: saddle brook, nj
sounds like you need to re-think your tuner, "60s were to big" what a statement, sounds like his injector control skills are lacking.
also, look into a larger frame, or larger comp wheel, or larger compressor cover for that turbo (what ever you have) at that boost number (actually i was lower in boost) i was making a solid amount more power.
if you start moving more air then your numbers will jump, untill you have to battle stock head flow rates
once the cars done(again) with my new gm pieces i'll re dyno in hopes of being close to my power goals.
also, look into a larger frame, or larger comp wheel, or larger compressor cover for that turbo (what ever you have) at that boost number (actually i was lower in boost) i was making a solid amount more power.
if you start moving more air then your numbers will jump, untill you have to battle stock head flow rates
once the cars done(again) with my new gm pieces i'll re dyno in hopes of being close to my power goals.
Banned
Joined: 09-17-06
Posts: 6,266
Likes: 1
From: between heaven and hell
sounds like you need to re-think your tuner, "60s were to big" what a statement, sounds like his injector control skills are lacking.
also, look into a larger frame, or larger comp wheel, or larger compressor cover for that turbo (what ever you have) at that boost number (actually i was lower in boost) i was making a solid amount more power.
if you start moving more air then your numbers will jump, untill you have to battle stock head flow rates
once the cars done(again) with my new gm pieces i'll re dyno in hopes of being close to my power goals.
also, look into a larger frame, or larger comp wheel, or larger compressor cover for that turbo (what ever you have) at that boost number (actually i was lower in boost) i was making a solid amount more power.
if you start moving more air then your numbers will jump, untill you have to battle stock head flow rates
once the cars done(again) with my new gm pieces i'll re dyno in hopes of being close to my power goals.
Honestly though, DTM did hit 270whp on a 2.6" there. I think something is in the setup cause it should be way more in my opinion.
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: 09-30-06
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
From: saddle brook, nj
dtm made 270 in dynojet #'s, not on matts mustang, matt told me
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: 09-30-06
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
From: saddle brook, nj
Senior Member
Joined: 11-27-05
Posts: 1,780
Likes: 0
From: Weston, FL
sounds like you need to re-think your tuner, "60s were to big" what a statement, sounds like his injector control skills are lacking.
also, look into a larger frame, or larger comp wheel, or larger compressor cover for that turbo (what ever you have) at that boost number (actually i was lower in boost) i was making a solid amount more power.
if you start moving more air then your numbers will jump, untill you have to battle stock head flow rates
also, look into a larger frame, or larger comp wheel, or larger compressor cover for that turbo (what ever you have) at that boost number (actually i was lower in boost) i was making a solid amount more power.
if you start moving more air then your numbers will jump, untill you have to battle stock head flow rates
Senior Member
Joined: 07-08-05
Posts: 6,200
Likes: 0
From: Niceville, FL
Sounds good man. Congrats on the progress, and I hope you get all the kinks worked out. I will not argue the 60lb injector thing because I don't know how they are with the turbo setup, but they work great with my twinscrew.
My only gripe here is that you made 270WHP on a Mustang dyno and converted it to 324WHP for a Dynojet, and when I made 272WHP on the 3rd lowest rating Mustang dyno in the U.S. with my twinscrew everyone gave me ****! WTF?
I guess finally people will be able to conclude from this that my car did make some freaking awesome power too!
Either way nice work bro.
My only gripe here is that you made 270WHP on a Mustang dyno and converted it to 324WHP for a Dynojet, and when I made 272WHP on the 3rd lowest rating Mustang dyno in the U.S. with my twinscrew everyone gave me ****! WTF?
I guess finally people will be able to conclude from this that my car did make some freaking awesome power too! Either way nice work bro.
Banned
Joined: 08-09-07
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
From: Edmonton, Alberta
Sounds good man. Congrats on the progress, and I hope you get all the kinks worked out. I will not argue the 60lb injector thing because I don't know how they are with the turbo setup, but they work great with my twinscrew.
My only gripe here is that you made 270WHP on a Mustang dyno and converted it to 324WHP for a Dynojet, and when I made 272WHP on the 3rd lowest rating Mustang dyno in the U.S. with my twinscrew everyone gave me ****! WTF? I guess finally people will be able to conclude from this that my car did make some freaking awesome power too!
Either way nice work bro.
My only gripe here is that you made 270WHP on a Mustang dyno and converted it to 324WHP for a Dynojet, and when I made 272WHP on the 3rd lowest rating Mustang dyno in the U.S. with my twinscrew everyone gave me ****! WTF?
I guess finally people will be able to conclude from this that my car did make some freaking awesome power too! Either way nice work bro.
where are the scientific and proven records of this?
324 whp on a dynojet is way too high
i hit 269whp on a mustang without a turbo, just on the heaton with alot of mods, same with a friend and his cobalt modded like mine. with 10% as a LOW gain you would get on a dynojet, thats 295+ whp.... go off that so you dont get flammed.
290-300 is a realistic number, trust me on this one..... stop doing alphajaguar math and his i would have 19-25% more on a dyno jet blah blah blah and thinking 200 hp is somehow almost 400 haha.
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: 09-30-06
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
From: saddle brook, nj
people give you gripe because u always have to add in the "on the 3rd lowest rating Mustang dyno in the U.S."
where are the scientific and proven records of this?
324 whp on a dynojet is way too high
i hit 269whp on a mustang without a turbo, just on the heaton with alot of mods, same with a friend and his cobalt modded like mine. with 10% as a LOW gain you would get on a dynojet, thats 295+ whp.... go off that so you dont get flammed.
290-300 is a realistic number, trust me on this one..... stop doing alphajaguar math and his i would have 19-25% more on a dyno jet blah blah blah and thinking 200 hp is somehow almost 400 haha.
where are the scientific and proven records of this?
324 whp on a dynojet is way too high
i hit 269whp on a mustang without a turbo, just on the heaton with alot of mods, same with a friend and his cobalt modded like mine. with 10% as a LOW gain you would get on a dynojet, thats 295+ whp.... go off that so you dont get flammed.
290-300 is a realistic number, trust me on this one..... stop doing alphajaguar math and his i would have 19-25% more on a dyno jet blah blah blah and thinking 200 hp is somehow almost 400 haha.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-08-05
Posts: 6,200
Likes: 0
From: Niceville, FL
people give you gripe because u always have to add in the "on the 3rd lowest rating Mustang dyno in the U.S."
where are the scientific and proven records of this?
324 whp on a dynojet is way too high
i hit 269whp on a mustang without a turbo, just on the heaton with alot of mods, same with a friend and his cobalt modded like mine. with 10% as a LOW gain you would get on a dynojet, thats 295+ whp.... go off that so you dont get flammed.
290-300 is a realistic number, trust me on this one..... stop doing alphajaguar math and his i would have 19-25% more on a dyno jet blah blah blah and thinking 200 hp is somehow almost 400 haha.
where are the scientific and proven records of this?
324 whp on a dynojet is way too high
i hit 269whp on a mustang without a turbo, just on the heaton with alot of mods, same with a friend and his cobalt modded like mine. with 10% as a LOW gain you would get on a dynojet, thats 295+ whp.... go off that so you dont get flammed.
290-300 is a realistic number, trust me on this one..... stop doing alphajaguar math and his i would have 19-25% more on a dyno jet blah blah blah and thinking 200 hp is somehow almost 400 haha.
Alphajaguar math FTW!
I'll take it!
Senior Member
Joined: 11-27-05
Posts: 1,780
Likes: 0
From: Weston, FL
Senior Member
Joined: 07-08-05
Posts: 6,200
Likes: 0
From: Niceville, FL
Mine made like 5000+ on one of those random wack runs...
Senior Member
Joined: 08-19-05
Posts: 3,018
Likes: 0
From: Horseheads, NY
I made 305 on a mustang dyno (water load based ...actually reads a lil lower then a mustang) at 20.5 psi. Something isnt right. 50s ought to be damn neared maxed at that point. Pretty much everything 06black said is true...whether you want to believe us or not is your perogative.
Senior Member
Joined: 08-13-05
Posts: 5,733
Likes: 1
From: the glove
I made 305 on a mustang dyno (water load based ...actually reads a lil lower then a mustang) at 20.5 psi. Something isnt right. 50s ought to be damn neared maxed at that point. Pretty much everything 06black said is true...whether you want to believe us or not is your perogative.
lol, i love those runs!
dan i got some more free dyno time for me and you.
trust me, you dont want to get into an e-bitch fest with myslef and friends about HPT, i'll win that battle every time.
if you scaled the tables wrong (sounds like thats what happened) then you might have an overly rich problem, other then that your more then likely just wrong, or being told incorrect information.
Last edited by 06black; Oct 22, 2007 at 12:57 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
the most powerful lsj eva!
