The Only 3300 lb. Buick V6 in the 8s using...

[Alky V6]

I find it funny that you are so damn smart that you can accomplish "pressure pulse tuning", yet you still have the slowest car on the planet with a 91mm turbo.

It's also funny that you're so smart that you started a thread to show how smart you are, but you clearly don't even know how to choose the proper parts when building a race car.

You need to open your mind and read between the lines. It's not what I've done with this 91mm in particular, it's what others might do if they took the time to try and understand what I'm doing and bothered to apply it in other ways.

Key phrase: Apply it in other ways.

 

[Alky V6]

True meaning=

My car is awesome.
How can it be more awesome?
Did I tell that my car is awesome?
Let me tell you my car is awesome
Im not sure....no wait.....yeah...... my car is awesome.
My car is awesome.
No your wrong....my car is awesome.
I created awesome with lil small awesome.
My car pulses awesomely.
I tuned awesome...spray awesome and are awesome.
Instead of bantering how more awesome my awesome can be......remind me my car is awesome...no wait ill tell you...my car is awesome?
My car is awesome and pulsed awesomely with small awesome.
Dont try to figure out my awesome, cause I created awesome and my car is awesome...you cant see my awesome from your lowly unawesomeness.

HA HA

Hmmm. Looks like someone is playing in the corner of my sand box with me.

 

[Alky V6]

No, the original poster just wants answers!



Here is your one and only answer to this great question:

Everyone else who is building an 8 second GN is better at choosing parts than you are, so nobody else has to ask how they go SO fast IN SPITE of the dumb choices they've made.

My choice was never to do 8s. Would you have built what I did and expected 8s? I'm assuming you build your own engines. Do you build your own engines?

 

[turbobitt]

This is the funny part. I don't recall ever directly criticising another persons build in a mean spirited manner. Ever.

If we calculate for a drivetrain loss of 15%, which is the very least we would expect, we get 894 bhp.

You’re "rip your head off and spit down your throat" approach to other opinions and criticism is a little strong.

Based on my testing, I calculate driveline loss to be a little more, maybe %18. This could be because of the Ford 9" and big tires that I have. So maybe power is a little better than you think.

Allan G.

 

[Fryguy]

My choice was never to do 8s. Would you have built what I did and expected 8s? I'm assuming you build your own engines.

I would never choose a 91mm turbo unless i was planning on running BOTTOM 8s or high 7s.

 

[Alky V6]

I wonder who you guys think is laughing the hardest.

 

[Alky V6]

You’re "rip your head off and spit down your throat" approach to other opinions and criticism is a little strong.

Based on my testing, I calculate driveline loss to be a little more, maybe %18. This could be because of the Ford 9" and big tires that I have. So maybe power is a little better than you think.

Allan G.

Like I stated early on, 15% would be an absolute minimum. I didn't want to get too carried away with it, because you know I'd get some flak from the peanut gallery for over-inflating the drivetrain losses. I've learned a lot over the years from sharing on this board.

 

[Alky V6]

I would never choose a 91mm turbo unless i was planning on running BOTTOM 8s or high 7s.

I wholeheartedly agree with you.

 

[Alky V6]

You’re "rip your head off and spit down your throat" approach to other opinions and criticism is a little strong.
Allan G.

If you look at the manner in which others give their opinions and criticisms, I think you'll better understand my approach to countering some sorts of comments. For instance, go back and read over this page of the thread and tell me what you think.

 

[Alky V6]

The above comparisons between my two different states with the car were with differing boost levels, but the static CRs between the two builds are also drastically different. 22 psi boost was about as high as I could go with the static CR I was using with the old build back then.

 

[Fryguy]

If you look at the manner in which others give their opinions and criticisms, I think you'll better understand my approach to countering some sorts of comments. For instance, go back and read over this page of the thread and tell me what you think.

This thread openly invites the harsh responses you've received. You're obviously attempting to brag about something stupid, and using a lot of posts to do it. That **** is always going to happen if you make threads like this.

This reminds me of the LS1 tech records like the "fastest stock cube, aftermarket headed, ls6 intake, 10.235:1 compression, cloth interior, t-top, orange camaro in the world!"

 

[Street Lethal]

One word: Backpressure

Kevin.

Your exactly right Kevin. The same answer to Don's very first question. That's why he makes the power with the small valves....

Can you guys expand on this a little more, as perhaps I missed something. I was under the impression that the only difference between two identical engines running 30 pounds of boost pressure, with two different sized turbo's (or single vs twins) would be the denser air charge of the larger (or extra) turbo(s). I would agree with Donnie in that boost pressure is an irrelevant reading, it's just telling you how hard that particular turbo(s) is working to achieve that amount of pressure. How is backpressure used in the equation as being the sole factor in making more power? If you compare two turbo's with one equally matched turbo (exhaust housing, flow ability, MAP, etc.), run two 2 1/2" downpipes on the twins, and a 5" downpipe on the single, how exactly do the twins make more peak power at a given RPM (note that twins will obviously make more power under the curve)? Please explain, as I am very curious....

 

[Alky V6]

No, the original poster just wants answers!

Here is your one and only answer to this great question:

Everyone else who is building an 8 second GN is better at choosing parts than you are, so nobody else has to ask how they go SO fast IN SPITE of the dumb choices they've made.

This is an interesting statement. Let's explore this.
What parts would someone use to do 8s?
What choices did I make that are 'dumb'?
If the choices I made are 'dumb', then I suppose you have the answer as to how my 'dumb' choice of parts is deep in the 8s. Please enlighten us all with your wisdom.

 

[Alky V6]

This thread openly invites the harsh responses you've received. You're obviously attempting to brag about something stupid, and using a lot of posts to do it. That **** is always going to happen if you make threads like this.

This reminds me of the LS1 tech records like the "fastest stock cube, aftermarket headed, ls6 intake, 10.235:1 compression, cloth interior, t-top, orange camaro in the world!"

But you have to admit, there is a lot of interesting stuff being thrown around. Otherwise, why are you here? Just to troll?

Do you just surf the net for rediculous threads to troll on?

 

[Alky V6]

Can you guys expand on this a little more, as perhaps I missed something. I was under the impression that the only difference between two identical engines running 30 pounds of boost pressure, with two different sized turbo's (or single vs twins) would be the denser air charge of the larger (or extra) turbo(s). I would agree with Donnie in that boost pressure is an irrelevant reading, it's just telling you how hard that particular turbo(s) is working to achieve that amount of pressure. How is backpressure used in the equation as being the sole factor in making more power? If you compare two turbo's with one equally matched turbo (exhaust housing, flow ability, MAP, etc.), run two 2 1/2" downpipes on the twins, and a 5" downpipe on the single, how exactly do the twins make more peak power at a given RPM (note that twins will obviously make more power under the curve)? Please explain, as I am very curious....

This is an excellent question. I also look forward to the explanation.

 

[Fryguy]

Can you guys expand on this a little more, as perhaps I missed something. I was under the impression that the only difference between two identical engines running 30 pounds of boost pressure, with two different sized turbo's (or single vs twins) would be the denser air charge of the larger (or extra) turbo(s). I would agree with Donnie in that boost pressure is an irrelevant reading, it's just telling you how hard that particular turbo(s) is working to achieve that amount of pressure. How is backpressure used in the equation as being the sole factor in making more power? If you compare two turbo's with one equally matched turbo (exhaust housing, flow ability, MAP, etc.), run two 2 1/2" downpipes on the twins, and a 5" downpipe on the single, how exactly do the twins make more peak power at a given RPM (note that twins will obviously make more power under the curve)? Please explain, as I am very curious....

There is more than just back pressure to consider. If you look at a compressor map, you can see at what pressure ratio a given turbo will work best. For the many (most) of the smaller units, a smaller and less efficient engine will actually make more power with a given turbocharger. The OP's engine, which is small in displacement and has mild heads on it, would be a great engine to get the most out of a small turbo with because you could run a very high pressure ratio (boost level), which is where many small turbos are happy.

That's why the compressor map and the boost number is actually important, and not irrelevant. At one time I had a very mild 6200 rpm 347 engine and a GT42-76. That car went 155mph @ 3300# at around 21psi. We took that turbo off and put it on a only slightly heavier F-body which had a very nice 370cid LS engine with good heads, etc. That car at the same boost level wouldn't fall out of a tree. It was a total turd. The answer was in the compressor map. The turbo was outside of it's happy place at 21psi on that engine but it was just fine on the mild street engine. That's why the pressure ratio matters.

 

[Fryguy]

But you have to admit, there is a lot of interesting stuff being thrown around. Otherwise, why are you here? Just to troll?

Do you just surf the net for rediculous threads to troll on?

Honestly your thread was annoying to read. Normally I am too busy, but I am on the phone and have been on hold for over an hour.

 

[Fryguy]

This is an interesting statement. Let's explore this.
What parts would someone use to do 8s?
What choices did I make that are 'dumb'?
If the choices I made are 'dumb', then I suppose you have the answer as to how my 'dumb' choice of parts is deep in the 8s. Please enlighten us all with your wisdom.

I'm really not interested in individually picking apart another racer's combination and categorically stating what I think it dumb about it. You drive an 8 second GN, so obviously your car is cool. You made a big thread blowing yourself and I don't think you have too much to be excited about, that's all.

 

[Alky V6]

I'm really not interested in individually picking apart another racer's combination and categorically stating what I think it dumb about it. You drive an 8 second GN, so obviously your car is cool. You made a big thread blowing yourself and I don't think you have too much to be excited about, that's all.

If that's the case, then you're done. Good luck to ya.

 

[Alky V6]

FWIW, I have had a T4 T70, T4 T76, and T6 91mm on this car. I would never consider going back to a T70. Maybe 70mm turbos are different today. I'd have to take a good look at the compressor map. Backpressure would also be a consideration.