EDIT: This is on a STOCK b16a

Here is a dyno of a b16a w/ a t3 vs a t04b/t3. both runs were at 15psi and both were on the same turbine and same a/r housing. only difference was the compressor...



copy and paste for bigger version
The graph is from 3250 rpm to 8250 rpm. peak on the t3 was 342, peak on the t3/t04b was 331.

I know a lot of you are going to dismiss this as garbage (you always do ) BUT I do think there is something behind this. These were basically back to back (corrected) dyno runs with nothing but the compressor changed.

What'd you think? Could slip losses be that much? I really have no idea.......

 

Insert Brad's rant here...

 

made an addition up top...this is on a stock b16a

 

whats a more common case than a stock b16 running 12-15psi? (I know its not the most common.....but its still far from abnormal.....)

 

342 horsepower out of a straight T3? I'll belive it when I see it. And when I say see it, I mean a dyno sheet that has numbers along the X and Y axes, and with curves that don't look like they were drawn on in photoshop, or with smoothing set to 15 billion.

 

lol...ok. want me to post the whole chart? i just took a pic w/ my digicam. i took this outta "how to build honda horsepower". I know it sounds like a joke of a book, but there are tons of graphs in here showing popular mods making no gains. i really dont think its BS. if you dont wanna believe it fine....be ignorant

 

I have never seen a T3's ability to create that much horsepower, no matter what the boost pressures, unless it was like a T3 Super 100 trim or something

but of course the information is only as valid as the source, where'd you get it from?

 

here are the whole graphs...


because its small: x scale: 1.0 - 9.0 w/ .5k rpm intervals y scale: 25 - 375 w/ 25 hp intervals

because its small: x scale: 1.0 - 9.0 w/ .5k rpm intervals y scale: 10 - 290 w/ 20 ft-lb intervals


and arturbo. what does brads rant about hp have to do with this?

 

Nothing, I am trying to increase my post count.

 

i said one post up:

"how to build honda horsepower" by Richard Holdener.

no to be all-trusting, but who just randomly makes up dyno numbers and sticks them in a book when they benefit no one

 

Super street magazine?

all kinds of companies have done this before... If you look at any compressor map from a T3, the CFM ratings at that pressure ratio would not even come close to allowing that horsepower output...

 

ok? so the answer to this is that they were lying and its all horse ****?


I'm not trying to sound like an ***....but i really doubt that. I think there is a legit reason behind this...

 

Largest trim T3 compressor for the dynographs setup, PR would be ~1.5

In order for a turbo of this size to make the power that dyno says, it would have to make decent boost pressure Way out of it's efficiency range, (Compressor efficiency below 50% most likely if it were possible)

Also the airflow rating (if it were measured as crank HP on the graph) would be appx. in the 35 Lb/min area...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Arturbo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Nothing, I am trying to increase my post count. </TD></TR></TABLE>

lol

now notch one up for mine as well

 

quote from the book: "The small T3 worked so well, that many in the turbo industry were reluctant to believe the results of the test run on this B16A motor. They questioned the ability of the relatively small T3 turbo to support in exceess of 340hp at the wheels. Their concerns were genuine, as the compressor map for this particular turbo showed nowhere near this flow potential. Regardless of what the books and maps say, the reality is that the trubo did indeed produce these power levels on this B16A and not just once."

IF ( ) these graphs are for real it wouldn't be the first time real life results differred drastically from theory and paper results....

 

Yes, you're very correct, thats why i say it's improbable, not impossible

But then the question would arise, why did the larger turbo make such low power?

and then, how the hell does that small t3 produce double the airflow it's rated at?

 

thats what I wanna know. i know slip losses are supposed to be pretty influential. i dont know how much, but that may have made a difference. im gunna look into that a little more and see what i can find....

 

**** you and your t3/t4 hype. !!!!!!

I dont know what that graph is or isnt, but i wouldnt doubt a super 60 T3 or a .63/.60/60 trim T3 could put down 350whp. The graph is obviously doctored but is supposed to give a general idea. I'm going to be putting a .63/.60 T3 in my LS shortly. Ill post the dyno results at 11psi and i bet they are very similar to any hybrid at the same psi. I might actually get better results because i will actually be in the turbo's efficiency range, god forbid

 

I just have a really hard time seeing ~385 crank horsepower arise from a Super60 trim T-3 at 15 lbs of boost pressure.

There are ways to cheat dynos, too,

 

why? have you seen T3 super 60s max out? or just beauce it seems weird?

not sarcastic...serious..

 

I don't know about the whp number. whether if you dyno'd the car today it would make 275whp on the t3 and 265whp on the t3/t4...i honestly couldnt tell you what the specs of the dyno inwhich they tested. but one thing with testing is the conditions must be the same except for one variable. obviously the variable is the turbo and with that change in variable it shows the T3 made more power at the 15psi.

I dont really care honestly if the 342whp is true or not. I just think it proves that its not necessary to buy a t3/t4 or a precision to get 300+whp and a lot of people seem to be blowing their money on turbo's that are honestly just not the right turbo for their car. Thats what i think this graph shows.

 

To be honest, i dont think i've ever seen any dynograph of a T3 powered small displacement (2 litre and under) make over 300 whp.. if anyone has a dynograph, do post!

 

Well whether or not what I am about to say has anything to do with this post, I think it NEEDS to be said. Everything that you read in magazines is NOT true! Believe it or not, I am begging people to not take what they read in a magazine as GOSPEL! After meeting lots of "high end" people, and hearing what they think that their car will make for horsepower, it is a JOKE. I say bring the t3 vs. t3/t4 challenge. The problem is that getting something published doesn't mean having it filtered through a Bullshit screen like it has in the past, pretty much anything someone even slightly accredited says can be published nowadays, correct or not.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by lazerus &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">To be honest, i dont think i've ever seen any dynograph of a T3 powered small displacement (2 litre and under) make over 300 whp.. if anyone has a dynograph, do post!</TD></TR></TABLE>

i just did lol...

(I too can up my post count w/ pointless replys )

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Arturbo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Nothing, I am trying to increase my post count. </TD></TR></TABLE>

lol

on a side now, that's a little wierd. The T3 has a smaller compressor housing? If it does im switching turbos this second.