Q&A with Trevor!

[tarekwheeler]

Gotcha, thanks!

[BOOSTD]

My only question... is my car some bastardized younger sibling/relative of your car? haha. I've been on here forever and have always had the utmost respect for both you and your car, that's for sure.

[hated]

Trevor: Congrats again. Way overdue, but I'm happy to see all your hard work payoff. I had a question for you:

Could you run two stock MAF's (one to each turbo) control it with the e-manage, or AEM, and have enough airflow to support 10's? I ask cuz it may be a way for us Cali guys to pass a visual. Thanks in advance, and keep pushing.

[WolfSL]

Originally Posted by Trevor

I need to go back...I have a feeling it's around 670-675 AWHP & Torque.

That's on the to-do list.

I realize this a hard question to answer without actually having been to the dyno and not having a graph in front of you with your current setup. But how would you or do you expect the curve to be? i.e. Do you expect the curve to look similar to your 14B graph with power coming on faster when you get on the boost? Or something different from that?

Also outside of the turbo's, were there any other changes that you believe are giving some extra power between your 14B and 16G setup? Would you go with some slightly higher compression pistons and/or a larger overbore if given the chance? Why or why not?

Thanks for your knowledge and insight Trevor

[niterydr]

Originally Posted by hated

Trevor: Congrats again. Way overdue, but I'm happy to see all your hard work payoff. I had a question for you:

Could you run two stock MAF's (one to each turbo) control it with the e-manage, or AEM, and have enough airflow to support 10's? I ask cuz it may be a way for us Cali guys to pass a visual. Thanks in advance, and keep pushing.

Not to interject in Trevors thread, but why not gut the mass 100% and install a map sensor hidden in the intake stream? That should pass any cali inspection as you are still using stock looking sensors. Heck, if you grab the wires off the mas plug far enough back, you can still leave the "maf sensor" plugged in.

[mjannusch]

Originally Posted by niterydr

Not to interject in Trevors thread, but why not gut the mass 100% and install a map sensor hidden in the intake stream? That should pass any cali inspection as you are still using stock looking sensors. Heck, if you grab the wires off the mas plug far enough back, you can still leave the "maf sensor" plugged in.

Good idea with gutting it and whacking off the harness away from the MAF... Instead of putting the MAP in the intake stream, I'd just put a nipple on the underside of the Y-pipe and put the MAP somewhere down by the battery out of the way where nobody would see it. I think it'd look stock enough to pass a visual inspection.

[niterydr]

Originally Posted by mjannusch

Good idea with gutting it and whacking off the harness away from the MAF... Instead of putting the MAP in the intake stream, I'd just put a nipple on the underside of the Y-pipe and put the MAP somewhere down by the battery out of the way where nobody would see it. I think it'd look stock enough to pass a visual inspection.

Yeah I was thinking about something along those lines. (Get it lines ).
I didn't mean to actually mount it in the stream, I guess my wording was a bit off.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by hated

Could you run two stock MAF's (one to each turbo) control it with the e-manage, or AEM, and have enough airflow to support 10's? I ask cuz it may be a way for us Cali guys to pass a visual. Thanks in advance, and keep pushing.

The ultimate can't mix two Karman Vortex signals together.

It can mix two voltage based sensors together. They did that for the Skylines (RB26DETT). I don't see a way to get it to mix two voltage based sensors then output a single Karman frequency though.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by WolfSL

I realize this a hard question to answer without actually having been to the dyno and not having a graph in front of you with your current setup. But how would you or do you expect the curve to be? i.e. Do you expect the curve to look similar to your 14B graph with power coming on faster when you get on the boost? Or something different from that?

I bet from 0-4000 they're rally close...the E16G may have 10-15 extra HP in places. Once it hit 4000 I bet they would seperate dramatically. By 4550-4600 the torque will peak out along with the boost. I expect the same shape as the 14b graph from there on up...just magnified.
Here's the old chart if you want to compare:
http://members.cox.net/trevorlj/552AWHP.JPG

Originally Posted by WolfSL

Also outside of the turbo's, were there any other changes that you believe are giving some extra power between your 14B and 16G setup? Would you go with some slightly higher compression pistons and/or a larger overbore if given the chance? Why or why not?

I think 90% of the gains I saw from the new E316G setup was the turbos themselves. I think the new intake, 4" exhaust, and methanol setup only accounted for a very small amount of that extra power. It's surprising how much going up from a 6cm2 turbine housing (like I ran with the 14bs) to a newer style 7cm2 housing could make. All without affecting spool...just like I was hoping would happen. Ah well...an extra 3.8 psi from the compressors at 6600 couldn't have hurt either.

I'm not a fan of the big overbores. I chose a 0.039" overbore because thats the max allowed in the service manual. I like having the extra block mass for heat transfer and strength. Plus I don't need any special head gaskets. That overbore alone probably raised my compression to somewhere in the 8.16-8.30 range...which is actually pretty good for pump gas. High compression motors with turbos do well on high octane fuel but they actually end up handicapped if you run them on pump fuel. You end up leaving some power on the table to keep knock at bay.

[Multiades]

I just noticed that your dyno sheet is with ZERO smoothing. Your car purrs like a kitten.