Thread: Yada yada, more dynos.

i wont go into details about the restriction as it has cost customers thousands in r&d. I will say there are parts of the ve ex port that really let down the well set up intake. Besides core shift and the divider placed too low and a few other little details i wont go into, the intake is quite a good base to start with.

The ex side is rough as guts, has certain parts/platforms very undersized even for the tiny standard valve and needs a fair bit of work even if you plan on an N/A setup using standard valves. However they can be made to work well but it isnt cheap and not too many places will do the "right job".

to answer you question does a ve need e85 and high compression to work well? the answer is no.

However on a standard head intended for turbo e85 will work very well. WHY? because as a general rule e85 will require much lower intake to exhaust ratio that normal petroleum based fuels. This is due to the way it burns, so you dont need as high exhaust flow. All our jobs have a different port design for alcohol based fuels vs petroleum and then turbo vs na obviously. High comp suits the big overlap cams, but is not needed also

Thats definitely a move in the right direction, thanks!

Yah, I've pointed it out I think a year ago in one of your other (massive) threads. I might not be right, but I've always said the VE cams (and high overlap N/A cams in general) are completely wrong for a turbo car. The VET cams (with their low overlap) are the way to go. Nothing's changed since then. Not sure why you ever went away from the VET cams.

Edit: I'd also like to point out that I believe you're on par with the other turbo VE guys now, when you take the elevation into account. Does that not make sense? Do we still think you're lacking in power now compared to others with similar setups?

have you ever thought about having camshafts sent out to be reground? im not that famillure with the ve's so im not sure if there are or arent a aftermarket camshaft to be had, but if you arent satisfied with the camshasfts having a company regrind them might be a good idea. i donno

on every VE-T setup I have done, helped with or whatever up here, I always switch BOTH IN and EX cams at the same time. Usually 3500-4000rpm on average. with GT30R and larger turbo's I always the best power and power curve with SR16 cams over std sr20ve cams.

2 months ago I did a RWD red top build that was making 354whp, 335lb ft TQ with cams, and all the other "normal" goodies, and converted it to a SR20VE head setup. stock sr20ve cams, stock cam gears and so on. It has a T2 flanged GT3071R .86 housing, silkroad t2 turbo manifold, internal W/G and so on. that car is making 438whp from about 6000rpm to 7500, and 414 lb ft TQ at 4600rpm at 20psi boost. The car has since been tuned on E85 and made more but I do not know how much more.

Being that you are in the higher altitude, the dyno should have an automatic correction factor for that with the pressure difference read out between sealevel and your current baro pressure.

coheed this will help. this will allow you to convert your current compression readings over to sea level. I also agree with the others that if you don't know what corrections the dyno is running the numbers are useless. this is one of the reasons I stick to a dynojet preferably one that is a true inertia dyno. Not to say the others are wrong I just know there is less user error involved with a inertia dyno since I can calibrate dynojets.

Air - Altitude, Density and Specific Volume

Everyone seems to make great power on the VE cams, without any extravagant setup. JP also has made good power on both the 20ve and the sr16ve cams. It doesn't seem like I lose power from reversion with the std cams, but you def don't feel the kick when they hit. When the exhaust switches you feel it, but that's about it.



The dyno has a STD correction on it. So my 380whp could be only 320-340whp depending on what the correction was, which I have no idea what it is. The dynojet tells you exactly what correction you are at. Let's see... Stock DET swap was making about 170-175whp...

Also, there is a local VET making 410whp on only 15psi with a 60-1 with a .82 housing. Stock 20ve cams, but standalone. Actually, their shop welded up my manifold. So my manifold is almost the exact same as theirs. I played around with just AFRs and timing today. The afrs only really made a big difference on the top end. but adjusting fuel pressure causes some spots of the map to lean out to nearly 12.5 as boost comes on. Timing didn't seem to make a big difference. I retarded timing a bit and the car lost a bit of power, but it wasn't substantial. Timing maps are hitting about 22* of timing on the top end on 22psi of boost. I tried some more boost, but spark started to blow out on the .032 gap so I lowered boost again to 22psi. It still cuts out a bit when full boost hits, so I will need to close the gap or turn the boost down.

I think the .82 housing will really help. I know it is a gamble, but this .78 just seems too small. The boost climbs and climbs, but the engine doesn't seem to pull decent with the boost. It hits over 5psi at 3000rpm and is still gutless. 10-15psi starts to pickup a bit but there is still no torque until around 5000rpm. I hit 15psi at 4K and the car just doesn't feel like it is at 15psi. It feels choked. Almost like it has a 2" exhaust on it.

most people say that you need about 5psi more boost to make up for the elevation, I don't believe it is that easy though. Element Racing is hitting 410whp on 15psi with about 9.5:1? compression and stock cams. They are running a fairly conservative pump gas tune as well.

Whats their leak down and compression readings? find that out before you spend money on the larger a/r housing.

What do their compression numbers have to do with anything. They are using higher compression pistons. Leakdown on this motor is perfectly acceptable. I've seen brand new motors with under 15K miles having higher leakdown than this motor.