Thread: Think I went with too big of a turbo...

I actually barely knew about Coheed's struggles, or the extent he went through testing this. Lynch linked me to one of Coheed's posts and that's all I had. Once Coheed posted in this thread I knew more, and dyno graphs helped even more.

Fixed!

I am not going to bother anymore....after this.... how many of you have seen a log manifold with stock cams make in the high 300whp range on pretty low boost 12-14lbs? I have, more than just once. The first one I saw was even done on an e-manage omg! Actually, how many of you have ridden in a ve/stock cammed/log manifold car that was dyno tuned? How about been there for the dyno tuning? Jamie, I know you don't want to beat the horse anymore but I hate the fact that because one person had troubles, it is now a fact that a log won't work on a ve with stock cams. I know it isn't ideal but.............. It does freakin' work. It worked 7 years ago and I would imagine it would still work now, lol. Is it optimal..... NO! but can it work for moderate power.... YES! I need some of the o.g.'s to back me up on this because the forum and this thread is being cluttered with all sorts of misinformation that somehow became gospel. For some reason these things only work in CT and FL I guess smh
Drew

im not a turbo guy at all and i was only really passing on things i've read to vadim such as coheeds stuff. an other tid bits here an there.

i think vadims on the right track now guys.

I think that he will get to where he needs to be but I also think that he is going to be spending more time and money than is necessary for his goals. It is his car and more power to him but for what he stated his goals were, his setup should be just fine. We don't even know where the setup stands at this point since there have been no dyno runs made yet. Erick, Jamie, Mark, John someone please vouch at least for Nate's blue NX with the super 60 so that people know the truth. The truth is also that a tubular is better in all aspects but for what V's goals were, they should have been hit with no issue with the setup that he has. It may need a few tweaks here and there but it shouldn't be an issue to hit 400whp with a decent power curve on a stock ve with a log. It has been done in CT I know for sure.... I have heard of cars in FL that have done it also. Why are those the only two states that this setup works on? There are probably some NY people who have done it also but I don't know any of the NY guys personally and none have posted on here.
Drew

Drew, it's just the only people that brought any dyno's and specs to the table have been the folks that have had trouble with logs and VE cams. People saying that log's do fine on VE haven't showed any real information, just we have seen/heard of them making good power. But besides touching the tune I haven't found anything else.

Can you ask the CT guys on what log's they are running? Coheed and I both have/had Protech's, maybe that's the problem?

I would love to see some of the dyno's, just to see the power curve. I'm expecting torque numbers greater then my T28 had, but as it stands right now it barely touches that. Especially when the cam's kick in, which feels like the car loosing power.

I also hate to seem difficult, unwiling to listen to the OG's, etc. It's just what I see personally is different from what is being told by OG's. And since no one wants to share, it's hard for me to get it any further then it is now. Which is fine, I knew logs sucked with flow, I thought I could get away with it easily, failed and learned my lesson to do it right the first time.

I'm pretty sure that Nate(exxd) on the old forum was running a protech just like yours if I remember correctly. He gave up on posting his dyno charts because even when they were posted, people called b.s. He had no reason to make up dyno charts for internet bragging rights but people still didn't believe what they saw, even when dyno sheets were posted. You need to get your car on a dyno and see where you stand and go from there. That is my opinion, I have asked some others to chime in but we will see if they do or not. Without a doubt, a tubular manifold is better and will make better power but honestly making your own with a mig over spending money on a few dyno runs makes no sense to me as we don't even have a baseline to start at. Nothing against you but your butt dyno doesn't help anyone give you pointers. What would help would be a few dyno runs, charts with datalogs and your corresponding fuel and timing maps. That would be where I would start. I would also make sure that your manifold has no obvious restrictions besides being a log, lol.
Drew

I have never seen a log manifold car make that power on that low of boost. High 300s? come on man, that is a ridiculous statement. You would need a much larger sized turbo to flow that much. Seriously.

Hell, I though 321whp on 10psi on my GT30R was really good. But knowing that others have made high 300s on a log... well it certainly isn't a NS111 or T30 turbine. Gotta be something way bigger.


I'll tell you, Manny's car has always been one I have looked up to. One of the best VVL builds for its time. 520whp on 24psi with an SC61. But come on, the inducer of my turbine fits inside the exducer of the SC61 stage 3 wheel. These turbos being used on the log manifolds are not very large. Rated 500hp (crank) or less.

Now I think my biggest problem with this setup is not even the low power, it's the lag. If I could get faster spool, I would leave the log on there. 5krpm for full boost is outside of my regular driving, having to rev to 7k on the street all of the time gets annoying too.

When Enthalpy did a full race log vs full race equal length dyno test, the log for them spooled faster then an equal length. That was another reason why stuck with a log, I figured it would spool faster. I think the problem here is I'm on low cams only, and even switching high cams at 4k rpm didn't help the boost lag.

Exactly why you do not see the dyno graphs you guys are looking for. If someone can make 270-310 whp with a t25 on a ve why do you doubt that a t3 super 60 can make 370whp? It is all in the tuning, that is all I have to say on that subject.

Comments like you posted are the reason that the people that do stuff like I mentioned stay in the bushes or even way past the bushes into the forest. I wish I could get the dyno chart to show you guys but I am not sure how to get ahold of him anymore ( moved to Cali last I knew). Even if I had the dyno graph you wouldn't believe it anyway which is why Nate and the other people that have done things like this don't even bother posting or even logging on to the forums anymore.

You have all sorts of dyno graphs but do people accuse you of making false numbers/dyno sheets? No, because the numbers that you have made are nothing spectacular and you are at high altitude on a jwt tuned for 91 octane, which is a contributing factor. We have 93 oct in CT so that helps a bit but the biggest difference is the fact that each setup is tuned on a dyno, for that particular setup. Every setup is different and needs to be treated as such, meaning you will never get spectacular numbers on a generic tune for 91 oct, no matter how many ways you try and re-invent the wheel.

You have spent so much money on changing things around trying to make the powerband and numbers that you want when you could have probably made very good power and a broad powerband with an e-manage on a log manifold or a simple tubular setup since I agree that once you go past the 400whp mark the log is a limiting factor. Your altitude and octane fuel that you have available limit you as far as tuning goes but you have never tuned any one of your setups. You have messed with base timing and maybe fuel pressure(not sure on that one).

I do commend you on the amount of time and effort that you put into your setups but I do not understand why none of you see how important it is to tune each setup/car on the dyno. Just to say it again so you all realize why this info isn't out there, when people came on the old forum posting dyno sheets, people called bullshit because they never saw anyone else do numbers like that on a similar setup.

These people know what they did, I know what they did and anyone who rode in the cars or were around the local scene knew what the cars did so why would they sit here and argue until they are blue in the face trying to make other people believe them.

A true enthusiast does it for the challenge or love of the game, not for the nut huggers to ride their sack just because they made good dyno numbers. They especially don't do it to be told that they are all liars and they are just making photoshopped dyno graphs or not telling you all that they were spraying on top of boost etc. etc. etc. Every excuse people could come up with would show up trying to disprove the achievements of some of the most honest people I know.

To sum it all up, the VE on boost can make great numbers when tuned correctly, even on a log setup. It doesn't necessarily take huge amounts of boost to do so either, just a little knowledge and thinking outside the box and trying new things. These were not big dollar builds as none of us had the funds for expensive parts. People made use of what they had to work with and did it well.

Now it seems that people think that if you put this part + another part with a certain tune it should = huge powah! I don't know what else to say to any of you on this subject as that about sums it up.
Drew