Protomotive's investmnet in sponsoring this board is working.

 

Tom...here is the dyno sheet from Scotts Proto 700 that ran 10.6...these are rear wheel numbers so I will use a 12% to my AWD numbers of 18%...It is real hard to be exact so I think I came as close as possible ,but the graph is hard to see.

RPM.....Proto wheel HP....Proto FWHP......UMW Wheel HP...UMW FWHP
4000.......350................397................. ..450.................548.
4500.......475................540................. ..500.................610
5000.......530................602................. ..550.................670
5500.......600................681................. ..540.................658
6000.......600................681................. ..575.................701
6500.......550................625................. ..620.................756
7000.......550................625................. ..640.................780
.............Delta
4000.........+151 UMW........+38%
4500.........+70 UMW.........+12%
5000.........+68 UMW.........+11%
5500.........+23 Proto.........+3%
6000.........+20 UMW.........+3%
6500.........+131 UMW.......+20%
7000.........+155 UMW.......+25%

I am not seeing where the 24/18G's larger turbine is an advantage, looks like a liability to me.As a matter of fact it looks like they fall away hard after 6K.The umw hybrids keep making power all the way to redline but the 18G's remain flat around 5K and then fall.The Dyno Dynamics sheet shows the turbines are flat as well around 5k+. Keep in mind Scott was running higher boost levels as well. This still has the 1.3 safety feature... I can do the TQ side as well, but it will be the same...Peak TQ may be close but the Tq under the curve wont be ...I apoligize if I made any mistakes ,but it is close. Kevin

 

here is the sheet..

 

Thanks for the info guys! 6speed is the BEST!!!! keep the info coming.....

 

Hi Kevin,

Yes...we have discussed your new kit and I agree, it appears you are going to have your cake and eat it too! I am really anxious to see what type of numbers it produces on the track because based on the dyno it looks very special. I know your new set-up will have K24 based turbos and I am curious as to how they appear to eliminate the lag (yet it's a K24 turbo) and still provide the stong top end. It has always been considered a rule of thumb that "there is no free lunch" when it comes to lag vs. power...it appears the system is much like the Proto 700 (fuel system, air & intercooler work, MAF, etc.) so the big difference must be the turbos???

 

John, its not a K24 based kit....not a K16 either... A hybrid in every sense of the word. I have a good understanding how the lag is dimished ,but that is not something I can speak of...The turbos and the programming working together is the key. These turbos are made by Kevin, so it is safe to assume he knows their capabilities better than anyone and has written programming to take advantage of those capabilities... The proof will be in Tulsa though... Kevin

 

I hope Tulsa happens...It will be a great day of comparison - same day, same track, etc.

 

There wont be alot of excuses , that's for sure.... Kevin

 

Kevin - just to clarify; I was running 1.3 BAR according to my OEM gauge, and only 1.2 BAR according to the dyno's boost gauge. I never ran higher than that with my old setup...be it on a dyno or at the track. Also, that dyno was done on a Dyno-Dynamics dyno with no fans, and my car made around 675 crank at 1.2/1.3 BAR....not 700.

You're trying to convert from RWD to AWD, with two different types of dynamometers, on two different days, at two different locations. I see where you are going with this...but I don't believe the comparison is an accurate one.

Again, I think the numbers from the new UMW setup look outstanding, but as you mentioned in another thread, let's be consistent. Thanks brother.

P.S. - As long as you get a 1.8 60' or better, I fully expect you to *hammer* my old 10.6 @ 136 in Tulsa.

 

Is this event in Tulsa open to dorks like me? ...or only those with fast Porsches?

 

I think the track will really tell the story.... MPH more importantly...
And liek Scott said, if u run 1.8 or better it should do well.

As far as Scott's car... we all know he has less power (Dyno) then Evoms GT700 for example... yet Scott's trap is higher then of those gt700s seen so far( Im excluding DMKs special)... pretty strange...
So the real test will be the 1/4 run and the Trap speed... I think it will be close to Scott's.. somewhere around 137 mph...
markski

 

Scott, I agree that comparisons of this type are difficult at best, but sweeping generalizations that are made by some posters with zero facts to back them up are disingenuous at best. This is a forum where info is public . I encourage others to use any info I have posted to advance their argument. All I have done is take public info and organized it to make my point clear. I have total faith in the members here that will look at these numbers and use thier judgement that it is an estimate only...until Tulsa , that is all I can do. I have no issues with Protomotive, their customer base speaks volumes. You and Mark are great advocates for Todd and I respect that.I have seen what Mark's car can do firsthand, and it is nothing short of impressive. Kevin

 

Agreed. And I'm a big fan of UMW as well. Kevin is doing some great things.

 

I had Kevin's stage 5 ZC and spent a lot of time trying to perfect the set up...
I have nothing but good things to say...

 

Information is power, this is what its about!! I bashed my head going back in forth with UMW & PROTO, one day PROTO one day UMV, its not easy. at least the info is there to make an educated decision. Either of the two are great, its just a matter of preference. The more choices the better for all of us

I spoke to many people before my decision, It just happened that stage 3b came along & when I saw those numbers it was no brainer!!

Alan I sent the turbo's out to John, good luck with the 18g setup!!

Tom