I am sure the car is very fast. However, based on my experience 970 fwt @ 3900 rpm's with large valves and stock displacement just isn't in the cards. Not saying it can't be done ...... just I personally haven't ever seen it without nitrous with these motors. Then again, maybe EVOMS has a new break through that no one else knows about.

If you weigh and run a quarter, if the numbers jive ......... I will become a believer.

 

Hey Alex any news for me yet. Call or pm me.

Jag

 

Great write-up Craig. Congrats on your monster. Amazing tune by EVOMS.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by KPG

Craig, sounds like you have the ultimate stop light warrior on your hands...congrats. I am glad to hear that the car has exceeded your expectations and that EVO has produced the goods. I am glad you decided not to chase the peak numbers and went with a low/middle rpm band beast. Sounds like you will be able to exploit the car fully in your day to day driving...late for court?...don't think so! Once again, congrats to you, Todd Z and Dan. BTW, that much TQ at less than 4K is just plain ridiculous....my kind of car! Be safe, Kevin

Thanks Kevin. You hit the nail right on the head!!!!!!!!!!

Craig

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by joetwint

Enjoy it in good health,my friend .It would be interesting to see how your car would do in the 1/4 with all that torque and one less shift.Funny thing about Craig's car is it has so much torque that now he needs tires just to go out and even attempt a 60-130 because he runs sideways at 60 on street tires and awd.Sharky get this car to the track,its gonna be fun watching you guys launch this car.

Lol!!! Its true. I have to resolve the wheel spin (and learn to shift better) before I can get some times. I have been told by a very knowledgeable guy that PS2s simply will not hold with the Gs I am producing. I’m not sure what I am going to do about this. Toyos? Nittos? DRs?

Thanks again for everything over the past few months (and the next couple of months, as I will likely continue to hound you)!!!

Craig

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjv

I am sure the car is very fast. However, based on my experience 970 fwt @

Lol . . . can always count on you Chad to make a Chad post!!! I have no idea what my actual crank TQ number is . . . I was merely guessing based upon a 22% estimate for drive train loss (even though some say 23% is the correct drive train loss number for me to use). All I know is that I have seen the dyno graph with the AWTQ figure.

Bottom line . . . I don’t give a rats *** whether YOU are a “believer.” Thanks for your input. Now kindly refrain from further posts in this thread which serve no purpose whatsoever.

Regards,

Craig

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharkster

Craig it was fun catching up last week and even more funny listening to you tell me that a Tip roasts all four tires at some serious speeds. Based on what I now know with your car vs mine, there is no comparison. Yours _should_ be so much more capable than my black car ever was. The right tuning with the Hitachi MAF and the fuel system was not available back then and hence my top-end was not what it could have been 2.5 years ago My car _never_ spun tires like yours that's for sure. Not to mention that your 9ff tranny shifts even better. I would seriously think that with the right conditions your car could certainly challenge for a 9 second run. It might not trap 145mph (probably 140-ish at this point?) but with a 1.5-6 60 foot you've got the mph to do it. I'm always game brutha!

Thanks Alex!!! Whatever she might be capable of (I think 9s are a stretch), it is only with the skilled driving of someone like you. Lets schedule something!

Good point about the boost. There was a day when you, I and others ran some stupid boost levels (e.g., 1.9-2.0 bar). No more my friend!!! 1.5 bar is plenty!

Craig

 

Thanks Bajo, John, Marty, Scott, Rob, Vincent, Wross, Jay, TopGun, Buddy, Jags, and Alex. I genuinely appreciate all your kind words and well wishes!

Regards,

Craig

 

Craig,

You always take things so personal. It it is sad day when anyone is criticized for pointing out a number that on the surface appears to be, for lack of a better word .... "off." Or for just asking a question. There could be a rational explanation .......... I understand you have chosen not to provide one. Instead you don't give a "rats ***" and that is your perogative.

Sorry that an honest open discussion is something you are not interested in. Some of us know these cars, know what makes them work, know what is possible and when the impossible becomes possible we want to know how it was achieved. Do you even know the torque/hp standands that were loaded for the test? Some of us are enthusists and want to know how new things are done. Others simply hand over a wad of money to a tuner and can care less or don't have a clue. In some cases they find out later that they didn't have what they thought they had. In others they were onto something new and exciting. You have made it clear I'm wasting time asking questions. Have a great day. I really hope you have what you believe you have.

 

Craig, I think for starters some RA-1s would be a good starting point. They are much stickier than those PS2s. 245s in the front and 335s in the rear. I hope you don't have some much power than you have to drive around on 17 inch drag radials

 

Hehe it's not much skill, I just went so many times that I figured out a few nifty tricks on my own car and got it down to being consistent to 1.6. I actually tried for 2 years before I _finally_ figured out the launches (which is really the key to the whole thing). I'm sure with half an hours driving you'll be just as capable as me with those tips. Try doing that thing we talked about with the shifts. Your car is a different animal to mine with the 9ff tranny so it might not work. I'm seriously wondering how on Earth that tranny can still take this type of abuse.

After seeing the results of lifting the heads- no more 2bar. Not ever!

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjv

Craig,

Chad,

For someone who is so incredibly knowledgeable about cars in general, and these cars in particular, and someone who is incredibly giving of his wisdom and experience, you are occasionally remarkably tactless. You have single-handedly taken a positive, upbeat thread focused primarily on the fact that I am enjoying my new tune, and turned it into a debate regarding the veracity of my dyno graph. Thanks buddy!!!

I have seen the dyno graph with my own two eyes. I have shown it to others that even you consider authoritative, and they did not see any basis to question its veracity. You are correct that I have no idea what standard was used (although I do know it was 100 degrees outside at the time). I also saw a dyno graph with the OEM MAF and tune, where the TQ peaked at 4500 rpms, rather than 3900 rpms. Can I explain how it is that EVOMS achieved this. Absolutely not! As you are well aware, I am among the least intelligent people on this forum, and it is a miracle that I can successfully tie my shoes on a daily basis, let along understand the details of tuning a 996TT motronic. That being said, I am confident of one thing: Todd Z. and Garrett, individually and collectively, know FAR FAR FAR more about tuning Bosh motronics than you or I! Using the hew Hitachi MAF, and the greater information/flexibility provided thereby, and changing certain of the hardware as well, they were able to make tremendous improvements in the tuning of my car. There are certainly additional factors that play an important role, including my turbine A/R (which is lower than a typical GT30), and the fact that they changed my Y-pipe to smaller inside diameter unit.

As far as your pejorative reference to people who throw money at tuners (an ironic comment from someone who has thrown more money at his tuner than anyone else by a factor of three or more), and your corresponding suggestion that I may not be a true enthusiast, I assure you that I was actively and intimately involved in the process from start to finish -- likely more so than EVOMS would have preferred, but that is my nature -- and I asked an endless stream of questions in order to educate myself and understand as much as I possibly could (with my limited baseline). It has been an incredibly educational experience for me. On the other hand, I still have a lot to learn. Consequently, while my technical competence may pale in comparison to yours and others, I do not blindly throw money at tuners, and I resent your suggestion that I am somehow less of an enthusiast simply because I admittedly lack the technical competence possessed by certain others.

Finally, my “rat’s ***” comment was directed at your suggestion that it was incumbent upon me (or anyone else) to make you a “believer” (your word). The reality is that, whether you believe or not, will have no affect whatsoever on the enjoyment I experience driving my car. Therefore, I have little desire or incentive to endeavor to make you a believer. Moreover, as stated above, I plainly lack the technical competence to do so. Therefore, I will remain quite content with you being a non-believer.

I hope your project is progressing well.

Regards,

Craig

 

You requested earlier:

"Now kindly refrain from further posts in this thread which serve no purpose whatsoever."

I have nothing more to say.

 

Awesome well-written (as usual) post Craig.

 

Craig, so glad to hear your car is complete. It has been a long road. When I read your first post in this thread, all I could think of was RA1's, in the sizes listed by Sharkster. They heat up real fast and have virtually eliminated the possibility of straight line wheel spin, on a good surface, in my car - which obviously has much less torque than yours.

Be safe and enjoy!