Lithium

Quite a different way of doing it, mixed long term reliability results for them but SP and a like of the Supra guys stand by them. Be aware that if comparing with the QSV on vs QSV off results published - that is comparing the performance a dual entry turbo on a single entry manifold (ie, a shit way of doing it) with the QSV behaviour, a PROPER single entry turbo on a single entry manifold, or even better a fully implemented twin scroll setup will perform substantially better overall than the "QSV off" scenario these guys will be showing. Just IMHO, but worth considering I reckon.

How do you think the power delivery etc?

I was referring to looking for boost leaks...

Then it'd be the first thing I'd look at

Are you running an AFM?

Nom!! Very nice, ultra keen to see how this pans out

Hmmm I'm not inclined to believe that there would be sufficient air density difference to make 23psi on a 45 degree day = 14-15psi on a 10 degree day, not that I know how to explain that but it does seem a bit strange.

Is boost creep common with these turbos? What is your boost cut, as it must be quite bad creep if you were still hitting it with less preload and no external boost control? Nonetheless, very nice results all things considered - 13.0 @ 115mph isn't bad for your first outing and if you were down on power delivery, definitely more to be had - especially with sticky tyres Its a good respectable time which gives you something which is realistic to be aiming or expecting to beat - so till next time!

I am not aware of any, though I suspect it would work really well.

Haha I was kidding, we've discussed it before I'm guessing between 115 and 120mph.

Unfinished tune? 14.0 @ 98mph

As much for my reference as anyone elses - a BMW guy has just upgraded from a GT3582R to an HTA3586 on his BMW and intends on giving it some beans on pump gas, will be interesting to see the comparison when it's done http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?2004332-700whp-with-a-GT35-it-is-possible&p=26557578#post26557578

The dead times are under the voltage heading, flow rate is under the flow rate heading to the far right

Fair enough, been a long week, and I didn't explain my point very well - so it being missed is easily understood. What we can agree on (from your post) and what I was partly trying to get at is you CAN'T compare results from other setups on other dynos, so I guess you can't say yours is supposedly as good or better performing than another product when there is no fair and even testing of both in a like situation (ie, same or at least equivalent car, dyno etc). Suggesting differently would be hypocritical, and essentially making false claims - which is not one of my favourite characteristics, especially from someone I'd consider buying goods from.

Some big claims, be good to see how they pan out - I got curious and plotted what I have available so far with Excel to get an idea of where everything is, I have tried to be reasonably accurate with this, but it is Friday night and I haven't got ultra precise with my measuring so if people get curious they are most welcome to check out the dyno plots themselves and compare the points (I chose 500rpm increments from 3000rpm->7000rpm) and draw their own conclusions or correct me on the plots, if indeed my numbers are definitely wrong (this means that it is agreed to be) I can update the chart and resupply it - I do this for data collection, as I like data and like the stories to be presented with accuracy. Other points worth taking into consideration when looking at this chart: - The HTA3076 peaks at 28psi and drops back to 24psi, while the SS2 is holding around 22psi and the SS3 around 24psi steady. This gives the HTA3076 an artificially high midrange advantage in those plots and isn't so much of a representation of the turbo so much as just how the cookie crumbled. Again, when more dyno plots show up (ideally a flat 24psi one) I can redo the chart for a better comparison - I am unconvinced that the Mainline the HTA3076 result was run up on reads the same as the Dynapack - I don't feel it is a huge difference, but when you are talking a few kw those kw mean a lot. I've added a second HTA plot which scales the numbers from the Mainline dyno plot by the amount I SUSPECT covers the difference between these two dynos. I came up with the numbers I used to get the difference between these dynos well before any of these results came up, so I could make sense of comparisons like this - and also predict results (which I did within a few kw for the HTA3076 result). I have added the numbers as directly from Mainline dyno as well so people can come to their own conclusions, though FWIW remember the HTA3076 is running aftermarket cams two which means that there is some advantage there - which means the HTA result has a bit of advantage, though that also means that anyone indicating that my dyno scaling (which results in the HTA and the HG making similar power on similar boost) is off I'd like to know reasoning for it - including how a stock cam RB25 should be able to make more power than a cammed RB25 on the same pressure ratio... would be awesome to see the HTA result on a Dynapack actually, I don't really enjoy or relate to rolling road dynos (hence me working out how to compare it with a Dynapack ): Be interesting to see what other people make of it, to me it seems the SS2 Alpha has a slight advantage over the HTA3076 (and others) in spool but at least in this comparison falls short on power. I don't know if this was it run to max on the setup it was on or not, and hard to say how much it will add with cams but I've just plotted what I can find. The HTA seems to be very similar to the SS3, if not a little quicker coming on but it does like a bit like it could possibly hold on slightly more at the top end than the HTA. All in all, the VNT trick seems to help nicely - though the HTA is an ultra potent turbo for one that doesn't use any mechanical intervention

This is ridiculous. His turbo is not a 400hp turbo at any point - it is a 600hp capable turbo limited to 400hp due to measures taken to spin up the 600hp capable wheels a bit quicker. Its still a 600hp turbo, and I am dubious that when it is in 400hp mode it will match a "conventional" well matched 400hp turbo. There is no standard behaviour of a "600hp" turbo, for example an old T3/T4 versus an HTA3076 will have QUITE a different driving experience. On the topic of the 600hp thing - I have asked twice now how these perform on pump gas. Any answer?

Bare in mind that the 60psi will not be differential pressure while the engine is running, and it is also probably damn near the worst case scenario for the FPR to have to deal with while the engine is idling - as soon as load or rpm go up the injectors will work more and the FPR will need to return less.

When I mentioned retuning to the new pressure I meant to change the FPR setting to target 60psi... not just leave it at the current setting to hold 60psi, if that makes sense?

Found something... Couple of interesting dyno plots from ATPTurbo.com for turbo upgrades for Ford Focus - a .86 GTX2867R: And .63 GTX3067R: .63 GTX3067R makes more power and spools better than the .86 GTX2867R - looks like it could be as promising as I was hoping it would be, definitely making decent power. Would love to have more detail on it. Source: http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=tp&Product_Code=DYNO-DATA+-+2013+FOCUS+ST+2.0L+TURBO&Category_Code=FET

It doesn't NEED to be, it's just that IDs like higher pressure. At 43psi ID1000s will not be actually flowing 1000cc/min - they'll be fine though. Check this out:

Good point, worst come to worst can just aim for 60psi instead of have it happening as an effect, ID1000s will love it anyway. Only issue for him is he'll need the fuel table to be touched up to suit the new flow rates of the injectors if it is currently tuned for 43psi.

Yep EVOs, though the turbo moves the air to make the power. For what it's worth based off what I know about that dyno I'd guess that a 500kw R32 GTR may run near 140mph with that kind of power

I'd be interested to see that curve - sounds a bit odd. Looks like it goes well, hard to tell from clips but it seems on the laggy side to me though - could easily be wrong. Usually easier to tell when you can see rpm/boost. Enjoying it?

Gotta love modern turbo tech - a 56lb/min turbo responding like a <45lb/min turbo... its a pretty sweet age when you can go for 25% more power and not loose any response