Sweet. Sounds great Christian!!!

 

BUMP

Want to see those dyno charts

BUMP

 

Here is a comparison dyno graph of the VF39 mapping vs. the FP18G mapping for the 2006 WRX MT. As you can see these maps produce very similar power. The FP18G flows a bit more in the upper RPM ranges. I will address any comments or questions as they are posted.

Take care,
Christian.

 

Hello Christian,

I am just a little confused as to why there is a difference between the first dyno sheet you showed us and this one.
The first one showed the VF-39 doing 268 HP and 289.9 Ft-Lbs.
Now the new dyno shows the VF-39 at 247 HP and 261.7 Ft-Lbs.
Why is there a 21 HP and a 28 Ft-Lbs difference? Did you use a difference dyno? If so, which one is more accurate? The new numbers seem to be a lot lower then I expected. I thought that the 18G would be around 300 Ft-Lbs and maybe 280 HP.

Please let me know about this.

Thank you

 

Answer, the dyno is different then originally used

 

Ok then which one is more accurate? I mean there is a pretty big difference between the two.

Thank you

 

Both of our chassis dynamometers are very accurate. One is not more accurate than the other. One was just running a version of software that is much newer. This is why I am currently servicing and upgrading the older dyno to the newer software. Just an FYI, the SAE also changes how HP is measured and most dyno manufacturers do not keep their clients up to date with these changes. This is one of the many reasons we use Mustang Dynamometers...they constantly update and improve their software. Regardless dyno #1 will always read differently (very, very slightly now that they will be running the same software) than dyno #2 because they are two different dynamometers with different parasitics, static weight, etc. I have spent the last several months preparing the new dyno room and dyno #2 so that all of our tests will be performed on the same dyno from now on. This new dyno software allows me to datalog 2 separate EGTs, 2 separate intake air temperature sensors, relative pressure (boost), exhaust gas back pressure, WBO2, RPM, speed, etc. along with the torque and horsepower curves. I used this new software feature to graph the boost and Lambda (Air/Fuel) curves for the 2006 WRX MT VF39 map notes. I wanted to better represent how boost should be responding, rather than just typing the boost target and the taper values. Plotting the fuel curve has been very helpful as well. These particular tests just happened to come when I was servicing dyno #1. My guess was that our clients would appreciate that the release of these maps was not delayed…I hope I was correct with that assumption. In addition, all dyno #s will change over time because dynos are like vehicle, they wear down, they need maintenance, parts break and need to be replaced, etc. Long story short, chassis dynamometers are just tools used to measure differences, positive or negative, in performance. With this new mapping we were able to make significant improvements on the 2006 WRX MT using the VF39 and FP18G turbos. I hope you enjoy the new mapping. I will be paying attention to this thread, I want to make sure I answer any questions you all may have.

Take care,
Christian.

 

any one get to stage 3 yet? the map is up on cobbs website. any advice before i start to order this stuff?

 

I have a different, but entirely related question. I've been reading about tuning for years but I've never actually played with a real dyno/car/tables; so sorry if I'm missin something.

I have a 2006 WRX wagon and have been planning to get AP to do Stage 1 for a long time. I don't care about peak power as I don't drag my car. This is my daily driver and autox and just weekend fun car so I appreciate these three things (long term reliability, MPG, an low-mid range power)

All dyno pulls are done at WOT, so this leaves out partial throttle applications (street). I noticed that the stage 1 graph and stock shows that you modified the target A/F ratio closer to 13 (stock was closer to 14.5) and pulled down the rich (A/F ~11) crossover point from ~3200rpm (stock) to and smoother transistion between 2600-3000rpm (stage 1). I'm guessing the increase in low power came from this change.

My question: how does this look in partial throttle situations? Is the target A/F the same no matter what throttle position?

I live in California so I get the crappy CA gas which means I'll actually have to use the CAStage1. I noticed that the A/F target on boost for stage1 is not as rich as the stock... does the CAstage1 A/F target lie somewhere between these two curves?

Is there anyway to see the actual boost readings superimposed on these (very helpful, thank you) graphs?

 

Christian- I was wondering if you will be doing a map for the vf34. if so when can we expect it to come out, i am looking to get an AP and STi TMIC with a Turbo back exhuast but i was also wanting to run the vf34 rather than the vf39 or fp18g because of the quicker spool up and high flow capability.

 

We are most likely not going to develop a VF34 calibration for a 2.5L since that turbo is a very poor match for a 2.5L.

Take care,
Christian.

 

FYI, the VF39 spools up a touch quicker than a VF34