We made 5 successful pulls at Knowledge Performance in Woodstock, Georgia. The guys are great down there. Very friendly and very helpful with a brand spanking new dynapack awd dyno. Southeast guys should really check them out. Their website is www.knowledgeperformance.net I want to give a big thanks to those guys.

Results AT THE WHEELS

389.3 horsepower at 6352 rpm :eek:

313.4 ft/bs of torque at 5653 rpm

Scan of dyno of course will be available soon. All done on the stock ecu with an apexi safc. I just got back from there.

chad
evolution racing sports

awesome!

whats the latest list of mods?

the car hasn't changed since we first posted pictures, except with minor things.

Forced Performance Green
2 1/4in Catless Uppipe/3in Downpipe
STI Injectors
Supra Pump
HKS Exhaust
HKS Standard Wastegate
Joe P MBC
Blitz FMIC
Apexi SAFC
HKS FCD

Stock bottomend, stock heads, stock cams, stock intake mani, stock throttlebody, stock exhaust manifold except port matched to the bigger uppipe.

Originally posted by evorace1
We made 5 successful pulls at Knowledge Performance in Woodstock, Georgia. The guys are great down there. Very friendly and very helpful with a brand spanking new dynapack awd dyno. Southeast guys should really check them out. Their website is www.knowledgeperformance.net I want to give a big thanks to those guys.

Results AT THE WHEELS

389.3 horsepower at 6352 rpm :eek:

313.4 ft/bs of torque at 5653 rpm

Scan of dyno of course will be available soon. All done on the stock ecu with an apexi safc. I just got back from there.

chad
evolution racing sports GREAT results and I tell you some great guys ! Very very excelent guys ! Theyt desreve the crown of the most HP and they sure knew what they were doing !

BTW - when are the rest of you guys going to start believing me about the SUPER AFC???

thank you al. We appreciate your support.

Originally posted by alfriedesq
BTW - when are the rest of you guys going to start believing me about the SUPER AFC???

:lol: i tried to tell folks that the afc was a neat gadget. :D

Did you guys see the new FP30 turbo on the Forced Performance web site ???

oh yeah! hmmm...wonder what's next for our wrx? :cool:

I can't wait till these guys get to the 1/4 mile race track !

BTW - PPS - If this was on street gas i'm going to need a Xanax pill to de-stress!

Hoping this is race fuel !

How much boost was this at - - how many RPM;s to reach boost power ?

c16 gas and 23.9lbs of peak boost

Originally posted by evorace1
c16 gas and 23.9lbs of peak boost Thanks !

Looks like the GREEN is a perfect match for the WRX!

I have another turbo on order - and soon we'll see some comparsions with other kinds of turbos - eg Garret

BTW - anyone know exactly which parts are IN the GREEN??

GREEN looks like a killer combo on the WRX!

the green is td06h t04e 50 trim 7cm2 housing

Originally posted by alfriedesq
BTW - when are the rest of you guys going to start believing me about the SUPER AFC???

I believe the SAFC is a fine tool for adjusting the air fuel ratio.

now, where is the tool for timing?

Originally posted by jmott


I believe the SAFC is a fine tool for adjusting the air fuel ratio.

now, where is the tool for timing?

the stock ecu will take perfect care of that. I had 28 degrees spark advance to redline. You just have to know how to trick it. ;)

can you post a dyno map of this setup on street gas (93) ?

unfortunately I can't. I did not dyno the car on pump gas.

Would you recommend the safc if you can't get it dyno tuned? If so what would you use to monitor the changes with?

Originally posted by evorace1


the stock ecu will take perfect care of that. I had 28 degrees spark advance to redline. You just have to know how to trick it. ;)

By all means! How?

Great results! :)

-Jonathan

Any chances they dyno'd a stock WRX on that dyno? It's kind of hard to pull the figures out of thin air, a comparison to a stock car would be very useful. Great numbers in any respect, I have no doubt you'll be deep in the 11s whenever you get to a 1/4 strip.

any plans on hitting the track, id love to see some trap speeds :D

Originally posted by mynew02


By all means! How?

Great results! :)

-Jonathan Thats the wonder of the Super AFC - its amazing what leaning out the A/F ratio a little bit can do to the timing curve on the WRX!

Originally posted by alfriedesq
Thats the wonder of the Super AFC - its amazing what leaning out the A/F ratio a little bit can do to the timing curve on the WRX!

I think the wild card for the S-AFC is the race fuel. No reason to retard to redline with that C16 (unless your worried about pushing the cylinder pressures too high.)

This is very exciting given the small number of mods!

-Jonathan

Originally posted by dwx
Any chances they dyno'd a stock WRX on that dyno? It's kind of hard to pull the figures out of thin air, a comparison to a stock car would be very useful. Great numbers in any respect, I have no doubt you'll be deep in the 11s whenever you get to a 1/4 strip.

i think vishnu and turboxs have dynoed stock wrxes on several occassions. I know Todd (ByByv8) put down 199 at the wheels without the spray on the very same dyno, if the guys from knowledge performance told me correctly.

Originally posted by mynew02


By all means! How?

Great results! :)

-Jonathan

;)

Originally posted by FloridaWRX
any plans on hitting the track, id love to see some trap speeds :D

i will be hitting the 1/4 soon. However, I did run the car in the 1/8th.

7.66@93

That is the fastest 1/8th mile of any subaru currently known in the United States, if I am not mistaken.

Originally posted by mynew02


I think the wild card for the S-AFC is the race fuel. No reason to retard to redline with that C16 (unless your worried about pushing the cylinder pressures too high.)

This is very exciting given the small number of mods!

-Jonathan

Well not necessarily. Don't forget about the knock sensor in the car. There are a variety of things that help to determine overall spark advance. We have found the settings to enable us to achieve this level of power.

Dont get me wrong, a standalone is a very nice alternative and ultimately probably one of the best. Chips are great too for guys who want power and don't want to mess with it anymore.

But lets not count out the stock ecu. The car made over 380 hp on 5 consecutive pulls. Our ecu's are able to be manipulated and consistent. I think some folks were a little too skeptical of our ecu without giving it some thorough investigation.

Just my opinion though. :)

Originally posted by evorace1


i will be hitting the 1/4 soon. However, I did run the car in the 1/8th.

7.66@93

That is the fastest 1/8th mile of any subaru currently known in the United States, if I am not mistaken.

OMG... and he has the times to back it up. Dude you've got it in the bag! Don't beat around the bush with this 11 second car ;) get that bad boy to the track.

-Jonathan

evorace,

I have a math question about the numbers that you posted (389.3hp & 313.4 ft/lbs)
According to your post, the torque peak was at 5653rpm, but if you derive the torque number from 389.3hp @ 6352rpm it equals 321.89 ft/lbs. 321.89 ft/lbs is greater than 313.4 ft/lbs.... so why aren't you claiming 321.89 ft/lbs as your torque peak?

Here's my math for calculating the torque number:

Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5252

389.3 = TQ * 6352 / 5252

389.3 = TQ * 1.2094
_____ __________
1.2094 1.2094

321.89 = TQ @ 6352

Check out This Place (http://www.revsearch.com/dynamometer/torque_vs_horsepower.html) for a good description of this math formula.

-dash

Originally posted by evorace1


;) ;) ;) :lol:

I'm curious as to what other things are done to the car. Like what gages are you using to monitor the engine? I saw that you had a knocklink, what else? Also, what clutch are you using, and are you still on the stock tranny?

Thats the wonder of the Super AFC - its amazing what leaning out the A/F ratio a little bit can do to the timing curve on the WRX!


One of the reasons why the WRX torque chip by IWTU Electronics works and let's peeps run high boost on stock injectors without detonation (also removes high boost fuel cut that SAFC doesn't).

evorace1 - Hey glad to see such great numbers, but your torque number looks a little low to me versus your HP number...it is very interesting :)

Good Luck!

ImprezaRS dot com - Hey, What the heck is a torque chip and where do I get one?

Thanks :)

email info@imprezars.com if the info at my website products page isn't enough - this should be discussed offline - not trying to make a sale here :p just trying to let people know this isn't new news :)

Originally posted by -dashwrx
evorace,

I have a math question about the numbers that you posted (389.3hp & 313.4 ft/lbs)
According to your post, the torque peak was at 5653rpm, but if you derive the torque number from 389.3hp @ 6352rpm it equals 321.89 ft/lbs. 321.89 ft/lbs is greater than 313.4 ft/lbs.... so why aren't you claiming 321.89 ft/lbs as your torque peak?


-dash

oh lord, not another conspiracy thread!

Its not rocket science on how you can get gobs of timing with an safc.
Ecu's on turbo'ed cars usually give more timing if they see less air going in, and since he has bigger injectors and c16 gas he could lean out the mixture a lot and trick the ecu into thinking he's getting a lot less air through the maf then he really is.
If you have an adjustable fuel pressure regulator you can adjust the timing up and down even more.

Now 28 degrees of timing seems like a lot, have you tried lowering it and see if you can make the same hp or even more?
The trick is to make the most hp with the least amount of timing, with too much timing you can actually loose hp.

amazing...new info to discuss at the pdxwrx install days :lol:


GREAT JOB GUYS (and nice 1/8th too)

Originally posted by -dashwrx
evorace,

I have a math question about the numbers that you posted (389.3hp & 313.4 ft/lbs)
According to your post, the torque peak was at 5653rpm, but if you derive the torque number from 389.3hp @ 6352rpm it equals 321.89 ft/lbs. 321.89 ft/lbs is greater than 313.4 ft/lbs.... so why aren't you claiming 321.89 ft/lbs as your torque peak?

Here's my math for calculating the torque number:

Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5252

389.3 = TQ * 6352 / 5252

389.3 = TQ * 1.2094
_____ __________
1.2094 1.2094

321.89 = TQ @ 6352

Check out This Place (http://www.revsearch.com/dynamometer/torque_vs_horsepower.html) for a good description of this math formula.

-dash

my only idea is that in the real world formulas don't always hold true. it is overly apparent in injectors and their ability to produce power. formulas are just a reference point in most instances, and often are close but not necessarily dead on.

Originally posted by PAWRX
I'm curious as to what other things are done to the car. Like what gages are you using to monitor the engine? I saw that you had a knocklink, what else? Also, what clutch are you using, and are you still on the stock tranny?

egt, boost, jumptronix, and a knock link. I have an oil pressure gauge but haven't gotten around to hooking it up just yet.

Originally posted by ImprezaRS dot com


One of the reasons why the WRX torque chip by IWTU Electronics works and let's peeps run high boost on stock injectors without detonation (also removes high boost fuel cut that SAFC doesn't).

remember that torque gets the object moving, once the object is moving torque is linear to horsepower. Horsepower makes the object move faster and faster. Therefore in the upper rpm more horsepower is needed to progressively move the object at faster speeds.

Originally posted by shabby
Its not rocket science on how you can get gobs of timing with an safc.
Ecu's on turbo'ed cars usually give more timing if they see less air going in, and since he has bigger injectors and c16 gas he could lean out the mixture a lot and trick the ecu into thinking he's getting a lot less air through the maf then he really is.
If you have an adjustable fuel pressure regulator you can adjust the timing up and down even more.

Now 28 degrees of timing seems like a lot, have you tried lowering it and see if you can make the same hp or even more?
The trick is to make the most hp with the least amount of timing, with too much timing you can actually loose hp.

you are correct for dsms but the wrx is a completely different beast all together. You can actually adjust the afc and maybe pick up a couple of degrees, but big jumps in spark advance are made other ways. The maf is not necessarily the deciding factor in our cars like the mas is in dsms. Actually lowering the spark advance makes less power on our cars in most instances. Retarding seems to help up top with the chips, but in comparison no one has made the type of horsepower we have even with retarded timing up top. Even in dsms, the major concern is spark advance and boost pressure. You look to run as much pressure without the car pulling timing.

Originally posted by evorace1


you are correct for dsms but the wrx is a completely different beast all together. You can actually adjust the afc and maybe pick up a couple of degrees, but big jumps in spark advance are made other ways. The maf is not necessarily the deciding factor in our cars like the mas is in dsms. Actually lowering the spark advance makes less power on our cars in most instances. Retarding seems to help up top with the chips, but in comparison no one has made the type of horsepower we have even with retarded timing up top. Even in dsms, the major concern is spark advance and boost pressure. You look to run as much pressure without the car pulling timing. By comparison - on my Tec II set up at the 20 psi range and 324 HP I was running 22 degrees advance on the c 16 race fuel and about 19 degrees on the street gas

I always saw on my wrx engine that the more advance - the more HP on top - UNTIL the point of detonation

A safer approach would be to raise the advance a degree at a time till you see no substantial gain in tourge on the dyno sheet - - then stop there

In any event - my new V 8 sti ecu seems to LOVE the super AFC and unlike the unichip - the perforance and feel stays the same from run to run and from week to week

Originally posted by alfriedesq
In any event - my new V 8 sti ecu seems to LOVE the super AFC and unlike the unichip - the perforance and feel stays the same from run to run and from week to week

Are you saying that the AFC is causing the consistancy, the new ECU is causing the consistancy or the Unichip is causing inconsistancy?

-Jonathan

Originally posted by evorace1


you are correct for dsms but the wrx is a completely different beast all together. You can actually adjust the afc and maybe pick up a couple of degrees, but big jumps in spark advance are made other ways. The maf is not necessarily the deciding factor in our cars like the mas is in dsms. Actually lowering the spark advance makes less power on our cars in most instances. Retarding seems to help up top with the chips, but in comparison no one has made the type of horsepower we have even with retarded timing up top. Even in dsms, the major concern is spark advance and boost pressure. You look to run as much pressure without the car pulling timing.

IMO it all comes back to C16.

It's hard to compare the ECU activity you are having with a car running pump gas. I am however interested to know if anything you have learned could carry over into our daily driver world...

-Jonathan

a Originally posted by mynew02


Are you saying that the AFC is causing the consistancy, the new ECU is causing the consistancy or the Unichip is causing inconsistancy?

-Jonathan I'm saying the sti v 8 ecu and super afc is a perefect combo - works for me

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by -dashwrx
evorace,

I have a math question about the numbers that you posted (389.3hp & 313.4 ft/lbs)
According to your post, the torque peak was at 5653rpm, but if you derive the torque number from 389.3hp @ 6352rpm it equals 321.89 ft/lbs. 321.89 ft/lbs is greater than 313.4 ft/lbs.... so why aren't you claiming 321.89 ft/lbs as your torque peak?

Here's my math for calculating the torque number:

Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5252

389.3 = TQ * 6352 / 5252

389.3 = TQ * 1.2094
_____ __________
1.2094 1.2094

321.89 = TQ @ 6352

Check out This Place for a good description of this math formula.

-dash
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



my only idea is that in the real world formulas don't always hold true. it is overly apparent in injectors and their ability to produce power. formulas are just a reference point in most instances, and often are close but not necessarily dead on.

In this case the formulas are not theory but are how horsepower is calculated from torque. Horsepower is the rate at which torque is generated. Based on the calculations he is correct, you should have a higher peak torque number and based on usual plots the peak torque usually seems to occur earlier in the powerband than the peak horsepower numbers. Something does seem odd here.

That is correct. As previously said, horsepower is derived from torque and engine speed. And if you have any two of them, you can solve for the third quite easily using the formula above. It is not "theory." It is algebra, plain and simple. This is why hp and torque values (on the dyno sheet) are equal to each other at exactly 5250rpm. This equation insists that if an engine is making 389hp at 6352rpm, then it HAS TO make 321ft-lbs at that same RPM. If it is not, it is defying a number of important fundamentals and even math theory itself.

My 2c,
shiv

Originally posted by wrx_fun
quote:
In this case the formulas are not theory but are how horsepower is calculated from torque.

My point exactly. If anyone would care to read the link that I posted above, it would explain (in short and simple english) how this calculation is not theory at all, but how the Dyno's computer actually calculates the HP Numbers in relation to TQ. As a simple way to see this in the real world, look at ANY dyno chart ever produced, and in each one, the HP will EQUAL TQ at 5252 rpm EVERY time. A stunning revelation, that most people don't know about.

I'm not saying that you didn't actually get 389hp or 313ft/lbs on the dyno, but the numbers that you posted are mathmatically Impossible in the REAL WORLD to have existed as peaks on the same dyno chart.

Readers Digest Version: "Something isn't right here"

-dash

Note: A scanned in dyno chart will shut me up real fast.... (although i guarentee that it won't agree that you had peaks of both 389hp and 313tq at the same time)

Originally posted by evorace1


my only idea is that in the real world formulas don't always hold true. it is overly apparent in injectors and their ability to produce power. formulas are just a reference point in most instances, and often are close but not necessarily dead on.

It's not a "real world formula" as in something to base something on like a "guess".

hp = torque * rpm / 5252 or torque=hp*5252/rpm

This is also why you'll notice that torque and hp graphs always cross at 5252 rpms. If they don't then something is wrong.

Now, I'm not going to jump on the usual bandwagon and say this isn't possible, but I'll offer that maybe the hp graph is showing corrected values and the torque graph is not or vice, versa...

Carlo

He said he would post the dyno slip.

Let's not blow his thread up too bad with the same old questions :)

-Jonathan

Originally posted by Vishnu Performance
That is correct. As previously said, horsepower is derived from torque and engine speed. And if you have any two of them, you can solve for the third quite easily using the formula above. It is not "theory." It is algebra, plain and simple. This is why hp and torque values (on the dyno sheet) are equal to each other at exactly 5250rpm. This equation insists that if an engine is making 389hp at 6352rpm, then it HAS TO make 321ft-lbs at that same RPM. If it is not, it is defying a number of important fundamentals and even math theory itself.

My 2c,
shiv

I learend this the first time I dynoed my car and the RPM pickup on my ignition wires was screwing up and I had 442 RWTQ.
After seeing this I looked at how the dyno produced its data. Then realized how important the RPM pickup being accurate is

here it is guys. as requested.

http://members.aol.com/seasix20/dyno-1.jpg

And here are the other 5 dyno plots together including my best pull all of which are over 380hp and 300 ft/lbs of torque at the wheels

http://members.aol.com/seasix20/dyno-2.jpg

I guess you can take your formulas and calculations and put them in your mouths now. :)

ah haha hahahah :lol:

Wow, you are laughing at your own post :rolleyes:

Anyone with a brain would NOT question the green turbo making these kind of numbres becuase its well known in DSM land to make 400 wheel HP

I am curious becuase it seems to be reaching the powerband a bit HIGh up - and the power band is kind of narrow

Any thoughts on why its spooling up so high on those dyno sheets ???

Because it's big and that's what they do on small engines ;) If you hear DSM people say that it spools up early, recognize that they are not a crowd obsessed with low-end power in general and something that hits that hard up high is considered streetable. When they say it's not streetable, _it's not_.

Originally posted by Conduit
Because it's big and that's what they do on small engines ;) If you hear DSM people say that it spools up early, recognize that they are not a crowd obsessed with low-end power in general and something that hits that hard up high is considered streetable. When they say it's not streetable, _it's not_. Well - I was made privy to the dyno sheet of the www.pruvenperformance.com drag car that goes 9.77 in the 1/4 with a giant FP 30 and it spools far quicker then the smaller green turbo is showing on those dyno sheets

5,300 - 7,000 rpm powerband is quite narrow

Lets hope they ahve some tunning tricks to build the spool up a bit earlier - such as timing etc

remember that the green is NOT a ball bearing turbo like the fp30.

Originally posted by evorace1
remember that the green is NOT a ball bearing turbo like the fp30. Does it spool that high on the street also - or is that just some dyno issue???

I'd say we need something green size with ball bearing!!!!!!

What kind of upipe are you guys running >?

Originally posted by alfriedesq
Well - I was made privy to the dyno sheet of the www.pruvenperformance.com drag car that goes 9.77 in the 1/4 with a giant FP 30 and it spools far quicker then the smaller green turbo is showing on those dyno sheets

5,300 - 7,000 rpm powerband is quite narrow

Lets hope they ahve some tunning tricks to build the spool up a bit earlier - such as timing etc

Could be many things. I doubt it has stock heads, too.

Pretty smooth power curve, however. Now, what to do about timing...tap tap tap.

What does this drive like on the street with pump gas? I know you didn't dyno it, but any feedback? I can't wait until you go to the track.

Yeah - the 1/8 mile times have been simply AMAZING ! i wonder if it feels the same on the street as it looks on the dyno sheet ?

it kicks ass on the street. the lag isn't really all that bad, i promise. When the power kicks, hold on to your hat is all I have to say. :)

My green has full boost (20-21psi on pump) at 4100rpms or so.

Al, I'm currently testing exactly what you said. Its basically a ball bearing green size turbo. Made by AGP. Its double ball bearing, all GT series wheels, and 50lb/min turbo compared to a greens 49lb/min. The compressor wheel is more efficent too since its GT series. Price is green range too, nothing outrageous.

Heh I think you need a stroker kit now. :)

Originally posted by NickV
My green has full boost (20-21psi on pump) at 4100rpms or so.


:eek: :eek: That aint too bad.

Thats also at 5000+ ft elevation, and a low compression motor. 7.8:1. With 8.5:1 and sealevel, people are getting full boost at 3700 or so when setup right.

Originally posted by evorace1
here it is guys. as requested.


I guess you can take your formulas and calculations and put them in your mouths now. :)


oh good god, fine, live in ignorance.
if the dyno chart reports something inconsistent with HP/Torque calculations its due to error in the dyno.

prolly not a big deal, no machine is perfect.

Maybe I drank too much last night, but looking at his chart the lines appear to be matched around 5252. Could it be that this dyno is correct or am I seeing things?

-Jonathan

:eek: I'm sorry, but that's the worst powerband that I've seen on i-club thus far. The turbo looks like it's much too big for your setup. I guess if you were using it for drag only (and even then, you should rev a little more to get some reach). Kinda reminds me of a single turbo supra dyno (except theirs more than doubles the hp). Good luck with your project.

Originally posted by TypeC
:eek: I'm sorry, but that's the worst dyno I've seen on i-club thus far. The turbo looks like it's much too big for your setup. I guess if you were using it for drag only (and even then, you should rev a little more to get some reach). Kinda reminds me of a single turbo supra dyno (except theirs more than doubles the hp). Good luck with your project.

I wonder if playing with the uppipe size (headers) and other things would help or hurt?

-Jonathan

Originally posted by NickV
My green has full boost (20-21psi on pump) at 4100rpms or so.

Al, I'm currently testing exactly what you said. Its basically a ball bearing green size turbo. Made by AGP. Its double ball bearing, all GT series wheels, and 50lb/min turbo compared to a greens 49lb/min. The compressor wheel is more efficent too since its GT series. Price is green range too, nothing outrageous. I think the issue with the green turbo on the wrx has to do with the length of pipe between the turbo and the header is much closer on the dsm

Originally posted by mynew02


I wonder if playing with the uppipe size (headers) and other things would help or hurt?

-Jonathan

it would probably kick some serious ass with a 2.5liter block and some cam work =)

Wow those are good NUMBERS. Seems like all it is is numbers. I don't mean to be a jerk but that power band does nothing for me but that IS just MY opinion. Power at 5200rpm's does a lot for you on the track but nothing for daily driving.:(

When we originally posted about Chads car with the Green on it, he said it gets 20 psi by 3800-4000 rpm. It still does. As far as why it says what it says on the dyno, I have no clue. I have no experience with those kind of dynos. Does anyone elses turbos appear to be laggy on them also? Just curious. I do know for a fact that his car has NO lag problems on the street, is a GREAT street turbo, and has no problems whatsoever respooling on shifts. It pretty much behaves the way a Green powered DSM does.

I did think it was odd to see the curve it made when I saw the sheets, but i cant help to think that 390hp to the wheels falls right in line with a 7.6 at 93mph 1/8th mile time, also. Who knows what the explanation is, I jsut wanted to clear up any confusion that the turbo on the car is "laggy".

Originally posted by 122andy
When we originally posted about Chads car with the Green on it, he said it gets 20 psi by 3800-4000 rpm. It still does. As far as why it says what it says on the dyno, I have no clue. I have no experience with those kind of dynos. Does anyone elses turbos appear to be laggy on them also? Just curious. I do know for a fact that his car has NO lag problems on the street, is a GREAT street turbo, and has no problems whatsoever respooling on shifts. It pretty much behaves the way a Green powered DSM does.

I did think it was odd to see the curve it made when I saw the sheets, but i cant help to think that 390hp to the wheels falls right in line with a 7.6 at 93mph 1/8th mile time, also. Who knows what the explanation is, I jsut wanted to clear up any confusion that the turbo on the car is "laggy".

As someone that has played around with a dynapac, i know that if you set it up for a shorter pull, you sort of out run the turbo because of the lack of load on it.

What settings were you guys using on the dyno? We use a 4 second settle time, and a 15 second ramp time in 4th gear. This gives us "close to street" conditions.

In truth, it doesn't matter what settings you use as long as you stick with them.

-Nathan

I have no idea what the settings were, I wasnt there. I was just speaking from first hand experience from both riding in and driving the car as far as spool up goes.