iam always drooling over aps stuff and just noticed this cant wait to see the rest. it seems to me that everybody else is slacking on the sti vishnu is slow godspeed is the only one i have heard about and thats going slow too whats going on ? pruven performance has 11.6 evo wheres the sti ?
http://www.airpowersystems.com.au/us_spec/subaru/sti/2004_sti.htm

Give them time; the major hump is that the STi's ECU is totally different from that of the WRX and is giving tuners major headaches in cracking/understanding it.

Interesting, this is the first engine dyno I've seen for the STI, or is it just a software based estimate?

They also dynoed the Evo which makes for interesting comparo.

http://www.airpowersystems.com.au/us_spec/evo/evo.htm

Doesn't say at what Octane level though.

It says the STi was running 94 octane.

Below the STi chart it says they used the equivalent of 94 octane.

Glad I'm not paying $2 a gallon for nothing! :)

Originally posted by bigb_9_99
pruven performance has 11.6 evo wheres the sti ?
[/B]

Getting the evo into the 11s when it got here really was no big challenge. The engine has been around for a while and people know what it can do, all they had to do was throw some parts on it and go to the track. The sti engine has never been seen by anyone untill now, except for exhaust and some suspension there are no preexisting parts for the car so it should be expected that tuning take a bit longer.

Im sure that if the evo had debuted at the same time as the sti with a brand new engine both cars would be in this learning stage that the sti is in.

They also dynoed the Evo which makes for interesting comparo
Interesting, but hard to really compare since it seems they are showing crank hp for the Sti but whp for the Evo.

Vishnu and Godspeed have both hit 300whp with the research, testing and development. OK this isn't stock but both did it with very little in upgrades.

Originally posted by Broeli

Interesting, but hard to really compare since it seems they are showing crank hp for the Sti but whp for the Evo.

How can you tell? Both graphs say results were plotted in shootout mode. Isn't that a mode used to estimate crank hp?

Also...my question about octane pertained to the Evo. I saw where it said 94 octane for the STI.

It's not clear to me how crank HP is derived here, but still....it is fairly impressive.

Originally posted by Broeli

Interesting, but hard to really compare since it seems they are showing crank hp for the Sti but whp for the Evo.

I seriously doubt that is whp.

:D Go read each chart carefully. It clearly states that they purchased an Sti and an Sti motor. The Sti motor by itself is what they dynoed ("The above chart shows flywheel power and torque data for the stock US Specification STI running on the equivalent of US 94 (R+M)/2 octane fuel.")
They state: "APS has imported a left hand drive North American Lancer Evolution to Australia for product development". They did not import a seperate motor for testing. Also, under description, for the Sti it lists the motor "US25", for the Evo it lists the car "Evo8" (not 4g63 or US20).

That could be adjusted crank horsepower for the EVO considering Mitsubishi claims 274 bhp. Also, it has been stated that the USDM STi could be producing more horspower than claimed at the crank because of the high numbers (at the wheels) that certain tuners have achieved on their dynos. I just think it is great that they imported both the car and the engine to develop products for the US.:banana:

Originally posted by Broeli
:D Go read each chart carefully. It clearly states that they purchased an Sti and an Sti motor. The Sti motor by itself is what they dynoed ("The above chart shows flywheel power and torque data for the stock US Specification STI running on the equivalent of US 94 (R+M)/2 octane fuel.")
They state: "APS has imported a left hand drive North American Lancer Evolution to Australia for product development". They did not import a seperate motor for testing. Also, under description, for the Sti it lists the motor "US25", for the Evo it lists the car "Evo8" (not 4g63 or US20).

Thanks, I read all that, but it doesn't exactly clarify on the question I asked previously.

The STI chart says it is a dyno dynamics dyno in shootout mode.

I believe that is a software mode designed to derive crank hp from wheel hp.

quote: "APS has fully imported a US specification STI and complete engine for engineering and development purposes."

That doesn't answer the question about how the crank figure was derived; from an engine dyno, or a wheel dyno in shootout mode. That's why I asked.

Also....your statement that the Evo is wheel horsepower is also fuzzy to say the least.

The Evo dyno also says....shootout mode.
Read the graph in the upper left it says S_HP. That's shootout horsepower which = estimated crank horsepower...not wheel horsepower.

Frankly: it looks like both cars were subjected to similar if not identical testing procedures. Could be wrong though...if so, feel free to clarify.

There's no reason why APS would or should use two different methods to get dyno numbers for the STi or EVO. Seems pretty obvious to me...

I believe that is a software mode designed to derive crank hp from wheel hp.
No shootout mode is just a mode that uses no compensation and/or averaging. It provides accurate and more importantly repeatable results. The same vehicle will read the true power on any DD dyno in the world. This allows for a true comparison of power and will remove any ambiguity from figures quoted from different DD dynos in different locations.
The Evo shootout power was derived and shown as whp and the Sti shootout hp was shown as crank. That's all. APS is being contacted though to get more info and clarify a few things :)
Whp for an Evo on a Dyno Dynamics dyno isn't that high, I've typically seen around 240awhp. BUT, I think the Evo chart shown was an Evo with pre-production Unichip (tweaked a/f ratio).

Originally posted by Broeli

The Evo shootout power was derived and shown as whp and the Sti shootout hp was shown as crank.

BUT, I think the Evo chart shown was an Evo with pre-production Unichip (tweaked a/f ratio).

What makes you think one is WHP and the other is crank?

Also, I doubt your last statement since it says "Power and Turbo Boost Pressure of the stock Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution." right under the graph. A unichiped Evo is not a stock one. APS puts "Unichip" in the customer block in a lot of their web dyno sheets.

TRS

Originally posted by Broeli

No shootout mode is just a mode that uses no compensation and/or averaging. It provides accurate and more importantly repeatable results. The same vehicle will read the true power on any DD dyno in the world.

No compensation will not make results more repeatable across different dynos. Temp and atmostpheric pressure make huge differences in power.

For example, if I had a DD dyno at my house (9200ft) and you didn't use any correction factors, I'm pretty sure my readings will always be lower than someone at sea level...makes it hard to compare to any DD dyno in the world.

TRS

Originally posted by Broeli

No shootout mode is just a mode that uses no compensation and/or averaging.

Well, I don't know. But I found this quote from Shiv of Vishnu from an Evo site:

"For those who want to know the facts, Shootout mode is a Dyno Dynamics software feature that estimates flywheel horsepower. That's what the S_HP stands for... Shooutout HP. It basically multiplies actual wheel hp by some predetermined driveline loss factor (1.3-1.4, depending on car and output). While there is some science to it (DD does a lot of engine and chassis dyno testing), it's still an estimate. "cheers, Shiv.

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37248&highlight=shootout+mode+flywheel+horsepower

Shiv was incorrect. Here is a note direct from Dyno Dynamics.
Here's an email I got from Dyno Dynamics this morning:

---------------------------
Dear Shiv,

Steve passed on the link to the EVO forum which I read with interest.

First of all ShootOut mode is not just for flywheel power calculation. Although it does a super job of that. Much better than Coast Down.

The prime objective of ShootOut is to create uniformity of readings from all DD dynos. This is done by causing uniformity of dyno settings (this is done by the software selecting the most appropriate drivetrain inertia and ramp rate for the class of vehicle being tested). The rest is acheived by training our customers (eg. you) in the correct methods of tie down, tire pressure, fan positioning, good ventilation neccesities etc, the list goes on. If you set up the car and the dyno the same and the car is repeatable, the readings will be repeatable, world wide!

One of the members doubted the reality of our readings, because our atmospherics are entered manually. That is why ShootOut prints these manual inputs on the dyno graph. If the operator enters figures that are "slightly" inaccurate, the power variations will be extremely minimal. If howeverthe operator inputs unrealistic figures large enough to significantly effect the power readings, then this will be obvious to anyone who studies the graph.

The principal of ShootOut is to ensure that there is no difference between your dyno, Dyno-Comps dyno, Axis's dyno, or any other Dyno Dynamics dyno run correctly in ShootOut mode.

There will always be some small variations in readings because of the difference in locations therfore conditions that can effect the way the engine management system behaves and it turn the turbocharger system behaves (their behaviour is inherintly linked). No dyno can automatically compensate for this.

It would be interesting to read Shiv's reply, although I'm not sure if anything said in the DD response actually contradicts him. It almost sounds like DD is dissembling. Whatever other value it does/does not have it seems clear that shootout mode is being used to estimate flywheel horsepower. It's whp multiplied by some factor. DD didn't deny that at any point in their reply.

You can get flywheel hp with or without shootout mode. It is just a simple calculation that they use to estimate it. This quote says it: "First of all ShootOut mode is not just for flywheel power calculation. Although it does a super job of that. Much better than Coast Down."
They are telling Shiv that shootout mode is simply a different mode and it was inaccurate to say it was a mode that gives flywheel hp. Shiv said himself that he hadn't used the software...I'm sure Dyno Dynamics knows best :)

Originally posted by Broeli
You can get flywheel hp with or without shootout mode.


LOL. That is exactly what Shiv said and you are making his point. Namely: You can achieve the same result by doing the math.

His point was that if you take the 185-190 whp that he has measured on several Evo's and multiply it by 1.4 -> you get 265 S_hp.

And low and behold if you take the 220+ whp that he has measured for some STI's and do the same, there's your 311 hp.

Originally posted by Broeli

Shiv said himself that he hadn't used the software...I'm sure Dyno Dynamics knows best

I'm not, but even so, nothing said by DD supports your claim that STI shp is flywheel horsepower and Evo shp = wheel horsepower. They are both s_hp = shootout horsepower = est. flywheel horsepower. It doesn't matter that shootout mode is also good for say...baking eggs, calculating taxes or fighting male pattern baldness. :lol: The point is, nowhere does Dyno Dynamics deny that shp is being used to est hp at the crank. Only you deny that, why?

Are you saying that the STI was dynoed on an engine dyno, whereas the Evo was dynoed on an awd wheel dyno?

Does Dyno Dynamics even make an engine dyno?

His point was that if you take the 185-190 whp that he has measured on several Evo's and multiply it by 1.4 -> you get 265 S_hp.

And low and behold if you take the 220+ whp that he has measured for some STI's and do the same, there's your 311 hp
.
Well that isn't really that an accurate statement. If you keep up on the Dyno Dynamics dyno and the Evo you will see that Shiv used incorrect ramp-up and other settings that gave him a variable of whp #'s that were low and inaccurate. He is now making 200-212whp on average. The Evo is making on average 15whp less than the Sti on Shivs Dyno Dynamics dyno now....if you don't believe it call and ask him. So explain why you think all of the sudden the Sti is making 45hp more. :confused:
Think about it a little.
I'm done debating though :D You are very close minded stangerq :)

http://www.vishnutuning.com/lancer.htm

and

"Using Shootout Mode on our dyno, most EVOs are putting down 260-270 hp. And WRX are making 220-230 hp. So, it can be quite accurate.

cheers,
shiv"

Looks like the shootout mode does what it was intended to do here, as Shiv's results match APS'.

TRS

Does Dyno Dynamics even make an engine dyno?
Umm, yes they do. As a matter of fact the printout for the engine dyno looks the same. That is one reason I said it could easily be a whp and crank hp graphs. Afterall they didn't ship over an Sti engine to just look at it. :) They also have a Dyno Dynamics engine dyno. If you would like to read up on Dyno Dynamics here you go. BTW, I linked you to the "shootout" page but there are other good links to take a look at:
http://www.dyno.com.au/shootout.htm

Todd, those are old results using the old method and incorrect ramp-up. Write or call Shiv. Or do a search and you will see his updates. I know what he used to get :)

Originally posted by Broeli

I'm done debating though :D You are very close minded stangerq :)

If I ask questions and you don't answer them, how does that demonstrate close mindedness on my part?

REPEAT: What is your basis for claiming that the STI dyno graph is crank horsepower and the Evo's is wheel horsepower?

This is your contention, and it is has not been supported by anything you've said or by anyone else in this thread.

Unfortunately, you ignore questions you can't answer and substitute with dissembling and insults.

It's not a big deal to me, and if anyone else would care to agree with you, and address the questions.....I'd be more than happy to apologize if you are somehow offended. Or maybe you think everyone else is close minded?

Anyway, insults won't help you. They just show frustration on your part.

Originally posted by Broeli
Todd, those are old results using the old method and incorrect ramp-up. Write or call Shiv. Or do a search and you will see his updates. I know what he used to get :)

If this is regarding:


"Using Shootout Mode on our dyno, most EVOs are putting down 260-270 hp. And WRX are making 220-230 hp. So, it can be quite accurate. cheers, shiv"

The quote is from the 1st of September. When did this change?

It's also odd that on the one hand you support DD's shoot out methods based on their claim that it exists to weed out variables and supply accurate measurement for comparison (hence the name shoot-out)....yet on the other hand, you reject the idea that the Evo and STI measurements are comparable. Which is it?

If there are two kinds of shoot out horsepower...one measuring wheel and the other flywheel, and not to be compared with one another....then does that not defeat DD's stated purpose for S_HP?

If we can't compare S_HP, then on it's own terms...it is a waste of time.

Maybe they should call it don't_shoot horsepower. Or, compared to nothing horsepower, or....... ;)

Originally posted by Broeli

So explain why you think all of the sudden the Sti is making 45hp more. :confused: Think about it a little.


I did.

That is why I initially asked what octane level the Evo was tested on.......

I find it perfectly plausible that a particular Evo may only make 265 (instead of the rated 271) or even less on 91 octane for instance. Don't you?

APS should just stick to wHP to avoid all this confusion!!!

They only really post them for each car to show how their mods increase horsepower on that particular car. It isn't an EVO vs. STI comparison so uhhh.... settle down.

If you look at any of the dyno plots and info on their site they are generally given as Flywheel horsepower. Usually in kW however. I seriously doubt they ran the car on 91 octane gas.

Originally posted by Broeli

The Evo shootout power was derived and shown as whp and the Sti shootout hp was shown as crank.

So it's a stock EVO WHP graph that shows 265 hp......that is some miracle drivetrain you got to only have a 2% loss.

Yea, somebody in this thread isn't making any sense, can't quite put my finger on who though.

Originally posted by dwx
They only really post them for each car to show how their mods increase horsepower on that particular car.

Agreed. That is the only real purpose of a whp dyno, but these dyno's are not whp....they are shp.

The reason Vishnu does not use shp, following their logic, is because it serves no purpose for modding.

From Dyno Dynamics site:

"We developed the ShootOut system to weed out the variables.....provide a reliable form of accurate comparison."

They are most certainly not merely talking about before and after mod comparisons. You don't need a shoot-out mode for that. The idea of a "shoot-out" that is meant to compare one car before and after modding is ridiculous.

You are supposed to be able to compare one shp dyno result to another.

The result is supposed to = crank horsepower.

Here's my conclusion:

If shp is a valid concept the two dyno results are comparable. Indeed they are of little use other than to compare with one another, and the manufacturers horsepower claims.

However: If the two are not comparable then shp is not valid.

If you can't compare.......then get it out of there! :lol:

But you can't have it both ways.

Update. I talked to an engineer at APS. Here is what he said. He said the Sti run was an overall better mix than what we have available here in the US and had a little over 500 miles. The Evo for some reason was run on slightly lower grade fuel and was brand new with about 5 miles. He did state that for that reason the Evo power was lower than what they now see. With correct fuel and now broken-in it is 275-279hp. He said he feels the manufacturers horsepower claims are pretty accurate...some may be a little higher, some a little lower than claimed. They will continue to run the overall better gas mix in the Sti (better than typical US pump) to help avoid detonation and for continued product development.
He is going to change the Evo graph to read stock flywheel hp..and may include the other tidbits of no miles and lower octane fuel used. :D
Looks like I was wrong. I have NO problem admitting when I was wrong. I think that explains the descrepency between the two graphs though ...since Shiv is now seeing the average Evo put down 205whp and the average Sti 220 on the same gas and similar miles.
I may talk to him again today about product development. If anyone wants me to ask him any questions (ref. dyno or products) let me know.

Broeli: Thank you for following up on that.

Originally posted by Broeli
since Shiv is now seeing the average Evo put down 205whp and the average Sti 220 on the same gas and similar miles.


Can you provide a link for that?

TRS

According to the latest news, the VF39 layout will not allow direct-fit replacements such as the other VF series of the APS SR series. This is bad news as adquiring a direct-fit replacement will take even longer as new turbos (or brackets) would have to be made.

Needless to say I'm dissapointed that the current SR-50 will not fit.:mad:

Um they do fit... just have to protect the hose from the TB and the TB from the intercooler hose.

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
Um they do fit... just have to protect the hose from the TB and the TB from the intercooler hose.

We just did 10 dyno pulls in row yesterday with my intercooler hose contacting the throttle body harness connector. Seems to be intact so far. Granted, that's at fairly low boost pressures though, the air isn't too hot.

Oh well, I'd like to go to a reversed intake manifold anyway.

Kevin

well try wrapping the place where the hose contacts the TB with electrical tape. Nice and slick. Might want to do it on the non-hose side since I bet the glue will be horrid to get off the nifty red elbow.

I agree its a non-concern even over several thousand miles. Its when you are talking 100K+ like subaru has to think about that protecting stuff is important.

I know its kinda early still but has anybody tried installing any APS SR series into the STi yet?

Now that debate #1 is resolved, riddle me this. The APS site says that "the turbocharger is airflow limited to approximately 350 flywheel horsepower" and "Side feed 480 cc injectors (350 flywheel horsepower at 11.0:1 A/F ration, 100% duty cycle)." How is this true if Shiv has already reached 370+ on the stock injectors and turbo? I know that Shiv had written that they were at the maximum of the injectors, and that larger ones would be needed to go higher.

Originally posted by PPower
Now that debate #1 is resolved, riddle me this. The APS site says that "the turbocharger is airflow limited to approximately 350 flywheel horsepower" and "Side feed 480 cc injectors (350 flywheel horsepower at 11.0:1 A/F ration, 100% duty cycle)." How is this true if Shiv has already reached 370+ on the stock injectors and turbo? I know that Shiv had written that they were at the maximum of the injectors, and that larger ones would be needed to go higher.

Gee, this sounds like a reversal of the WRX debate between Shiv and APS a few years ago. Who is trying to sell what? APS now has a new manifold for a double injector set-up.

the yellow STi injectors are definitely more than 480cc's. I think subaru rated them at that rate but they actually flow more like 530cc's accordiing to some older thread. That would explain why Shiv is able to push more power out of them. Remember that Shiv has had the STi a bit longer than what APS have even though APS already had a full U.S. STi motor in R&D!

Bottom line, those injectors would have to be replaced to accomodate a standard Stage 2 setup.

Originally posted by zacek
APS should just stick to wHP to avoid all this confusion!!!


No..... They should use Shootout mode like they are supposed to so we can all compare hp levels from different DD dynos. Once you know the stock run number you can see the delta change from the modifications.

If they used Whp then people on the forums would say "So and so got 300whp! The APS car only did 250whp!" Meanwhile So and so has one of the highest reading dynos on the planet and APS has the lowest reading dyno.

C

Originally posted by Alleggerita


Gee, this sounds like a reversal of the WRX debate between Shiv and APS a few years ago. Who is trying to sell what? APS now has a new manifold for a double injector set-up.

Even APS showed 370HP, which is more in line with what Shiv got and what the injectors seem to be good for. Interestingly, Shiv used just an Exede and turbo back. vs the additional front mount and intake.

TRS

Originally posted by AZScoobie



No..... They should use Shootout mode like they are supposed to so we can all compare hp levels from different DD dynos. Once you know the stock run number you can see the delta change from the modifications.

If they used Whp then people on the forums would say "So and so got 300whp! The APS car only did 250whp!" Meanwhile So and so has one of the highest reading dynos on the planet and APS has the lowest reading dyno.

C

he, he! yeah. I guess this would be a more interchangeable format for comparisons.