I bet it will be the first one running 9s. Looking forward to track results too!
Hellion turbo 2015 gt.......949 rwhp!
- Thread starter HELLION TURBO
- Start date
Exactly my point. The correction factor takes into account the atmosphere difference, which makes up a huge part of the correction factor. With NA engines the correction factors are pretty much spot on assuming the dyno is receiving the proper inputs.
With a turbo the wastegate maintains a set manifold absolute pressure. Sure there will be some variations as far as turbo efficiency, the powerband will change slightly, but the MAP is constant over various altitudes given the turbo has the room to make up the difference. Doesn't matter if the elevation is 0ft or 10,000ft. If you see a difference in max boost due to elevation in a turbo car, its most likely due to a variance in turbo efficiency.
If you correct the dyno number at high elevation for a turbo car you are saying it is a giant NA engine and when it goes to sea level there will be a change in MAP, which there won't. The portion of power made by the engine itself will increase at sea level, where as the portion produced by the turbos will decrease. Again there are more variables but we are just making estimates.
If you look up the SAE standards they specifically state that applying the correction factor to turbo cars at high elevations is wrong.
HELLION TURBO
New Member
Hello.
Its very nice to see everyone taking an interest into the details of our dyno pull.
As far as correction factors go, we use SAE corrected numbers for all comparisons.
We have situations where the correction takes the SAE number up, some down. In the winter months, most sea level corrections are negative, (where the power is pulled down from actual ---up to 10 %). At high altitude, we have seen in upwards of a 25% correction (where displayed power is higher, mostly due to the lower density air).
In either case, the SAE number is always very close. This is even true for a turbocharged application. We have seen thousands of dyno sheets from all over the world, and the average power for a set amount of boost is always within an acceptable range for most random chassis dynos (Different brand dynos can read differently, but we are assuming the same dyno in this example). We have dyno tested vehicles in Albuquerque, NM, then driven them straight to sea level and dyno tested them again (with same brand dyno) and been within 5 hp. It is proven accurate time and time again. Different correction numbers, all giving accurate comparisons (which is the purpose, and it works very well).
We do not have the entire data from this particular pull at this time, but we will request it (We were given a single file, no correction numbers).
The internals of the 2015 engine are similar to Boss components, and we (and our dealers) have tested those engines at high altitude and at sea level to over 900 RWHP repeatedly.
If you scroll to 15:56 into video below (our install episode on Engine Power), you can see a 910 hp pull, at lower altitude, on 16 psi. The correction factor was actually negative on this pull (Jan 2013 filming, 20 degrees outside).
http://powernationtv.com/episode/EP2014-07/twin-turbo-coyote
We understand that the actual strain on the engine can differ, but the point to our testing was to show the capability of the system and display the HP potential. We were not intending to emphasize the strength of the engine (although we are very impressed).
Hope this helps.
Its very nice to see everyone taking an interest into the details of our dyno pull.
As far as correction factors go, we use SAE corrected numbers for all comparisons.
We have situations where the correction takes the SAE number up, some down. In the winter months, most sea level corrections are negative, (where the power is pulled down from actual ---up to 10 %). At high altitude, we have seen in upwards of a 25% correction (where displayed power is higher, mostly due to the lower density air).
In either case, the SAE number is always very close. This is even true for a turbocharged application. We have seen thousands of dyno sheets from all over the world, and the average power for a set amount of boost is always within an acceptable range for most random chassis dynos (Different brand dynos can read differently, but we are assuming the same dyno in this example). We have dyno tested vehicles in Albuquerque, NM, then driven them straight to sea level and dyno tested them again (with same brand dyno) and been within 5 hp. It is proven accurate time and time again. Different correction numbers, all giving accurate comparisons (which is the purpose, and it works very well).
We do not have the entire data from this particular pull at this time, but we will request it (We were given a single file, no correction numbers).
The internals of the 2015 engine are similar to Boss components, and we (and our dealers) have tested those engines at high altitude and at sea level to over 900 RWHP repeatedly.
If you scroll to 15:56 into video below (our install episode on Engine Power), you can see a 910 hp pull, at lower altitude, on 16 psi. The correction factor was actually negative on this pull (Jan 2013 filming, 20 degrees outside).
http://powernationtv.com/episode/EP2014-07/twin-turbo-coyote
We understand that the actual strain on the engine can differ, but the point to our testing was to show the capability of the system and display the HP potential. We were not intending to emphasize the strength of the engine (although we are very impressed).
Hope this helps.
I dont believe the numbers are in doubt, its just the stresses being put on the motor more or less. A motor making 900 whp at 5000 ft is working harder than a motor making 900 whp at sea level no? Taking the correction factors into consideration.
Why would a 900hp car (7xxhp actual) at 5,000ft be working harder than one at sea level making 900hp corrected (likely more actual hp)?
Did you mean to type the opposite?
Hellion,
When I get a new 2015 or 2016, I will be highly interested in getting this kit.
With your kit on this car, does it spool up pretty fast?
What boost controller comes standard?
Will your kit come with tune(s)?
Thanks.
When I get a new 2015 or 2016, I will be highly interested in getting this kit.
With your kit on this car, does it spool up pretty fast?
What boost controller comes standard?
Will your kit come with tune(s)?
Thanks.
epper::banana:thats great power from the motor,FORD did a great job with it.check out the video,on youtube called the mad man 160 pt.1,and 2.its a 2015 mustang gt doing 160mph.I'll bet! This car made some SICK numbers! I'll bet it's ALOT of fun!
Nice job Hellion! :thumbsup:
What are they running for a boost controller? Is it a stock automatic too?
Last edited:
How long will the short block hold up at that level.... We'll see
HELLION TURBO
New Member
Hello Freddy,
This car is an unmodified automatic, and we are using a Turbosmart E boost 2 for boost control.
Hi Hellion!
That's Very Impressive that it's an UNmodified Stock A6 trans!
That's a Really Nice boost controller too!
Great job!
Users who are viewing this thread
