[Ben]

I don't drive in the rain on the track. If there is any chance of rain, we reschedule. Luckily, I live in California, so of the 50 or so track days I've scheduled over the years, none of them ever had any rain.

[STi_4_Daddy]

all I gotta say is WOW .. not to suck up or kiss your rear end but DAMN you are an inspiration to all subaru owners

[evodon84]

Ben I don't know how you can own that car and only drive it on the track

talk about temptation

[spazegun2213]

Originally Posted by Ben

I don't drive in the rain on the track. If there is any chance of rain, we reschedule. Luckily, I live in California, so of the 50 or so track days I've scheduled over the years, none of them ever had any rain.

ben your car would ROCK in the rain!! i would love to see your friends in their porsches try to keep up with you in the rain!!

either way, if i come out to the left coast I'll make sure to stop by and get a ride!!

nice going ben! but I'm sure the weight loss plan will not end there

[Ver7wannabe]

So what was the actual weight reduction from changing the lights?

[Rac10000]

Originally Posted by Ver7wannabe

So what was the actual weight reduction from changing the lights?

I am pretty sure it was 9 pounds total.

[Ben]

Originally Posted by Ver7wannabe

So what was the actual weight reduction from changing the lights?

9 pounds.

Stock STI Headlight: 6.5 lbs
Hollowed out WRX Headlights: 2 lbs
Net reduction: 4.5 lbs x 2 lights = 9 lbs.

[Ben]

Hey guys, just letting you know I have lots of stock parts for sale from my car. If you're interested, go to:

http://www.iwsti.com/forums/showthre...774#post731774

[Ben]

Alright guys, here's the dyno graph (click to enlarge):



Stage 2 Base Map (91): 280WHP / 300WTQ
Protune Map (110): 307WHP / 379WTQ

Also, here's the same graph with the Air/Fuel Ratio shown below it (click to enlarge):



As you can see, we picked up 27whp and 79wtq over the base Stage 2 map on a completely stock motor other than a Cobb TBE. This was pretty damn good considering the first run was done first thing in the morning with a cold engine / intercooler and the last run was done 2 hours later when it was 13 degrees hotter outside with a hot engine / heatsoaked intercooler.

There were a few graphs where the car made more WHP (when it was cooler) but we wanted to get the car somewhere near normal race conditions (HOT) to see what the actual HP would be instead of making numbers on the dyno that you would never see again in real life.

The one major thing I noticed that was different than my graphs compared to other people the day was that my HP curve between 4700 and 6000 was almost flat. Other dyno graphs seemed to build up to a peak value and quickly drop off, whereas on this graph the peak power of ~300whp is there from 4700 all the way to 6000. Is the Carbon Fiber Driveshaft responsible for this? I'm not sure, but that's my best guess.

It's also worth noting that from 4000 all the way to redline the car makes 275whp or more, which was almost the PEAK value previously.

The last thing I noticed was that the cars running meth kits + pump gas made similar or slightly more WHP (anywhere from 305 to 315 whp) but made about 20-40 less WTQ (340 to 360 wtq).

[Swine]

Originally Posted by Ben

Alright guys, here's the dyno graph (click to enlarge):



Stage 2 Base Map (91): 280WHP / 300WTQ
Protune Map (110): 307WHP / 379WTQ

As you can see, we picked up 27whp and 79wtq over the base Stage 2 map on a completely stock motor other than a Cobb TBE. This was pretty damn good considering the first run was done first thing in the morning with a cold engine / intercooler and the last run was done 2 hours later when it was 13 degrees hotter outside with a hot engine / heatsoaked intercooler.

There were a few graphs where the car made more WHP (when it was cooler) but we wanted to get the car somewhere near normal race conditions (HOT) to see what the actual HP would be instead of making numbers on the dyno that you would never see again in real life.

The one major thing I noticed that was different than my graphs compared to other people the day was that my HP curve between 4700 and 6000 was almost flat. Other dyno graphs seemed to build up to a peak value and quickly drop off, whereas on this graph the peak power of ~300whp is there from 4700 all the way to 6000. Is the Carbon Fiber Driveshaft responsible for this? I'm not sure, but that's my best guess.

It's also worth noting that from 4000 all the way to redline the car makes 275whp or more, which was almost the PEAK value previously.

The last thing I noticed was that the cars running meth kits + pump gas made similar or slightly more WHP (anywhere from 305 to 315 whp) but made about 20-40 less WTQ (340 to 360 wtq).

What dyno did you dyno on. Do you have a theory as to why your car did so well, could it be the unsprung mass reduction?

Oh yeah, headlights need holes with velocity stacks in them for some more ducting to the engine/brakes/ic/intake/something.

Nice dood.

[Ben]

It was done on a dynojet intertia based dyno (says Dynojet Research on the top of the graph ).

I was told by Doug that they are very accurate and read 2-3% lower than load based dynos, but I'm not a dyno expert .

My only theory was the CF driveshaft and lightweight rotors. Both of those *should* make the wheels easier to spin...All of the other weight loss wouldn't have any effect on a dyno since the car isn't actually moving.

[Swine]

Originally Posted by Ben

It was done on a dynojet intertia based dyno (says Dynojet Research on the top of the graph ).

I was told by Doug that they are very accurate and read 2-3% lower than load based dynos, but I'm not a dyno expert .

.

Cool, as we know from many different discussions dynos cannot be compared between one another... but making similar numbers as alky injected cars is proof enough that this sucker is abnormally strong.

Your car is begging for a high reving built 2.5 with a .83 35r. I would say 30r but i dont know if it would support a 2.5liter motor to 8k.

[409industries]

Sick numbers Ben... totally amped on the 380 ftlbs of torque...

So whats next? alky injection or just run 110 gas all the time???

[Ben]

Originally Posted by 409industries

Sick numbers Ben... totally amped on the 380 ftlbs of torque...

So whats next? alky injection or just run 110 gas all the time???

No alky for me... 110 all the time unless the track doesn't sell it, then I have my 285 whp / 340 wtq 91 octane map.

Alky would be great for the street but it's a bit of a safety problem for the track. After a discussion with Doug he said he would rather run 110 at the track than alchohol, so I'm just going to stick with it.

Other than eventually frying the 02 sensors, the leaded gas is fine. It burns ALOT cooler than 100 unleaded, I was fairly impressed. Running cool & consistent is the name of the game, for me atleast.

[spazegun2213]

Originally Posted by Ben

No alky for me... 110 all the time unless the track doesn't sell it, then I have my 285 whp / 340 wtq 91 octane map.

Alky would be great for the street but it's a bit of a safety problem for the track. After a discussion with Doug he said he would rather run 110 at the track than alchohol, so I'm just going to stick with it.

Other than eventually frying the 02 sensors, the leaded gas is fine. It burns ALOT cooler than 100 unleaded, I was fairly impressed. Running cool & consistent is the name of the game, for me atleast.

yea, if an alky pump fails on the track.. kiss your engine goodbye!

ben, thoes ae some GREAT numbers. Now you should really give your friends in their GT3's a run for their money!!!