TVS Dyno Graph Comparison

[Woody6799]

Just to start off, I do not care about numbers.

My biggest concern, and the reason for starting this thread, it to try to figure out where tq hits on set ups that are comparable to mine. Please post a picture of your dyno sheet as that would be the most helpful for me.

I have a TVS with a GT500 TB, JLT HB, and kooks 1 5/8 headers with a catless H.

As you can see from my chart, I don't get peak tq until 4600 rpms, and I don't really start seeing noticeable tq until 3000 rpms.

On my Eaton Stage 4, (Apples and Oranges, I know) I had fill tq at 1800 RPMs and I loved the instant hit. I know the 2.3 will take longer to spool the hit but does this seam right? I am really considering selling the set up and getting a POSI unit to get back to the insta tq...

 

[gmtech]

No dyno numbers or graphs to support it but I can tell the difference in low rpm torque with the 2.9 whip vs the eaton too.

 

[c6zhombre]

well, there's no question a good running eaton will make great low end TQ...and even a 2.3 spinning sub 20psi is not truly in it's "sweetspot"....however, those 2 dyno graphs you posted, Woody, are not even from the same dyno and are graphically setup with the x/y axis in very distorting looking designs. I think it's very hard with the eye ball to simply look at those 2 graphs and draw a ton of conclusions.

Also....I have been to some dyno shops where the dyno operator really never goes WOT off idle...they will slowly spin it up in 4th and then smash the gas around 3800 to redline and this could "alter" where the peak "should have been" if smashed from the get-go.

I personally would not take that TVS off!

 

[cj428mach]

well, there's no question a good running eaton will make great low end TQ...and even a 2.3 spinning sub 20psi is not truly in it's "sweetspot"....however, those 2 dyno graphs you posted, Woody, are not even from the same dyno and are graphically setup with the x/y axis in very distorting looking designs. I think it's very hard with the eye ball to simply look at those 2 graphs and draw a ton of conclusions.

Also....I have been to some dyno shops where the dyno operator really never goes WOT off idle...they will slowly spin it up in 4th and then smash the gas around 3800 to redline and this could "alter" where the peak "should have been" if smashed from the get-go.

I personally would not take that TVS off!

I agree, I think I'd give it more boost.

 

[Woody6799]

well, there's no question a good running eaton will make great low end TQ...and even a 2.3 spinning sub 20psi is not truly in it's "sweetspot"....however, those 2 dyno graphs you posted, Woody, are not even from the same dyno and are graphically setup with the x/y axis in very distorting looking designs. I think it's very hard with the eye ball to simply look at those 2 graphs and draw a ton of conclusions.

Also....I have been to some dyno shops where the dyno operator really never goes WOT off idle...they will slowly spin it up in 4th and then smash the gas around 3800 to redline and this could "alter" where the peak "should have been" if smashed from the get-go.

I personally would not take that TVS off!

I agree, I think I'd give it more boost.

I am on 93 so there is really only so far I can go. I have a 2.8 I can toss on and with the LT's I should be seeing about 19# with that set up. I know the charts are different, they are not for true comparison, just more or less to illustrate my point of the early onset of tq. I just want to know if what my car is doing is "normal" or if I should be seeing tq sooner.

 

[whitedevil95]

My Whipple 2.3 hits over 500ftlb from the start of the pull at like 2800-6500rpm. I dont see why your set up would be any different. I bet in order to avoid spinning on the dyno he tips into the throttle and that explains the slow start.

 

[98 Saleen Cobra]

For 1, T/S don't spool..

For 2, Add gears and you'll be happy.. don't go swapping for a less efficient setup.

 

[evolve]

For 1, T/S don't spool..

For 2, Add gears and you'll be happy.. don't go swapping for a less efficient setup.

This man knows what hes talking about.

 

[R.D.P.]

My Whipple is over 500whtq at 2350 and peaks 548 at 3700. On my graph you can see he nails it at about 1800 and the torque shoots straight up. That's the way it feels on the street also. When I went Whipple I was worried about the torque hit, and there is a little different feel for sure, but on my setup at least I like it better.

Just throwing this out there - it could be the way your car is tuned. I remember a thread that was talking about timing and I think I remember it being said that if you limit the max timing below a certain rpm, that it's easier on the engine, but doing so will decrease the low end tq and most tuners don't do it - but maybe yours did? Just a possible theory...

 

[Woody6799]

My Whipple is over 500whtq at 2350 and peaks 548 at 3700. On my graph you can see he nails it at about 1800 and the torque shoots straight up. That's the way it feels on the street also. When I went Whipple I was worried about the torque hit, and there is a little different feel for sure, but on my setup at least I like it better.

Just throwing this out there - it could be the way your car is tuned. I remember a thread that was talking about timing and I think I remember it being said that if you limit the max timing below a certain rpm, that it's easier on the engine, but doing so will decrease the low end tq and most tuners don't do it - but maybe yours did? Just a possible theory...

The tq hit you have with the whipple is what I was expecting out of the TVS with everyone pumped about the tq being a monster. Maybe its just the way I am driving it but I expected it to me torquier than it is right now. I am thinking about having it retuned with the 2.8 but I am worried about overboosting on 93. Ideally, I'd like the tq to hit at 2500 so I am trying to figure out how I can achieve it. I will look into the timing theory you put up.

 

[Bdubbs]

Here is my old dyno graph, but with tvs and headers. I wasn't happy with it at all lol. you can see my torque hold steady from 3k-6k. Don't mind the spark blowout up top either. That torque is also low only reading 509 ft/lbs for peak. Temps were nearly 85* degrees outside and the shop did it when I wasn't even there. Who knows it could have been heat soaked as well.

 

[Woody6799]

bump, anyone else?

 

[c6zhombre]

The tq hit you have with the whipple is what I was expecting out of the TVS with everyone pumped about the tq being a monster. Maybe its just the way I am driving it but I expected it to me torquier than it is right now. I am thinking about having it retuned with the 2.8 but I am worried about overboosting on 93. Ideally, I'd like the tq to hit at 2500 so I am trying to figure out how I can achieve it. I will look into the timing theory you put up.

Most the guys raving about the TQ are running torco with the pump gas. This would allow the tuner to dial the timing earlier in the rev band. Your tuner is most likely doing exactly what he should....he's erring on the side of caution with pure pump gas. This is also one of the reasons E85 is so desirable....the tuner can dial up many more degrees of overall timing (even way past torco) and MUCH earlier in the band.

 

[Five-o-Joe]

My 2.3 whipple has a stock lower and a 2.76 upper. It makes over 550rwtq at 2300 and peaks at 593. Power is 625 rwhp and 17.5 psi. This is on straight 93 octane, no octane boost and no race gas. Runs 111+ in the 1/8th

 

[Woody6799]

Most the guys raving about the TQ are running torco with the pump gas. This would allow the tuner to dial the timing earlier in the rev band. Your tuner is most likely doing exactly what he should....he's erring on the side of caution with pure pump gas. This is also one of the reasons E85 is so desirable....the tuner can dial up many more degrees of overall timing (even way past torco) and MUCH earlier in the band.

I don't want to be locked into torco and there is no E85 around here or that would be a no brainer with a 2.6 pulley and I'd be off like a rocket... but I don't have that option. I am at 17# now with the 3" and the 2.8" should land me about 19# but I am worried about the 93. I want to build a motor soon but not tomorrow. I am about half an inch away from going to a different tuner but don't want to waste the money if my car is doing what it is supposed to be.

I am still really playing with the idea of selling it and going POSI with cams...

My 2.3 whipple has a stock lower and a 2.76 upper. It makes over 550rwtq at 2300 and peaks at 593. Power is 625 rwhp and 17.5 psi. This is on straight 93 octane, no octane boost and no race gas. Runs 111+ in the 1/8th

You have a chart for this or more details. I would love to see how its all put together.

 

[Five-o-Joe]

Sure. If you want to PM me your number I'll send you the graph..

It's a teksid block with cams and long tubes, and cats. Let me know what else you would like to know...

 

[c6zhombre]

My 2.3 whipple has a stock lower and a 2.76 upper. It makes over 550rwtq at 2300 and peaks at 593. Power is 625 rwhp and 17.5 psi. This is on straight 93 octane, no octane boost and no race gas. Runs 111+ in the 1/8th

I see you said it has cams and teksid block, too...but regardless thats great for 93!! What compression is the motor? How much boost are you seeing with the 2.76 and stock lower?

No desire to run E85? Seems like you could make near 90/90 more

 

[Bdubbs]

I personally would NEVER sell my tvs for a posi heaton.

 

[c6zhombre]

I don't want to be locked into torco and there is no E85 around here or that would be a no brainer with a 2.6 pulley and I'd be off like a rocket... but I don't have that option. I am at 17# now with the 3" and the 2.8" should land me about 19# but I am worried about the 93. I want to build a motor soon but not tomorrow. I am about half an inch away from going to a different tuner but don't want to waste the money if my car is doing what it is supposed to be.

I am still really playing with the idea of selling it and going POSI with cams...
.

You're one of the few thats been disappointed. Not sure what to think....maybe a retune is worth a shot before pulling it off? Try 04sleeper for the tune, as long as you don't mind sending logs and going remote (its easy, trust me, he's awesome to work with and a wealth of knowledge on these cars!).

But nothing wrong with a posi eaton considering your fuel restrictions. I'm sure it will still be plenty of TQ fun and who cares if it can't spin 20+psi when you have no easy or inexpensive access to other fuels.....I say go for it!

 

[c6zhombre]

I personally would NEVER sell my tvs for a posi heaton.

you better not! lol

I'm looking forward to the high psi driving impressions! I'm also going to start a dyno gofundme page for you so you do indeed get that thing back on that identical roller one more time! I know you're not chasing a number....but I really would like to see it LOL