I'd appreciate input from CTSC 9PSI owners

[McAttack]

I'm currently running the CTSC w/9psi upgrade, CT Intake, CT Headers, CT Exhaust on my '99 3.2 DynoJet run on June 29th showed 345.7 hp and 251.6 lb of torque. I thought this was low given the dyno chart on CT's site showed 367 hp for the 6psi but wrote it off assuming different dyno, very hot and muggy on the 29th and the A/F ratio being off. HOWEVER, after tuning and tweaking, a dyno run today showed 345.9 hp, virtually the exact same #'s Temp was a cool 63 degrees.

Is 345 rwhp "normal" for the CT 9psi? While it was lean the first time, it now was at 12.5 which is pretty dead on. My mechanic has suggested adjusting the TPS. I wasn't sure if it may be the timing. Any thoughts?

I was hoping for about 365-370 rwhp pre NOS.(I have a 50 shot) Is this unrealistic? Not for nothing but if there is an extra 20 hp "hidden," I'd welcome any help finding it.

Thanks

 

[David Allen]

346RWHP sounds about right. Remember, Comptech exagerates quite a bit on their numbers. My 3.2L with a SC, Intake, Headers and Exhaust was pushing 324RWHP before Mark Basch did his magic (I'm ~345RWHP at 1500 feet and 90 degrees). If I recall, the 9psi kit adds ~20RWHP.

I believe Comptech claims ~365RWHP with their 6psi SC on a 3.2. NOBODY has ever gotten anything close to those numbers AFAIK.

------------------
David Allen
'00 Silverstone NSX-T
Comptech SC, Headers, Intake, Exhaust & a little Mark Basch tweakage

 

[4AU4LIFE]

Boy I'm happy I went with the BBSC !!!!
Best bang for the buck in my book !!

------------------
ALL NSX
92 RED/BLACK 5-SPEED

 

[Number9]

Zanardi #10 dynoed 355 RWHP with CT sc/i/h/e at 6 psi. Zanardi #9 dynoed at 360 RWHP with just CTSC and high boost kit. Both dynojet (at different dynos and neither at CTs optimistic dyno). Both have better torque than the BBSCs out to 6.5K RPM (and worse thereafter) and both were worked on by Mark B at times. Not entirely apples-to-apples comparison because of the 3.2L vs. 3.0L thing.

[This message has been edited by Number9 (edited 27 July 2002).]

 

[Vytas]

Mike Niday's 92 Comptech supercharged NSX with Comptech headers and exhuast (stock airbox) and 9psi boost kit, put out 360RWH. Prior to that, it was 340. Roughly a 20RWH gain. I believe he has more than 20K miles on his NSX using the CT boost kit with no problems to date and he drives his car hard.

See specs at: http://northwest.nsxca.org/mikedyno.html

Vytas

 

[nsx1164]

Originally posted by Vytas:
Mike Niday's 92 Comptech supercharged NSX with Comptech headers and exhuast (stock airbox) and 9psi boost kit, put out 360RWH.

See specs at: http://northwest.nsxca.org/mikedyno.html

Just as important, if not moreso, his torque curve is pretty linear -- at 2200 rpm he has more than a stock motor, and hits a peak at around 4400 rpm (264 ft-lb RWT ) and again at around, where it levels off in the upper 250s to low 260s -- that's comparable with a 360 Modena (275 at crank)

 

[Roy]

I have a 3.0 with the CTSC and high boost kit. I have Comptech headers, exhaust, and stock air box. I had my car dyno’ed on a Mustang dyno and measured 330 hp at the wheels. I would expect that since you started out with 20 extra hp that you should still have an extra 20 hp (350 hp). The dyno what I used was just calibrated by a factory technician the week I was there.

I would expect that your output was about right, maybe a hint lower than average, but the dyno numbers are just that…numbers. Dynos do not all measure the same. I have heard of wildly inaccurate dyno readings (40-50 hp too high).

It would be nice to require that dynos be calibrated periodically since the owners are charging for a service, but cannot verify the accuracy of their measurements.

 

[McAttack]

Wait.....am I missing something?

Your responses are stating 345rwhp for the CTSC 9psi is about right yet these threads are also stating you are getting the same OR MORE HP with the 6psi. I'm confused.

Granted CT dyno figures would give me about 387rwhp which is optimistic to say the least or perhaps it's their dyno (I did my runs on a DynoJet) but I'm putting much more credence in owners (your) actual numbers which shows I'm clearly missing 15-20 HP somewhere.

What did Mark Basch do to "find" 20 more hp on an existing setup?

Given the $$$ I spent to get 70hp for the SC upgrade and 50 shot of NOS, 15-20HP "for free" would be nice.....again any thoughts?

Thanks in advance.

McAttack

 

[Number9]

The non-N2O dyno plot you posted in your other thread looks pretty nice, except you have an anomolous lean condition in the low revs and a slightly lean condition after 7.5K RPM (at about 13:1), so you might pick up a bit of HP if you get that down to something nearer 12:1. Also, you probably want it a tad richer than you have it currently at max power just for safety margin, since you're not running an intercooler/aftercooler. As a practical matter, you need to shift just after 7.5K RPM anyway so as not to hit the rev limiter, so optimizing the last 500 RPM for HP isn't really important, though you should check with a knowledgeable tech/tuner to see if a 13:1 A/F ratio is a problem from a reliability standpoint, especially now that we're well into the summer season.

[This message has been edited by Number9 (edited 29 July 2002).]

 

[McAttack]

Originally posted by Number9:
The non-N2O dyno plot you posted in your other thread looks pretty nice, except you have an anomolous lean condition in the low revs and a slightly lean condition after 7.5K RPM (at about 13:1), so you might pick up a bit of HP if you get that down to something nearer 12:1. Also, you probably want it a tad richer than you have it currently at max power just for safety margin, since you're not running an intercooler/aftercooler. As a practical matter, you need to shift just after 7.5K RPM anyway so as not to hit the rev limiter, so optimizing the last 500 RPM for HP isn't really important, though you should check with a knowledgeable tech/tuner to see if a 13:1 A/F ratio is a problem from a reliability standpoint, especially now that we're well into the summer season.

[This message has been edited by Number9 (edited 29 July 2002).]

THIS is good info! THANK YOU

FYI, we did make the adjustments on the a/f and brought it down to about 12.5 (CT suggested not going much lower). My mechanic plans to call Shad at CT this week to adjust the TPS. He was told Shad would have the exact ##'s to adjust it for peak gain.

So I guess my thought on the timing is N/A?

Hope to hear back on this but regardless, thanks again for your input.

------------------