BA XR6T - 480rwkw+ - Currently @ 10.05. 9s knocking in Oct13

by **misk** » September 22nd, 2011, 10:32 pm : **iCER Likes this post**

not really, but picking on icer is fun

by **iCER** » September 22nd, 2011, 11:30 pm

cheers! Coming along nicely.

by **iCER** » December 7th, 2011, 11:34 pm

put car back on the dyno with the new AMS 1000 installed. Ready to go racing. Car has made 436rwkw on 23.6psi on the soft tune thats on the street. Currently making an aggresive race tune for the track and chasing about 28-29psi. Car ran out of fuel and so far is on 456rwkw. So hopefully tomorrow i pick it up with some 470rwkw~ numbers and smash into the 600rwhp / 800hp mark!

See how we go.

Will keep me entertained till the powerglide setup in the 4sp BTR that bayswater is building is ready early next year! Will be the next best thing for us 4sp btr boys with big power!

by **Ef_frmnt** » December 7th, 2011, 11:38 pm

powerglide setup in 4sp BTR?? im confused here...

by **iCER** » December 8th, 2011, 12:03 am

more to come!!!!!!!

just some powerglide parts will be fitted to strengthen up the c1 clutch in the 4sp btr. They were showing me some plates they are making and stuff. Still a while off anyway.

by **Parfrey** » December 8th, 2011, 12:18 am

Nice to see some more development going into the btr. Does yours have treated or tuffer planiteries in it? You going to stick with the btr?

by **Mr_4.0** » December 8th, 2011, 6:55 am

A lot of the btr's longevity is in the auto strategy.

by **Mr. CVE** » December 8th, 2011, 7:01 am

While my car wasn't making the top end power of yours, it did make heaps of power down low, over 300 rwkw under 3000 rpm.
I had my BTR built and converter made from a billet core and was fine.

There are ways to keep them running well fluid / clutch wise, and parts are available for the physical strength side of them.

by **justa6** » December 8th, 2011, 7:09 am

thats still standard (sorta) turbo isn't it. it's doing well.

by **Mr. CVE** » December 8th, 2011, 7:19 am

justa6 wrote:thats still standard (sorta) turbo isn't it. it's doing well.

Huh, Sorry don't get what you mean ?

Was a turbo V8. so had the V8 box.
but had parts from other versions, it had an AU pump or planetry, a different pump, valve body was done, plus all the normal crap.
and the ecu was done to set it up properly as well.

by **Mr_4.0** » December 8th, 2011, 7:33 am

I think he meant icer has a stockish turbo.

Yer I agree Paul. They can be built quite strong. Cost a bit but can be done. There's a bit of a mix and match of parts to do it but it's possible.

The tune plays such a big part. All of settings and tourqe reductions that can be modified to keep the box running and not cost you power are so important.

by **justa6** » December 8th, 2011, 7:49 am

sorry paul, i was refering to icer's turbo..

by **Mr. CVE** » December 8th, 2011, 7:53 am

It's all cool

by **iCER** » December 8th, 2011, 9:18 am

all turbo really has is t04z internals and external gated. Dont know anyone who has pushed it as hard as I have though. But then again, go on certain dyno's and get 100rwkw more. Id like to say it is the fastest low mount/t3 out there. See how we go when we go to the track!

Might have to go back to cve and re-dyno the car just for a back to back.

And the auto's still goign under R&D to make em last. The C1 is the weakest link in my auto so bayswater are implementing the pglide internals to see if they can rectify that! :thumbsup:

Tune has everything to do with lasting auto. Also fresh oil, finned trans pan, trans cooler and no flicking into 4th gear at high rpm!

Hopefully get some more numbers this morning...

by **iCER** » December 8th, 2011, 11:04 am

Car ended up maxing out at 24psi on stock exhaust manifold. Car ended up at with 463rwkw (751hp). Thats enough for now till end of next year i think as now im in the process of building 4 houses...funds will be scarce! Street tune will be 440-450rwkw

Ill pick up car and dyno sheets tonight.

by **juiceman** » December 8th, 2011, 11:54 am

Congrats for sticking with a low mount turbo and getting results. The 10.5@137 speaks for itself really.
I guy I know with an F6 up here in Brisbane made 1031hp two days ago which is impressive, however, he's using a GTX45 and it would no doubt be completely rubbish off the line and only good for a big mph. I have no physical proof of it being slow off the line, just using logic haha.

Sensible turbo is the way to go :-)

by **iCER** » December 8th, 2011, 3:09 pm

hah ye cryptcs car. im still 250hp off! lol

but thats it for me. Big dollars are needed for next step. himount + t4 + turbo, new zorst and will need to port head and fit cams....

fark that lol. Hopefully i can pip a 9 in with full slicks and race tune!

by **67rce** » December 8th, 2011, 4:05 pm

iCer, 460rwkw is 650rwhp NOT 750!

by **Rollin** » December 8th, 2011, 7:44 pm

Stock turbo manifold? Jeebus that's doing well.

You should put a 6boost manifold on there and see how much difference it makes...

by **TUFED6** » December 8th, 2011, 10:17 pm

Has it still only got one 044? Must be at the limits of that bad boy now.

by **OMY-747** » December 8th, 2011, 10:35 pm

His on e85 isn't he? Couldn't be a single 044 at those powers on e85 surely

by **NUT347** » December 8th, 2011, 11:30 pm

That's alot of power! Well done!

Tufed6, he upgraded to twin 044s a while ago.

Might just say, the heat that cast manifold must push out can't be good!

by **justa6** » December 9th, 2011, 5:50 am

is it a bit low for a twin cam on 24psi and e85. or is it due to the turbo being a bit smaller, and stock manifold.

by **RSWEPN** » December 9th, 2011, 8:36 am

justa6 wrote:is it a bit low for a twin cam on 24psi and e85. or is it due to the turbo being a bit smaller, and stock manifold.

I think the power is fine for the boost/fuel. He is using an auto/stally which will give a lower power figure.

by **Rollin** » December 9th, 2011, 8:47 am : **Mr_4.0 Likes this post**

The manifold will be holding it back a lot I reckon. Can't remember how much boost Fritzz is using but pretty sure it's less than iCER - Fritzz has a manual and a much bigger turbo and manifold, which explains the difference.

I'd guess 50-100hp would be gained by bigger turbo and a proper exhaust manifold.

by **OMY-747** » December 9th, 2011, 9:01 am

I would say the turbo and manifold are restricting are fair bit. But regardless it's awesome power especially on a turbo of that size

by **iCER** » December 9th, 2011, 10:58 am

its 750hp not 750 rwhp. ITs about 630rwhp or so?

the turbo still has another 5psi to go so its not limiting anything yet. If i port the log manifold i may get more, but id rather just go a 6boost as it will cost the same. Im using a twin 044 setup on the surge tank.

Yes im using e85 only for now.

If i went a big turbo and manifold, id get 600rwkw+ no worries. But id have to port the head and do cams as well. For all this and a retune im looking at over 10 for all parts new, labour and retune. or about 7k if i can find second hand GOOD stuff. Id go at LEAST a GTX4294 or bigger only. Still a street car so cant go to laggy. But again, we revisit this in 12 months. If i can run a 9 with stock log manifold and just a t04z internal wheel, people will be saving a heap of money that dont need to go into the hi mounts and 5k$ turbos. So hopefully this setup will allow people to see you dont need 600rwkw to run a 9 and that virtually stock turbo setups can still run 9s everyday with the right efficient setup. Mind you would be cheaper to just get a gt45 and himount with a stock motor and just crank the boost up...but that wont turn out well lol.

Its like everyone...you have your own goals. Brocky is sticking with an NA, others have 700rwkw but never go down the track as they are dyno whores...i want to run a 9 with stocking turbo setup no NOS on ET streets....im getting close! Also I share everything with the public about my car. My R&D is shared unlike all those others with stupid power/fast cars. I want to help people as much as possible so they save their cash on their setup's.

If i can run a 9, i wont be upgrading anything else!

Car is up and running with the built motor. Now runs an AMS 1000. Will play around with it and its 'launch control' settings. Even will work well flooring it on the streets with my ETs if need be. Leaving off at 15psi and not getting wheel spin with 450+rwkw on the street will be awesome...anyway ill keep you all posted how it works out.

Car has been redynoed:

Red line is with exhaust on. Need to change gears at about 5500rpm for max efficiency. Blue line is exhaust off or when i change the cat back to somethign bigger. Rev's out to 7000rpm at max power!

So if anyone has a good exhaust for sale or wants a quieter exhaust over there 4" Im happy to swap my quiet APS 3.5" cat back. I just need CAT back.

Car is now about 750hp at the fly and if i want to go anymore i neeed to spend millions! Next step is cams + head port and 6boost manifold with a big turbo...forget that for at least 12 months as im building 4 houses atm!

Might get a NOS setup though... cheap power

And i can blow the welds of my intake y0!

If i ran 10.5 @ 137+mph with 420rwkw with boost gremlins, im hoping i can NUDGE in the 9s with a perfect run on 463 and with over 5psi stall launches.

Hopefully i can go down to the 1.55< 60" with the current setup, maybe pop in 142mph and net a 9.95 or so...without anything breaking.

Ahhh..the dreams...

I dont know any other stock low mount setup that has this much power nor this quick. Anyone know of anyone? We have maxed out the lowmount to 24psi and cant go over 463rwkw (through the stall). If the rule of thump 10rwkw stolen per 100rwkw in he convertor, then there is a genuine 500rwkw that can go through the stock log manifold. This is all at 24psi only. Turbo efficiency is 28-29psi... (stock ba turbo with t04z wheel only).

I think she is doing well for now!

by **Parfrey** » December 9th, 2011, 11:27 am

Interesting to see the restriction of a 3.5in exhaust.
Isn't 137mph = to a low 10? so a 9 should be pretty achievable?

Also aren't FG exhaust manifiolds better than BA? could be a cheap option if it did become a restriction.

by **iCER** » December 9th, 2011, 11:45 am

i think they are the same. The INLET manifold is better on the FGs and worth replacing.

137mph is a low 10. If i could stall boost over 5psi and launch, i would of done a 10.3. 2nd to 3rd gear was flaring so lost .1 or so there too...gremlins here and there....but i was wrapped getting in the 10s so yeah. As i said, a perfect run should bet me a 9

by **EBOOST** » December 9th, 2011, 4:03 pm

yeah ive heard that fg exhaust manifolds are better also??

uve done well with it mate.
cheers josh.

by **bentls** » December 9th, 2011, 5:11 pm

the fg ex manifold is a bit different but i doubt it would give u much of a gain, id just wait and get a 6boost and bigger turbo later...

also why do you think you need cams next stage? xft ran 608rwkw with stock cams and swear by them...

by **Mr. CVE** » December 9th, 2011, 5:19 pm

MPH on turbo cars are often higher for the ET. especially if you run a boost controller like what Icer has.
I am the same leave on low boost and bring the power in as it goes down the track. thats how i run 170 mph but at only 8.5 for the ET.

Oh and congrats Icer on the progress.

by **Rollin** » December 9th, 2011, 5:21 pm

Power curve looks really good - the shape does indicate that a lot more top end is available if you swap a few bits and pieces, but the area under the curve is awesome.

IIRC you have an external gate, is it plumbed back? If it is, you might be able to keep the 3.5" exhaust if you use a nice big screamer - not sure if you'd want to go that way...but I would haha.

I can understand why you're trying to get into the 9s with the stock manifold and sorta stock turbo, was just putting them up as reasons the power output appears 'low' to some people for the boost you're using, compared to some SOHC motors (which are infinitely better

).

by **iCER** » December 9th, 2011, 5:40 pm

we need to remember with same boost you can make more power with e85. if i had same setup and same boost on 98 id make less power. You can get more timing with the e85.

If i can get an even BIGGER ET CVE thats mint. I was aiming for 141-142mph with all this extra power, does that mean i might get 143-146mph? slower then others who run the same mph though?

As for stock cams, i think i can push them more if i went bigger turbo etc. But would be cheaper power. Will cost me about 2k for new cams, porting head and retune. Or nos, all done for about 1500$. Or turbo+mani for 5k+!

by **OMY-747** » December 9th, 2011, 5:58 pm

Another thing I'm liking is that your still using the 4 speed btr. Really showing what can be achieved without going overboard

by **Dansedgli** » December 9th, 2011, 6:01 pm : **bentls Likes this post**

iCER wrote:. If i can run a 9 with stock log manifold and just a t04z internal wheel, people will be saving a heap of money that dont need to go into the hi mounts and 5k$ turbos. So hopefully this setup will allow people to see you dont need 600rwkw to run a 9 and that virtually stock turbo setups can still run 9s everyday with the right efficient setup.

Wasn't this done like 6 years ago with inflyt?

by **iCER** » December 9th, 2011, 6:51 pm

yep. 9.98 once off.

420rwkw only!

Mind you it was gutted completely and on c16 with a glide, 6b00st himount and big turbo and on full slicks and FRs.

I will have none of the above.

im a stockish turbo setup and just a btr on et streets!

Whole setup would cost people 5k not 50k. Mind you no other tuner has done the same setup bar Dion @ dyno-mite. He has done Clinic's 4sp btr running 9s though.

With a Dion tune(800), 4sp btr kit from preston/bayswater (3300 drive in/out), turbo t04z + external gate setup ($2500 in/out) and 600$ for some etstreets will get you close to 9s for about $6k-7k. Nothing special in my setup. twin feed rail with twin 044 off the surge tank, plenum, cooler kit + airbox and id 2000s and exhaust system.

The above with a stock bf post 06/06 motor you can get a low 10. When i put the built motor in, i got 20rwkw cause we put more boost in.

stock rear end bar ssl's. stock front end just SLs. There is all the RnD for you!

by **bentls** » December 9th, 2011, 6:56 pm

why dont you run stock springs at the track? if anything you will be less likely to snap cv's

edit: also a big call but i reckon i could run a 10.x in a b series for under 15k including purchase price.

by **OMY-747** » December 9th, 2011, 7:31 pm

I thought inflyt ran the time on btr and stock exhaust manifold and turbo on c16? I looked at buying it when it was last for sale with a fresh powerglide in it

Edit - here

http://calaisturbo.com.au/showthread.php?t=220699

by **iCER** » December 9th, 2011, 7:40 pm

i could go stock springs, but thats not how i run it on the street. One of my main goals is to run it on the track how i run it on the street. And yes, i run on the street with ET STREETS on the back at ALL times. Except to dynos/tuner

I recon a 10.99 is achievable for 10k even for someone without doing any work.

deka 80s 500$ fitted
btr 4sp kit $3500 fitted
x3 + tune $1600
internal fuel pump $250 fitted
cooler kit 1500 fitted
plenum 1500 fitted
turbo ported, flapper, actuator $600
valve springs $800 fitted

with e85 you can get an extra 20rwkw or 30-40rwkw with c16. Say one 200L drum for tuning and race bout 450$.

With stock springs, and full slicks and front runners, i recon a 10.99 is achievable as you will net about 370rwkw with 21psi through the converter and a perfect run with a 1.5x 60".

But when does shit go perfect and nothing break?

Mind you without a surge tank and 044 your pushing your luck. Also i doubt the engine will last long. But you can run 10.99!

If i had a stock car and wanted 10s id start with that list.

Who is online