[boostkingMatt]

Beautiful truck! Now, about those inside wheel barrels. One of my little pet peeves. Horrible on my Exploder's black wheels.

Inside wheel barrels?

 

[GearHead_1]

The barrel of the wheel, you know, the back side that you can see through the spokes, it's dirty, they look tacky.

 

[EcoXLT]

Inside wheel barrels?

I was thinking the same thing. Didn’t know there was a name for that.

 

[FanaticalKilla]

Flat portion of the wheel behind the brake rotors.

 

[qmmartel]

Inside wheel barrels?

Inside wheel barrels?

ZFG tuning, I hear is doing great stuff.

Little update.

Im going to get 6, 5 gallon gas cans and fill them up with e85 at the station that is 1.5 hours away from me. Then I will put 10 gallons of e85 in and that will last me a month and a half before I have to go get more. 10 gallons of e85 will give me an e30 mixture.

Also, I’m in a Ram Hurricane group on Facebook and I think one of the reasons those trucks are so quick off the line is the fact that the inline 6 is torquey, and the guys getting 3.6 0-60 have 3.92 gearing. I have seen what they do on the top end and it lacks a bit compared to the Ecoboost v6. Also from what I’ve seen, the Hurricane turbos’ turbine is pretty stinking small, and has a lot of blades. That equals quick spool, and not to mention that they are running 20+ psi of boost. The Ecoboost doesn’t run as quick 0-60 stock vs stock, but the 3.5 stock has bigger turbos, and runs 14-15 psi of boost, and that number is peak, down low. Up in high rpm’s the Ecoboost lets boost fall down. Not sure what the hurricane boost curve looks like but I doubt it falls as much.

 

[boostkingMatt]

Ok, prepare for some stupidity. Loaded Adams new tune revision for my e30 mix. In the log it didn’t appear to me as though he increased timing at all. But, he fixed shifting and it is amazing now. This is in sand mode, which in my truck is set up as drag mode.

You can see my first attempt was 12.35 at 106 because I was retarded and let off early. So mad at myself. Oh well. Based on what the second run did (it was slower, and trap speed wasn’t trending as high as the first run was on the graph) I think the first run would have trapped 111 or close to 112. Anyways, pretty pleased with these results and I honestly don’t care to keep running it much. I’m going to go check the log and compare to the old 91 logs to see if he increased timing at all.

Just doing some quick math, my first run trapped 102.02 at the 1000’. Second run trapped 100.91. So, I subtracted the difference from 100.91 to 110.17 on my second run and added that number to 102.02 and it would have trapped 111.28 on that first run. Amazing.

 

[butthead]

Get the plug issues straight? KM

 

[boostkingMatt]

Get the plug issues straight? KM

It doesn’t have any issues on e30. Those issues are gone. I think it was knock

 

[JasonMink]

What gear ratio you running? Im thinking of going from 3.55 to 4.10

 

[FanaticalKilla]

What gear ratio you running? Im thinking of going from 3.55 to 4.10

Are you planning increase tire size? Or trying to leave in 2nd?

 

[JasonMink]

Are you planning increase tire size? Or trying to leave in 2nd?

Im going to go with Mickey Thompson street/drag 305/45R20 or R17

 

[boostkingMatt]

What gear ratio you running? Im thinking of going from 3.55 to 4.10

I have a 3.55 gear.

 

[TOWMA8R]

It doesn’t have any issues on e30. Those issues are gone. I think it was knock

pretty much my thoughts from the beginning, pretty aggressive for 91 octane IMO

Glad to see the e30 blend in there......

 

[qmmartel]

pretty much my thoughts from the beginning, pretty aggressive for 91 octane IMO

Glad to see the e30 blend in there......

E50 blind with Meth Gen1 5*.
Just putting it out there!
Gtr-x600 turbos with all performance bolt ons.
List is to long to write! Just being lazy.

 

[boostkingMatt]

E50 blind with Meth Gen1 5*.
Just putting it out there!
Gtr-x600 turbos with all performance bolt ons.
List is to long to write! Just being lazy.

View attachment 204697

47 lb/min isn’t too bad! That’s stout for a Gen 1. But for comparison on my Gen 3 I am running 71 lb/min

 

[qmmartel]

Yep Boostking said the same thing.
These turbos appears to be the same size as CRP stage 3’s.
the lower pressures are due to the 11 vane inducer.

These turbo are hand built with triple inspection with signatures. And certificates of inspection.
They don’t cast a turbo until you order. 2+ months waiting time.

so I would say 47lbs or 71lbs appears to just be a reference.

If you are getting the same or better then that’s a good thing!!!!!
ill send a picture of just pump gas with Meth.

ps: I’m on v13 now about 40hps more.

 

[boostkingMatt]

Yep Boostking said the same thing.
These turbos appears to be the same size as CRP stage 3’s.
the lower pressures are due to the 11 vane inducer.

These turbo are hand built with triple inspection with signatures. And certificates of inspection.
They don’t cast a turbo until you order. 2+ months waiting time.

so I would say 47lbs or 71lbs appears to just be a reference.

If you are getting the same or better then that’s a good thing!!!!!
ill send a picture of just pump gas with Meth.

ps: I’m on v13 now about 40hps more.

Boostking? Yeah, 11 blade compressor wheels just don’t flow as much air as a 6 blade. Less blades = more flow. More blades = quicker response but less flow.

Airflow is not a reference, it’s what the turbos are flowing. It can also be calculated to guess the crank horsepower of the engine too. But that’s a complicated thing I won’t get into right now.

 

[Gord0]

47 lb/min isn’t too bad! That’s stout for a Gen 1. But for comparison on my Gen 3 I am running 71 lb/min

Did you miss the HP number on that pic he posted? That 47lb might be close to 1 turbo putting out 810hp I assume to the wheels?

 

[boostkingMatt]

Did you miss the HP number on that pic he posted? That 47lb might be close to 1 turbo putting out 810hp I assume to the wheels?

That means nothing. You cannot make 800hp with 47 lb/min of airflow.

My buddy Jake with the 9 second truck has 850 whp and he makes like 98-100 lb/min, which on full e85 equates to 1000hp

My 2.7 on the dyno with e50 running 12 degrees of timing and low boost made 44 lb/min on the datalog. The hp uncorrected (which is actual) was 450whp.

It’s commonly known that when you multiply your lb/min by 8-12 (everyone uses 10 since it’s middle of the road), that tells you your crank horsepower. Obviously that varies based on what you’re running. I do not have 710 crank hp since I’m running 71 lb/min. I’m not running much timing, but if I was running 14 degrees of advanced timing it would 100% be 700whp. Timing plays a role. If im running 5-8 degrees of timing my crank horsepower is less than 71x10. It’s probably more like 71x8.5 or 9. That gives me a tad over 600 crank hp or about 500whp which is about right since 3.5s trapping 109-111 in the 1/4 mile usually have 500 whp depending on tire size.

I don’t know if he was on e85 but if so, i would say he’s definitely over 500 whp even thought it’s 47 lb/min. But 800 crank? No. You’d have to see a whole lot more airflow to get 800 crank.

Back to my 2.7, I ran that dyno pull and got 450whp with 19 psi of boost and 12 degrees of timing. Later on we cranked it up to 14.5 degrees of timing, and 54 lb/min on 25 psi of boost. That was around 570-590 whp with my small tires I had.

 

[Evo8John]

Higher octane is less susceptible to pre ignition. Not necessarily harder to ignite. Less susceptible to igniting from a hot spot.

Little behind the curve here, but I have had issues in the past with vehicles acting like they had spark blow out from timing being retarded too far. That could have been the issue as well. Lighting the mix too late creates a very unstable burn. Sometimes you make significantly more power with less boost and more timing.