Charlie - That's correct. But the delta in relative pressure (which is how you determine a compressors efficiency as in Comp. Maps) shifts by the relative pressure difference from inlet to outlet. In this case 2.3psi. This lack of efficiency also hurts IAT's. As you can see we were at 122-124 vs the 100-110's I see on similar setups at sea level.

Mace - I understand and agree. If I dial in a set of gears or tire size for a car based on estimated trap speed for instance, I use Uncorrected.

However Jeremy (Servion) has found evidence to indicate that uncorrected values at altitude for F.I. cars do not correlate directly to uncorrected values at sea level.

Here's what he found - http://www.honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=1543048

So in this same line of thought, my educated guess would be that he'd make anywhere from 530-540.

And this is important as we will be at HC2 (Cali) and factors like duty cycle, fuel pump limits, etc.. should be minded.

 

So it just ended up being a matter of correction? Again, just a tuning tool (I know, I know....)

 

You both need to sit down. You're both over your head here. Just more sheep of S2KI's famous flock...

First, it's not the dyno, but C.F. of where the dyno is. It wouldn't make any difference if he went to another dyno if it was still in Denver... You should have caught up on that by now.

Spec, obviously the meaning behind SAE correction isn't lost on me. As I am even beginning to argue a point that it should be more meaningful with respect to context. As you're still behind the curve, I can understand you still lashing out at someone disgusted with fearful ignorance by labeling it arrogance. Perhaps you should have a look at your own 'snarky' comments made before I even entered the thread. It's a shame, I thought all 3C's were supposed to be quick...

 

really? so the correction factor of every reputable shop in all of Colorado is wrong? i dont think so, its probably just yours. get over yourself dude. holy shit.

 

I'll just leave this here for comparison with 13psi hitting 58xwhp.

 

Oh dear...

Look, I can see you don't have a full grasp on this concept yet. Please do what you can to understand the problem first. Then try to aid the conversation.

 

You make these comments as if I aspire to be whatever you call yourself. I can assure you, nothing is further from the truth. I saw an erroneous number, I called and I was right. You can back pedal all you want by pulling up other people's research, but the facts remain.

 

this thread should be locked. dude said what it made uncorrected, and that is much more believable then the 580. which consequently, would make his car the most efficient setup on the planet for an s2k at 13psi on a dynojet.

apparently, which was spoken about earlier, SAE is not too accurate on a FI setup at high altitude. showing a na car dyno 190-195 ap2, proves it. at 13psi, your not gaining nearly 400whp. ITS NOT ACCURATE. the chart above shows this. sure, you will have better setups then others at 13psi, but not this good. its impossible, and esp on a stock HG car with no meth.

hell, even fullrace would say "holy ****, you sure that shit is right?" if you asked them and its there product!

 

Again, the debate isn't whether it made 580whp. It did, undeniably by the widely accepted standard of SAE. The debate is how wrong inaccurate SAE is when at altitude and turbocharged. Catch up home boy.