# Put my VR6 Turbo on the Dyno



## VeDubgtiVR6 (Apr 27, 2000)

Here is my dyno sheet from yesterday, let the flaming begin
















Specs on car: 
1996 VR6 133k plus miles
T04E 60-1 tangential turbo
9.0:1 compression spacer
C2 based software(no O2s) with 42# injectors
Kinetic Manifold w/ Tial 38mm wastegate
3" exhaust, no cat or mufflers
re-routed wastegate back into exhaust








A full size picture can be found here http://www.ohiovw.com/cars/gal...2.jpg


----------



## Captain Jack (Mar 2, 2002)

*Re: Put my VR6 Turbo on the Dyno (VeDubgtiVR6)*

No 02's? What does the management use to calculate fuel trims?


----------



## VeDubgtiVR6 (Apr 27, 2000)

*Re: Put my VR6 Turbo on the Dyno (Captain Jack)*

The chip I use is an early design of C2 and it uses the maps in the chip for the fuel trim.


----------



## dreadlocks (May 24, 2006)

Holy running lean batman!
Nice numbers tho, I would look into getting your chip updated if possible.


----------



## SELFMADE (Mar 30, 2006)

Get the update. You`ll be very happy you did. Does look a bit lean, th enew software ill fix that.


----------



## silvrsled (Jan 24, 2005)

*Re: (SELFMADE)*

Sorry to hijack this thread but what would be considered good for A/F? Underboost and heavy throttle, my wideband shows about 10.8-11.3ish


----------



## MKippen (Nov 6, 2000)

*Re: (silvrsled)*


_Quote, originally posted by *silvrsled* »_Sorry to hijack this thread but what would be considered good for A/F? Underboost and heavy throttle, my wideband shows about 10.8-11.3ish 

i was told that under boost you should look for 11.3-11.5


----------



## Vdubsolo (Apr 11, 2004)

*Re: (theflygtiguy)*


_Quote, originally posted by *theflygtiguy* »_
i was told that under boost you should look for 11.3-11.5

I think it should be more like 12.3-12.5


----------



## jhayesvw (Oct 3, 2001)

*Re: (Vdubsolo)*

i think that your car runs very consistently. not alot of change between runs. that tells me your intercooler is working well.
as for the air fuels, it looks like it hits the 10s and that is RICH.
i would definitely get the updated chip and see how much better it looks. 
other than that. 300 + wheel HP is ALOT in a FWD car. 
i would be plenty happy.


----------



## VWralley (Mar 30, 2002)

*Re: (Vdubsolo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Vdubsolo* »_I think it should be more like 12.3-12.5

an article i read in grassroots motorsports claimed that there was barely a noticable difference in hp when the a/f range was in the 11-12.5ish:1 range. for boosted motors. i tend to shoot for about a good 12:1 ratio under boost


----------



## MKII16v (Oct 23, 1999)

*Re: (VWralley)*

Very true. For all us water/methanol guys we can safely run on the leaner side of things.


----------



## dreadlocks (May 24, 2006)

Jeffs tunes shoot for 12.3-12.5 AFR @ WOT
I thought the red dotted line was 12 but after looking closer its 11.. so it looks like once you reach full load your AFR's are pretty good. My mistake.
jhayesvw, what are you talking about.. he never comes close to 10


----------



## leebro61 (Nov 7, 2001)

*Re: (MKII16v)*

Are the people saying it's lean looking at the boost plot? To me it looks like he never gets above ~12:1 when in any serious boost.


----------



## jhayesvw (Oct 3, 2001)

*Re: (dreadlocks)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dreadlocks* »_Jeffs tunes shoot for 12.3-12.5 AFR @ WOT
I thought the red dotted line was 12 but after looking closer its 11.. so it looks like once you reach full load your AFR's are pretty good. My mistake.
jhayesvw, what are you talking about.. he never comes close to 10

oops i saw that line and assumed it was the 10 line. its actually the 11 line


----------



## VeDubgtiVR6 (Apr 27, 2000)

*Re: (jhayesvw)*

Im very happy with the way the car drives,handles. The new software update would be nice, but i'm sure I would have to pay for it and that I do not plan on doing when it runs fine how it is, plus then I would have to install o2 bungs and sensors.
All comments are welcome as well as other topics similar to BOOST!!!
Shreddin tires is our jobs!


----------



## killa (Nov 26, 2000)

*Re: (VeDubgtiVR6)*

Pretty good number http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
Paul


----------



## give_it_to_dem (Jan 28, 2005)

*Re: (killa)*

any tranny work, LSD, R&P????


----------



## volkswagengeek (Dec 17, 2004)

12.5 is the very top of where you want to be under boost at WOT. 11.3 - 11.5 sounds about right, for good power.


_Modified by volkswagengeek at 6:48 AM 5-14-2007_


----------



## tekstepvr6 (Aug 15, 2001)

*Re: (VeDubgtiVR6)*

What size housing do you have on the 60-1? 10 psi by 4500 has to be extremely laggy. The numbers look to be on par from what others have made with the 60-1.


_Modified by tekstepvr6 at 1:12 PM 5-14-2007_


----------



## Zupek (May 10, 2000)

*Re: (tekstepvr6)*

the point of AFR under boost isnt to keep optimal horse power, its to keep combustion chamber tempatures down. Too much isnt a good thing and too little certainly isnt a good thing. I personally shoot for low 12's. 11's seem too rich to me and prefer not to waste the fuel. @ 1850 degrees, things start to melt...
edited to amek people happy.


_Modified by fatfreevw at 2:00 PM 5-14-2007_


----------



## the_q_jet (Mar 19, 2005)

*Re: (fatfreevw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fatfreevw* »_.... @ 1750 degrees, things start to melt...
yea silver and brass







add another 1k degrees and then you'll have a problem


----------



## Zupek (May 10, 2000)

*Re: (the_q_jet)*

i had a monday brainfart, removed


_Modified by fatfreevw at 2:21 PM 5-14-2007_


----------



## the_q_jet (Mar 19, 2005)

1k=1000 so 2700ish and steel starts melting....


----------



## Zupek (May 10, 2000)

*Re: (the_q_jet)*

spark plugs arent made of steel.


----------



## the_q_jet (Mar 19, 2005)

*Re: (fatfreevw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fatfreevw* »_spark plugs arent made of steel.
touche!


----------



## Zupek (May 10, 2000)

*Re: (the_q_jet)*


_Quote, originally posted by *the_q_jet* »_1k=1000 so 2700ish and steel starts melting....

and to stir the pot, jet fuel burns @ under 2000 degrees, which means twin towers couldnt fall because of the jet fuel.


----------



## the_q_jet (Mar 19, 2005)

*Re: (fatfreevw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fatfreevw* »_
and to stir the pot, jet fuel burns @ under 2000 degrees, which means twin towers couldnt fall because of the jet fuel.









true but start to contain that heat...add other sources..and watch it rise!


----------



## Zupek (May 10, 2000)

*Re: (the_q_jet)*

those sources burn much lower the 1000 degrees. So if
flame 1 = 500 degrees
flame 2 = 1200 degrees

flame 1 and flame 2 combined still equals = 1200 degrees, not 1700


----------



## the_q_jet (Mar 19, 2005)

no but what i'm saying is once you start boucing around heat within an enclosed space (i.e. elevator shafts, ships, cars) it starts to amplify...thats how microwaves work...thats why a car gets SOOO much hotter with the windows closed as opposed to up thats why the towers suffered a structural collapse...but lets not get this topic OFF topic and go to PMs...


----------



## Zupek (May 10, 2000)

*Re: (the_q_jet)*


_Quote, originally posted by *the_q_jet* »_thats why a car gets SOOO much hotter with the windows closed as opposed to up thats why the towers suffered a structural collapse...

isnt that because of the refraction index and the fact that the expanding molecules have nowhere to go?(aka heat) much like the greenhouse effect and magnifying glass


----------



## VWAUDITEK (Dec 26, 2006)

*Re: (fatfreevw)*

#'s look good and AFR looks good http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## MiamiVr6T (Jul 24, 2004)

*Re: Put my VR6 Turbo on the Dyno (VeDubgtiVR6)*

afr and power looks good... just the boost seems a little late.. could be that they didn't hit full throttle till late..


----------



## VeDubgtiVR6 (Apr 27, 2000)

*Re: Put my VR6 Turbo on the Dyno (MiamiVr6T)*

Turbo has a .68 side on the turbo, peloquin lsd is in the trans.
The only thing the guy who did the dyno run said they used 3rd gear, so no clue as to full throttle the whole time or what.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 16, 2004)

*Re: Put my VR6 Turbo on the Dyno (VeDubgtiVR6)*

The not so short runner intake you have is giving you that power band. I have a .63ar on an SC61 turbo. This is my graph compared to yours, I'm at 11-12psi. 








The problem is, its the same intake as stock, without the plenum that gives you some low end/midrange tq.
You have the same exact top end and worse low end, but at least you'll be easier on your gears that way.


----------



## VeDubgtiVR6 (Apr 27, 2000)

*Re: Put my VR6 Turbo on the Dyno ([email protected])*

Nice graph eric, the manifold I have on there was an after thought because the turbo I bought wouldnt fit with the stock intake manifold.


----------



## fastslc (Sep 14, 1999)

*Re: Put my VR6 Turbo on the Dyno (VeDubgtiVR6)*

So the real short runner does indeed a great job at improving mid end .. woww


----------



## VeDubgtiVR6 (Apr 27, 2000)

*Re: Put my VR6 Turbo on the Dyno (fastslc)*

It would be interesting to get one of the C2 ones and see if there is an actual difference shown on a dyno, too bad its $800


----------

