# Dyno'd my car, VRT 6 psi NON IC



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

231whp 6 psi.


----------



## cifdig (Jun 4, 2005)

Nice:thumbup:


----------



## HidRo (Sep 19, 2003)

Why no IC? It should make it better, but good non the less!:thumbup:


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

HidRo said:


> Why no IC? It should make it better, but good non the less!:thumbup:


 2.9 JE IE A.R.P. in the works! (AP tuning) I need to get my a $$ to the post office to send down the main caps I forgot. I'll post up the print out a bit later tonight. The A/F was pretty good for static 10:1. CE's current tune. I would love to pop in UM's chip if they could guarantee better numbers, but for now I am satisfied. :beer::beer::beer: 

I have a stock plastic end tank srt-4 IC the p/o of my kit said was a vibrant intercooler ... i also have some ebay piping. My buddy is a great welder, just need some cupplers and we'll fab it up real quick. 

but if im going to hassle him i may go for some super sexy and have my p coat budy do it up real real nice instead of just putting some crap up for now so im on the fence on what to do. 

it would be nice to intercooler and turn it up some more (9-10 being te max right) it hits 7 sometimes if I jump on it, and the numbers are perfect. (A/F, Oil Temp).


----------



## mk4vrjtta (Feb 3, 2007)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> 2.9 JE IE A.R.P. in the works! (AP tuning) I need to get my a $$ to the post office to send down the main caps I forgot. I'll post up the print out a bit later tonight. The A/F was pretty good for static 10:1. CE's current tune. I would love to pop in UM's chip if they could guarantee better numbers, but for now I am satisfied. :beer::beer::beer:
> 
> I have a stock plastic end tank srt-4 IC the p/o of my kit said was a vibrant intercooler ... i also have some ebay piping. My buddy is a great welder, just need some cupplers and we'll fab it up real quick.
> 
> ...


 
it hurt my brain to read that..


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

^ He's been working at it long enough. Good that he has some positive results instead of carnage.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)




----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

OP, what tune do you have?


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> OP, what tune do you have?


 c2 current stuff


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> c2 current stuff


 30#, 42# or 60# is what I was getting at.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

30#


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

If you have a good intercooler, you should be able to push 10-12 psi. I had a 98 ginster with a similar setup. You running a head spacer on this engine?

sent from a calculator using tapatalk.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

no spacer, 30# tune can push that much boost? I got an srt - 4 bar and plate intercooler were gonna rig up with some ebay piping and vibrant cuplers, my buddy welds so i should be ship shape to get it rigged up. I did have a spacer but I sold it, doing JE IE ARP, waiting for it to get finished over bore and assembly at AP tuning :beer::thumbup:


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> no spacer, 30# tune can push that much boost? I got an srt - 4 bar and plate intercooler were gonna rig up with some ebay piping and vibrant cuplers, my buddy welds so i should be ship shape to get it rigged up. I did have a spacer but I sold it, doing JE IE ARP, waiting for it to get finished over bore and assembly at AP tuning :beer::thumbup:


 I pushed 12 on stock stuff with an intercooler. Got me my time slip in my sig. AFR's were high 11's to low 12's. Miss that car.


----------



## prs_cky (Mar 31, 2007)

you live by the parkway right near the VW dealer right? I see your car all the time near my house too :wave:


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

true story... yea should be 450+ whp soon 2.9!


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> I pushed 12 on stock stuff with an intercooler. Got me my time slip in my sig. AFR's were high 11's to low 12's. Miss that car.


 whats stock stuff? internals? what injectors what tune? I thought C2 told me to keep it below 9 regarless of intercooler but i could be mistaken. My AFR's are still a little chunky at wot. Prolly why people go for the UM stuff. I'll believe it when someone shows me dyno results.


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> whats stock stuff? internals? what injectors what tune? I thought C2 told me to keep it below 9 regarless of intercooler but i could be mistaken. My AFR's are still a little chunky at wot. Prolly why people go for the UM stuff. I'll believe it when someone shows me dyno results.


 Kinetics stage 1 kit for OBD2 with and Evo 8 intercooler. 30# on C2 chip Version 1.42. The same guy that wrote the C2 chips owns UM btw...


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

it can take that much boost, i guess its all about the a/f ratio and temps. 

how did that evo 8 intercooler fit under the mk3? Do it again? I have a cobalt SS bar and plate one laying around here and ebay piping. im about to get on that lmao, also need a boost controller to unleash the beast, or a new spring for the WG. :beer:


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> I pushed 12 on stock stuff with an intercooler. Got me my time slip in my sig. AFR's were high 11's to low 12's. Miss that car.


 thats an awesome time slip, i have a peloquin, but what i need to tackle is the weight! im at 3,120 with me in it, my tools water and other random stuff. did you ever weigh yours, sounds like it was significantly lighter. I have yet to run at the strip yet. keeps raining.


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

I just took the rear seats out. Quaife and 22 inch slick.

sent from a calculator using tapatalk.


----------



## DubmyRUCA (May 22, 2007)

Nice #'s, what is your exhaust setup?


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

2.5 kinetic to 3" MBS open dump


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> I just took the rear seats out. Quaife and 22 inch slick.
> 
> sent from a calculator using tapatalk.


 whats your weight with you in it. im 250 :-( i like :beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer: :laugh:


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

what's an ideal weight with driver for a mk3 vrt? 3120, theres gotta be room for getting it down to 2900


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Ideal is whatever the rules let you weigh.


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> what's an ideal weight with driver for a mk3 vrt? 3120, theres gotta be room for getting it down to 2900


 I am 175 lbs, no clue on weight, maybe around 3k.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> I am 175 lbs, no clue on weight, maybe around 3k.


thats crazy fast. i didn't know 12 lbs would make such results on the track. what size turbo?


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

anyone ever put in a Cobalt SS intercooler? the dude who sold me the kit said it was a vibrant intercooler lmao


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> thats crazy fast. i didn't know 12 lbs would make such results on the track. what size turbo?


If you have a Kinetics kit, it was the same turbo on a stock VR.


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> anyone ever put in a Cobalt SS intercooler? the dude who sold me the kit said it was a vibrant intercooler lmao


I have seen them before, should work ok.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

got any pics? How of a pita is it that custom ordering whatever correct dimensions I need? My buddy welds, I just gotta figure out what elbows and cuplers I need. I got some generic ebay 2.5 pipe around.


----------



## vr6pilot (Jul 5, 2000)

Please stop. _Couplers_ 

I do wonder what the big difference is between the Mk 3 & 4 that they went with 30# injectors for Mk3's but 36 pounders for Mk4's.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

vr6pilot said:


> Please stop. _Couplers_
> 
> I do wonder what the big difference is between the Mk 3 & 4 that they went with 30# injectors for Mk3's but 36 pounders for Mk4's.


 Couplers... Like a couple ok. Mk4's are heavier and have 9:5:1 static compression...


----------



## vr6pilot (Jul 5, 2000)

Yes...literally "to join two", "to couple". 

Sure I get the comp ratio difference but the higher comp is actually a_ limiting _factor where Mk4 guys typically _reduce_ compression in order to run more boost without detonation. Weight is inconsequential in this discussion. So I'm still not sure why the difference in injector size.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

vr6pilot said:


> Yes...literally "to join two", "to couple".
> 
> Sure I get the comp ratio difference but the higher comp is actually a_ limiting _factor where Mk4 guys typically _reduce_ compression in order to run more boost without detonation. Weight is inconsequential in this discussion. So I'm still not sure why the difference in injector size.


 Arent mk4 24 valve? Or is there a totally different kit for this instead of 12v mk4? It prolly has to do with the differen sensors/ecu my bet.


----------



## vr6pilot (Jul 5, 2000)

apples 'n apples. mk3 VR 12 valve gets 30# injectors. Mk4 VR 12 valve gets 36# injectors. the 24 valve motor came later in 2002 or 3,


----------



## Rod Ratio (Jun 6, 2012)

Good to see you having some success bud. That last build didn't go to well iirc


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

*+NEIL*+DIAMOND*+ said:


> Good to see you having some success bud. That last build didn't go to well iirc




Thanks, waiting to put this 2.9 liter bullet proof in and crank it up like woah.


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

Are you upgrading your fuel setup? Watch your intake temps, I don't know how far that ic will go efficiency wise. Don't want to wind up like me, lol.

sent from a calculator using tapatalk.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

that kinetic IC is pretty beefy... i think i read 550 horse somewhere? my turbo poops out around 550 flow as well? who knows we'll find out once its all the way raging. Siemens injectors stage 3 tune right?


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> that kinetic IC is pretty beefy... i think i read 550 horse somewhere? my turbo poops out around 550 flow as well? who knows we'll find out once its all the way raging. Siemens injectors stage 3 tune right?


You should run a bigger core than the Cobalt one if you going stage three. If your still on a 60 trim, you will never see 550. You will more than likely max that turbo out in the high 300 to low 400 range setup dependent.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> You should run a bigger core than the Cobalt one if you going stage three. If your still on a 60 trim, you will never see 550. You will more than likely max that turbo out in the high 300 to low 400 range setup dependent.


I have a kinetic FMIC...


----------



## Norwegian-VR6 (Feb 6, 2002)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> I have a kinetic FMIC...


Seen 577whp on that inercooler setup. GT35R 1.06 with C2 ProMaf w/m.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

Norwegian-VR6 said:


> Seen 577whp on that inercooler setup. GT35R 1.06 with C2 ProMaf w/m.


2.9 over bore 9:1 JE, IE Rods, a.r.p. all over the place. sounds like it will be getting done. A 60 trim turned up all the way will produce what results. Going stage 3, Seimens 630's... At what point do you need the pro maf, and if you do go pro maf; what is the cost benefit ratio to just going stand alone at that point?


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> 2.9 over bore 9:1 JE, IE Rods, a.r.p. all over the place. sounds like it will be getting done. A 60 trim turned up all the way will produce what results. Going stage 3, Seimens 630's... At what point do you need the pro maf, and if you do go pro maf; what is the cost benefit ratio to just going stand alone at that point?


 I don't know if your just ignoring my statements, but I told you what to expect out of a 60 trim. If I were going stage three, I would not even think twice about getting the Pro MAF. Superior in every way to the stock MAF. Your money, 1700 bucks gets you Lugtronic with some bells and whistles. Depends on your use of the car I would guess.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> I don't know if your just ignoring my statements, but I told you what to expect out of a 60 trim. If I were going stage three, I would not even think twice about getting the Pro MAF. Superior in every way to the stock MAF. Your money, 1700 bucks gets you Lugtronic with some bells and whistles. Depends on your use of the car I would guess.


im not just a bit busy... 

ok Pro MAF check, i just thought about going the Megasquirt route


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

11.6 on 30# tune is incredible.


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> 11.6 on 30# tune is incredible.


I think it had more to do with the fact I did not want to get beat by the LS1 Camaro on a 50 shot, lol. If you got the cash and plan on making more power, ditch the 60 trim.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> I think it had more to do with the fact I did not want to get beat by the LS1 Camaro on a 50 shot, lol. If you got the cash and plan on making more power, ditch the 60 trim.


wait, so you made that time slip with what turbo?

or do you have an estimated power to weight ratio... I was about to sell my car for an ellis, but then i popped the motor and went h.a.m. 

im saying though i have those same injectors and the turbo isn't the problem yet but your were running 11.6 with a stock block and those same injectors? im lost

I will ditch the 60 trim eventually but its a good entry level turbo, I thought it would max out a lot of what I could throw at it by increasing the boost. I get flow vs air temperature vs boost pressure... but you must be dealing with a lot of turbo lag on the street. i daily mine (not for long - project mark viii pt II coming up) or an ellis. 

but having a fast ellis is like being the smartest kid in special ed  I wanted to build something for the backroads, always wanting a vr6 turbo, i went that route. I had a 1.8t in a corrado on MS1, IE rods, big bar and plate FMIC etc etc... all it needed really was someone that could tune it and a big turbo and it would have been quite fun.

with this i am kinda sore i didn't go with a supercharger... the hp factor is fun, but gti's or older vw's thrive on that back road predictable driving, where if you know where it understeers you can scare the living **** of your friends on the twisty back roads (at least the one's here in pa dutch country haha)

anyways, if im going to straight drag this car I better find a daily driver and fast! im delivering pizza's in this bad boy watch out!


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

my lincoln dyno'd 367 at the wheels on 150 wet kit, i held down an F430 up hill. 255whp with out the spray, 14.5 @ 96 (NA) with about 30 consecutive time slips to back it up, shoulda bracket raced


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> I pushed 12 on stock stuff with an intercooler. Got me my time slip in my sig. AFR's were high 11's to low 12's. Miss that car.


my afr's are really rich... even on hot days, like 10.3 out of the gate all the way up to 11.3 to redline, im at 9ish 10 psi... i turned it down after i thought i broke something. I need to jump on the dyno again, but I should be buying a vag com before I do that. 

My open dump is kind of annoying, I almost want to get rid of it but it's fun to scare innocent by-standing pedestrians


----------



## 'dubber (Jun 15, 2004)

GinsterMan98 said:


> I think it had more to do with the fact I did not want to get beat by the LS1 Camaro on a 50 shot, lol. If you got the cash and plan on making more power, ditch the 60 trim.


22" slicks were paying off, too. I'd be interested to know if you made any comparable runs on drag radials with that car and what were you seeing usually? Only because you're in somewhat rarefied air when you are running big slicks and a lot of us really can't compare that to our own cars times in our heads.


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> wait, so you made that time slip with what turbo?
> 
> or do you have an estimated power to weight ratio... I was about to sell my car for an ellis, but then i popped the motor and went h.a.m.
> 
> ...


I was running the Kinetic 60 trim with a .82 AR exhaust housing. C2 chip and 30# injectors with 12 psi of boost. Motor was bone stock except for DSR 256 cams. With my new turbo, PTE 58/62 and Intercooler, I really don't notice it being anymore laggy than the last setup. 
What I was trying to tell you that if you get a stage three fuel setup, your not going to be able to take advantage of it. Maybe the 42# setup would suit your needs better.
Not sure what you mean by the "fast Ellis" comment. 

sent from a calculator using tapatalk.


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

'dubber said:


> 22" slicks were paying off, too. I'd be interested to know if you made any comparable runs on drag radials with that car and what were you seeing usually? Only because you're in somewhat rarefied air when you are running big slicks and a lot of us really can't compare that to our own cars times in our heads.


I never run drag radials because they are much harder on drivetrain stuff at the track. 22's are not big, they are small. I currently run 23x7x15's and cut 1.8 60's with them.

sent from a calculator using tapatalk.


----------



## 'dubber (Jun 15, 2004)

So you're saying that you probably would not have hit those times on drag radials then. Big is relative, let's not harp on that. I think the OP sees the timpslip and has unrealistic expectations because of the slicks.


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

Yes, I think I would not have cut a 1.722 on radials. I already told him I was using slicks long ago when he first asked. 22's are baby slicks, but work awesome with stock ring and pinion. 

sent from a calculator using tapatalk.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> I was running the Kinetic 60 trim with a .82 AR exhaust housing. C2 chip and 30# injectors with 12 psi of boost. Motor was bone stock except for DSR 256 cams. With my new turbo, PTE 58/62 and Intercooler, I really don't notice it being anymore laggy than the last setup.
> What I was trying to tell you that if you get a stage three fuel setup, your not going to be able to take advantage of it. Maybe the 42# setup would suit your needs better.
> Not sure what you mean by the "fast Ellis" comment.
> 
> sent from a calculator using tapatalk.


why can't I take advantage of this at 9:1 compression?

ellis is LS one


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> why can't I take advantage of this at 9:1 compression?
> 
> ellis is LS one


never mind i follow now, the turbo will run out of juice... 630's are not needed yet. I need a bigger turbo?


----------



## GinsterMan98 (May 19, 2008)

CorradoFuhrer said:


> never mind i follow now, the turbo will run out of juice... 630's are not needed yet. I need a bigger turbo?


Yep, that what I was trying to get at. I made more power on my setup because of the cams and stock compression. Best advice I can give you is pick a turbo and fuel setup that will support your goal. You don't want to waste money on a setup you don't need or have the supporting hardware to take advantage of. If you went with the 60#, pick a turbo that will support it. That setup can do 500+. 30# will do low 300 and the 42# setup will max out somewhere around the low 400 range depending on what else you have in the mix. You could get the 42# setup and be able to keep the 60 trim for now. I also highly recommend the .82 housing for the 60 trim, it will smooth out the mid range torque and give better top end without chocking. Plus, it will save your trans depending on if you drive easy on the street. I know you said your tight on money, so I would get a used 42# and injectors and have some fun with the 60 trim.


----------



## CorradoFuhrer (Mar 21, 2002)

GinsterMan98 said:


> Yep, that what I was trying to get at. I made more power on my setup because of the cams and stock compression. Best advice I can give you is pick a turbo and fuel setup that will support your goal. You don't want to waste money on a setup you don't need or have the supporting hardware to take advantage of. If you went with the 60#, pick a turbo that will support it. That setup can do 500+. 30# will do low 300 and the 42# setup will max out somewhere around the low 400 range depending on what else you have in the mix. You could get the 42# setup and be able to keep the 60 trim for now. I also highly recommend the .82 housing for the 60 trim, it will smooth out the mid range torque and give better top end without chocking. Plus, it will save your trans depending on if you drive easy on the street. I know you said your tight on money, so I would get a used 42# and injectors and have some fun with the 60 trim.


sounds good


----------

