# 726bhp and 616lbft on PUMP fuel, with full boost by 4500. Good?



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)




----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

GOOD!!!

what spec?


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

This is on a GT42 by the way.


----------



## Madden (Nov 14, 2004)

Good stuff mate.

The Torque really stops quite quickly and tails off?


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

Considering the low torque numbers most GTR's get barring the RB30s, 616lbft on pump fuel at 4500rpm, over 550lbft even at 7000rpm, and still 500lbft at peak power, is quite awesome.

Unless you have seen some RB26/7/8 graphs on pump or race fuel I havent?


----------



## Gez (Jan 8, 2003)

mate thats v good....well done


----------



## plumwerks (Dec 15, 2006)

Damn,that's excellent.


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

Its not my engine, I cant take the credit, mines not ready yet, I just thought youd like to see this engine that was just mapped


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

SteveN said:


> Considering the low torque numbers most GTR's get barring the RB30s, 616lbft on pump fuel at 4500rpm, over 550lbft even at 7000rpm, and still 500lbft at peak power, is quite awesome.
> 
> Unless you have seen some RB26/7/8 graphs on pump or race fuel I havent?


it's not awesome, it's insane! What I wouldn't give to make that kind of torque...when the boost kicks in, the car must smack you like getting hit by a truck!


----------



## Nocturnal (Nov 5, 2004)

What engine is this to begin with?


----------



## Rich_A (Apr 11, 2003)

Looks like it hits hard at 4250rpm!

Loving the shape of that graph lol.:chuckle: :bowdown1:


----------



## Rostampoor (Nov 20, 2006)

That's fantastic!


----------



## Madden (Nov 14, 2004)

It's very good mate dont get me wrong and incredable work just seems that the it stop porducing torque early? 

This is my torque graph and it would keep going if the boost kept rising to say 1.6 bar but this is only at 1.4 bar. This is at the hubs


----------



## Adam Kindness (Jun 22, 2002)

2.0 ford... Rod Tarry / MAD


----------



## Fast Guy (Jan 26, 2003)

Madden said:


> It's very good mate dont get me wrong and incredable work just seems that the it stop porducing torque early?


Why do you say it stops producing torque early? It's still producing about 470lbft at 8000rpm and it starts at 4500rpm with over 600lbft. Your torque has been and gone in 1000rpm and then starts to drop like a stone. You need more rpm or a hell of a gearbox to not drop out of the power band everytime you change gear.


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

Adam- Spoilsport!

FastGuy- Exactly. I couldnt be bothered to explain, but for a car with not even 200bhp per litre, thats a v.poor powerband IMO


----------



## Adam Kindness (Jun 22, 2002)

hearing there is a bit of a challange between this car and the lemon


----------



## Madden (Nov 14, 2004)

I guess its because it produces it so early that the graph is stretched out and there are almost right angles it the line. I see what your saying about mine but that is in stock cams and producing its torque really late. Just looks strange thats all. I'm not a expert and dont want any debates just saying what i think. 

So is that graph from the cossie engine then? That is crazy if so?


----------



## Smokey 1 (Nov 1, 2005)

Adam Kindness said:


> hearing there is a bit of a challange between this car and the lemon



If it is the said Ford cossie then yes they will be going head to head at Fighting torque over a mile. Mick managed 202 mph last year but seems to have fitted bigger turbos this year and altered the diff ratio's again.
I wont be able to attend as the Brands Hatch round of Time Attack is on the same day  


Any ways good luck Mick kick his ass , oh and Steven I think the Cossie might need a bit more than 730 bhp








Smokey :smokin:


----------



## m6beg (Apr 21, 2003)

Adam Kindness said:


> hearing there is a bit of a challange between this car and the lemon


Well its a race to a mile on the 10th of August. A demo race for Toyo Tyres.

The Lemon now has a Dry sump and bigger turbos and running gas.

But i will not run the gas against Rod in his cossie its not fair.

The event is called Fighting Torque.

I will do a run at the end of the day on full power and full gas, See what she does.

His car is Awesome and will be very hard to beat.

But i am looking forward to the challenge.

Mick


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

How much boost for it to get that power?

As a comparison, here's 750hp @ wheels on 4wd rolling road with a RB / GT42 on pump gas at 1.6bar:










The same motor made 840whp by 7500rpm at 1.9 bar, the GT42s are awesome!!

Rob


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

m6beg said:


> The Lemon now has a Dry sump and bigger turbos and running gas. Mick


Sounds good:clap: , have you had the white or the lemon out lately for a run, any power figures?

Rob


----------



## m6beg (Apr 21, 2003)

R.I.P.S NZ said:


> Sounds good:clap: , have you had the white or the lemon out lately for a run, any power figures?
> 
> Rob



I have been to busy to be honest with work. Lemon is ready though. The engine bay is a work of art.


Mick


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

m6beg said:


> I have been to busy to be honest with work. Lemon is ready though. The engine bay is a work of art. Mick


Sounds great, any pix?

Best of luck with the standing mile, hope you sort out that ford :thumbsup: 

Rob


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

It runs about 1bar more Rob, but is about 1litre less! But at this level of insane cyl pressures, extra actual boost pressure matters nothing in the grand scheme of reliability at least.

Here is the graph from an early mapping run on race fuel, aborted as they had gasket probs, should be having another go next week...










675lbft and 700bhp at under 5500rpm from a 2.1litre 

Im sure people good at maths can do an estimate on the rough maximum power its likely to give... 

And its got about 300bhp of Nitrous to put on it if they fancy it 

Dont thihnk Mick has much to worry about though, Micks car is insane. This was just about a good powerband, from a small engine. And big power on pump fuel. It can be done if done right. And RB26s have about half a litre more to play with.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Yeah awesome results from a small engine.
If its in something nice and light with traction it would be VERY quick indeed.

Any info on the car its going in?

Rob


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

This car, a stock looking, full leather interior'd, Saff Cossie, owned by an OAP.

ROD TARRY WELCOMES YOU TO HIS SIERRA COSWORTH WEBSITE

Mostly built to see what top speeds it can hit within the confines of Bruntingthorpe and RAF Woodbridge runways, about 1.5miles. 210mph so far.

But also specced every time to be nice and driveable on the road, as its a road car on road tyres with a road interior, hence why its been build with bigtime midrange power rather than just mental cams and massive turbo for top end only (like most UK skylines seem to be!).


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

In 500 rpm the power goes up 350hp ?
Man I must be having a blonde moment.
in 1500 rpm it goes up 500 hp...
tell me im blind.
Im sure its good power but that graphs got me buggered.
Have you seen an eslinger sohc ford race engine power graph ?


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Just had a look at the video of him doing 206mph in the wet, what a fookn nutter, no helmet, normal seatbelt etc haha.

Its not suited to drag by any means but once its rolling it seems to go quite well, looks like Mick should be OK with this one,

Rob


----------



## Rich_A (Apr 11, 2003)

SteveN said:


> And RB26s have about half a litre more to play with.


Not to mention 8 more valves.....


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

I must admit I am jealous of some of the things the Poms have, like good race tracks on both sides of the channel and airports they can hoon on ....

Id love to fang my car around an old airport ...

I dont miss your rain and cold tho


----------



## Madden (Nov 14, 2004)

My car does have a very poor power band but i dont see where your getting not even 200bhp per liter. It has 219 per liter.

Just checked another of my graphs and it looks the same as that one but of course no where near that power.  My mistake sorry Dr Steve.

Car looks crazy who is doing the mapping?


----------



## kingsley (Aug 26, 2002)

If that (awesome) result was achieved with a 2.1 litre 4 pot running just 1 bar of boost, apart from the fact that I can't comprehend how so much can be got out of so little by so few (  ) it makes it even more surprising how little torque and response we seem to get from the RB26.


----------



## Adam Kindness (Jun 22, 2002)

i'm pretty sure it runs more than 1bar Kingsley :|

Madden - I assume the mapping was done by Mark Shead / MAD


----------



## Madden (Nov 14, 2004)

I just been on his webstie awesome. . Mark is a top man.  That car should be crazy. Been watching his video's and the car looks a handfull.


----------



## Adam Kindness (Jun 22, 2002)

it must weigh a fair bit less than our lardass skylines too


----------



## davewilkins (Jun 30, 2001)

On the run for 5th gear, the driving in the wet was done by Mark. The man is a nutter:clap:


----------



## T.F.S. (Feb 5, 2004)

VauxSport - Vauxhall advice and chat forum :: View topic - My mate Rod's new turbo - 793bhp, but gasket failure 

2.7bar at 4400rpm


mark shead is probabley the best mapper in the UK


----------



## kingsley (Aug 26, 2002)

Adam Kindness said:


> i'm pretty sure it runs more than 1bar Kingsley :|


Well 1 bar did sound a bit ridiculous for the power and torque he was getting but I'm sure I read SteveN saying it ran 1 bar ... however I've just re-read his post and he said 1 bar _more_. My brain must have skipped over the "more" bit when I read it this morning!


----------



## tuRBy (Feb 8, 2006)

Is he using Nitrous or high compression to spool that gt42 so early on a 2100cc engine? 2.7bar @ 4400rpm!?

I would of thought a 2.1L would start to spool a GT42, at best ,from 5500rpm with 2.7bar peak arriving 6500rpm+ 

That powerband looks more like what a 3litre with a gt42 should do


----------



## Moff (Sep 27, 2004)

That has a bit of power that car..

Moff


----------



## canman (Jul 7, 2001)

That's pretty impressive from a 2.1Litre........ 

Here's a 2L running 28PSI .... power is at the hubs. Comes on a bit later, but holds it's power nicely.... reasonable spread of power too.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

From a certain blue evo is it Fraser?


----------



## plumwerks (Dec 15, 2006)

Holy horsepower batman.


----------



## canman (Jul 7, 2001)

Something close Rob...............that blue evo makes 1158HP at the hubs I think or something close.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Please be carefull stating power etc:
Dont want another which side of the globe has the best engines etc:

lol


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

tuRBy said:


> Is he using Nitrous or high compression to spool that gt42 so early on a 2100cc engine? 2.7bar @ 4400rpm!?
> 
> I would of thought a 2.1L would start to spool a GT42, at best ,from 5500rpm with 2.7bar peak arriving 6500rpm+
> 
> That powerband looks more like what a 3litre with a gt42 should do


No nitrous, compression in the 7's, not like it makes a jot of difference to spoolup rpm.

Its called speccing an engine properly.


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

:thumbsup:



> Its called speccing an engine properly.


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Here's one Gary Passingham was playing around with back in June. Early run on new engine, pump fuel, too rich and with a glitch when the secondary injectors came on line.

Doesn't match the Dagenham Dustbin torque figures but OK for 1.7bar road use................... and to take the win at Round 3 PRO Drag Street Series! :thumbsup:











It gets a bit more lively on race fuel and higher boost.


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

ATCO- The point was how much midrange it has, ie its driveable, and not even having 250bhp or 250lbft by 5000rpm (under half of each what the YB had by the same revs) doesnt make the graph you posted look very nice on the road to me, esp as that engine has half a litre over the one I posted.


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Steve, I didn't offer any comment about driveability and you will get no arguement from me about the benefit of mountains of torque from low revs. I posted it just by way of comparison and to show that whilst you can get BHP, it does not necessarily guarantee torque across the range like the Ford. 

The above torque curve admittedly does change substantially when the boost is turned up, however the configuration of the engine is never going to deliver a shed load of torque at low revs. But it does not matter because under 'power' conditions with the sequential gearbox the rev-drop on changes still leaves you above 6000.

With respect to road use, I have commented before about how the car drives. The map has been cleaned up somewhat since this initial run to deliver more, cleaner power/torque, however that sharp thresh hold between asleep and awake remains. It isn't in reality that bad on the road because it means I can drive around in the 1500-4000 range with enough power to clear any traffic without getting any nasty surprises. As you can well imagine only a gnats whisker of throttle at the wrong revs/moment sends the car ballistic. OK, you can argue what's the benefit of driving around 'off boost' it seems somewhat pointless, well the novelty of constantly fighting big horsepower on the road all the time soon wears off, gaps to the vehicle in front are perpetually non-existent, every corner begins to feel 'tight' and the life expectancy of your license can be counted in minutes. It isn't like a bike where you can go for the gap or flick around an obstacle. However, when those rare moments arise when the road is clear and its safe to let the revs rise............ its all worth it!

Get yours together and join the club.


----------



## tuRBy (Feb 8, 2006)

SteveN: that is truly amazing then, the graph for the evo CANMAN posted shows the 2L having its powerband from 6700rpm-9400rpm with a large turbo, so with a 2.1L/GT42 to drop that powerband threashold to 4400rpm with only 100cc more must have had alot of time and effort put into it. M.A.D should start doing RB engines, then we could see big boost from 3500rpm on an RB 26/GT42


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

tuRBy said:


> SteveN: that is truly amazing then, the graph for the evo CANMAN posted shows the 2L having its powerband from 6700rpm-9400rpm with a large turbo, so with a 2.1L/GT42 to drop that powerband threashold to 4400rpm with only 100cc more must have had alot of time and effort put into it. M.A.D should start doing RB engines, then we could see big boost from 3500rpm on an RB 26/GT42


Mark has! He was the original mapper of Keith Cowies car when he swapped to the Autronic EMS. 

I think he is an acknowledged expert with Cossie's, however not all engines are alike so whilst the core knowledge is always valuable the idiosyncrasies (tricks) of particular models (like an RB26) often needs extensive experience of mapping them to draw upon to get the very best out of them.


----------



## tuRBy (Feb 8, 2006)

I would be very interested to know the setup combo and if he's got a dyno graph showing a GT42/t88/t51r [BIG turbo etc] on an RB2.6L [no vcam] but any cam setup and head work, compression 8.5 or less. To see it making serious boost at as low RPM as these cossie engines can manage, it should be even lower RPM with 20% more engine capacity.

All the RB graphs ive seen on a 2.6 show big turbos waking up at over 5000rpm


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Keith was originally running twin 3037S units like myself, which Mark did the original mapping.
Since then I think he has moved on (up?) to a GT60, not sure if Mark has done the mapping for it or not.
The car as far as I'm aware has not/never been on a dyno.

If you want to see an uprated RB26 with a T51R maybe Henk/skyrocket will put one of his up. I know he gets (claims!) good spool up and mid-range and his son did win the Dutch Time Attack event at Zandvoort earlier this year in the Car.


----------



## tuRBy (Feb 8, 2006)

cheers ATCO, i will ask henk, i think i may of seen his dyno before, but will have another look to be sure. 

nothing i have ever seen compares to this 2.1L cossie on a gt42 with apparently no Nitrous,

2.7bar, GT42, 7:1compression, 2.1L ,all at 4400rpm sounds amazing to me. On an RB26 that should be 3500rpm~ [allowing for 20% more CC]


----------



## 8pot (Dec 29, 2002)

My dyno sheet is here

http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=97152&page=3

2.7 litre with a gt42, makes its power quite low as well even with 280degree cams and 50mm throttle bodies,. This was on pump fuel with octane booster.


----------



## Pavlo (Sep 12, 2002)

It's worth noting the results for ROd's engine come from an engine dyno where you can hold the RPM until the boost rises. Unless you hold it on the brakes you're not going to see those torque levels at 4500rpm with normal driving.


----------



## R.I.P.S NZ (May 7, 2004)

Pavlo said:


> It's worth noting the results for ROd's engine come from an engine dyno where you can hold the RPM until the boost rises. Unless you hold it on the brakes you're not going to see those torque levels at 4500rpm with normal driving.


I was thinking there'd have to be something like that going on but didn't want to start anything.

I think it would be a pretty safe bet to say that if he drove along in 4th gear at 4000rpm and nailed it, not alot would happen for quite some time.

Rob


----------



## R32 Combat (Jan 29, 2004)

How come all the dyno graghs are curved, expect the 2l engine one?

Was it drawn with a rule?


----------



## Harry (Sep 1, 2002)

*Another chart to add to the fun*

Mapping finished yesterday...figures at the rear wheels on a dynojet rolling road


----------



## Howsie (Feb 25, 2002)

Crazy fool!


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Harry, you are a fruit cake short of a full flock of sheep! :bowdown1:

Why did it stop at 6k, is that peak safe revs? Torque wasn't dropping off so it would have kept pulling. Is that with 'just' turbo's or have you gone new cams, plenums etc.?

With this power what is the expected life of the gearbox........... :bawling:

Would you get the engine in an R32!


----------



## Harry (Sep 1, 2002)

ATCO said:


> Harry, you are a fruit cake short of a full flock of sheep! :bowdown1:
> 
> Why did it stop at 6k, is that peak safe revs? Torque wasn't dropping off so it would have kept pulling. Is that with 'just' turbo's or have you gone new cams, plenums etc.?
> 
> ...


It will happily pull 6500 all day, and this motor shoudl pull 7000. At 11psi theres wasnt much point pulling past 6000 as it had reached peak power earlier.

Whats more interesting is that torque looks like it would have climbed harder from 4500 if we let boost climb. 

Those turbos are rated to 550bhp each and should run to 20psi easy.

The build was extensive, theres not much original left on the enginbe bar the ancilliaries. Its a work of art....



















Still running the stock gearbox and diff for the time being. I have a replacement diff to go in and were working on a gearbox. We're being gentle kind with the current gearbox.....

Others have put LS engine in a GTR - theres was a thread on here somewhere. Someone did it for a drfit car.


----------



## Howsie (Feb 25, 2002)

Has it ripped the car in half yet?


----------



## Harry (Sep 1, 2002)

Howsie said:


> Has it ripped the car in half yet?


Not yet, although we preempted it by seam welding the rear half of the body substantially


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

Interesting point there paul. I know bugger all about engine dynos so ill take your word for that.



R32 Combat said:


> How come all the dyno graghs are curved, expect the 2l engine one?
> 
> Was it drawn with a rule?


I dont know, ring up Norris Designs with your usual pathetic snidey comments, its his dyno.


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

Regarding Robbie and Pauls comments, which seemed valid to me, here is a reply from someone who was there on the day...

*
it was revving up quickly through the rev range and making boost as it went, Id say in fact that on most of the runs the revs were going up QUICKER than they would in 4th or 5th gear.

The thing they seemed to have missed somewhat though, is that if you are in a high gear and off boost, the revs wont rise anyway, as its got not torque till its on boost, lol

In this instance the dyno wasnt holding back, particularly on the run where we did the power curve, the whole run took only a few seconds.*


----------



## tweenierob (Aug 5, 2003)

When i used to do Engine dyno work, it would take a measurement at certain set points and then draw a straight line inbetween them markers.
Every 500rpm for example.

IT is not unusual to see high torque figures on an engine dyno.

Not to say Rods are untrue in any way, but if you hold a car WOT at a set rpm for a bit longer you will see a torque increase. I'd say an engine dyno is more for what is capable of than what it would actually see on the floor.

Rob


----------



## zell (Nov 23, 2007)

Harry, you're a maniac ! :bowdown1:

Hope to get such results with Nissan's V8 :smokin:


----------



## Corsa1 (Sep 8, 2003)

lol at steveN quick report back to passionford


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

[email protected] said:


> lol at steveN quick report back to passionford


i want to know the answer from someone who knows the truth, ie mark or rod or whoever, what you expect?


----------



## MADRod (Nov 12, 2005)

SteveN said:


> i want to know the answer from someone who knows the truth, ie mark or rod or whoever, what you expect?


Just seen this thread. Didnt go back to Dyno for Fighting Torque, sorted the problems first & will be back in October.

More from this engine next time, just like to say no boost levels held etc. just a pull on the handle, over in a couple of secs.

Hopeing for as much as 770bhp on pump & 820 on 109, wont use 120 this time as we will limit ign to 19 deg, have seen 24 on 120 without det but cylinder pressures are way too high. This is a development engine that has hopefully now been sorted.


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

I'm glad to see this car gets the recognition it deserves on here rather than the bickering and disbelievers on PF.

Hats off you


----------



## rapluvalways (Jun 18, 2008)

Agreed with mike, all anyone ever wants to do on Pf is argue.


----------



## scoooby slayer (Jun 13, 2009)

After abit of looking around finally found this thread 
I now own this car after rod the previous owner passed away, still same yb engine but on new build with an efr 9180 turbo 
Tuned on pump fuel v power to 2.7 bar for 768 hp 600 ftlb 
Dyno is motorworx dyno dynamics 
Thought anyone who was reading this thread originally might like an update on the car 12 years later


----------



## MIKEGTR (Jul 8, 2005)

Lol you seem to pick up all the old ‘internet famous’ cars! Good on ya


----------



## tonigmr2 (Sep 12, 2002)

Was the PO the thread starter?


----------



## scoooby slayer (Jun 13, 2009)

MIKEGTR said:


> Lol you seem to pick up all the old ‘internet famous’ cars! Good on ya


It's a car I aspired to for many years and when it came up for sale I had to have it 😁
Can't beat abit of reliving youth 

I was finished but mad are now going to fit a smaller turbine housing as we believe it will not loose any power but will spool a good bit quicker


----------



## scoooby slayer (Jun 13, 2009)

tonigmr2 said:


> Was the PO the thread starter?


Previous owners handle was madrod across the forums and internet sites


----------



## scoooby slayer (Jun 13, 2009)

I've used my current dyno plot and overlayed a similar spec engine except it has 150cc less capacity than mine and it has the smaller exhaust housing on

My current tune is red plot, comparison car is black plot, and looking at my gains off boost due to extra capacity I've put in a theoretical prediction green plot of where I believe we will gain some spool

We have equal power at 7600 rpm and beyond which tells me the smaller housing isn't a restriction at all as the higher the rpms get the more a restriction will become apparent in power loss











If my predictions are correct we will get good gains to the left with no losses to the right, fingers crossed lol 🤞🤞🤞🤞

Turbo shaft speed is monitored and it will be tuned again to the max turbine speed of 116000 rpm for a like for like comparison, an efr 9180 turbo back to back testing flat out on a 1.45 and a 1.05 ar housings


----------



## scoooby slayer (Jun 13, 2009)

Final tune has been done on smaller housing 2.7 bar of boost on a smaller 1.05 turbine housing v power fuel 
A good gain in response for minimal hp losses up top 

Boost at 4200 rpm has gone from 0.5 bar upto 1 bar, boost at 5400 rpm was 1.6 bar we now have 2.1 bar by 4700 rpm
All testing in 3rd gear


----------

