Nubira 2.2 Turbo 217 whp and 204 tq (graph posted)

Nubira2.2 · Post by **Nubira2.2** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 7:42 am

thats true
went to the dyno today

it was 217 whp and 204 tq
safe AFR 11.5 - 11.8
13psi

post graph soon

vid @ the dyno http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQWKQlgo9L4&

exist3nce · Post by **exist3nce** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:29 am

Congrats on the new numbers. I know you will feel the extra power. What kind of dyno did you goto this time ? Was it a dynojet?

I am convined that your motor must have better head, cams, or intake manifold to produce more HP with less torque. That and probably mine was designed with more more focus on fuel economy and emissions.

daewoomofo · Post by **daewoomofo** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:15 am

yeah nice numbers. you have to remember the old saying "there is no replacement for sispplacement" (which means the bigger engine, the more power)

exist3nce · Post by **exist3nce** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:35 am

daewoomofo wrote:yeah nice numbers. you have to remember the old saying "there is no replacement for sispplacement" (which means the bigger engine, the more power)

Well regardless of displacement, if our motors are the same family and have similar heads, cams, etc then the powerband should also be similar as well. Typically a larger displacement will give you more torque earlier in the rev range, but the opposite is happening between my 2.0L and his 2.2L. So my only guess is that the T22SED (I think) breathes better overall in the top end and holds torque better into the higher rpms, thus making more HP.

edit: Just took another look at the 2.2L 185whp dyno graph, and yes his torque is holding alot better into the higher RPMs, with his peak @ 5200rpm compared with my peak @ 4600rpm.

daewoomofo · Post by **daewoomofo** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 11:07 pm

from what ive read (and i very well could be wrong) the 2.0 and the 2.2 are the same engine on the top, its just the pistons crank and rods that are different. i was under the inpression that the head, cams, and all of that is the same between the 2 engines, if im wrong please some one correct me (seriously. im not being a smart ass, i would like to have the correct info)

exist3nce · Post by **exist3nce** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 11:44 pm

daewoomofo wrote:from what ive read (and i very well could be wrong) the 2.0 and the 2.2 are the same engine on the top, its just the pistons crank and rods that are different. i was under the inpression that the head, cams, and all of that is the same between the 2 engines, if im wrong please some one correct me (seriously. im not being a smart ass, i would like to have the correct info)

Thats pretty much what I thought too.

mocpac · Post by **mocpac** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:36 am

basically only rods and crank. Pistons are the same.

daewoomofo · Post by **daewoomofo** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:21 am

doesnt the 2.2 have a larger bore? or is the increase in size only from stroke?

mocpac · Post by **mocpac** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:45 am

only the stoke. You can use some 10.5:1 pistons from the c20xe in a leganza. but need the leganza rods and boom some more HP to the engine.

Pir0 · Post by **Pir0** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 5:28 pm

Are leganza pistons lower CR than the 10.5:1 redtop pistons?

Or where is this extra power coming from?

Leganza pistons are pressed onto the rods right? they dont have a fully floating gujon [sp??] pin?

exist3nce · Post by **exist3nce** » Sat Mar 01, 2008 8:26 am

Dyno graph ready yet?

Nubira2.2 · Post by **Nubira2.2** » Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:56 pm

yeap!!

what do u think guys ???

Post by **PrecisionBoost** » Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:04 pm

It seems a bit odd that your torque flattens out (if not goes down slightly) between 3K and 4.5K....... I would expect it to be slightly smoother and a more pronounced jump as the turbo spools up.

A digital boost controller would probably help out in this situation.

Does your dynoshop have the option to log boost?

I'm pretty sure that Dynojet makes a boost sensor that you can just plug in.... but perhaps I'm thinking of another dyno company.

Nubira2.2 · Post by **Nubira2.2** » Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:21 pm

definitely it would help
car does full boost over 4k rpms
maybe that turbo lag is the one that is saving my tranny

Post by **PrecisionBoost** » Sat Mar 01, 2008 7:50 pm

Your still right around that 200 ftlb range.... I don't think your going to have a problem unless you have the unlucky chance of having a "weak" gearbox.

If your hitting full boost at 4K then your engine should be making 200 ft lbs

I would expect to see a fairly straight line between 3000 RPM and 3750 RPM and then a fairly quick rise to 200 ft lb around 4000 RPM

Again.... most likely an issue with the manual boost controller which allows exhaust to leak out the wastegate prior to full boost.

A digital keeps it closed very tight and opens up just at the right moment to ensure that you don't get a boost spike.... so it helps the turbo spool up a bit quicker.... you might find it spooling 250RPM earlier with a digital controller.

If your happy with the power.... why change...... I'm just saying that your car would feel slightly faster with a digital boost controller to help in the midband during spooling of the turbo.

Again...... some people (such as myself) like a smoother transition like you have.... if I were in your shoes I'd probably be happy with what I have.... but I might try to find out why I drop from 3000 to 3400 when it should gain slightly.

But then again I don't usually have to pay for dyno time.... so it doesn't cost much to fool around until things are just right.

It would be really nice to see your A/F ratio plotted against those numbers..... it's typically available with the WINPEP software if they did a wideband reading.

I have to think that your A/F is in transition right at that spot ( 3K to 3.4K )..... perhaps a quick lean to rich transition as the boost hits atmospheric ?