Jackson Racing C38-81 Supercharger - CARB legal

[johan]

Your math doesn't mean anything when we're talking about Church Automotive's pack. Their pack has a "special" calibration that makes it read higher than a normal pack - by a lot... And reality is, all dynos, across all makes of dyno, read differently.

All you can really compare reliably is relative gains on the same car, on the same day, on the same dyno. The rest is hyperbole.

Originally Posted by SPCorBUST

This is going to be an un-scientific comparison, but its as good as I think it can get it.

The very first thread in the Engine, Exhaust, and Transmission sub-forum is on the general calculated differences between Mustang, Dynojet, and Dynapack dynos.

According to that, the community *should* understand as a general reference that Dynapacks are marked as reading 8-10% higher than Dynojets. The numbers you posted are 374.382 on the Dynapack and 328.55 on the Dynojet. If we run a 10% difference for your numbers between dynos, then:

374.382 Dynapack * .9 Dynojet correcter = 336.9438whp Dynojet corrected

Its hard to believe that a 8 hp difference would even remotely be considered as so far off that it's head is "in the clouds" given your stated number of 328.55 and the general rule of thumb, differences in weather between the two days, and whether this is a worst run to best run comparison.



To regularly expect 320-340whp on a Dynojet seems extremely conservative. Personal experience with a C38 and E85 tells me its higher, especially with supporting mods.

A while back, I put down 330whp with a C38 on a Mustang dyno. There are folks with C38's in the KW Owner's thread that have made more than that (albeit on Dynapacks, but when corrected, they were still higher). Again, using the general rule of thumb that Mustangs read 12% lower than Dynojets, then correcting for that: (nevermind that where I did it they claim its a 17% difference compared to other local Dynojets)

330 Mustang * 1.12 Dynojet correcter = C38 369.6whp Dynojet corrected (rule of thumb)
330 Mustang * 1.17 Dynojet correcter = C38 386.1whp Dynojet corrected (their stated difference based on local Dynojet comparisons)

That was with the stock headers, overpipe, and front pipe, and not a lot of tuning time.

I'm currently at 370whp from the Dynapack. Again, following the rule of thumb:

370 Dynapack * .9 Dynojet correcter = C30 HBP 333whp Dynojet corrected

386 (C38 old setup, Dynojet corrected) - 333 (C30 HBP new setup, Dynojet corrected) = 53 hp difference, not maxed out

Driving between the two cars, that difference seems to be about right. That makes going back to a C38 enticing, especially given that neither setup was actually set up to achieve their full potential. I still have a bit of room left on the C30 with the high boost pulley, IMO. I believe I might be able to hit the 340-350whp Dynojet mark (and higher on the Dynapack) with a different header and overpipe setup, a fuel pump change, and some additional tuning time.

TL;DR
Only being able to hit 320-340 on a regular dyno (seems to be a Dynojet dyno) with a C38 seems factually incorrect, and the "Miracle" dyno does not have "its head in the clouds." The publicly posted dyno numbers from community members and general, readily available information on the differences calculated between dyno types in the community/this forum seem to corroborate that. I might do some back-to-back dyno testing to see some differences for myself after my next tuning appointment.

[SPCorBUST]

Originally Posted by johan

Your math doesn't mean anything when we're talking about Church Automotive's pack. Their pack has a "special" calibration that makes it read higher than a normal pack - by a lot... And reality is, all dynos, across all makes of dyno, read differently.

All you can really compare reliably is relative gains on the same car, on the same day, on the same dyno. The rest is hyperbole.

I'm not sure you understand the math. Given that, put simply, if we understand that Dynapacks as a whole read ~10% higher, then the difference between Church's dyno and a standard Dynapack is negligible - it does not have its head in the clouds. If you want to say that it reads higher, then yes, this is true - but this is an understood, stated difference between Dynojets and Dynapacks.

[CSG David]

Originally Posted by SPCorBUST

I'm not sure you understand the math. Given that, put simply, if we understand that Dynapacks as a whole read ~10% higher, then the difference between Church's dyno and a standard Dynapack is negligible - it does not have its head in the clouds. If you want to say that it reads higher, then yes, this is true - but this is an understood, stated difference between Dynojets and Dynapacks.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88696

Just to put the whole dyno argument off to the side, this is our testing with a completely factory RS1.0 + ACE parts. Hundreds of dynos of BRZ/FRS were used to compare factory baselines to ensure they are all within spec. Stock BRZ/FRS generally dynos at 166HP at Church, which happens to be exactly the same numbers as a few local dynojets we have compared with. Obviously...YMMV.

Now back to the C38 JRSC specific posts.

[SPCorBUST]

@CSG David is there upgrade information forthcoming for moving from a C30 to a C38 without having to purchase an entirely new kit?

[NotSoJDM]

Originally Posted by SPCorBUST

@CSG David is there upgrade information forthcoming for moving from a C30 to a C38 without having to purchase an entirely new kit?

Originally Posted by Jackson Racing

The C38 mounts in the exact same location as the C30. The High Boost Pulley fits both C30 and C38.

Based on this info from Jackson Racing, it sounds like it should mount to your existing bracket, no?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by SPCorBUST

@CSG David is there upgrade information forthcoming for moving from a C30 to a C38 without having to purchase an entirely new kit?

Yes, coming soon

If you want to pre-order, PM.

Originally Posted by NotSoJDM

Based on this info from Jackson Racing, it sounds like it should mount to your existing bracket, no?

Negative batman. The C38 is much larger. It's like comparing a TVS1320 to a TVS900.

[VitViper]

Originally Posted by SPCorBUST

I'm not sure you understand the math. Given that, put simply, if we understand that Dynapacks as a whole read ~10% higher, then the difference between Church's dyno and a standard Dynapack is negligible - it does not have its head in the clouds. If you want to say that it reads higher, then yes, this is true - but this is an understood, stated difference between Dynojets and Dynapacks.

Ignorance is bliss. I posted analytical data, not random numbers pull out of someone ass. I have tons of such data and comparisons (all motor car made 360 at Church, and then 304 on my Dynapack -- hardly "negligible": 360/304 = 1.18). You must have used soooo many more dynos around the country than I have (around the world actually), so I guess I'll just bow to your "expertise".

lol...

[VitViper]

C30-94 blower, not even on E85. On a dynojet. Probably make like 480 on the miracle dyno down south.



lol... smh

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by VitViper

C30-94 blower, not even on E85. On a dynojet. Probably make like 480 on the miracle dyno down south.



lol... smh

That's not a FA20...

[SPCorBUST]

Originally Posted by VitViper

Ignorance is bliss. I posted analytical data, not random numbers pull out of someone ass. I have tons of such data and comparisons (all motor car made 360 at Church, and then 304 on my Dynapack -- hardly "negligible": 360/304 = 1.18). You must have used soooo many more dynos around the country than I have (around the world actually), so I guess I'll just bow to your "expertise".

lol...

Your ignorance knows no bounds, and the only thing higher than these numbers is your level of arrogance.

Hat tip to you for the afternoon laugh, it was welcome.

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

[VitViper]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

That's not a FA20...

So? Based on analytical data comparing a dynojet and what you think are actually legitimate #'s off a sky high dynapack, that C30-94 would be 480-490. There's your C30 making absurd numbers.

Originally Posted by SPCorBUST

Your ignorance knows no bounds, and the only thing higher than these numbers is your level of arrogance.

Hat tip to you for the afternoon laugh, it was welcome.

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

Coming from the guy with his fuzzy math logic... doesn't mean much.

Same all motor car.

Church Dynapack


My dynapack


351/304 = 1.15. So for this specific case, that dyno was 15% higher than mine, there goes that "all dynapacks read 10% high".... lol

[SPCorBUST]

@VitViper Let me take a step back here. Dynos aside, because I can see we aren't (and we don't need to) see eye to eye there. Its akin to beating a dead horse.

Members of this forum are either hitting or exceeding your claimed hp levels on dynos other than, but including, the Church dyno.

Related but separate, 2 out of the 3 tuners I have personally worked with have succeeded in doing just that, one doing so with the smaller C30, and one doing so with the C38.

Other tuners who I have not worked with, but have worked with other members and whose dynos are publicly accessible, have also met or exceeded the numbers you claim.

Tuning is complicated, and its an art. I think the community gets that. (if not the whole, then at least myself) I respect the craft. But maybe, just maybe, and as an expert who has tuned all over the world as you've mentioned, there is still something left to be learned, given that your hp results are lower than others.

I in no way shape or form mean any disrespect to your practice of the craft., so take this all with a grain of salt. In the end, this is the internet. Its just my opinion, and its okay to agree to disagree.

[CSG Mike]

I don't understand why you're making such a big deal.

All I care about is the delta, and that the car doesn't blow up when I'm beating on it at the track. It doesn't matter what dyno you use, the AUC/% delta will always be the same.

[VitViper]

Originally Posted by SPCorBUST

@VitViper Let me take a step back here. Dynos aside, because I can see we aren't (and we don't need to) see eye to eye there. Its akin to beating a dead horse.

Members of this forum are either hitting or exceeding your claimed hp levels on dynos other than, but including, the Church dyno.

Related but separate, 2 out of the 3 tuners I have personally worked with have succeeded in doing just that, one doing so with the smaller C30, and one doing so with the C38.

Other tuners who I have not worked with, but have worked with other members and whose dynos are publicly accessible, have also met or exceeded the numbers you claim.

Great story, why do I care?

Originally Posted by SPCorBUST

Tuning is complicated, and its an art. I think the community gets that. (if not the whole, then at least myself) I respect the craft. But maybe, just maybe, and as an expert who has tuned all over the world as you've mentioned, there is still something left to be learned, given that your hp results are lower than others.

I in no way shape or form mean any disrespect to your practice of the craft., so take this all with a grain of salt. In the end, this is the internet. Its just my opinion, and its okay to agree to disagree.

You're right, I have no clue what I'm doing. I only wrote my own MoTeC M150 Flex Fuel firmware for our shop turbo car. http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...1&postcount=21

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

I don't understand why you're making such a big deal.

All I care about is the delta, and that the car doesn't blow up when I'm beating on it at the track. It doesn't matter what dyno you use, the AUC/% delta will always be the same.

I don't really care. Stock FR-S here is 148-150. An auto barely makes 130 here (modded one made 137 before tuning). I posted relative gains from the ground up for James's car, ending at 2.25-2.3x more power than stock after the C38 and E65 fuel. E85 would of been nice for a bit more power, but that's the blend we got and James was more than happy with not just the power, but how the car drives (tuning isn't just about "power").

Take it or leave it.