follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook.
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Delicious Tuning
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB > 2nd Gens: GR86 and BRZ > BRZ Second-Gen (2022+) -- General Topics

BRZ Second-Gen (2022+) -- General Topics General topics for the second-gen BRZ


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-02-2021, 03:59 PM   #29
Strat_FRS
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Drives: 2015 FRS for daily and track use
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 61
Thanks: 13
Thanked 146 Times in 36 Posts
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PulsarBeeerz View Post
I don't buy that this dyno reads 14% lower than a Dynojet either. Mustang dynos read whatever the operator wants..That tuned Gen1 would be making over 200whp on pump gas if that was the case and the Gen2 245whp which doesn't happen on Dynojets... It reads like a Mustang dyno calibrated to deliver result similar to a Dynojet with SAE correction factor.

The dyno does not read what the operator wants. There is no way to skew the result or scale it using the holeshot software we use. The only thing you can do is skew the load loss calibration by running it in gear for adding to the drivetrain drag. However this was not the case. Both cars were run on the same day using the same prep process without any scaling.



Yes the turbo FRS was done in the summer with warmer temperature and yes it wasn't the strongest performer especially given our fuel quality. IF SAE correction was applied you would see a bigger gap but I left the numbers uncorrected on all vehicles. What you are seeing there is how knock resistance can really come into play when you have a high compression motor and add boost to it without having enough octane. Higher octane would have made a significant difference in that case.
Strat_FRS is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Strat_FRS For This Useful Post:
alphasaur (12-04-2021), DriveDriftDogfight86 (12-03-2021), Kona61 (12-04-2021), Sport-Tech (12-02-2021)
Old 12-02-2021, 04:34 PM   #30
Sport-Tech
Senior Member
 
Sport-Tech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Drives: TBD
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,511
Thanks: 578
Thanked 647 Times in 360 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
@Strat_FRS, would you have a baseline run from a non-tuned 1st gen on the same dyno you could post for comparison? Or post a link to a before/after on the FRS mods/tune?

Last edited by Sport-Tech; 12-03-2021 at 12:00 AM.
Sport-Tech is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Sport-Tech For This Useful Post:
timurrrr (12-02-2021)
Old 12-02-2021, 11:32 PM   #31
PulsarBeeerz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: JRSC BRZ
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 790
Thanks: 575
Thanked 606 Times in 333 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphasaur View Post
While the turbo does look weak, a reasonably tuned SC/Turbo gen 1 is ~260-280whp. If the gen2 can hit 230-240whp with minor mods for me it makes a FI gen 1 a hard argument to make when you also look at the worse reliability profile.
Ok, I understand you were speaking for your particular scenario now. For myself, a owning a SC'd paid off Gen1, hoping back into dept for the same car with less power that has to be modded again would be a poor choice. BUT of course our situations are different! If I had a nearly stock Gen1 and only a could years into payments I could easily see making the leap. Well I'd move up class to Zupra or M2 but you see what I mean.lol
PulsarBeeerz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 12:44 AM   #32
Sport-Tech
Senior Member
 
Sport-Tech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Drives: TBD
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,511
Thanks: 578
Thanked 647 Times in 360 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Found a Mustang dyno graph for a stock 2013 BRZ on Perrin's site that gives 164 whp and 142 torques. http://https://www.perrin.com/blog/p...z-dyno-testing
So compared to the 214/175 found for the gen 2, the latter shows a 30% gain in peak wheel hp and a 23% gain in max torque. Not on the same dyno of course, and the refreshed twins did get 5 more hp.
Sport-Tech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 01:05 AM   #33
PulsarBeeerz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: JRSC BRZ
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 790
Thanks: 575
Thanked 606 Times in 333 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sport-Tech View Post
Found a Mustang dyno graph for a stock 2013 BRZ on Perrin's site that gives 164 whp and 142 torques. http://https://www.perrin.com/blog/p...z-dyno-testing
So compared to the 214/175 found for the gen 2, the latter shows a 30% gain in peak wheel hp and a 23% gain in max torque. Not on the same dyno of course, and the refreshed twins did get 5 more hp.
What was the correction factor? None, STD, SAE? They aren't comparable at all..
PulsarBeeerz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 02:57 AM   #34
Sport-Tech
Senior Member
 
Sport-Tech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Drives: TBD
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,511
Thanks: 578
Thanked 647 Times in 360 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Use of a correction factor won't make a huge percentage difference here with such a large gen 1 to gen 2 gap, but I fully agree stock gen 1 data from the same dyno run in the same conditions, uncorrected, would be the best comparison by far, which is why I asked the OP to post that if available.
Sport-Tech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 07:34 AM   #35
nikitopo
Senior Member
 
nikitopo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Drives: '15 BRZ RA
Location: Greece
Posts: 3,765
Thanks: 2,378
Thanked 1,919 Times in 1,251 Posts
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Don't want to comment about the dyno numbers, but air-fuel ratio in new engine looks to be optimal and exactly the same with what some 1st gen tuned cars are running. Not the rich air-fuel ratio they had with the factory tune. Of course, engine temperatures will be another story. Sometimes I have a feeling that the 2.0lt engine was held a bit back and had a conservative tune, because of reliability concerns raised by Toyota. This time looks to be more confident or it will be easier to stick the finger to Subaru in case of future issues (<- your engine! ).
nikitopo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 02:34 PM   #36
Strat_FRS
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Drives: 2015 FRS for daily and track use
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 61
Thanks: 13
Thanked 146 Times in 36 Posts
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sport-Tech View Post
Use of a correction factor won't make a huge percentage difference here with such a large gen 1 to gen 2 gap, but I fully agree stock gen 1 data from the same dyno run in the same conditions, uncorrected, would be the best comparison by far, which is why I asked the OP to post that if available.

We are doing some more testing here and will showcase more gen1/gen2 parts and differences. This will shed more light on the situation.


The only correction you can do using the Holeshot software is SAE. STD is a often used on the dynojet as it reads 3-4% higher than SAE.
Strat_FRS is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Strat_FRS For This Useful Post:
Blighty (12-03-2021), Pete (12-03-2021), soilent (12-04-2021)
Old 12-04-2021, 10:28 AM   #37
Jianlun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Drives: GR86 RC
Location: Singapore
Posts: 159
Thanks: 42
Thanked 140 Times in 73 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)


I would have thought the catless Borla would be worth something at the top end vs the stock catted dp, even though the runners are a tiny bit smaller. Maybe the AFRs are super out of whack at the top end?

Keep em coming Strat_FRS!!!!
Jianlun is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Jianlun For This Useful Post:
alphasaur (12-04-2021), Blighty (12-04-2021), cactus (12-05-2021), Interceptor777 (12-04-2021), Pete (12-04-2021), PhatFreshPrince (12-04-2021), Strat_FRS (12-04-2021)
Old 12-04-2021, 11:03 AM   #38
alex87f
Meow
 
alex87f's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Drives: GT86
Location: Belgium
Posts: 261
Thanks: 141
Thanked 178 Times in 93 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
I'd be very interested to see whether using FA24 headers nets any interesting gains on an FA20.

In places like here where aftermarket parts can cause issues with your insurance, having a completely stock looking header would definitely help.
alex87f is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to alex87f For This Useful Post:
cactus (12-05-2021)
Old 12-04-2021, 11:52 AM   #39
Pete
Senior Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Drives: 22 BRZ
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 613
Thanks: 1,313
Thanked 478 Times in 230 Posts
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Without a tune, just the headers alone pretty much got rid of the torque dip completely. I can't wait to see what some 2022 model optimized headers with a tune will do. Come on ecutek! Those are the exact same Borla headers I had on my 2013, and they were great at the time but within a few years after that there were much better performing headers out there.

It didn't sound too loud either, @Strat_FRS is it possible for you to get some sound clips with headers and stock exhaust? Thanks for the work you've already done. I subbed to your channel, and I'm dropping likes on your vids.

That's the setup I will probably have (headers+stock headerback) because I don't want it to be crazy loud this time, but do want the mid range gains from a good set of headers.
__________________
2013 FRS -> 2011 CTS-V -> 2006 Cayman S -> 2015 GTI -> 2022 BRZ

Last edited by Pete; 12-04-2021 at 12:04 PM.
Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Pete For This Useful Post:
JesseG (12-12-2021), Strat_FRS (12-04-2021)
Old 12-04-2021, 01:35 PM   #40
Strat_FRS
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Drives: 2015 FRS for daily and track use
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 61
Thanks: 13
Thanked 146 Times in 36 Posts
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alex87f View Post
I'd be very interested to see whether using FA24 headers nets any interesting gains on an FA20.

In places like here where aftermarket parts can cause issues with your insurance, having a completely stock looking header would definitely help.

You read my mind. This is next on the list so stay tuned. We will optimize the gen2 stock and gen1 stock headers via tuning on the gen1 car and since we've already done this for the Borlas you will see exactly how they stack up.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post
Without a tune, just the headers alone pretty much got rid of the torque dip completely. I can't wait to see what some 2022 model optimized headers with a tune will do. Come on ecutek! Those are the exact same Borla headers I had on my 2013, and they were great at the time but within a few years after that there were much better performing headers out there.

It didn't sound too loud either, @Strat_FRS is it possible for you to get some sound clips with headers and stock exhaust? Thanks for the work you've already done. I subbed to your channel, and I'm dropping likes on your vids.

That's the setup I will probably have (headers+stock headerback) because I don't want it to be crazy loud this time, but do want the mid range gains from a good set of headers.

Thanks for the sub. You get a bit more growl with the headers but cold start sounds tinny due to cat warmup procedure. The sound is not too great - I think something like a Perrin catback and turning off the sound enhancer will be the sweet spot here.
Strat_FRS is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Strat_FRS For This Useful Post:
alex87f (12-05-2021), bcj (12-05-2021), Pete (12-04-2021), soilent (12-04-2021)
Old 12-04-2021, 03:45 PM   #41
Jucostud
Rookie
 
Jucostud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Drives: '22 BRZ Premium MT6
Location: DFW
Posts: 147
Thanks: 196
Thanked 142 Times in 51 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Awesome info again Alex! Thank you, and keep it coming!
Jucostud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2021, 06:17 PM   #42
Blighty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: WR Blue Pearl 2022 Subaru BRZ
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 719
Thanks: 692
Thanked 491 Times in 254 Posts
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strat_FRS View Post
We are doing some more testing here and will showcase more gen1/gen2 parts and differences. This will shed more light on the situation.


The only correction you can do using the Holeshot software is SAE. STD is a often used on the dynojet as it reads 3-4% higher than SAE.
Thank you for doing all this.
Blighty is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My FA20 NA Dyno Results and Analysis - Stock, 98 RON, and E85 pt1878 Engine, Exhaust, Transmission 12 12-17-2021 08:43 AM
BRZ MPG Data Analysis housecat BRZ First-Gen (2012+) -- General Topics 30 02-14-2016 08:32 PM
Data analysis and modification with Python burdickjp Software Tuning 17 07-12-2015 08:19 PM
Recognizing Brake Fade with Data Analysis GSpeed Tracking / Autocross / HPDE / Drifting 25 07-06-2015 12:42 AM
In Dyno we trust, so let's bring some data mobybrz Engine, Exhaust, Transmission 12 09-18-2013 12:37 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2022 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.