What I would like to say about post 22, is that it is not always good to increase the diametre in 3".
I think that it is a pretty large number for our car and engine size.
With a 3" exhaust we reduce significantly the important backpressure.
Subarus usually have 3" exhausts but there are 2,0 litre engines....

I think that the best diametre is 2,5", still bigger than the OEM, but short enough to keep backpressure in an acceptable level.

 

Thanks Terrbut they come up as thumbnails and not readable

 

If you click on them they grow. But I also emailed you a file with reasonable scaling and a SAE correction.

 

thanks to Terry....

The SAE smoothing data varies slightly with that provided by Dynajet's STD smoothing

 

i am suprised 4 hp gained from an exhaust! not bad at all.

 

I think that there are not so good the gains from a catback exhaust and a CAI.

It is not only the exhaust...

 

I think that there are not so good the gains from a catback exhaust and a CAI.

It is not only the exhaust...

 

SAE and STD are correction factors. Generally SAE is preferred but it just depends on what R56 owners around here post.

Looks like a 5-8whp gain from 4000-redline, not bad considering but different than the advertised numbers.

 

having worked extensively on/with normally aspirated & turbocharged Porsche's on both roller dyno's and the New Zealand Dynapack system, I can assure you Alta's numbers are likely a LOT more accurate. The Dynapack can set the time of the run, control a number of variables, and provide consistent accurate readings. Longer run times provide more accurate and higher resolution measurements more consistent with the real world.
On the tuning end, the Dynapack can hold the engine at any rpm & any load cell.
I know you're here to promote your products as a competitor for Alta, but you're working with much cheaper and less accurate equipment and really showing a lack of experience/understanding when it comes to turbos.
I'd recommend starting with some basics, eg. Maximum boost, it's a relative 'oldie, but goldie'
http://www.amazon.com/Maximum-Boost-...4000444&sr=1-2

It's good to see companies like Alta really investing in the technology needed to take R&D to that next level and creating products that are really a step above the factory in every regard.

 

I totally disagree with your opinion.
A gain from a specific part is measured in all ways.
I do not (and I think nobody wants) to spend a significant ammount of money in order to get a part with a specific advertised performance, where these numbers will show up under specific constrains, specific variables, specific this and specific that.

The car is not be used in a specific world.
The car is used every day, and so the gains must be shown in all circumstances.

With you opinion, everybody is free to presume that alta basically "cooks" the results of the dyno runs to show whatever they want.

Things are simple, a member bought a CAI and a catback exhaust.

The gains were 6-8 hp. nothing more, nothing else.
And please, there is no point to insult other people's experience because they are competitors of Alta.
Because as I read you post, it seems that you work for Alta, so things are even.

In Greece, almost nobody uses ALTA, due to their high price and many doupts on their performance.
Miltek, Minispeed, Schnitzer, Lohen and local tuners with very obvious results in all dunos rule the market.
To find an untuned mini in Greece is probably, impossible

Especially for R56s, the use of a 3" exhaust is not so good.
The backpressure is reduced in a very significant way, and you only come up with less performance than was promising.
Scoobys have 3" exhausts, but do not forget that their engines are 2,0L.

A 3" exhaust should be a very nice mod only if you would plan SHORTLY to tune the car much higher, with a possibly larger turbine.

 

Well said! Thank you for putting some of the differences in dyno technology in laymans terms. You hit the nail on the head!

 

While we are ALL entitled to our opinions yours is simply FALSE in all respects. Your current post count of 11 as of this quote is also suspect.

Greece is one of our LARGEST growing markets. Go speak to MiniSpeed.gr about the ALTA quality etc. They are a HUGE reseller of ALTA and the fact that you mention them in the same sentence as a slam that our products aren't well received is even MORE suspect as to your motivations and point of view. It simply isn't true and makes NO sense to this conversation. I have had no reports of any doubts in our technology, quality or performance from Greece.

The dyno results of 6-8 aren't disputed, they are simply being re-referenced to the type of dyno and setup being used to measure it. This is a common difference in dyno types. There is no criticism of the OP results (and I appreciate the business of course.)

Also, your comment about backpressure is straight up false. A turbo motor is nearly allergic to backpressure. And if you want a scientific and third party evaluation, I suggest you read Kenne Bell's books on the very subject.

Again, thank you for the post, my apologies if my reply is construed as harsh, but I respect your right to a differing opinion.

Let me know if I can help further!

 

For your info, I have already ordered (not from Minispeed but from Minikinetics, because with Minispeed there are several problems) the alta ic, alta PnP and all the set of boost tubes(not the exhaust, sorry but I prefer Miltek).

As for the motivation, I just doubt the fact that with these 2 mods that our friend did, the gains were so low.
Miniclub.gr is the biggest club for Minis in Greece, 2695 members.
Alta just started to show up and gain some respect with PnP which is right now (this is my opinion too) probably the best product in terms of ECU tuning, along with Alta IC, not because of its price ($1260 in Minikinetics costs the FMIC, $1600 in minispeed.gr), but because of its perfect fitting and appearance.
Regarding the reports that you mentioned, the reason is that there are other tuners that rule the market..
As for the post counting, I subscribed here very lately, but in miniclub.gr my posts are reaching a four digit number...
Sorry but I read only the topics that interest me.
About dyno runs, here in Greece Maha Dynos almost rule the market, and are considered probably the most accurate.

But, one way or an other, the "greek" logic is that we dyno the car before the mod, and one or two days after the mod.

The results are straight forward in every case and in every dyno.
So, lets stay in topic.
We have an alta cai and a catback exhaust...

Assuming that the scoop is open(very important prerequisite as you very correct mention in you site) I think that the gains should be at least 12-13 hp at least.
Minispeed uses a TAT duno.

Mustang dyno is considered a very good dyno here and along with Maha, a very "strict" one...

Based on that, please do not consider my post offensive, but since the fact that Alta is starting right now to gain a market share in Greece (knowledge from 2695 minis in Greece), when reading that a car with a CAI and a catback gained only 6-8 hp, along with your very high prices (in Minispeed, because they just overcharge everything), makes me very sceptical about the acctual gains.
But, this did not stop me to install you PnP, your IC and the whole boost tube set.

Regards from Greece,
Marios


P.S: In my initial post I referred to Minispeed.co.uk, not in minispeed.gr (they just use the same name, nothing else is similar)

 

I've been tuning forced induction cars since 1995, but thanks for the vote of confidence.

Being the smart guy you are, you probably already realize the boost, air/fuel, and ignition advance systems are "closed loop" on the R56? The ability to hold and tune by RPM is nifty but irrelevant in this case. If we were tuning a 600+rwhp FI V8 with open loop cell by cell (which I've done, many times), you might have a valid point.

But getting back on topic, the OP was underwhelmed with his performance increase as result of the modifications. Are you saying that the performance is really there and the dynojet just missed it? Or are you saying this particular case is an outlier? I could go along with the outlier, I haven't seen enough before and after dynos to conclusively say one way or the other.

 

Ok, you have the fastest 335. But you still have the stock exhaust, which is fine. But you make it sound like a bigger exhaust won't make a difference. We could make the fastest stock exhaust mini with our turbo kit on it, but its just going to make more power and spool the turbo quicker with a bigger exhaust.

Regarding the intercooler:
Our production core netted 10 cooler degrees F, compared to our prototype. (totaling more than 50 deg) The pressure drop of our prototype was a little high, and this changed from 2.8psi to a much more normal 1.0psi. So we improved both pressure drop and the cooling of the intercooler with our final procution version. This is info from our site, and i am not sure how 40 degrees is bad let alone 50 degrees in drop. Remember this is 40 degrees better than stock! So the over all drop was huge.

I would agree, 3" is too big.....but for a normally aspirated car. Turbo cars love big exhausts! Back pressure on a turbo car(after the turbo) is just going to make the turbo spool slower, and loose power. This is a fact. The only thing bad a 3" system does it make it too loud. But we fixed that.

Great dyno plots! Thanks for posting them up.
There is one thing that i see that makes the graphs different than others. The launch RPM. Maybe the car was floored at 1500RPM and the dyno started its reading at 2500, then its ok. Also the engine seemed to be stopped earlier than normal. Its common for a dyno operator to stop the dyno after peak power. Cars make power at all RPM points, so had the dyno continued to 6500RPM it would have shown that same 6-ishWHP all the way. In the end, the power that we see vs. the dyno graph posted is very close. It shows the same power increases at the same RPM, just a little different numbers, which is expected.


You are right, we could back them up one more time with road going numbers. But the speeds we would be going are illegal and in no way do we promote people going 100MPH on public roads. That is not safe. Showing some zero-60 times is a safe way to do this, but still tons of variables play into the numbers.

As we have said before, the dyno is a great way to show numbers. But in the real world there is only one difference that we can not mimic on teh dyno, more air flow. If we could mimic this higher air flow, we would see more power than on the dyno. So when we see a specific gain from the dyno, we can say for 100% that it will be better on the road.

He does not work for us. But we shouldn't say that the results are inaccurate in the least. Dynos are reasonably accurate, but its how the results are gotten. The second runs show a high launch RPM which definitely effects power numbers and turbo spool. This could be why the differ from what we see. Also the runs look like they take 5.6 seconds where ours are 14seconds. This also effects the overall numbers. But either way you are right it does show a gain in HP.

Great! Lets fix that! I think if most people read our site or our forum posts we have done in the back they would see the proof we have showing the gains we claim. We take our 7 runs and show the average gain. The only graphs that we use the highest HP on is our turbo kit stuff or our own shop car when we tuned it with WI. Our graphs showing part to part differences are not showing peak numbers.

Our prices may be higher, but parts are made in the USA which makes the cost to get it to you pretty high. The dealers in Europe may be able to help you out if you haven't contacted them.

I don't want this to sound bad, but this is a very common thought in the Euro tuner community. This is why some of the other brands you mention make thing that are "OK" or "work just fine" for the car. I would be happy to do a back to back comparo of any of the 2.5" exhausts on our dyno. If we see 10WHP with our system (3") and the stock one is 2.3", i could make a reasonable guess that the 2.5" system are going to make about 3WHP-5WHP compared to 10WHP. For us, while a 2.5" system may have its place in the world, why go to the length of building a system that is ok, when you can build one that blows others out of the water!

"Subarus usually have 3" exhausts but there are 2,0 litre engines...." yes, but a 2.0L WRX in stage 2 or even 3 form makes about 210-230WHP. This is what we are seeing on the R56, in stage 3 form the 1.6L. Given the same engine HP, the engines are flowing the same amount of air, and in turn showing that a 3" exhaust can benefit from both.

Please don't think we are arguing with you at all, just trying to make our point to those reading the posts. It seems that far to often the Euro way of tuning is touted at gold when in fact, some of us guys in the US know what we are talking about. No one argues with us when we dyno'ed the JCW R53 Exhaust and our 2.5" system back to back, and we show it makes more power. This is showing that some aftermarket parts which are supposed to be better than stock, can still be improved upon.

 

Ummmm, no that is not true. The AFR is not closed loop under full throttle conditions above a certain point. This is proven by us modifying the MAF curve and getting AFR changes. And getting the AFR changes to stay. If you are using some of your Porsche tuning that is the case with those(at least from what i hear). These cars do have a wide band front 02 sensor, as does the mini. In fact many cars have widband front 02 sensors, but most do not do closed loop to redline. In fact besides the Porsche, i can't think of any turbo or SC car that does. But i can assure you that the Mini doesn't do closed loop all the way to redline.

Yes OP may not be happy with the results, but was the intake scoop pulled out?

 

The MAF closes the loop on the fueling. It's not perfect (e.g. air/fuel ratios will move), but it eliminates the need for cell by cell speed density tuning.

The BMW N54 (335i, 535i, etc) use a fully closed loop system via. wideband sensors, as does the European R56. But my point wasn't to get in to a debate on how great MAF fuel metering is or isn't, we're talking about dynos here. And for my money dynojet tuning is more than adequate for a 175hp R56.

What's extra funny is reading people make the argument that dynojets read lower than full load dynos. Never heard that one before.

 

Dear ALTA2,

1) I totally agree with your opinion about IC. That's why I have already ordered one.

2) You mention: "But either way you are right it does show a gain in HP."

I know that I am correct, it is less than advertised.

3) You mention: "In the end, the power that we see vs. the dyno graph posted is very close. It shows the same power increases at the same RPM, just a little different numbers, which is expected."

It is 20% less, plus the fact (that it is nowhere mentioned here), that our friend has installed also an ALTA CAI. So, something is missing here.
Please, do not mention about air flow in road, because every dyno that respects its self, has a very large fan in front of the car in order to simulate this flow. ( At least in Greece...)

4) You mention: "but a 2.0L WRX in stage 2 or even 3 form makes about 210-230WHP. This is what we are seeing on the R56, in stage 3 form the 1.6L. Given the same engine HP, the engines are flowing the same amount of air, and in turn showing that a 3" exhaust can benefit from both."

The WRX is originally 225hp at the crank. Not stage 2 or 3. You cannot presume in any case that a 1,6L engine that has the same performance with a 2,0L engine, it produces also the same or more quantity of exhaust gases.
No, since the fact that they produce the same HP, the 2,0L engine produces more due to its size.

5) I know and agree that you do not in any way promote anybody to go with 100mph in public roads. That is the reason why we are discussing about dynos and etc...
Thank God, in Greece the speed limit is 82 mph.....!!!!!!!

 

Hi Jeff,

On the 335i I've tested a variety of 335i exhausts and they offer mild gains, because the factory catback/mid cats are so good. Whether or not the MCS catback is good is open for debate. But its easy to inadvertently temporarily change the boost levels or air/fuel ratios. The result would be nice dyno sheets from the tuner, but less than spectacular independent dynos. That is why I always like to see boost and air/fuel plots along with dyno sheets.

On the intercooler, we might be talking about different aspects. In my (limited) testing I noticed a 40 degree rise over ambient post intercooler during 1/4 mile pulls. What is the average rise over ambient with your upgraded intercooler during a 1/4 mile pull?

 

Go look at dyno charts of a 2.0L WRX with a chip, intake, exhaust.

The numbers he said 210-230 WHP are what they dyno at to the WHEELS with those mods, plus a few other minor mods (boost tubes, etc).
Sure they have 225 at the crank, they dyno no where near that to the wheels in stock form. Like he said, the performance of the 1.6L MINI engine in terms of power output is quite similar to that of the 2.0L WRX engine.

 

If we are talking about the wheels (225 at the wheels in a WRX, which is a 4-wheel drive, so we are talking about 17-20% losses (or even more), is about 263 at the crank.

I would really love to have a mini with 263 at the crank.

So, if we compare a mini with 263hp at the crank with a WRX with 263 at the crank, then yes, the power output is the same, but the quantity of gases is not(at least you cannot prove it)...

 

Hi,
I got confused at this paragraph.

How can a 2.0l engine flow the same amount of air as a 1.6l engine based on it's power output?

Due to the physical capacity of the engine, the only way for a 1.6l engine to flow the amount of air of a 2.0l engine at 7000RPM is for it to rev at a speed of more than 7000RPM.

 

man this is a nice pissin contest keep it comin. im even learning stuff. my head is going to pop off. but dont stop i want to learn more.

 

There is a lot more involved than just displacement as far as flow goes.

 

From the little I know of cars, a 1.6l engine can flow the same amount of air as a 2.0l. The reason is BOOOOST! Up the boost and there goes more air. So it's possible. In this case we are comparing 2 turbocharged cars so it's not the best example. What I got out of Alta2's comment was pretty much that a 3 inch exhaust system is fine on our r56 and well as the wrx. please someone correct me if i'm wrong!