What do you think was the problem with STS?

[Abygale]

Thank you for all your time on this Alltrbo......I know many of us appreciate your insight here.

[Venom40k]

Originally Posted by scrming

Heck, I'm seeing some interesting things on my car right now... Makes me think perhaps the car does behave incredibly different on the dyno than it does on the street...

Do tell!

[Blade]

Yo....ALLTRBO here's Vince's site:

http://trifectaperformance.com/

He loves talking tunes. Talked to him last night, he just picked up a Buick Lacrosse with one of those new 6spd automatic transmissions. He was going on and on about seeing some major improvements in his tunes in the coming weeks, since he has the transmission to play with now.

BTW.......where is this vide of the STS doing burnouts? I looked through that Turbo thread and couldn't find one.

[scrming]

Originally Posted by ALLTRBO

Gah, just noticed some typos in my last post. I'm OCD but I think you all know what I meant and since it's quoted, I'll just leave it as is, heh.


LOL, but no, no, we're trying to accomplish the same goal, just discussing it from our own viewpoints or whatever. PLEASE leave politics out of it! Those guys have different agendas altogether, heh...



See, the dyno is a funny thing, I agree.
[storytime]Somewhere in the middle of my modding on my AWD Talon a couple few years ago, I headed up to a free AWD dyno day some 90 miles away from where I lived. During that trip I had my laptop fired up with DSMlink and was doing highway pulls in third and fourth to tune as best I could before I got there.
I had it dialed in nicely... 21psi, 93 octane, stock timing and no KR and a slightly rich(er than needed) AFR, and it just generally pulled like crazy in both gears.
I got to the Dynojet AWD dyno, strapped in and warmed up but not too hot with their fan blowing on the IC/radiator with the hood open. The conditions were about as comparable as it could get while stationary. Same boost, ambient temp, baro, altitude, etc. Of course the only difference was actual load, and true airflow.
First pull, only 290awhp with around 7 degrees of KR (a LOT when total max advance is 16 degrees!). I gave it a bit more fuel and the second (and last) pull was 293awhp with still 7 degrees of KR! I've had that kind of timing retard on the highway before in other conditions, and the car falls flat on its face. I'm thinking it should have been around 350awhp at the time.[/storytime]

So, in that case, due to the conditions, the car made much LESS hp on the Dynojet than on the street. It was a turbo car tuned to the edge, similar to the AAC car, but an opposite effect occured, and also in contrast from what you've experienced.
Air to air IC'd turbo cars tuned to the edge of knock really need that airflow, so you can't compare the N/A dyno vs. street results to these cars. This also shows that you can't always assume the car will produce better dyno results on a Dynojet (of which there are many models) than on the street.
My only guess is that the 6.5 psi STS dyno'd the car at was at a lower ambient temp than the runs at the track (excluding the variables about driver skill, traction, blah blah blah) and/or better (and cooler) fuel was used on the dyno.
Again, I know that random dyno to dyno numbers vary considerably, but on the same dyno in the same conditions, it is a fair enough comparison for actual power gained.

It's very reasonable that you're issue is the lack of a straight story. However, I didn't see anything out of order if it was all true, from what I've read it was "this this this and also this" and not "this, but I mean that, I mean, then something else"... and it could make sense, but now you said that 'the' Trifecta guy, Vince (right?) basically said that he didn't tune it further after those runs.
What does 'basically' mean, what did he say exactly?
I'm just trying to get the full truth as well, that's why I've wasted so much time on this already.

Funny that you mention your ECU acting 'interesting'; Just a couple weeks ago I dyno'd my bone stock LLT M6 Camaro (RS, but with the 1LT aluminum 18's installed), also on an AWD Dynojet (in 2WD mode, of course). 243whp best. He did say his dyno reads on the low end according to other customers.
He did four alternating third gear pulls and fourth gear pulls (3rd, 4th, 3rd, 4th, all with traction and stabi control off). Both times, the 3rd gear charts showed a square wave of a hp curve, but the 4th gear pulls were normal. We've both seen that square wave before, and it's indicative of KR. So much for GM's BS about the tune being optimized on 87! Mine gets only 93 now. Anyway...
Fourth puts more of a load on the car than third, why would it have knock in third but not fourth? Funky un-optimized gear-based tuning is my only guess, and that's possible (my ZX-10R had factory gear-based tuning). So yes, we both think these ECU's act funky compared to the 'norm'. Hmm...
Everything I've been able to gather has told me this ECU is definitely something else... Nothing impossible, just new and more advanced. Again.

I'd like to talk to an STS engineer or tech or whoever designs and builds these kits, as well as the Trifecta tuner. Anyone have any contact info?
I'm still waiting on clarification by the STS sales rep for the questions I've yet to be answered (I'm not holding my breath until Tuesday... Practically everyone's off work today anyway).

Good gosh, I need to finish/test this cable so I can get out of here sometime today...

Again... Forget about the dyno results... The dyno could have shown 1000 RWHP, it wouldn't have mattered! It's the real world that matters! I was running the same track, at the same time, same conditions and was consistently 14.3 to 14.5 (when I really hot lapped it) and trapping 96 to 97 MPH...

Now lets look at the time slip from an SS i lined up against... Ok, STS/AAC car pulled a 2.4 60'. A bit slower than my 2.1... The SS however pulled a 2.498. So even though the STS/AAC got off to a slow start it's still in line with the SS.. SS ended up with a 14.025 at 104 MPH! So the whole theory of big wheels, and gearing seems to be a bit of a stretch.... So if it's a tune issue, which what AAC said it was, then why is STS saying the tune is spot on and Vince says he has not made any tune adjustments since the car came off the dyno... Maybe it really was driver error... I mean I watched the guy make at least 3 passes (I was standing right there in the staging lanes)... looked like he was running it all out to me...

Bottom line is there are some serious inconsistency with the story.... I'm guessing we'll never know what the deal is with the AAC car.... Best hope is that STS actually gets a plain old V6 and puts it on and runs it...

[scrming]

Originally Posted by Venom40k

Do tell!

Not yet... got back to your popcorn! LOL

[Venom40k]

Originally Posted by scrming

Not yet... got back to your popcorn! LOL

Doh!

and Blade.... page 14. (7 post down)

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showth...=71749&page=14

[Blade]

Originally Posted by Venom40k

Doh!

and Blade.... page 14. (7 post down)

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showth...=71749&page=14

Thanks bub!!

[ducted]

I've been watching this video:

I don't know if you're referring to this, but even without knowledge about forced induction, I can see the problem it's not the turbo.

At minute 1:10 I can see a moderated or normal launch, I can hear the turbo spinning but the engine didn't raised the top RPM, so I assume the driver didn't pressed fully the accelerator nor fast. Call it a "Driving Miss Daisy" start.

At minute 1:36 the things change radically, hear how the turbo starts spinning, the wheels also start spinning fast and when the driver release the brake... someone stopped recording. Call it "The Fast & The Furious: Director's Cut". (Everybody knows in a director's cut edition, the best scenes are removed...)

At minute 1:46 everything goes really bad, notice the sound of the turbo and the engine trying to spinning up slowly, but something is retaining from spinning fast.

I think the most probably can be the brake by itself due a overheating or a half hooked piston in the caliper. Maybe the driver didn't disabled the TC/StabiliTrack controls or whatelse. But after watching the minute 1:36 I have no doubts about the STS turbo system is working as expected.

Consider also the asphalt and the tires, both look giving a good grip. Nobody tried to do the same with his stock (or mostly bolts-on tuned) V6 over a good asphalt with the tires warmed? I tried, and mine can't do that.

Just to mention if someone watched the Lingenfelter supercharger video for the Camaro V6 ( ), look the technique used by the driver. He doesn't start accelerating with the car completely stopped. He releases the wheels a bit, then he brake & accelerate at the same time.

Obviously a supercharger it's totally different than a twin turbo, but it's not the same start accelerating with the brakes fully pressed like in the STS video, or do it like as seen on the Lingenfelter video.

Well... that's all. And please, excuse my english.

Cheers,
ducted.

[ALLTRBO]

Originally Posted by scrming

Again... Forget about the dyno results... The dyno could have shown 1000 RWHP, it wouldn't have mattered! It's the real world that matters! I was running the same track, at the same time, same conditions and was consistently 14.3 to 14.5 (when I really hot lapped it) and trapping 96 to 97 MPH...

Now lets look at the time slip from an SS i lined up against... Ok, STS/AAC car pulled a 2.4 60'. A bit slower than my 2.1... The SS however pulled a 2.498. So even though the STS/AAC got off to a slow start it's still in line with the SS.. SS ended up with a 14.025 at 104 MPH! So the whole theory of big wheels, and gearing seems to be a bit of a stretch.... So if it's a tune issue, which what AAC said it was, then why is STS saying the tune is spot on and Vince says he has not made any tune adjustments since the car came off the dyno... Maybe it really was driver error... I mean I watched the guy make at least 3 passes (I was standing right there in the staging lanes)... looked like he was running it all out to me...

Bottom line is there are some serious inconsistency with the story.... I'm guessing we'll never know what the deal is with the AAC car.... Best hope is that STS actually gets a plain old V6 and puts it on and runs it...

Again, stop ignoring the dyno entirely!

If not fudged, the dyno numbers prove what the car should be able to do, the trap proves what it did do. To get the full picture of what is going on, you have to take BOTH into account as well as everything else.
I take no stock in some random dyno chart showing 400whp. I take note of a dyno chart showing a baseline of 240whp (peak) and then shows 400whp (peak, with a nice curve to match). There is a direct correlation, and it does matter.
...if not fudged.
Yes, the car needs to repeat the same additional physical driving force to the tires in real life for the car to go faster, but part of my point above was to show that it can. If it didn't (because the trap speed also matters!), then why is the question. I'm just repeating myself now, but that sums it up.

Okay, your car ran 7mph faster. Your point is that your N/A car was faster than his turbocharged car. All that you're pointing out is that something wasn't quite working right for a "400whp" car (whether driver, or tune, or engine, or turbo setup, or whatever). We already know that! Same thing for your SS comparo. Let's move on then...

Big wheels and gearing causing all of the issues? Very very big stretch for sure. Those combined with every other mentioned issue? Yep, it all adds up. It's possible...

I have no idea why the apparent tuner's story doesn't match up with the apparent turbo kit vendor's story about the tune, but obviously someone, somewhere is wrong, or lying (or both) about that.
Maybe is was driver error. Well, the driver himself said that! Of course it is pretty hard to screw up a slow starting slushbox car dragstrip pass. Again... add up all of the excuses (if they're valid, or even most of them).

I agree with your bottom line, there are some inconsistencies. Ah well, the internet strikes again, what's new? It's not the end of my world. (Heck, 12's feel slow to me now, let alone mid-14's so it doesn't matter anyway. Maybe I'll get a Corsa catback and call it a day. It is only my DD afterall, the fast car is coming soon! )

I received another reply from STS, I'll post it up after I get home, I'm out of this Memorial-Weekend Friday ghost-town called NASA.

[ALLTRBO]

As just posted in the other thread (to follow up on the first reply that I posted there)...

I'm getting burned out on this so sorry if I haven't answered some questions that I know the answers to or added more cents (I'm way past my $.02), but here's what I have for now...

I asked the sales rep a little more about the STS kit, mainly about how the tune is installed (I'm used to OBD1 GM tuning, I do it all myself), here was the reply.

The ECU will ship with a cable, which you will download the factory tune from, and send the tune off to our tuning department. The tuning department will write the tune for your vehicle and send the tune back to you. Typically we have you download the tune and send it off before you do the install. That way, when you’re done, you’ll have the modified tune in hand to start the vehicle and go.

We use our STS turbos for these systems. We’ve been developing our turbos for quite a while, and have them flowing better than their Garrett equivalents at this point. On the V6 Camaro, we use a 60-1 P-Trim Turbo with a .68 A/R. It’s gated with an STS/Turbosmart Ultragate 38, and we are running an STS/Turbosmart Raceport 52mm BOV. Hope this helps!

Still doesn't clear up some things for me and adds some more confusion (is that the new turbine housing or old? I did ask for both... The ECU will ship with a cable? Tuning department? I thought Trifecta did the tunes? Must bang head now ) :bangdesk:
I'm too tired and have to much to do to worry about this anymore for a while. Good luck sorting it out.

[usa1camaro1969]

I really can't believe there's this much crap still being talked about the showing of a brand new untested set-up on a car that isn't optimized or even designed for the strip. It's no wonder AAC has stepped away from these posts. If I were them I'd stay away from some of this crap too. Instead of waiting for them to get it all sorted you beat them with a stick and I think it sucks. I just hope if a regular shmo finally does install the STS they aren't afraid to post results due to the attitudes shown by the same few that want to bust everyone's balls.
And no, I'm not addressing this at you, ALLTRBO. You have been helpful in trying to bring to light some of the variables and questions that need to be addressed.
We really, really, REALLY need to remember that this, as far as anyone knows, was the first STS install on this V6. We also should remember they were in a time crunch due to a deadline and shipping issues so I have no doubt it wasn't sorted out, yet. If you've ever driven a car down the quarter whose suspension(I do believe they mentioned having to do the slower launch because of this)/tires(I do remember them offering it up) are way off it sucks. Slower launch means less initial boost built up. Finally, remember it was put on a show-car for a company that has no interest in blowing it up with less than 1K miles on it. We still don't know if the tranny/diff can take this much load. The masses asked for videos, they were provided.

[esperman]

I understand all sides of this entire argument/debate.

So far no new videos or data of this system, from anyone.
to me, that means kit=not ready. that simple. I look forward to seeing it perform.

[CamaroSSguy10]

Originally Posted by scrming

hard to say... first it's the oversized wheels, then it was driver error, then it was the tune... now the tune was fine, it was the wheels and the turbo housing was to large...

Even with larger wheels and a bit of lag, i still would have expected to trap better then 90 MPH....

Wish STS would have their own test mule, with normal wheels and tires.. and run that at the track...

You can't say that, because I have 24's on mine and I can do fast burnouts all day. I have a supercharger in mine, but still.

[sparaz]

you have a supercharger on an SS which has a different drive train and engine entirely.