I love the idea of raising the rev limiter and removing the pops and burbles in sport mode (I find them annoying). I would run 91 octane only and throw in the BMC air filters for good measure. Around 760hp at the crank is pretty good.
Porsche (and all manufacturers) rate HP at the flywheel, we use a dyno which measures power at the wheels, there is roughly an 18% drivertrain loss to the wheels on these.
I don't understand why do we have less power and torque than stock in the lower range ( stage 1 ). The reprogramming of the ECU should be made in such a way that that drivability and response at lower rpms, where you drive quite relaxed should be good or better than the stock parameters that were tuned heavily by Porsche to give a good possible response, given the size of these new turbos and all the constraints to put on a stable torque curve all over the rev range. this is something that always puzzled me, how many tunes available do end up messing up the throttle response at lower rpms and somehow also decreasing the torque figures. In this rpm range, where torque is not abundant, having less torque and/or more lag gives me the feeling of not well good calibration. I had several experiences with older turbo models. I am not sure how is the feeling of this one, but I always get a bit scared when I see the torque dropping from stock in the lower rpms...for me it ruins the feeling of the car. As an example, the Giulia QV, I had an experience tune in my car, it did put more power and torque in the end, but the overall feeling of the throttle, the response, and the fun of the car was gone. Calibration is a very serious and delicate task. Simply more power is likely easy...more difficult to make it safe, and much more difficult to make it well calibrated in terms of throttle response and low rev behavior for turbo cars
@@DrewP.Johnson-p5f I also would like to know the answer to this question. Many tuners look into torque curves, but they disregard the low rpm torque and also they completely disregard response time and throttle pedal linearity. Too rich mixture at low rpms low torque request will result in sluggish response, aiming to too much boost pressure too soon, may create very low reaction times in the torque response in low rpms...OEM tuning is not only about emissions and high safety margins. There is also a huge amount of engineering effort to make sure quick response is obtained at every rpm ranges, traction is good, that the torque request is proportional to the accelerator pedal and no abrupt changes can happen, etc..etc...it is very very easy to ruin the OEM tuning. To actually tune it and make it better everywhere is only possible to a few tuners...Give it more power and ruin it, much easier...
If you could do 0-60 or 1/4 mile runs to show the improvement. I’ve seen videos where a modified turbo S is actually slower than stock due to traction.
When we have opportunities to do that, we try. Often we're working on client cars and don't have access to private roads to test with schedules, etc. We've measured gains with the tune but yes, as you increase power, to capture it from a stop requires wider and better compound tires for traction. That being said, even at 900HP these handle traction well from a roll. We do have some Dragy recorded data here: flat6motorsports.com/products/m-engineering-m-tuner-suite-ecu-tuning-992-turbo (scroll down the page)
If we performed testing on the car, we would have included but this was a client car and we did not. He did mention, he picked up over 8mph trap speed in the 1/4 mile.
We use a hub dyno which reads horsepower at the wheels. There is roughly an 18% drivetrain loss. Manufacturers rate horsepower at the flywheel before there is any drivetrain loss by the transmission and driveline.
@@gokusupersaiya8067 yes, this particular car put out roughly 800HP. Usually, we see about 780-800HP. Here's a reference as well: flat6motorsports.com/pages/992-turbo-power-kits-by-flat-6-motorsports
