Nissan GT-R Forum banner

Bone Stock 2010 GTR + Tune = 540whp/570wtq

23K views 85 replies 33 participants last post by  Sean@Iveytune 
#1 ·
A buddy of mine and I took our 2010 GT-Rs down to see Tim at Surgeline in Portland today. Mine's 100% stock - 0 physical mods. I had it on 101 octane unleaded for safety. At 17psi, it makes some crazy power: 540whp/570wtq. . . over and over and over again.
My buddy made very similar numbers today on 92 octane, but with the addition of a Y-pipe and another pound or so of boost. We were all stunned to see the 2010s responding so well.

Tim is a GT-R tuning master, and all the guys at the shop are top notch. A giant thanks to Surgeline for hosting us today!

I'm thinking 10.9s stock with tune. Any takers?


 
See less See more
3
#11 ·
Didn't get them for a few reasons, but mostly because I rolled in with a tune already on the car (from another vendor) and 101oct in the tank and it didn't seem like it would tell us much to flash back to stock and have it try to burn the fuel. In retrospect, it would be interesting to see what a bone stock 2010 puts down on 92 octane with the stock tune. Might do that next time I'm down there.
 
#5 ·
what gear was the car dyno'd in?

solid numbers, although without a before/after graph on the same dyno it's hard to tell what you really gained.... you're about 40HP and 100tq higher than any other tune only car.... take it to the track and you'll really know how it's running... boost is holding well to redline!
 
#12 · (Edited by Moderator)
what gear was the car dyno'd in?

solid numbers, although without a before/after graph on the same dyno it's hard to tell what you really gained.... you're about 40HP and 100tq higher than any other tune only car.... take it to the track and you'll really know how it's running... boost is holding well to redline!
4th gear

RE: the power. . . yeah, we know! We were really surprised to see these kind of numbers coming out of the 2010s with almost no mods.

RE: the track. . . unfortunately they're closed for the season around here. I do, however, have a nice flat strip of private pavement and a Driftbox that makes a very solid track substitute. I've been drag racing for years and that's how I do my tuning. Turns out that the Driftbox with 1ft rollout config'd is within 0.1s ET and 1MPH of the official strip timers on every car I've ever tested that way, which have been many. SOOO. . . I plan to do some off-season tuning that way.

Some real data points for those interested:

  • my aforementioned buddy ran 11.8 @ 120 at Bremerton Raceway in his bone stock, untuned 2010 earlier this season (included because I never ran mine untuned)
  • my first time to the track, I ran 11.54 @ 121.8 at Mission Raceway on a Cobb Stage 1 map. For reference, this same day, my buddy's car was running 116-117mph
  • my second time to the track, I ran 11.3 @ 124.6 at Pacific Raceways on a custom mail-order tune that was significantly weaker than the tune that's in it now (92 octane timing, old boost control strat, etc.)
  • with my first revision of the rpm-based boost control strategy and 92oct timing, I ran 11.1 @ 127 on my tuning track with the Driftbox timing it (two, back-to-back runs, swapping direction each time)
I haven't run the latest Surgeline tune yet. I will this weekend if the weather holds. I know it's at least 30whp and 60wtq up on the last tune I tested. Oh, and more data: the car has 2500 miles on it and I'm 340lbs.

I think there's a real possibility to see 10.9 @ 130mph bone stock on these cars. I know. . . crazy talk. . . we'll see.
 
#15 ·
Tim is definitely a GT-R tuning master. Everyone at Surgeline/Cobb tuning is great. Highly recommended!

Mine made decent power, but less torque.


Bigger turbos are needed.
Yeah, but I was cheating with better fuel. With a 100oct map and a couple more pounds of boost, you'll probably hit 600wtq with your crazy midpipe.


Bigger turbos are definitely needed.
 
#18 · (Edited by Moderator)
CONGRATS! Tim is the man! My car is 2009 and it made 570wtq on 92 octane, so I don't think there are differences (power wise) but he suggested that I run that map with race gas. This was over 6 months ago, so it didn't have the new "boost control" map and boost fell off quickly after about 5k.If you're in the Portland area, lets race
....hehe j/k
 

Attachments

#19 ·
CONGRATS! Tim is the man!
My car is 2009 and it made 570wtq on 92 octane, so I don't think there are differences (power wise) but he suggested that I run that map with race gas. This was over 6 months ago, so it didn't have the new "boost control" map and boost fell off quickly after about 5k.
If you're in the Portland area, lets race
....hehe j/k
Heh. Thanks! When the tracks open up, let's run!

Was yours full exhaust on that pull?
 
#29 ·
Am I the only one that doesn't think it's possible to see those kind of numbers out of just a tune, even with 101 oct? Doesn't even make sense that someone with a midpipe and tune would make that much on 92 oct.
Tim was very surprised at these #'s also. I know his dyno reads very comparable to other Mustang dynos. We'll get my car back on the dyno in the next couple of days to try to verify #'s. These were the first 2010's he's had on the dyno, as it's only been 2009's up until this point.
 
#30 ·
I'm not trying to say it's impossible, but why hadn't someone been able to produce at least close to similar results? How about jumping on a different dyno? I'd be ecstatic if you did make those numbers as I'd love to make similar with similar mods, but I'm not even close. Do you know which smoothing factor was on? I know you can play with settings on a Mustang dyno in order to give different readings. I'm not trying to discredit anyone here, so please don't jump to that. To my knowledge there wasn't enough of a difference between an '09 and a 2010 to make huge differences in power with a tune.
 
#32 · (Edited by Moderator)
Everyone should understand that a dyno is just a measuring tool. I use this tool to determine if calibration changes change torque or horsepower. Dyno results allow me to optimize calibrations to find a best balance of fuel, cam timing, boost, and ignition timing that produces optimal horsepower and reliability.

With that in mind i thought it would be reasonable to show some other results from this same dyno.

Mustang dyno's are supposed to read low. The truth is that a knowledgeable operator can make the dyno read ANY value. Our dyno here in Portalnd oregon (http://surgeline.cobbtuning.com/) is calibrated to read about 5% lower than a comparable dyno jet. I've done this because dynojet is the industry standard across the variety of platforms that COBB Tuning SurgeLine services.

Please feel free to visit our dyno database online. We just enabled this feature and in fact its not on the web site. You can get to it here:

http://surgeline.cobbtuning.com/dyno/

Feel free to compare any of the selected GTR tunes that i've loaded to the site. Importantly, I've loaded a stock 2009 car for comparison.

Here is a stock car vs a early v110 mapping for your inspection:



http://surgeline.cobbtuning.com/dyno/index...;rgb2=204000000
 
#33 ·
This is a comparison of a recent beta stage 2 tune on a 2010 USDM vs a similar tune on a 2009...



Why did this car make comparatively more power? It did hold more boost but i've yet to tune enough stage 2 2010 cars to know if this difference is real or a coincidence

Best regards
Tim Bailey
Cobb Tuning Surgeline
 
#36 · (Edited by Moderator)
This is a comparison of a recent beta stage 2 tune on a 2010 USDM vs a similar tune on a 2009...



Why did this car make comparatively more power? It did hold more boost but i've yet to tune enough stage 2 2010 cars to know if this difference is real or a coincidence

Best regards
Tim Bailey
Cobb Tuning Surgeline
I wonder if the 2010 GTRs acutators are slightly better then the 09??? i think there is something fishy from 09 to 10 .. its seems all the 2010 hold 15 psi by redline and 09's 12's..

my actuators will be changed this week and we will see if that is the reason...
 
#34 · (Edited by Moderator)
What are your smoothing factors on? All other graphs in your link have nice smooth lines and these are all up and down all over the place. Look I'd love to hit those numbers with just a tune, but prior to now, neither Cobb nor anyone else made those numbers with just a tune. So did you unlock some magic factor in the tuning of these cars that allowed you to make the car so much more efficient? By all means sell me on the possible capabilities of making this kind of power, however, when something sounds too good to be true, it usually is. Also I'm well aware that a Dyno is just a measuring tool and you as vendor to this community should realize that assuming that people don't know that can come off the wrong way. Not trying to be a dick, but at the end of the day you're trying to earn my business not the the other way around.
 
#37 ·
No offense taken at all. I understand your concerns and wanted to address them directly by posting a completely stock car so you can compare it to other GTR tunes. If you go to my dyno database online you can compare any of the recent GTR tunes i've done here.

I think the biggest difference in my recent tunes is the use and refinement of our new boost control coding. Thistle wrote this code for Cobb and its been a revolution for tuning these cars. It makes actuators completely unnecessary and i can define the boost curve however i see fit... within the flow limits of the turbos and injectors.

Why are the numbers so higher than you expect? Well, the dyno reads as it does and in fact it may read more than you are accustomed to. Again, that's why i've added a stock car for comparison. I've calibrated our dyno to read a bit less than a dynojet.

You should also know that i've been calibrating cars for years and i do so as thoughtfully as anyone in the industry. Furthermore, as a core part of COBB Tuning I work directly with the software engineers. The Current COBB GTR tuning GTR software is fantastic so i've got excellent tools to work with.

Best regards
Tim Bailey
COBB Tuning Surgeline
http://surgeline.cobbtuning.com/
 
#35 ·
tim -

nice meeting you this weekend at Redline. the items we spoke about will be emailed to you shortly...i just have to take the time to get what you requested.

quick question. was there a different smoothing factor used between the 09 and 10 pulls? it seems the 10 is 'choppier' in both power and boost? or am i reading the graph wrong?

thanks for the candor.

- jeremy
 
#40 ·
Nice to meet you as well.... all in all it was a great weekend of time attack at Fontana. I just love the fact that the GOTO GTR was able to keep up with the 900 whp turbo NSX.... and we passed the siera siera EVO on the oval. Owned baby!!

I explained the smoothing in the last post.... I'll keep the smoothing consistent in the future.

Regards
Tim
 
#43 ·
Well I'm glad Crash challenged those #'s because now we find out Tim's dyno is calibrated to read more than a stock mustang dyno. Given two competent tuners, I can see one of them squeezing more out of a tune than the other but not to that ridiculous difference. A post like that would lead a reader to assume his tuner was incompetent, which is not fair to all concerned.
 
#47 ·
VEGAS if it isn't holding with 100% WG duty there is nothing the electronics or any boost controller can do about it. Indeed you need to look at the hardware, as long as you're not feeding a leak and you are comparing other cars at similar altitude. I wasn't happy with your car needing higher injector pulse to not run lean either especially when your MAF sensors read normally. I still fear you have undiagnosed hardware issues on your car.
 
#49 ·
I always find these 'dyno wars' conversations interesting. My car dyno'd around 385 ish the first time without any tune, but after the tune was up to 485. Same dyno, same tuner.

Considering this was after the midpipes, y-pipe, and a custom tune for about 15.5 PSI, you would think I would be upset seeing as how a new 2010 runs bone stock at 540 w/tune. But honestly I'm not, my car showed a direct increase of 100hp, that equates to roughly 25% increase for just freeing up the exhaust + a tune. That to me is pretty dang impressive.

As has been noted, a lot of dyno's read differently, both between the manufacture(Dyno Jet, Mustang and DynoDynamics) and also the way in which the dyno is set up for smoothing, correction factor etc. The only real way to compare is to take a before and after of the car to show the change/increase. That is how we should compare otherwise there are too many factors that can contribute to the variation between dyno graphs.

I trust my butt dyno (+/- about 50hp I guess) and it definitely tells me my car stock was much less responsive then when I put the Cobb AP Stage 1 tune on and in turn the Stage 1 tune was a lot slower then my new custom tune (I need to drive in R mode now when I want to pass otherwise I get slip ;-) )
 
#51 ·
I agree. No one is going to make power on these cars outside of the turbo's and motors ability to pump air. Perpaps we'd be better off to publish dyno results in % gain from stock or other appropriate baseline.

Regards
Bailey
 
#54 ·
Tim the problem is if you post % gain on your machine and then everyone uses the exact same thing and doesn't end up with the same % gain, then people are going to assume you falsified your numbers in order to drum up more business. Just do some comparative work on a different dyno to back up your claims.
 
#55 ·
I've tried to be as transparent with our dyno calibration as is possible. When the weather clears perhaps we'll get some trap speeds to provide a reliable metric that is universally accepted.

I know a customer of mine recently did a dyno session on the jotec dyno and made a ton of power... perhaps i'll get him to post his dyno sheets in this thread. I think he made ~520 tq and 530 whp. Given that this is your home dyno perhaps you can appreciate these numbers..... they are very similar to those produced here in portland.

Regards
Tim
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top