No B.S... How much Horse Power?

HILCLMR · Oct 1, 2009

How much horsepower does your Turbo M8 make?
Race / pump/ intercooled / non intercooled / Boost ?

I'm thinking of getting a HCR and doing a Turbo later on, but if they are only at 200 or 225 then I won't bother so help me make my decision.
Thanks guys

Steven c · Oct 1, 2009

PM Product Tester. I think he is doing a HCR for himself right now. He has done alot of M7, M8,and M1000 turbos. He will know what the numbers are on everything.

RACINSTATION · Oct 1, 2009

Race kits are around 240-260
Pump gas kits are 180-210
Bigger boost I would recommend an intercooler for sure
Pump gas, no intercooler.

The actually HP rating will depend on the kit, port timing etc.

Hope this helps.

VOHK · Oct 1, 2009

That question is so misunderstood and even more likely to have the answer misinterpreted than almost any other question on the forums. The principle consideration when faced with the "to turbo or not to turbo" question is rooted in "actual" or "observed" horsepower. For example a 2009 M8 boasts a 140+ SAE HP rating (SAE is an acronym for Society of Automotive Engineers and as applied to HP was meant to standardize the system of measurement to insure all entities were reporting a comparable number), so at 60 degrees F, 0% humidity and 29.92 inches of mercury (basically death valley on a cold January morning) that M8 will make that power. However that same M8 at my shop on an average fall day made an actual 111.3 HP which when correct to SAE Standards was 140.8. So now consider the same unit with a Boondocker pump gas kit later that same day made 192 actual HP at 7.8 PSI. Of course minor differences in baro and temp were apparent however insignificant to the point. The real issue is a naturally aspirated M8 Ported, piped, with an intake, billet head, v force reeds and whatever else you care to throw at it, will build less than 135 actual HP at altitude though it can be boasted as a 170+ package... That leaves little to the imagination with respect to the "no BS how much horsepower" question. So now consider race gas kits with mild modifications pushing up-wards of 16 PSI capable of 300+ actual HP. Sort of makes you feel silly screwing around with those reeds and heads and whatever else you may have been considering doesn't it? Kind of like that big bore guy that says "turbo bla bla... my 1200 with twins is 230 HP and will smoke one of those pump gas turbos" Not up here it won't! in fact at 12k' it won't even mount a challange... So the core issue is one of altitude, if you ride high don't waste your money on anything else. BD has a chart that loosely illustrates turbo power potential, http://www.boondockers.com/flyers/which_turbo_kit_ac_low.pdf

backcountryislife · Oct 1, 2009

Eric,
Why is it that where we ride (as high as it gets unless you're climbing 14ers!) that I have seen Brian's stock bore N/A 1000 beat so many turbos? I'm not asking that as some cocky question, I'm dead serious, I just don't understand.
Especially the pump gas 800s (one by you, a bunch by Donovan) don't seem to come close. Have these few sleds been turned down by their owners just to feel safe? (I know some of us back things off to avoid issues/feel safer, so I can understand that)
I truly want to understand this, as I own 1 turbo now & will likely buy my next one from you so I have local support, so I'm not in doubt that they work, I just don't understand why the ones I have run against have not stacked up? A few were barely a match for my very lightly modded 1000.

Btw, when you talk about the BD PG kit at 192, what psi are you talking about? Edit, 7.8psi, I never learned to read!.

This isn't some big bore/turbo challenge question, I honestly want to know why we see such a difference between the numbers and how SOME seem to do in person. This is not every turbo, this just the ones I've seen and what I & others have experienced here.

I would love to buy a PG turbo, that would be sweet, but I just have not seen the same thing others say they see & I want to know why.

RACINSTATION · Oct 1, 2009

Very well said VOHK. This helps a bunch.

JHG · Oct 1, 2009

HILCLMR said:
How much horsepower does your Turbo M8 make?
Race / pump/ intercooled / non intercooled / Boost ?

I'm thinking of getting a HCR and doing a Turbo later on, but if they are only at 200 or 225 then I won't bother so help me make my decision.
Thanks guys

I would say that you would be better off to go ride one in the area that you ride then make your decision. Probably a more accurate way to tell if you would be happy then comparing apples to oranges on paper. N/A motors and Turbos respond differently and ride and feel different.

HILCLMR · Oct 1, 2009

Correction

No BS...How much horsepower will a M8 boosted make at Sea level ?
No debates about SAE or Big Bore's, just what numbers did you get when your machine was on the Dyno? Corrected HP

Nubulin · Oct 1, 2009

I better get some popcorn going here.....

I love how people take a subjective situation and claim "My X works better than Y every time". This is a stupid statement as nothing always does anything in this world. I have "beat" "better sleds" many times and been "beaten" many times by "lesser sleds". Its not as simple as math. Hell, even "beat" is a subjective term. There are so many variables other than HP that equate to how far up the hill you go: Track style and length, suspension setup, traction, snow depth, snow density, overall weight, powerband, clutching, momentium, rider, etc, etc, etc.

I am shocked RKT has not chimed in yet.......

backcountryislife · Oct 1, 2009

Nubulin said:
I better get some popcorn going here.....

I love how people take a subjective situation and claim "My X works better than Y every time". This is a stupid statement as nothing always does anything in this world. I have "beat" "better sleds" many times and been "beaten" many times by "lesser sleds". Its not as simple as math. Hell, even "beat" is a subjective term. There are so many variables other than HP that equate to how far up the hill you go: Track style and length, suspension setup, traction, snow depth, snow density, overall weight, powerband, clutching, momentium, rider, etc, etc, etc.

I am shocked RKT has not chimed in yet.......

I can only assume you are referencing my post in how stupid it was.

I asked a question that NO ONE on here has ever been able to explain to me that I want to understand. If anyone can give a decent comprehensive FACT BASED answer, Eric can. I don't know how to phrase it other than a comparison between two sleds, so to the point, why does one of them not perform the way it should compared to the other? IF this is a simple as them not running as high as they can on PG, then that is a legit answer, but no one has ever provided a decent answer aside form more dyno numbers.

I don't know how to make a question any more factual & non confrontational than I did, sorry.

JHG · Oct 1, 2009

backcountryislife said:
I can only assume you are referencing my post in how stupid it was.

I asked a question that NO ONE on here has ever been able to explain to me that I want to understand. If anyone can give a decent comprehensive FACT BASED answer, Eric can. I don't know how to phrase it other than a comparison between two sleds, so to the point, why does one of them not perform the way it should compared to the other? IF this is a simple as them not running as high as they can on PG, then that is a legit answer, but no one has ever provided a decent answer aside form more dyno numbers.

I don't know how to make a question any more factual & non confrontational than I did, sorry.

I don't think Nubulin was making a negative comment towards you. Comparisons between two sleds for me are hard to make. You can say sled x beat sled y...but what does that mean? In chute climbing, boonbocking, drag race? If it's a head to head race, how far was it? I have a hard time with the comparisons because sleds have so many variables, a turbo clutched to 12# running 8# is going to suffer. I think a lot of the "shoot outs" are hard to judge because everyone wants to even the field with pump gas. Most turbo guys, even with pump gas setups aren't running straight pump gas, so for a weekend pump gas comparison they are going to have to resetup their sled to run well on less boost. Personally I think the setup on a sled makes way more difference than the HP. If you add a ton of power but don't it give a way to transfer to the ground you really haven't done much. Sometime the skid has more to do with the highmark than the HP numbers. Look at this vid of the stock dragon vs. the M8 turbo, the dragon climbs as high as the TM8....so was hp equal?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cf8eKXZc5E

hatchers · Oct 1, 2009

NO BS POST HERE:

it makes a ton more then stock.....

SSWIM · Oct 1, 2009

BigHoe said:
Sometime the skid has more to do with the highmark than the HP numbers. Look at this vid of the stock dragon vs. the M8 turbo, the dragon climbs as high as the TM8....so was hp equal?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cf8eKXZc5E

????? I am sure you are kidding. The only reason the TM8 turned out was it was going Mach 5 when it hit that spot on the hill.

Sam

Steve D · Oct 1, 2009

SSWIM said:
????? I am sure you are kidding. The only reason the TM8 turned out was it was going Mach 5 when it hit that spot on the hill.

Sam

I think that was his point...

Having all the power in the world don't make a bit of difference if you can't actually control it. But that is going off topic since the question was originally about power, and not necessarily making the mark.

Nubulin · Oct 1, 2009

backcountryislife said:
I can only assume you are referencing my post in how stupid it was........

backcountryislife,

I am not trying to be a jerk, way to many on here already. Sorry if I came off that way.

These threads seem to turn into "My X is better than your Y" pissing matches pretty fast. Maybe I jumped in too soon. So far its clean.

I think in a lot of riding situations the sled, setup, and rider are more important that the hp. I know I get owned plenty when "I shouldn't".

backcountryislife · Oct 1, 2009

BigHoe said:
I don't think Nubulin was making a negative comment towards you. Comparisons between two sleds for me are hard to make. You can say sled x beat sled y...but what does that mean? In chute climbing, boonbocking, drag race? If it's a head to head race, how far was it? I have a hard time with the comparisons because sleds have so many variables, a turbo clutched to 12# running 8# is going to suffer. I think a lot of the "shoot outs" are hard to judge because everyone wants to even the field with pump gas. Most turbo guys, even with pump gas setups aren't running straight pump gas, so for a weekend pump gas comparison they are going to have to resetup their sled to run well on less boost. Personally I think the setup on a sled makes way more difference than the HP. If you add a ton of power but don't it give a way to transfer to the ground you really haven't done much. Sometime the skid has more to do with the highmark than the HP numbers. Look at this vid of the stock dragon vs. the M8 turbo, the dragon climbs as high as the TM8....so was hp equal?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cf8eKXZc5E

ALL the sleds I ran with or that ran against Brian's sled were running the way they were setup, most of them were running 1/2 gal or 1 gal RG, so I dont' think they were turning the turbo down.

I hear the same excuses all the time, but an M with an 09 skid setup the way it came against a similar sled, same track, yadda yadda yadda, the point is that over & over I have yet to see the amazing pump gas turbos make the kind of power people claim, NOT ONCE. So, I was asking ERIC, not the mob, why this is, I wasn't looking for an argument or a pissing match, but all you guys just can't handle someone questioning the absolute perfection of the pump gas turbo so everyone has to defend them & make excuses like the skid was set up wrong, blah blah blah. Most of the sleds I rode against, I also rode, they felt fine, they transfered well (hell, it's a turbo, transfer isn't that tough to come by!) they just didn't feel like anything special.
Maybe the problem is clutching setup, but isn't that part of a turbo package? We ride way up high, but maybe these sleds were setup for 9k, but I don't notice a bit of difference on our M8 when we go to Rabbit Ears, feels the same to me.

Fer F's sake, I just want a simple answer from the one guy I truly believe understands the engineering & reality behind a turbo. As he's a pro turbo guy I expect a slightly biased answer, but I've never seen Eric write anything he couldn't back up with time in the field, HONEST comparisons & real data.

go ahead, flame & bash, defend & rationalize.

Radski30 · Oct 1, 2009

Look at this vid of the stock dragon vs. the M8 turbo, the dragon climbs as high as the TM8....so was hp equal?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cf8eKXZc5E[/QUOTE]

Have you seen the new Mountain Mod Mania 7? There is a Stock Skidoo 800 that Pulled Monster. There were Apex's and Nitros that couldn't pull it...even Product Tester rolled his sled the same day. He eventually made it with his 1200T, but that 800 Skidoo pulled it first tim!!!. If you don't believe it, watch it. it is in the Big Iron Shoot out section or Yamafest section.

It is all dependent upon handling, and getting that power to the ground/Track speed.

Going West · Oct 1, 2009

I find it funny that you all have got into a pissin match about tubos and na sleds and no one has answered the original post. I think most pump gas m8 kits make around 200 corrected hp.

sidewinder · Oct 1, 2009

HILCLMR said:
No BS...How much horsepower will a M8 boosted make at Sea level ?
No debates about SAE or Big Bore's, just what numbers did you get when your machine was on the Dyno? Corrected HP

This question is the reason I am in the middle of a turbo build on my M8. The one thing I see here is the term "sea level." As we all know atmospheric pressure at sea level is basically 14 psi and it degrades from there. I ride at 6-8k and have found that mod motor sleds at altitude have disappointed me and the guys running 8-10 pounds of boost on a stock motor have reigned. I don't know how much boost you can run at sea level but I would surmise it is fairly low before you have some type of combustion failure, either detonation or o-ring failure. Aggressive porting and a larger bore however should just get more efficient at lower altitudes. Maybe I'm wrong here so if I'm incorrect then someone please straighten me out. It seems though that to get a turbo sled to properly run at sea level you would need to lower the compression ratio significantly, which would just counteract the boost?

product tester · Oct 1, 2009

Radski30 said:
Look at this vid of the stock dragon vs. the M8 turbo, the dragon climbs as high as the TM8....so was hp equal?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cf8eKXZc5E

Have you seen the new Mountain Mod Mania 7? There is a Stock Skidoo 800 that Pulled Monster. There were Apex's and Nitros that couldn't pull it...even Product Tester rolled his sled the same day. He eventually made it with his 1200T, but that 800 Skidoo pulled it first tim!!!. If you don't believe it, watch it. it is in the Big Iron Shoot out section or Yamafest section.

It is all dependent upon handling, and getting that power to the ground/Track speed.[/QUOTE]

I did not roll my sled in the monster chute..
I rolled out of the 90 in the bull pin.

No B.S... How much Horse Power?

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Similar threads