V8 Intake = Loss of Torque?

[DRS]

👆👆👍👍 David, than you for sweating the detail above. Flushing out detail that is unknown to us, is amazing. Puts a complete different perspective to the test. A reality that helps me makes sure my hard earned trade for goods and services is not used something that does not meet the hype.

 

[2011 Genesis 4.6]

I was suspect of the abysmal hp reading for a 5.0, touted as 429hp at the crank thats a hell of a loss to read 272 at the wheel.

 

[Rey]

A year ago or so I did a quick dyno run at TPIS in Chaska, MN for my '12 Rspec.
http://www.tpis.com/pages/5_22_12
This chassis dyno is fairly accurate as it bolts to rear wheels. We did one run with hood open. Only mod was a drop-in K&N air filter. Result was 352 RWHP. Can't clearly remember the torque. 352 RWHP represents almost exactly an 18% drop from advertised 429 hp.

 

[daviderle]

Thank you gentlemen, I care too much about this forum and most of its active members to let wild claims go without being addressed, especially in my specific area of interest, as I have learned so much from may members on this forum throughout the years...

A year ago or so I did a quick dyno run at TPIS in Chaska, MN for my '12 Rspec.
http://www.tpis.com/pages/5_22_12
This chassis dyno is fairly accurate as it bolts to rear wheels. We did one run with hood open. Only mod was a drop-in K&N air filter. Result was 352 RWHP. Can't clearly remember the torque. 352 RWHP represents almost exactly an 18% drop from advertised 429 hp.

Ray, I think your Dyno run is right on the money, if I would to make an educated guess, I would say the 2015 5.0 would be around 345 RWHP (lower advertised of 420 HP), with around 8 additional torque points from what you have observed if the same equipment were to be used (+/-1.5% margin of error due to calibration, the correct vehicle figures, fuel quality and grade etc..)

 

[Granatelli]

Was this a 4.6 V8 car? Which resonator are you referring to?

2015 5.0 Engine

 

[Granatelli]

First I would like to thank EvilGen for allowing you to share his three Dyno attempts and I hope he is happy with the ‘sound effects’ and the ‘feeling’ of increased power!

I can tell you that there are few of us on this forum who are obsessed with unlocking the power of the V8 Tau engine and even fewer of us who may understand the intricacies of our ECU programming, that would agree with me to gain 50hp by adding few bolt-ons is highly unlikely, if not impossible without a proper ECU tune! Not to mention, those who studied the ECU would tell you that it does adapt over time (roughly 200 miles) and not instantly!? (Maybe different between 1st Gen R-Spec 5.0 and 2015 5.0, but I very much doubt it!)

However, to get to the meat of the issue, I find some of these results to be suspect and maybe open to interpretation, due to several inconsistencies with these reports:

1 – Some members may know that for a Mustang Dyno, it is absolutely crucial to enter the correct vehicle weight, in these particular tests, the number that was used is off by as much as 900+ pounds (correct weight should be 4588 pounds + the driver), which may explain the abysmal HP numbers noted by all three tests.

2 – You went to great lengths to try to hide the measured MPH for MAX TRQ and HP for all three tests (after / for each TRQ and HP numbers)! Why?

Fortunately for others that I care about on this forum, I have ways…

So I found out that for test 2 and 3 the speed was around 103 MPH which tells me you where in 4th gear for these tests, however for test 1 the speed was around 88 MPH which tells me you were in third gear!

Right there could explain the magical gains noted between test 1 and tests 2 & 3.

Next on the menu; the Mustang Dyno manual clearly states that measurements should be taken with the closest 1:1 ratio gear, which for the Genesis 8sp is actually the 5th gear, should one wishes to get some proper readings!

http://www.mustangdyne.com/mustangd...uploads/downloads/2011/11/QuickStartGuide.pdf

3 – But wait! Look at the 10 degree temperature reading differences I hear you say?

Well from your web site I see you have a fancy AWD Mustang Dyno which undoubtedly has an equally impressive variable exhaust fan(s) connected to the ‘Stag’? If so, I am wondering what effect the exhaust fan speed would have between 88mph and 103mph simulated wind speed at the same RPMs?
Around 10 Degrees or so, I would hasten to guess?

Regardless of your test results, I am sure we all thank you for your efforts and for sharing....

However, only the other day a cars sales man tried to flog me a 5500 miles ‘demo’ car as new!
So please do forgive the ‘stiff upper lip’ and the black humor as it is still work in progress, even after 15 years of being across the pond!

Respectfully, the car is gone and I would have hoped by now that he posted his pictures. I will find out what went wrong. For sure he will be back to have us build the air intake boxes.

If you're the ECU expert then I need to talk to you ASAP I know someone designed a twin turbo kit for this engine at SEMA 2014 and we would love to do our own kit to mass sell but first we need the tuning side addressed. What info can you share?

As for the dyno results, or dyno does not lie. We are bonded and do testing for BMW, Volvo, Porsche and Audi when the cars reach Ventura Harbor. Our dyno is calibrated every 30 days and certified every 90 by Mustang Dyne as well as independent 3rd parties when it is called for.

First I would like to thank EvilGen for allowing you to share his three Dyno attempts and I hope he is happy with the ‘sound effects’ and the ‘feeling’ of increased power!

I can tell you that there are few of us on this forum who are obsessed with unlocking the power of the V8 Tau engine and even fewer of us who may understand the intricacies of our ECU programming, that would agree with me to gain 50hp by adding few bolt-ons is highly unlikely, if not impossible without a proper ECU tune! Not to mention, those who studied the ECU would tell you that it does adapt over time (roughly 200 miles) and not instantly!? (Maybe different between 1st Gen R-Spec 5.0 and 2015 5.0, but I very much doubt it!)

The ECU adapting over time, also known as "learning out" as you stated would have more to do with forced induction add ons and/or vacuum leaks. I remind you and educate others. This vehicle has no Mass Airflow Sensor to report incoming airflow. Rather it relies on MAP. With that said the air intakes will not be "learned out" as the MAP sensor and BARO sensors are well within range. While not reported on the dyno graphs I did in fact monitor them and saw no changes in long term fuel trim values. Short trims numbers were hovering at + 2 to + 3 when it was stock and + 2 to + 5 with the intake and resonator removed. - hardly anything to worry about.

Keep in mind this car from Hyundai was intended to be more focused on dead quite than R-Spec -esque. The air intakes on the flow stand had 15" H20 drop above 600 cfm and the system we installed has 3" at 600 cfm and 6" at 900 cfm. This engine will never move (pump) 900 cfm N/A as it sits.

However, to get to the meat of the issue, I find some of these results to be suspect and maybe open to interpretation, due to several inconsistencies with these reports:

1 – Some members may know that for a Mustang Dyno, it is absolutely crucial to enter the correct vehicle weight, in these particular tests, the number that was used is off by as much as 900+ pounds (correct weight should be 4588 pounds + the driver), which may explain the abysmal HP numbers noted by all three tests.

You would be incorrect in your above statement. Adding more weight or should I say reporting more weight increase the load which basically increase the time of the sweep test. Had I left the reported weight at 4588 it merely would have slowed down the sweep and when doing repeated back to back pulls on a Mustang - it quickly over heats the cats and that makes the car go into CPM failure. (cat protection mode) it immediately dumps raw fuel and pulls timing to drop catalytic converter temps and that IS A HUGE NO NO. By reporting a lower weight it merely allows the engine to go from point A to point B in a shorter time frame. We are not here to kill customer cars. If this was a race car and had no cats I would do a longer sweep test. In short all tests before and after mods were done exactly the same at the same reported weights - so equal

How can you call 332 rwhp abysmal? a 30% lost via that transmission (auto slush) is 431 at the crank. basically what Hyundai claims in the first place. Remember Hyundai is famous for inflated HP numbers and inflated mileage figures.

2 – You went to great lengths to try to hide the measured MPH for MAX TRQ and HP for all three tests (after / for each TRQ and HP numbers)! Why?

Fortunately for others that I care about on this forum, I have ways…

So I found out that for test 2 and 3 the speed was around 103 MPH which tells me you where in 4th gear for these tests, however for test 1 the speed was around 88 MPH which tells me you were in third gear!

Right there could explain the magical gains noted between test 1 and tests 2 & 3.

Next on the menu; the Mustang Dyno manual clearly states that measurements should be taken with the closest 1:1 ratio gear, which for the Genesis 8sp is actually the 5th gear, should one wishes to get some proper readings!

The only info removed from the dyno sheets was customer privacy stuff. Nothing germane to the figures was redacted. Not sure what ways you have of reading mph but I can tell you all runs were made in 1:1 5th gear not 3rd or 4th. The car made peak hp at 123 mph and torque at 104.

You lost me on the exhaust fan summation. It had no bearing and again all testing was done the same way and I front of the customer.

I hope I was able to understand the flaws in your theory. I am not hear to fight. I was trying to help the guy out. Good luck everyone. Its a nice car

 

[EvilGen]

Hi everyone:

Not trying to cause a stir It was posted earlier by someone here they could not dyno the 2015 car on a 2 wheel drive dyno becuase there was an issue with the cars computer system freaking out the traction control or ABS. I found Granatelli becuase he had an AWD dyno. I talked to him about what you all said.

I told him about a supposed loss of torque with the CAI and I told him the car sounded whimpy. He was kind enough to give his time and explain everything to me. He agreed to dyno my car in 4 wheel drive mode right out of the box for $125 even though the sign posted $175. The numbers are what they are. Anyone here that thinks there is only an 18% loss via that transmission and super long driveshaft knows little about frictional loss and rotating mass. Hence thet are using a “Happy Dyno” that simply reports numbers the customer wants to see.

Just to give you all a simple confirmation of the math. Recently Car and Driver tested a 2014 Chevrolet SS Sedan. This car is rated at 420 crank HP
Here is what they reported

DISPLACEMENT:
376 cu in, 6162 cc
Rear wheel power: stock: 299 hp @ 6000 rpm,
Rear wheel torque: stock: 299 lb-ft @ 4700 rpm,
That is a 29% loss via the auto tran. This test was done on a Superflow dyno so you cant say the numbers are down because it’s a Mustang Dyne Product.

I stood there as they fabbed the CAI intake as well as removed the rear resonator. I would have had them change out the entire system but nothing was available and they wanted $1400 and 2 full days to design a system. He also told me truthfully he could make it louder but most likely not much more of a gain. We tried it like this (just cut out the mid muffler) and the results are what you see. Best off all my wife has no complaints about droning. Its sound tame at idle and throatier at wide open.

I was as surprised as the rest of you when I saw the dyno numbers pop up. That is why he did a back up. Granatelli went on the Hyundai website to confirm which gear was 1 to 1 and factually all tests were done in front of me and in 5th. This man had no reason to lie to me. He said I could expect 10hp at most with these changes so when we saw the gains he called BS and did a back up run. The numbers were the same again.

I feel the gain and I am happy. I raced my son before and after with his M4 BMW. Stock he beat me by 15 cars minimum and now its 5 at best so my car definitely has a great gain in power and sound.

I am not trying to be overly scientific and I am not going to sit here and tell you all my life story, how smart I am and how much I know about cars and car computers.

I will tell you Granatelli has a 70 plus year history in auto racing including NASCAR and winning the Indy 500 with none other than Mario Andretti. He has no reason to fudge numbers and he is not in the Genesis performance business so has nothing to gain. The man was trying to help me out. I asked him to post here and then watergate and deep throat come up with totally fuzy math as to how fast many car was running during the pull?? Really??

The only think removed from the dyno sheets were my naee home address

 

[dmitriylm]

Hi everyone:

Not trying to cause a stir It was posted earlier by someone here they could not dyno the 2015 car on a 2 wheel drive dyno becuase there was an issue with the cars computer system freaking out the traction control or ABS. I found Granatelli becuase he had an AWD dyno. I talked to him about what you all said.

I told him about a supposed loss of torque with the CAI and I told him the car sounded whimpy. He was kind enough to give his time and explain everything to me. He agreed to dyno my car in 4 wheel drive mode right out of the box for $125 even though the sign posted $175. The numbers are what they are. Anyone here that thinks there is only an 18% loss via that transmission and super long driveshaft knows little about frictional loss and rotating mass. Hence thet are using a “Happy Dyno” that simply reports numbers the customer wants to see.

Just to give you all a simple confirmation of the math. Recently Car and Driver tested a 2014 Chevrolet SS Sedan. This car is rated at 420 crank HP
Here is what they reported

DISPLACEMENT:
376 cu in, 6162 cc
Rear wheel power: stock: 299 hp @ 6000 rpm,
Rear wheel torque: stock: 299 lb-ft @ 4700 rpm,
That is a 29% loss via the auto tran. This test was done on a Superflow dyno so you cant say the numbers are down because it’s a Mustang Dyne Product.

I stood there as they fabbed the CAI intake as well as removed the rear resonator. I would have had them change out the entire system but nothing was available and they wanted $1400 and 2 full days to design a system. He also told me truthfully he could make it louder but most likely not much more of a gain. We tried it like this (just cut out the mid muffler) and the results are what you see. Best off all my wife has no complaints about droning. Its sound tame at idle and throatier at wide open.

I was as surprised as the rest of you when I saw the dyno numbers pop up. That is why he did a back up. Granatelli went on the Hyundai website to confirm which gear was 1 to 1 and factually all tests were done in front of me and in 5th. This man had no reason to lie to me. He said I could expect 10hp at most with these changes so when we saw the gains he called BS and did a back up run. The numbers were the same again.

I feel the gain and I am happy. I raced my son before and after with his M4 BMW. Stock he beat me by 15 cars minimum and now its 5 at best so my car definitely has a great gain in power and sound.

I am not trying to be overly scientific and I am not going to sit here and tell you all my life story, how smart I am and how much I know about cars and car computers.

I will tell you Granatelli has a 70 plus year history in auto racing including NASCAR and winning the Indy 500 with none other than Mario Andretti. He has no reason to fudge numbers and he is not in the Genesis performance business so has nothing to gain. The man was trying to help me out. I asked him to post here and then watergate and deep throat come up with totally fuzy math as to how fast many car was running during the pull?? Really??

The only think removed from the dyno sheets were my naee home address

The trick for me is that they have the lowest reading stock dyno for this car that I've seen and by a large margin. To me this makes them an outlier when it comes to the existing data sets.

Here is the Edmunds stock 5.0 dyno:


364whp and 342wtq.

Here is another 5.0 on a dyno making 365whp and 356wtq:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ld-pTsd3EOM&feature=youtu.be


The dyno results Granatelli posted are more in line with a stock 4.6 car rather than the 5.0. They are interesting to look at but I can't consider them an honest representation of the cars power.

 

[Granatelli]

The dyno test was simply a before and after. EvilGen is coming back tomorrow for more work I will redyno and video

Please also note his car made paek power at 6000 and these other people turned the motor and show power up to 6500 I do not know enough about the cars to explain a 2012 body vs. a 2015 with differnt intake system from factory

Also we have no plans to reweld the exhaust back to stock to make a few people here happy. But how about this one - bring me your car and I will dyno it for free

Hate to beat a dead horse but here are the numbers on a Hi-Po 2015 Mustang

The twin scroll supercharger cranks power up to 810 hp at the crank, 650 hp at the rear wheels. - Their words not mine

20% loss via 6 speed manual trans

 

[206rspec]

Granatelli, you can use my 2012 spec to prototype the twin turbo kit , Im familiar with your work!

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[DRS]

I feel the gain and I am happy. I raced my son before and after with his M4 BMW. Stock he beat me by 15 cars minimum and now its 5 at best so my car definitely has a great gain in power and sound.

I am not trying to be overly scientific and I am not going to sit here and tell you all my life story, how smart I am and how much I know about cars and car computers.

The only think removed from the dyno sheets were my naee home address

I have a casual observation based on the M4 race.. That might explain your low HP rating on the dyno. I posted a comment in the "what have you raced" thread about my experience with a new M4.. I have both 2012 and 2015 5-0. The 2012 is much faster.. While I do not run these hard much, nor race around like a banshee (run in Eco mode 90 percent of the time), the cars are challenged all the time. In this case, I was driving the 2012 to a appointment, in a dual left turn lane with a M4 beside me. Anyway, when I took on the challenge, when it ended I had a slight edge.. No way a 15 car defeat. His UPS truck sounding sputtering wheezing machine was put to shame. Surprised the heck out of me. But then the souped up straight six does sound like a old milk delivery truck with a Chevy straight 6. I wish I had closed the moon roof which was flipped up letting in the exhaust under full throttle sounds, that thing called a M4, was making under full throttle duress. My 2012 is bone stock. Quiet and fast. They should have never dumped the V8 for the M in that size class. If I were him, I would take off the M emblem.

Point is.. My 2015 heavy lug would not have been beat by 15 cars, but it would have lost. I think maybe your stock set up, and now modified, still does not have the grunt it should. Opinion strictly based on your battle with the souped up milk truck engine ��.

 

[EvilGen]

Not sure what kind of M4 you raced. Maybe it had blown up turbos or a discharge tube missing The M4 makes more power, more torque and is lighter than my 2015. All this talk so I simply went to the dealer and test drove a spank'n new B-mer M4. It’s hard to compare the cars to be quite direct. The Genesis is a nicer car inside even though it’s about 18k less. The M4 handles twice as good, goes around corners at least 50% faster and with 100% more confidence. In a straight line the Genesis feels like its dragging a boat anchor.

Adding insult to injury my kid purchase a BS $450 ECU upgrade for his car and now we are on different planets. He is taking his car to Granatelli now to have it dyno'd so there is no confusion as to his gain. They claim it’s an easy 480 at the tires and to be honest it feels that way.

So if I had to go to the store (about 10 miles from my house on a twisty road) I would take the M4. Driving to work every day the Genesis is the way better choice.

I would also add my last 4 sedans were:

2002 BMW M5 - 400hp V8

2004 Merc S600 - 500hp and Trq up the wazo ( or is that out the wazoo)

2010 Merc E63 TT V8 that dyno'd at 600 rwhp and 713 ft/lbs

2014 Merc S63 TT V8 with all the Renntech Mods you can imagine

So fast and expensive are nothing new to me. I have admired the Genesis for a while and thought what the heck.

Here is the take away. It’s the best 50k I ever spent. It’s not as fast and it does not handle like the others but it’s about 1/2 the price. Hell I paid 60k for the M5 in 2002 and 160k for the S63 (make my Genesis near a 1/3 the price). I have had the car for about 7 weeks and in that time I have received compliments from just about everyone I hang out with. When I pull up they all ask what kind of car it is. They can't believe I purchased a "Hyundai" and I immediately get all the jokes about needing a hand out. But you know what, when they get in I make a believer out of all of them.

Truthfully I purchased this car as a hold over until my new Z06 motor'd CTS-V comes in - in September. However by that time Granatelli may have my car twin turbo'd and I may just keep this car to surprise the

 

[svensk]

Dyno numbers are fun, but don't mean a whole lot. Take the car to the track and see what she runs.

 

[DRS]

Not sure what kind of M4 you raced. Maybe it had blown up turbos or a discharge tube missing The M4 makes more power, more torque and is lighter than my 2015. All this talk so I simply went to the dealer and test drove a spank'n new B-mer M4. It’s hard to compare the cars to be quite direct. The Genesis is a nicer car inside even though it’s about 18k less. The M4 handles twice as good, goes around corners at least 50% faster and with 100% more confidence. In a straight line the Genesis feels like its dragging a boat anchor.

Adding insult to injury my kid purchase a BS $450 ECU upgrade for his car and now we are on different planets. He is taking his car to Granatelli now to have it dyno'd so there is no confusion as to his gain. They claim it’s an easy 480 at the tires and to be honest it feels that way.

So if I had to go to the store (about 10 miles from my house on a twisty road) I would take the M4. Driving to work every day the Genesis is the way better choice.

I would also add my last 4 sedans were:

2002 BMW M5 - 400hp V8

2004 Merc S600 - 500hp and Trq up the wazo ( or is that out the wazoo)

2010 Merc E63 TT V8 that dyno'd at 600 rwhp and 713 ft/lbs

2014 Merc S63 TT V8 with all the Renntech Mods you can imagine

So fast and expensive are nothing new to me. I have admired the Genesis for a while and thought what the heck.

Here is the take away. It’s the best 50k I ever spent. It’s not as fast and it does not handle like the others but it’s about 1/2 the price. Hell I paid 60k for the M5 in 2002 and 160k for the S63 (make my Genesis near a 1/3 the price). I have had the car for about 7 weeks and in that time I have received compliments from just about everyone I hang out with. When I pull up they all ask what kind of car it is. They can't believe I purchased a "Hyundai" and I immediately get all the jokes about needing a hand out. But you know what, when they get in I make a believer out of all of them.

Truthfully I purchased this car as a hold over until my new Z06 motor'd CTS-V comes in - in September. However by that time Granatelli may have my car twin turbo'd and I may just keep this car to surprise the

Granatelli TT mod... That would be cool to see.. Especially as a total sleeper. As stock looking and sounding as possible.. Just whooshes away from many left with jaws dropped.

 

[Aquineas]

Indeed, a TT would be awesome; I'm guessing it would probably cost around $10K, based on similar kits for V8s. This might be something fun to do well out of warranty...

 

[daviderle]

Oh my, it looks like I missed lots of fun due to frantic travel schedule but it appears that few things got clarified in that time frame!

So instead of engaging in a useless debate with little benefit, like few threads on this forum that have been mercifully archived, I would rather focus on the possible golden opportunity and take a brief moment to explain the angle of my original post.

I feel the gain and I am happy. I raced my son before and after with his M4 BMW. Stock he beat me by 15 cars minimum and now its 5 at best so my car definitely has a great gain in power and sound.

I am not trying to be overly scientific and I am not going to sit here and tell you all my life story, how smart I am and how much I know about cars and car computers.

I will tell you Granatelli has a 70 plus year history in auto racing including NASCAR and winning the Indy 500 with none other than Mario Andretti. He has no reason to fudge numbers and he is not in the Genesis performance business so has nothing to gain. The man was trying to help me out. I asked him to post here and then watergate and deep throat come up with totally fuzy math as to how fast many car was running during the pull?? Really??

The only think removed from the dyno sheets were my naee home address

First welcome to our community and congratulations on being the first to Dyno a 2015 5.0 model as well as the first person who have done a performance related mod (as far as I know).

Also, thank you for validating Granatelli’s work and credentials, however, please understand that when an unknown person jumps in from nowhere on behalf of another member, announces incredible gains by a simple mod that have never been observed/noted by any 1st Gen 4.6/5.0/R-spec owners in the last seven years, it conjured up past threads by some fly-by-night outfits trying to make a quick buck, while denying “Hyundai Genesis” (the owner of this site) the appropriate advertising fees necessary to keep this unique site going for our community.

As far as the Dyno data, here is a sample of one of the processed images of what originally aroused suspension:



Clearly I was not there, in reality none of it has any significance as you are happy with the end product, which all that matters at the end of the day.

Should you have chosen to share these results with us directly, I assure you my reaction would have been completely different.

Granatelli, you can use my 2012 spec to prototype the twin turbo kit , Im familiar with your work!

Thank you for validating Granatelli’s work. If there is any chance that you could Dyno your 2012 R-Spec using Granatelli’s facilities, it will represent a great service to our community, as it will be the first time that a 1st Gen and 2nd Gen 5.0 engines are Dyno’ed on the same equipment and preformed by the same person, which will give us valuable data as to how far Hyundai went in tweaking the 2nd gen in the name of comfort and fuel economy (?as well as potentially avoiding the Gas Guzzler Tax?).

If you're the ECU expert then I need to talk to you ASAP I know someone designed a twin turbo kit for this engine at SEMA 2014 and we would love to do our own kit to mass sell but first we need the tuning side addressed. What info can you share?

I would love to help, but it has taken more than 5 years to get just to get 25% of the 4.6 Tau ECU cracked and around 5% of 5.0 R-SPEC in 10 months, the entire process has been so frustrating as there is simply very little info to go on. At least for the 1st Gen Genisis, Hyundai has done such a good job of not only protecting the engine management system but also encrypting the CAN bus traffic between the various components unlike some other car manufactures that I would care to mention (http://www.computerworld.com/articl...an-inexpensive-and-easy-way-to-hack-cars.html ).

So late last year, along with another member, we decided to sponsor BTR (Blood Type Racing) who have a long history working Hyundai Coupe performance options, to see if they can crack the Tau 4.6 and 5.0/R-Spec ECUs. They did manage to crack the 4.6 under six months and it is projected that they will be able to tune the 4.6 / ZF 6 speed sometime later this year. Unfortunately the 5.0/R-SPEC ECU work is still under development in Korea, but they are still hopeful to have some better news later this year.

In addition BTR, earlier this year had produced a turbo setup for the 1st Gen 3.8 Genesis sedan, based on the coupe work they have done in the past. However, it is unlikely they will do the same for Tau V8, potentially due to the engine bay physical limitations and other considerations, such as, most owners are not willing to forgo the 100k/10 year factory warranty.

At this point, I would be happy if they can achieve 20-25hp increase for my 4.6 and ecstatic if they can get 25-30hp for my R-SPEC with a simple ECU tune!

As far as SEMA 2014, indeed Hyundai commissioned two independent power houses, ARK and TOCA (undoubtedly with access to Hyundai own engineering resources) who independently worked with them to produce eye poping 550HP and 600HP (respectively) heavily modified versions of the 2015 5.0 genesis sedan which included engine bay components placement redesign (https://www.hyundaiusa.com/about-hy...SONATA_AND_2014_GENESIS_COUPE_A-20141104.aspx).

Curiously neither firm sells any performance items for the 2015 Hyundai Genesis (maybe due to NDA agreements?):
http://www.arkperformance.com/
http://johntoca.com/

As far as the performance of future models concerned, some us are hopeful that new Hyundai N-Division, under the leadership of Biermann who was chief engineer for BMW's M performance cars, will be able to tweak the Genesis to a new level, just in time for the mid cycle refresh due around 2017-18 (http://www.autonews.com/article/201...ongtime-bmw-executive-in-performance-car-push).

At any rate, I am man who has no qualms in admitting an error of judgment, which happened in this case, simply by misinterpreting your intentions as well as not doing a better job of researching your credentials and for that you have my sincere apologies.

My only wish is that if you decide to productize the intake design and sell it to any member of this forum, is to reach out to Hyundai Genesis (the owner of this site, his name is SAL) and become an accredited vendor (I believe the fee is very modest, just to keep this site going).

Finally, it has been more than 15 years since I worked on a twin turbo setup, so should 206rspec decides to Dyno his 2012 R-Spec at your facility, I would really appreciate your take on what type of turbo setup is required to fit in the rather cramped engine bay? Ideally, without any major work to move things around.

 

[206rspec]

Unfortunately they are in social and I'm in Seattle, however that doesn't mean I'm not interested in helping anyway i can to further the cause. as far as the SEMA cars, to my knowledge neither car ran (drivable condition) at SEMA. I work with Hyundai a little bit and was in the booth, both cars looked great, but I don't think were tuned yet, if Im wrong let me know i wanted to see a finished product from TOCA!

 

[Big_tugg]

if someone don't crack the ECU soon imma just drop a LSx in here...maybe a LTx