club.liberty.asn.au

"...sounds bad..." It's not exactly a measurable/objective statement now.

Each and every one of us has an idea of what "sounds bad" when it comes to music, engines, exhaust notes... the list goes on...

You think something sounds great, who's going to convince you otherwise?

If anyone comes across at workshop that say the H6 cannot be tuned - run away from that place and never look back.

McDoof wrote:Hmm, very interesting. I have 163Kw atw on what was described as a low reading dyno (thanks Matt) with only headers, 3rd cat delete and a tune, running on good old fashioned BP 98. That's about 30kw over the stated stock power. Seems a reasonable gain for not very much effort.
Oh yes, and my car sounds amazing. Especially at WOT.

Nice!! Where did you get your headers from?

Raptor superchargers make the headers.

Pm Tradewind on here to get em.

Murry_Gen4 wrote:

McDoof wrote:Hmm, very interesting. I have 163Kw atw on what was described as a low reading dyno (thanks Matt) with only headers, 3rd cat delete and a tune, running on good old fashioned BP 98. That's about 30kw over the stated stock power. Seems a reasonable gain for not very much effort.
Oh yes, and my car sounds amazing. Especially at WOT.

Nice!! Where did you get your headers from?

Here is the running thread. He has just taken delivery of another batch, so if you want a set you have to be quick.
http://forum.liberty.asn.au/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=17262&start=705

Tradewind wrote:

JTR wrote:Came across this, thought it was interesting.

http://www.mrtperformance.com.au/perfor ... tion-guide

Here's a few Quotes
"The only benefit for a reliable tune is drivability, dont expect ANY tune to give reliable Kw's"
"The H6 6 cylinder engine sounds horrible with even custom, hand made exhaust manifolds, zero value for Kw in this area as well"
"CAI, Other than a horrible intake noise no power here either"

Clueless if nothing else.

What is a 3.6L H6 Subaru engine?

Jup wrote:"...sounds bad..." It's not exactly a measurable/objective statement now.

Each and every one of us has an idea of what "sounds bad" when it comes to music, engines, exhaust notes... the list goes on...

You think something sounds great, who's going to convince you otherwise?

An efficient energy producing engine should 'sound' healthy and make a sweet note... even with straight pipes it should sound 'good'

Too much timing, wrong fuel, not enough timing or poor cam timing, engine quickly goes backwards from exhaust note Plenty of people here know what I mean

++++

There is good feedback on here for you to see that modding the 3.6 H6 produces good results. Go for it.

KiDo_Tuning wrote:

Jup wrote:"...sounds bad..." It's not exactly a measurable/objective statement now.

Each and every one of us has an idea of what "sounds bad" when it comes to music, engines, exhaust notes... the list goes on...

You think something sounds great, who's going to convince you otherwise?

An efficient energy producing engine should 'sound' healthy and make a sweet note... even with straight pipes it should sound 'good'

Too much timing, wrong fuel, not enough timing or poor cam timing, engine quickly goes backwards from exhaust note Plenty of people here know what I mean

Agree entirely, if it doesnt sound right, it aint right

Seeing Matt's posts on the h6 on E85 makes me very excited. To make 160awkw on 98 is pretty freaking incredible and then around 180awkw on E85 is astounding for N/A gains. +
Plus, my 3.0L spec B with Xforce centre Pipe plus TB STi Quads sounds mint. MRT aren't all good sense all the time they still have to focus sales to their more popular range, they still are a business at the end of the day...

McDoof wrote:Hmm, very interesting. I have 163Kw atw on what was described as a low reading dyno (thanks Matt) with only headers, 3rd cat delete and a tune, running on good old fashioned BP 98. That's about 30kw over the stated stock power. Seems a reasonable gain for not very much effort.
Oh yes, and my car sounds amazing. Especially at WOT.

Isn't that almost 50kw atw over stock?!

Swipez wrote:

McDoof wrote:Hmm, very interesting. I have 163Kw atw on what was described as a low reading dyno (thanks Matt) with only headers, 3rd cat delete and a tune, running on good old fashioned BP 98. That's about 30kw over the stated stock power. Seems a reasonable gain for not very much effort.
Oh yes, and my car sounds amazing. Especially at WOT.

Isn't that almost 50kw atw over stock?!

Yes, and he has to drive with the handbrake "ON" one or two notches to keep himself safe!

Swipez wrote:

McDoof wrote:Hmm, very interesting. I have 163Kw atw on what was described as a low reading dyno (thanks Matt) with only headers, 3rd cat delete and a tune, running on good old fashioned BP 98. That's about 30kw over the stated stock power. Seems a reasonable gain for not very much effort.
Oh yes, and my car sounds amazing. Especially at WOT.

Isn't that almost 50kw atw over stock?!

I think the manual cars put down about 130kw. Auto cars put down a fair bit less.

BillyCorgi wrote:

Swipez wrote:

McDoof wrote:Hmm, very interesting. I have 163Kw atw on what was described as a low reading dyno (thanks Matt) with only headers, 3rd cat delete and a tune, running on good old fashioned BP 98. That's about 30kw over the stated stock power. Seems a reasonable gain for not very much effort.
Oh yes, and my car sounds amazing. Especially at WOT.

Isn't that almost 50kw atw over stock?!

Yes, and he has to drive with the handbrake "ON" one or two notches to keep himself safe!

Safety schmafety.
It is nice to drive but then again it is still just a NA 3.0. It may give an early model stock E36 M3 a run for its money though.