Okay, this wasn't actually a head to head race, but the comparison is surprising. Below is a graph of 3 dyno pulls. Two are from a stock Turbo X and one if from a 1996 900 Aero. Can you tell which is which, it’s subtle?
Yesterday when I dyno’d my wife’s Turbo X I went to the same dyno I always go to. After her runs I pulled up an old run from my 1996 900 and overlaid it for comparison. It is nearly identical to the Turbo X. My 96’ Aero has the 2.3l engine and TD04 from the 9000 Aero; along with intake, intercooler, exhaust, software etc. Essentially a Stage 3 9000 Aero.
I find this very encouraging and it shows the potential of the 2.8l V6. I spent a lot of time and money to get my 900 to where it is now. And that is the starting platform for the Turbo X
In an actual head to head race the winner would be determined by the distance of the race. The Turbo X would have the advantage off the line with its XWD but the 900, which is ~650 lbs lighter and has a high rpm power advantage, would eventually overtake it.
Yesterday when I dyno’d my wife’s Turbo X I went to the same dyno I always go to. After her runs I pulled up an old run from my 1996 900 and overlaid it for comparison. It is nearly identical to the Turbo X. My 96’ Aero has the 2.3l engine and TD04 from the 9000 Aero; along with intake, intercooler, exhaust, software etc. Essentially a Stage 3 9000 Aero.
I find this very encouraging and it shows the potential of the 2.8l V6. I spent a lot of time and money to get my 900 to where it is now. And that is the starting platform for the Turbo X
In an actual head to head race the winner would be determined by the distance of the race. The Turbo X would have the advantage off the line with its XWD but the 900, which is ~650 lbs lighter and has a high rpm power advantage, would eventually overtake it.