ok first off i know its G-tech. some say good, some say bad. anyway as far as im concerned for testing mods on the same vehicle, at the same air temp, on the same road, same settings its much better than the butt meter.

that said, i used mine to see if i could get some results.
G-tech says to acurratly get hp and torque numbers, start from a standstill, roll launch, half throttle or less to 3500 rpms then shift easily into 2nd and then floor it to redline, coast and then it should have the run stored.

worked flawlessly for me. curves are nice and smooth and did repeated runs to get averages. remember this is net hp and torque. that means drivetrain drag and rolling drag and aero drag are all eating up power from the engine. i have the rpms set correctly and set the weight to 3900lbs. i figure if anything me and the car are heavier.

remember i have a 5-spd trans but have modified the drivetrain to accept 6-spd parts so overall gearing is different than U.S. 6-spd cars
these are all averages of 3 runs.

first set of data is rwd with the stock 5-spd rear end
Hp 239.5 @ 6128 rpm torque 208.0 @ 4598 rpm

next is rwd with a U.S. 99 6-spd rear end
Hp 279.4 @ 6125 rpm torque 255.3 @ 5108 rpm

next is awd with standard U.S. 6-spd front diff and rear end
Hp 287.2 @ 6055 rpm torque 277.0 @ 4951 rpm

i expect more power to come with the awd at later tests because i had to pull the trans i.e. reset the computer. after normilizing my fuel trims are usally at 81.2% but they didnt reset in time for the test so they were still running 100% which means i was still on the rich side. im now in iowa again which means 92 oct instead of 93 so i cant do any awd runs again till i get home.

i attribute low numbers with the 5-spd rear end becasue of the lower gear ratio and less load being there to spool the turbo. others have noticed this too with mr gears and such like Bret B. i could easily feel the difference right after i switched to the 6-spd in 2nd gear. in third it wasnt as big of a difference.

these runs were done on 13psi, 93 oct, 35ish degrees F, stock ecu, stock injectors, auto dsm 13g's. stock ic's

i did this mainly to help prove that awd is faster than rwd with our cars. we suspect the difference comes from more power loss from all power going throu the rear end and t-case.

i think the G-tech is fairly accurate when set up right. i tested it on a friends car who had be dynoed. the results where fairly accurate. obviously there was a power drop from the air resistance but the hp and torque curve shapes where nearly identical.

I do agree to some extent. I after riding in my cousins STI a few times that with the short gear ratio it gave the feeling more power ( pulled hard,ran through the gears fast), but in reality it had less power and was slower even with less weight.

Trevor did some calculations...

The jdm gears combined with my 8300 redline should be interesting with the 650's.

Going back to your "load makes boost" comment. This is actually a terrible argument. It's correct, but we both know too much load robs power. If that weren't true, the guys who run lighter flywheels, UDPs, CF driveshafts, or even anyone who does weight reduction wouldn't see any positive results. Our dinky little TDO4s definately don't need more load to spool faster.

I trapped 109 with the beasts. I think I can squeeze close to 110 traps outta them on via upgraded fuel.

With the jdm gears + 9bs I would say shift into 4th.