2.0L Blobeye PPP with VF34 - disappointing results
08 May 2015, 10:23 AM
#32
Scooby Regular
for comparison mine on a td04, nopt got boost graph for the td04 I dont think 
vs the v34
few bits to note, was running autronics on the vf34 and front mount, vs decat, ecutek and standard top mount on td04
vs the v34
few bits to note, was running autronics on the vf34 and front mount, vs decat, ecutek and standard top mount on td04
08 May 2015, 11:33 AM
#33
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The graph I got doesn't have AFR on it. I did see it on screen though and it was very stable around the 11:1 mark right through the rev range, leaning off at the top end.
Does the dyno make that much difference? The MAHA one is supposed to be more accurate in that it can calculate the transmission loss more accurately, and this is supposed to be the dyno that a lot of manufacturers use.
He was recommneded by my garage and has been racing / working on Subaru's for years and years, so perhaps a bit unfair to say he doesn't know his stuff.
Perhaps it was a very conservative map for use as a daily driver, but he reckoned advancing the ignition slightly would give a bit more, but not 50 .
Do Scoobyclinic do open source mapping as I really don't want to spend £500?
Does the dyno make that much difference? The MAHA one is supposed to be more accurate in that it can calculate the transmission loss more accurately, and this is supposed to be the dyno that a lot of manufacturers use.
He was recommneded by my garage and has been racing / working on Subaru's for years and years, so perhaps a bit unfair to say he doesn't know his stuff.
Perhaps it was a very conservative map for use as a daily driver, but he reckoned advancing the ignition slightly would give a bit more, but not 50 .
Do Scoobyclinic do open source mapping as I really don't want to spend £500?
08 May 2015, 12:00 PM
#35
Mate there is something seriously wrong if your car is only making 265bhp with a VF34, mine made 331bhp and could have made more but I didn't want to stress my gearbox so aired on the side of caution.
No dis-respect intended but if the bloke is as clued up as your suggesting what does he give as the reason your figures are so p1ss poor, I have been around Subarus and this forum for over 12yrs.
I've NEVER seen such poor figures from what was once one of the most popular turbos to up-grade to, never in that time have I seen one make less than 320bhp some get as much as 360 dependent on supporting mods, so that leaves you seriously a drift.
No dis-respect intended but if the bloke is as clued up as your suggesting what does he give as the reason your figures are so p1ss poor, I have been around Subarus and this forum for over 12yrs.
I've NEVER seen such poor figures from what was once one of the most popular turbos to up-grade to, never in that time have I seen one make less than 320bhp some get as much as 360 dependent on supporting mods, so that leaves you seriously a drift.
Last edited by ditchmyster; 08 May 2015 at 12:01 PM.
08 May 2015, 12:02 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
The graph I got doesn't have AFR on it. I did see it on screen though and it was very stable around the 11:1 mark right through the rev range, leaning off at the top end.
Does the dyno make that much difference? The MAHA one is supposed to be more accurate in that it can calculate the transmission loss more accurately, and this is supposed to be the dyno that a lot of manufacturers use.
He was recommneded by my garage and has been racing / working on Subaru's for years and years, so perhaps a bit unfair to say he doesn't know his stuff.
Perhaps it was a very conservative map for use as a daily driver, but he reckoned advancing the ignition slightly would give a bit more, but not 50 .
Do Scoobyclinic do open source mapping as I really don't want to spend £500?
Does the dyno make that much difference? The MAHA one is supposed to be more accurate in that it can calculate the transmission loss more accurately, and this is supposed to be the dyno that a lot of manufacturers use.
He was recommneded by my garage and has been racing / working on Subaru's for years and years, so perhaps a bit unfair to say he doesn't know his stuff.
Perhaps it was a very conservative map for use as a daily driver, but he reckoned advancing the ignition slightly would give a bit more, but not 50 .
Do Scoobyclinic do open source mapping as I really don't want to spend £500?
leaning off at the top end
thats bad, def needs looking at as to why at 265 fuel system shouldn't be struggling.Pay cheap, pay twice, but best bet is ring them, they can advise whats what. There are advantages to paying the extra for ecutek, software support etc, but you makes yer choice you pays yer money.
Clinic do various options mapping wise.
Dyno Dynamics rolling roads are more widley regarded by the subaru community as far as dyno's go, but you'll prob find that people will big up there prefered one. RR are always approx figures due to transmission loss varying from car to car epending on gearbox condition, oil condition etc etc afr is the most important thing to make sure the map is safe. all well and good getting 350bhp from a vf35/34 if its push so far the map doesnt run safe
08 May 2015, 12:35 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Horsham, Sussex
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max Power: 279 (HP) @ 5345 Max Torque: 304 (lb-ft) @ 3944
This is what I got with pretty much the same car as your's, with the same mods but running a TD04.
This is what I got with pretty much the same car as your's, with the same mods but running a TD04.
08 May 2015, 03:12 PM
#38
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ive got the option to go back for more power if I want, so what other parameters can be changed other than upping the boost (max safe boost??), advance timing, and increase fueling?
08 May 2015, 03:13 PM
#39
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 May 2015, 03:15 PM
#40
usual things to look at would be increase boost (or decrease if it's too high for your intercooler to support), advance timing and reduce fuelling. A leaner mixture can produce more power but go too lean and you miss out on timing due to knock.
It's up to your mapper to strike the balance and get the best from it so take their advice.
It's up to your mapper to strike the balance and get the best from it so take their advice.
08 May 2015, 03:31 PM
#41
Hi guys, this is my first post on the forum
I had my car remapped this week and I must say I was slightly disappointed - not necessarily with my mapper who was a nice bloke, but the fact that I had spent time and money on upgrades in preparation.
I've got a 2.0L Blobeye Wagon with a certified prodrive performance pack which should have been 265bhp / 260 lb/ft.
I've added:
Almost new VF34 turbo
K&N panel filter
Decat up-pipe
Prodrive sports cat
Silicone inlet hose
DW200 Fuel Pump
I've also polished / removed flash and radiused all ports on the turbo, Knife-edged the throttle plate, and made various improvements to my standard intercooler and it's under tray.
It was mapped at 1.3bar coming in quite early and holding until 5500rpm on the standard boost solenoid.
Now, from my research I thought since the VF34 will flow more air than the outgoing standard TD04 at any given level of boost, I should be 310-325bhp, which I believed would not be too much strain on the WRX internals / 5 speed box. I always use Tesco Momentum 99 RON fuel.
After the run, it showed...265bhp (@5,500rpm)/ 287lb/ft (@3,900rpm).
Now, I realise that the car is 10 years old so probably wasn't running at 265 bhp on the PPP, and different rolling roads show read differently (mine was done on a MAHA) but the results were 50bhp lower than expected.
I did say to my mapper that it is my daily driver and I didn't want to push it too far, but I came away a bit disappointed, and wondering why.
Dont get me wrong, the car drives better - smoother and definitely more lively but how can this be since all the tuning guides and websites I've read - Andy Forrest, Race Dynamics etc say north of 300?
I know it's not about chasing numbers but I wanted to get the best performance from bolt ons.
As I said to my mapper if that is the reality with my spec, then so be it.
Any views / experiences gratefully received, backed up by reasons would be great I must have been an engineer in a past life as air flow, calculations really interest me and I like to know how things work (or why they don't).
I have contacted my mapper who has offered me my money back or another remap, but how can an extra 50bhp be achieved?
Lastly, would 1.4 or 1.5bar on the VF34 kill it and my engine?
Thanks
I had my car remapped this week and I must say I was slightly disappointed - not necessarily with my mapper who was a nice bloke, but the fact that I had spent time and money on upgrades in preparation.
I've got a 2.0L Blobeye Wagon with a certified prodrive performance pack which should have been 265bhp / 260 lb/ft.
I've added:
Almost new VF34 turbo
K&N panel filter
Decat up-pipe
Prodrive sports cat
Silicone inlet hose
DW200 Fuel Pump
I've also polished / removed flash and radiused all ports on the turbo, Knife-edged the throttle plate, and made various improvements to my standard intercooler and it's under tray.
It was mapped at 1.3bar coming in quite early and holding until 5500rpm on the standard boost solenoid.
Now, from my research I thought since the VF34 will flow more air than the outgoing standard TD04 at any given level of boost, I should be 310-325bhp, which I believed would not be too much strain on the WRX internals / 5 speed box. I always use Tesco Momentum 99 RON fuel.
After the run, it showed...265bhp (@5,500rpm)/ 287lb/ft (@3,900rpm).
Now, I realise that the car is 10 years old so probably wasn't running at 265 bhp on the PPP, and different rolling roads show read differently (mine was done on a MAHA) but the results were 50bhp lower than expected.
I did say to my mapper that it is my daily driver and I didn't want to push it too far, but I came away a bit disappointed, and wondering why.
Dont get me wrong, the car drives better - smoother and definitely more lively but how can this be since all the tuning guides and websites I've read - Andy Forrest, Race Dynamics etc say north of 300?
I know it's not about chasing numbers but I wanted to get the best performance from bolt ons.
As I said to my mapper if that is the reality with my spec, then so be it.
Any views / experiences gratefully received, backed up by reasons would be great I must have been an engineer in a past life as air flow, calculations really interest me and I like to know how things work (or why they don't).
I have contacted my mapper who has offered me my money back or another remap, but how can an extra 50bhp be achieved?
Lastly, would 1.4 or 1.5bar on the VF34 kill it and my engine?
Thanks
Trev
Last edited by trevsjwood; 08 May 2015 at 03:35 PM.
11 May 2015, 08:46 PM
#44
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will simply putting in the blue hawkeye injectors be the answer? I really dont want to go above 1.3 bar, nor should I have to- it seems as though this is the max safe level of boost.
...and a remap of course
...and a remap of course
Last edited by DIB_23; 11 May 2015 at 08:56 PM. Reason: Missed a vital bit...
12 May 2015, 03:06 PM
#49
Your torque figures are high in relation to bhp for a 2litre and I would be looking at freeing up exhaust flow post turbo.
Trev
12 May 2015, 04:26 PM
#50
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Trev, after turbo theres a prodrive sports cat (late bellmouth one), straight through mid pipe and prodrive back box. Dont want to go decat, and as someone said before it shouldnt be that restrictive. Is 278 torque good then?
13 May 2015, 05:35 AM
#51
Hi there
Personally I would put Hawkeye injectors in if you have already them,simply on WRX injectors(440cc) you will never more if you are running high IDC(Injector duty cycle),I would be surprised if you can make beyond 310bhp on standard FPR or standard fuel pressure(but as Trev has made 325bhp on his its possible),seen only few guys make beyond that figure on WRX injectors,different story is on classic with 440cc.
Second bit,I would go with decat exhaust,Prodrive cat are pretty restrictive beyond 300bhp,if you want to stick with sport cat,please have look on Cobra sport cats,not sure on Japspeed how they are on this
We are made 350bhp on VF34 at 1.5bar and this has been on our WRX wagon,I wouldn't be worried too much going beyond 1.3bar,if car is mapped correctly you shouldn't be worried
Plus depends on RR used,on some you can make 300bhp,on some you can make bit more
Hope this helps
Thanks,Jura
Personally I would put Hawkeye injectors in if you have already them,simply on WRX injectors(440cc) you will never more if you are running high IDC(Injector duty cycle),I would be surprised if you can make beyond 310bhp on standard FPR or standard fuel pressure(but as Trev has made 325bhp on his its possible),seen only few guys make beyond that figure on WRX injectors,different story is on classic with 440cc.
Second bit,I would go with decat exhaust,Prodrive cat are pretty restrictive beyond 300bhp,if you want to stick with sport cat,please have look on Cobra sport cats,not sure on Japspeed how they are on this
We are made 350bhp on VF34 at 1.5bar and this has been on our WRX wagon,I wouldn't be worried too much going beyond 1.3bar,if car is mapped correctly you shouldn't be worried
Plus depends on RR used,on some you can make 300bhp,on some you can make bit more
Hope this helps
Thanks,Jura
13 May 2015, 09:23 AM
#52
Scooby Regular
Hi there
Personally I would put Hawkeye injectors in if you have already them,simply on WRX injectors(440cc) you will never more if you are running high IDC(Injector duty cycle),I would be surprised if you can make beyond 310bhp on standard FPR or standard fuel pressure(but as Trev has made 325bhp on his its possible),seen only few guys make beyond that figure on WRX injectors,different story is on classic with 440cc.
Second bit,I would go with decat exhaust,Prodrive cat are pretty restrictive beyond 300bhp,if you want to stick with sport cat,please have look on Cobra sport cats,not sure on Japspeed how they are on this
We are made 350bhp on VF34 at 1.5bar and this has been on our WRX wagon,I wouldn't be worried too much going beyond 1.3bar,if car is mapped correctly you shouldn't be worried
Plus depends on RR used,on some you can make 300bhp,on some you can make bit more
Hope this helps
Thanks,Jura
Personally I would put Hawkeye injectors in if you have already them,simply on WRX injectors(440cc) you will never more if you are running high IDC(Injector duty cycle),I would be surprised if you can make beyond 310bhp on standard FPR or standard fuel pressure(but as Trev has made 325bhp on his its possible),seen only few guys make beyond that figure on WRX injectors,different story is on classic with 440cc.
Second bit,I would go with decat exhaust,Prodrive cat are pretty restrictive beyond 300bhp,if you want to stick with sport cat,please have look on Cobra sport cats,not sure on Japspeed how they are on this
We are made 350bhp on VF34 at 1.5bar and this has been on our WRX wagon,I wouldn't be worried too much going beyond 1.3bar,if car is mapped correctly you shouldn't be worried
Plus depends on RR used,on some you can make 300bhp,on some you can make bit more
Hope this helps
Thanks,Jura
mine made 340bhp on 440's and standard fpr
but were maxed
13 May 2015, 02:46 PM
#53
very low figures chap. The original PPP figures where optimistic, but what you have should amount to a better result than you have. Unless you have an underlying issue that your mapper has not spotted.
I am surprised that your mapper did not question why he was struggling to release the power that 'he' should be expecting (unless he is not that knowledgeable)
Grab a set of STI pinks and speak with Andy Carr/Duncan
For ref, MY03 2.0l WRX with a filter, scrubber cat delete, (original cats still in downpipe & up-pipe, little TD04) is giving 280/287...
I am surprised that your mapper did not question why he was struggling to release the power that 'he' should be expecting (unless he is not that knowledgeable)
Grab a set of STI pinks and speak with Andy Carr/Duncan
For ref, MY03 2.0l WRX with a filter, scrubber cat delete, (original cats still in downpipe & up-pipe, little TD04) is giving 280/287...
13 May 2015, 04:21 PM
#55
I wouldn't be looking at injectors at this point (a) because 440's shouldn't be a restriction and (b) your mapper would have said so if there was a problem there.
If your mapper isn't known to us on here it may be worth going for a second opinion from such as Duncan (Racedynamix) or Martyn at engintuner or Bob Rawle another much respected mapper.
frustrating but many of us have been there.
Trev
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
fatboy_coach
General Technical
15
18 June 2016 03:48 PM