A QUESTION OF POWER???
Scooby Regular
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 1
From: 32 cylinders and many cats
After going in that beast 
of yours powered by that Purple Monster (TM) turbo I think you could whip a few 2.3s as well Andy. After experiencing the torque delivery (sideways 
) I seriously question the need for increasing capacity to make a powerful turbo spool up.
of yours powered by that Purple Monster (TM) turbo I think you could whip a few 2.3s as well Andy. After experiencing the torque delivery (sideways ) I seriously question the need for increasing capacity to make a powerful turbo spool up.
Scooby Regular
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
John,
it's all horses for courses mate - and for the price of a decent 2l rebuild I am getting something a bit larger - why not I ask myself I don't think they give out medals for sticking with 2l 
.....damn - they do! Reorders engine
Anyway - just cos I can get 400bhp plus with a 2l doesn't mean I have to stick with it - and you can't argue that is a turbo problem Well - actually you probably can, but you don't need to
Andy,
can't be arsed to replace clutch just before it all comes out anyway. Well Lane 5 will be something to look forward to - makes long list of things to do before then.
Trout
PS I don't think anyone has accused Rigoli for cheating as he uses a 2.4 - or have I missed something?
PPS Since the focus has turned to the wastegate - there is a simple test that you can do to see if the wastegate is leaking or whether the inlet pipe is choking up....and even tho# you quote the laws of physics John, the test clearly excluded the wastegate as the problem. Mind you, you have to be careful when you do it otherwise you can overspeed the turbo quite badly if it is inlet choke.
[Edited by Trout - 1/22/2003 1:36:04 AM]
it's all horses for courses mate - and for the price of a decent 2l rebuild I am getting something a bit larger - why not I ask myself
I don't think they give out medals for sticking with 2l .....damn - they do! Reorders engine Anyway - just cos I can get 400bhp plus with a 2l doesn't mean I have to stick with it - and you can't argue that is a turbo problem
Well - actually you probably can, but you don't need to Andy,
can't be arsed to replace clutch just before it all comes out anyway. Well Lane 5 will be something to look forward to - makes long list of things to do before then.
Trout
PS I don't think anyone has accused Rigoli for cheating as he uses a 2.4 - or have I missed something?
PPS Since the focus has turned to the wastegate - there is a simple test that you can do to see if the wastegate is leaking or whether the inlet pipe is choking up....and even tho# you quote the laws of physics John, the test clearly excluded the wastegate as the problem. Mind you, you have to be careful when you do it otherwise you can overspeed the turbo quite badly if it is inlet choke.
[Edited by Trout - 1/22/2003 1:36:04 AM]
Scooby Regular
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
There have been many posts since my last one, so sorry if my replies seem a little disjointed...
John,
seeing as you never asked what the MD304 was capable of flowing, it is unfair to say that it didn't do what it was described to do based on your incorrect assumptions. As you say it was sold to you as giving about 350 BHP at 1.3 bar, and that's exactly what it did. The ability of it to run 1.8 bar or not, is a completely separate issue to what power it can make. The 1.8 bar refers to the mechanical strength of the core and the compressor wheel, *NOT* how much air it can flow.
With regard to you overspeeding the turbo, that's actually quite obvious, one only needs to look at the compressor map to figure it out. So you wanted to run 1.4 bar at the redline, which would have made about 375BHP, but the compressor is not capable of that type of flow. Basically what you did was to take the compressor to the choke line, where it will stay regardless of any further increase in spindle speed. All that it will do is heat the air more, but flow no more. Then the blade tips go supersonic and it's sayonara sweet turbo. There some warning signs you get some time before this happens but I guess you missed them in your quest to get more power Rule of thumb, when you have achieved the maximum recommended flow for a turbo, STOP, the manufacturers give a maximum flow rating for a reason, and it's not just so that they can sell you a bigger turbo when the one you have will do the job just as well
What was undoubtedly happening when you were aiming for 300 at the wheels is that you got the boost at the expense of efficiency... any time that you increase the boost and you lose power you should know there's something not quite right! Your assumption about what is choking is backwards, it's the compressor that was choking, not the exhaust.
If you want to know why you needed the higher duty cycles, there are two main reasons. The wastegate construction is a little larger than an MHI, so for the same exhaust manifold back pressure, there will be more force exerted by the wastegate on the actuator trying to block it open. Also you were taking the compressor into the choke area of the map, so although it isn't flowing any more, it is putting more heat into the intake charge. The laws of thermodynamics require that this heat "comes from" somewhere, and of course it comes from the turbine. In order for the turbine to make the additional power so that you can boil an egg in your intercooler pipework in 3 seconds flat, it requires that there is more back pressure in the exhaust manifold, which will be compounding the problem you already saw due to the size of the wastegate.
With regard to an unported housing making the turbo 400 BHP capable, that really has nothing to do with it. If you fit a ported P20 to an MD195 then it will still make 400 BHP because it was designed to do that, however it would require a stronger actuator.
The distinction that you need to draw is the difference between the mechanical strength of the turbo being able to withstand 1.8 bar, and I can assure you that the MD304 will hold together at 1.8 bar at 4500 RPM , and a turbo that can flow 400 BHP, they are completely different abilities. Perhaps this should have been pointed out to you at the time.
The "wasted 0.5 bar" as you so eloquently put it isn't wasted, it's the difference between your car making 300 and 350 lb/ft. Your turbo could have run 1.8 bar at 4500 ROM and your car would have made about 350 lb/ft at 1.8 bar at 4500 RPM. The MD304 is capable of running 1.8 bar. It is also capable of running 1.8 bar at 7000 RPM if you install it on a 1.5 litre engine, what it is not capable of doing is running 1.8 bar at 7000 RPM ona 2 litre engine. Perhaps this should have been explained to you when you purchased the turbo, but then this was never one of your requirements.
The TD05 out of the box is a horrbile laggy monster, but this is mostly to do with the convoluted pipework, and all of the restrictions getting air into the poor thing. I figured that out ages ago, it's why I had mine converted to straight entry about 2 years ago. I was getting good boost down about 2700 to 2800, but it's a different animal to the MD304. It does not produce as dense a charge, and it won't make you 350 BHP at 1.25 bar. It is a nice little turbo, hell I went for another TD-05 (this time an 18G) after I sold my original straight entry TD-05! The MD304 gives you better power, with less boost, so it's less stressful for the engine (so long as you don't ask it for the impossible).
With regard to pricing, I think you need to be realistic here. You're comparing a straight entry converted TD-05 to an MD304. So let's assume that you have a UK car with a TD-04L, so what you have is no good to you anyway. You now have four options, you can buy either a TD-05 or a VF series, and in each case you can buy them new or used. Odds are you'll find a used TD-05, whereas you won't find a used VF, so right away you have to buy a new VF series to hybridise it. To level the playing field, we'll assume that you buy a a new TD-05H, so the cost of the turbos is about the same up to this point. You then convert both turbos, one to an MD304 and the other into a straight entry TD-05. The difference in price isn't all that high, machining costs are similar but the VF series does get a new wheel, so you gotta pay for that and the balancing. This is where it gets interesting, because your MD304 will actually be better balanced than your out-of-the-factory brand new TD-05.... just had a look at one today, balance report was 0.2G at 80,000 RPM, which is MUCH lower than the factory tolerance! Alternatively you could buy a used TD05, and rebuild it so that it is in the same condition as a new one. Trouble is that this is a lot of parts and work (re-grinding ALL the machine surfaces etc takes time y'know!), typically you're looking at about 500 quid to properly recondition the '05. So please, can we at least compare like with like? You cannot seriously compare a used TD-05 of unknown condition which you bought for 200 quid and spent another 150 on the cover, to a brand new, hybridised, balanced MD304! If you do a comparison the at least do it on a level playing field.
With regard to the turbo described as making 450 BHP, and with less lag than an MD304, perhaps it is worth remembering that the MD304 is not a "new" (as in recent innovation) turbo. Compressor design is continually evolving, and lag has much to do with compressor efficiency at low flow rates. If you want to see a good example of good compressor design have a look at Aerodyne Industries compressor wheels, they maintain good effiency down to about 8% of the available flow, have a really low surge line so you're unlikely to cross it etc. The MD304 or any other VF series hybrid is no panacea, it was never sold as such, and it has always performed as described. Perhaps it's poetic justice that the fastest Subaru on the "Ten of the Best" day up at Elvington was running an MD304?
If you are going to recommend that people install TD-05 turbos instead of MD304s, then please also advise them that they should be uprating the thrust bearing when they get their turbos stripped and a new bearing kit installed, otherwise your new panacea may turn out to be pandora's box.
Andy,
I'll have to do some calculations to see whether it's possible or not, gut feeling is that it may just be possible with "conventional" turbo design (ie not variable geometry), but you're treading a very fine line.
The 400 BHP turbo I have doesn't make boost low down because its efficiency plateau is higher up the rev range, and I for one prefer to have cooler air up the top where you're more likely to melt a piston. Furthermore its exhaust housing allows considerable amount of flow, indeed this unit made approximately 400 BHP at about 1.5 bar on a 2 litre engine. With regard to the 3000-3200 RPM boost threshold for the 350 BHP unit, again, it makes a nice cool dense charge, and once again I'de prefer this to the hotter charge that comes out of a TD05, not to mention it will probably last longer too
The VF35 wasn't pushed particularly hard, because that was an STi VII remap, and the main aim wwas to give a noticeable improvement over standard, while at the same time minimising the additional stress so as to try to maintain longevity, something that isn't always the main priority when performance tuning, I'm sure I could get more out of the unit, it has "potential" but I'm not willing to risk a customer's car just to satisfy my own curiosity!
Danny,
I thought that you were running a BT270, which has a larger compressor wheel than an MD304, so it's not surprising that you were able to get somewhat more out of it? Also the fact that you ran with a P18 housing further reinforces the fact that there isn't a problem with the exhaust side... if a P18 was big enough for your 1.6 bar (and I don't recall you ever having a problem with your turbo core going bang) then it sure as hell wouldn't have been choking John's at 1.4.
Carlos,
Watch This Space, I'm mapping a JDM STi VII tomorrow, hopefully all the gremlins will have been zapped and we can start to get good power from it
John,
unless I am completely mistake, Danny's is not an MD304, it is a bigger version thereof, it was specified to be bigger because that's what Danny needed to run his engine, which has Prodrive Group A rods, Cosworth forged pistons etc etc, so well able to take the "abuse" shoving 1.6 bar down it would create.
Your results from the TD05 seem to confirm what I have been saying, that it simply is not as efficient as the VF hybrids, we were getting about 400 at 1.4 bar. I would be surprised if you saw any further significant gains over 370, MHI themselves rate it up to 370 BHP maximum. Dan's turbo was able to get more air in at 1.6 bar because it was designed to do that.
Andy,
If you can't get 400 BHP at 1.5 bar out of the turbo, it's too small for your application. Gut feeling is you'll need to run about 1.8 bar to get your 400 out of it and it won't last long at that boost pressure, the thrust bearing will go south.
John,
if you want to know why an MD305 (a 304 with a P20) make more power than an MD304, and you're scratching your head trying to figure it out, remeber that I said that the MD304 is rated to about 350, and it was the compressor that was choking, so you may be thinking how could the exhaust get round this, it's easy. The larger exhaust housing presents less back pressure in the exhaust manifold, which means that there is less gas left in the cylinders at the top of the exhaust stroke. So for a given boost pressure there is more air going into the cylinders. It's therefore possible to get the same amount of air in at a lower boost pressure, and since the boost pressure is lower, the efficiency is higher, so the charge is denser. Additionally, even though the larger housing reduces the back pressure in the manifold, it is further reduced by the fact that the shaft will be spinning slower and therefore doesn't need as much driving force from the turbine. If you have a look at some Garrett figures you'll see that where they have the same assembly available with different size A/R exhaust housings, the ones with the larger A/R housings invariably make more power, yet the compressor flow potential is a constant.
Trout,
There is an additional effect that people often don't take into consideration related to this pipe. There will be a partial vacuum at the entrance to a turbo when it is operating, this is always the case and it is unavoidable. What happens though with a restrictive intake is that the turbo has to run a higher pressure ratio to achieve the same boost, than were it presented with a freer intake path creating less of a partial vacuum. The difference this can make can be quite pronouced, and may be partly to blame for very high spindle speeds.
John,
I'll have a closer look at the graphs later when I'm not so tired And on that note, I think I'll go and get some sleep...
Cheers,
Pat.
John,
seeing as you never asked what the MD304 was capable of flowing, it is unfair to say that it didn't do what it was described to do based on your incorrect assumptions. As you say it was sold to you as giving about 350 BHP at 1.3 bar, and that's exactly what it did. The ability of it to run 1.8 bar or not, is a completely separate issue to what power it can make. The 1.8 bar refers to the mechanical strength of the core and the compressor wheel, *NOT* how much air it can flow.
With regard to you overspeeding the turbo, that's actually quite obvious, one only needs to look at the compressor map to figure it out. So you wanted to run 1.4 bar at the redline, which would have made about 375BHP, but the compressor is not capable of that type of flow. Basically what you did was to take the compressor to the choke line, where it will stay regardless of any further increase in spindle speed. All that it will do is heat the air more, but flow no more. Then the blade tips go supersonic and it's sayonara sweet turbo. There some warning signs you get some time before this happens but I guess you missed them in your quest to get more power
Rule of thumb, when you have achieved the maximum recommended flow for a turbo, STOP, the manufacturers give a maximum flow rating for a reason, and it's not just so that they can sell you a bigger turbo when the one you have will do the job just as well What was undoubtedly happening when you were aiming for 300 at the wheels is that you got the boost at the expense of efficiency... any time that you increase the boost and you lose power you should know there's something not quite right! Your assumption about what is choking is backwards, it's the compressor that was choking, not the exhaust.
If you want to know why you needed the higher duty cycles, there are two main reasons. The wastegate construction is a little larger than an MHI, so for the same exhaust manifold back pressure, there will be more force exerted by the wastegate on the actuator trying to block it open. Also you were taking the compressor into the choke area of the map, so although it isn't flowing any more, it is putting more heat into the intake charge. The laws of thermodynamics require that this heat "comes from" somewhere, and of course it comes from the turbine. In order for the turbine to make the additional power so that you can boil an egg in your intercooler pipework in 3 seconds flat, it requires that there is more back pressure in the exhaust manifold, which will be compounding the problem you already saw due to the size of the wastegate.
With regard to an unported housing making the turbo 400 BHP capable, that really has nothing to do with it. If you fit a ported P20 to an MD195 then it will still make 400 BHP because it was designed to do that, however it would require a stronger actuator.
The distinction that you need to draw is the difference between the mechanical strength of the turbo being able to withstand 1.8 bar, and I can assure you that the MD304 will hold together at 1.8 bar at 4500 RPM , and a turbo that can flow 400 BHP, they are completely different abilities. Perhaps this should have been pointed out to you at the time.
The "wasted 0.5 bar" as you so eloquently put it isn't wasted, it's the difference between your car making 300 and 350 lb/ft. Your turbo could have run 1.8 bar at 4500 ROM and your car would have made about 350 lb/ft at 1.8 bar at 4500 RPM. The MD304 is capable of running 1.8 bar. It is also capable of running 1.8 bar at 7000 RPM if you install it on a 1.5 litre engine, what it is not capable of doing is running 1.8 bar at 7000 RPM ona 2 litre engine. Perhaps this should have been explained to you when you purchased the turbo, but then this was never one of your requirements.
The TD05 out of the box is a horrbile laggy monster, but this is mostly to do with the convoluted pipework, and all of the restrictions getting air into the poor thing. I figured that out ages ago, it's why I had mine converted to straight entry about 2 years ago. I was getting good boost down about 2700 to 2800, but it's a different animal to the MD304. It does not produce as dense a charge, and it won't make you 350 BHP at 1.25 bar. It is a nice little turbo, hell I went for another TD-05 (this time an 18G) after I sold my original straight entry TD-05! The MD304 gives you better power, with less boost, so it's less stressful for the engine (so long as you don't ask it for the impossible).
With regard to pricing, I think you need to be realistic here. You're comparing a straight entry converted TD-05 to an MD304. So let's assume that you have a UK car with a TD-04L, so what you have is no good to you anyway. You now have four options, you can buy either a TD-05 or a VF series, and in each case you can buy them new or used. Odds are you'll find a used TD-05, whereas you won't find a used VF, so right away you have to buy a new VF series to hybridise it. To level the playing field, we'll assume that you buy a a new TD-05H, so the cost of the turbos is about the same up to this point. You then convert both turbos, one to an MD304 and the other into a straight entry TD-05. The difference in price isn't all that high, machining costs are similar but the VF series does get a new wheel, so you gotta pay for that and the balancing. This is where it gets interesting, because your MD304 will actually be better balanced than your out-of-the-factory brand new TD-05.... just had a look at one today, balance report was 0.2G at 80,000 RPM, which is MUCH lower than the factory tolerance! Alternatively you could buy a used TD05, and rebuild it so that it is in the same condition as a new one. Trouble is that this is a lot of parts and work (re-grinding ALL the machine surfaces etc takes time y'know!), typically you're looking at about 500 quid to properly recondition the '05. So please, can we at least compare like with like? You cannot seriously compare a used TD-05 of unknown condition which you bought for 200 quid and spent another 150 on the cover, to a brand new, hybridised, balanced MD304! If you do a comparison the at least do it on a level playing field.
With regard to the turbo described as making 450 BHP, and with less lag than an MD304, perhaps it is worth remembering that the MD304 is not a "new" (as in recent innovation) turbo. Compressor design is continually evolving, and lag has much to do with compressor efficiency at low flow rates. If you want to see a good example of good compressor design have a look at Aerodyne Industries compressor wheels, they maintain good effiency down to about 8% of the available flow, have a really low surge line so you're unlikely to cross it etc. The MD304 or any other VF series hybrid is no panacea, it was never sold as such, and it has always performed as described. Perhaps it's poetic justice that the fastest Subaru on the "Ten of the Best" day up at Elvington was running an MD304?
If you are going to recommend that people install TD-05 turbos instead of MD304s, then please also advise them that they should be uprating the thrust bearing when they get their turbos stripped and a new bearing kit installed, otherwise your new panacea may turn out to be pandora's box.
Andy,
I'll have to do some calculations to see whether it's possible or not, gut feeling is that it may just be possible with "conventional" turbo design (ie not variable geometry), but you're treading a very fine line.
The 400 BHP turbo I have doesn't make boost low down because its efficiency plateau is higher up the rev range, and I for one prefer to have cooler air up the top where you're more likely to melt a piston. Furthermore its exhaust housing allows considerable amount of flow, indeed this unit made approximately 400 BHP at about 1.5 bar on a 2 litre engine. With regard to the 3000-3200 RPM boost threshold for the 350 BHP unit, again, it makes a nice cool dense charge, and once again I'de prefer this to the hotter charge that comes out of a TD05, not to mention it will probably last longer too
The VF35 wasn't pushed particularly hard, because that was an STi VII remap, and the main aim wwas to give a noticeable improvement over standard, while at the same time minimising the additional stress so as to try to maintain longevity, something that isn't always the main priority when performance tuning, I'm sure I could get more out of the unit, it has "potential" but I'm not willing to risk a customer's car just to satisfy my own curiosity!Danny,
I thought that you were running a BT270, which has a larger compressor wheel than an MD304, so it's not surprising that you were able to get somewhat more out of it? Also the fact that you ran with a P18 housing further reinforces the fact that there isn't a problem with the exhaust side... if a P18 was big enough for your 1.6 bar (and I don't recall you ever having a problem with your turbo core going bang) then it sure as hell wouldn't have been choking John's at 1.4.
Carlos,
Watch This Space, I'm mapping a JDM STi VII tomorrow, hopefully all the gremlins will have been zapped and we can start to get good power from it
John,
unless I am completely mistake, Danny's is not an MD304, it is a bigger version thereof, it was specified to be bigger because that's what Danny needed to run his engine, which has Prodrive Group A rods, Cosworth forged pistons etc etc, so well able to take the "abuse" shoving 1.6 bar down it would create.
Your results from the TD05 seem to confirm what I have been saying, that it simply is not as efficient as the VF hybrids, we were getting about 400 at 1.4 bar. I would be surprised if you saw any further significant gains over 370, MHI themselves rate it up to 370 BHP maximum. Dan's turbo was able to get more air in at 1.6 bar because it was designed to do that.
Andy,
If you can't get 400 BHP at 1.5 bar out of the turbo, it's too small for your application. Gut feeling is you'll need to run about 1.8 bar to get your 400 out of it and it won't last long at that boost pressure, the thrust bearing will go south.
John,
if you want to know why an MD305 (a 304 with a P20) make more power than an MD304, and you're scratching your head trying to figure it out, remeber that I said that the MD304 is rated to about 350, and it was the compressor that was choking, so you may be thinking how could the exhaust get round this, it's easy. The larger exhaust housing presents less back pressure in the exhaust manifold, which means that there is less gas left in the cylinders at the top of the exhaust stroke. So for a given boost pressure there is more air going into the cylinders. It's therefore possible to get the same amount of air in at a lower boost pressure, and since the boost pressure is lower, the efficiency is higher, so the charge is denser. Additionally, even though the larger housing reduces the back pressure in the manifold, it is further reduced by the fact that the shaft will be spinning slower and therefore doesn't need as much driving force from the turbine. If you have a look at some Garrett figures you'll see that where they have the same assembly available with different size A/R exhaust housings, the ones with the larger A/R housings invariably make more power, yet the compressor flow potential is a constant.
Trout,
There is an additional effect that people often don't take into consideration related to this pipe. There will be a partial vacuum at the entrance to a turbo when it is operating, this is always the case and it is unavoidable. What happens though with a restrictive intake is that the turbo has to run a higher pressure ratio to achieve the same boost, than were it presented with a freer intake path creating less of a partial vacuum. The difference this can make can be quite pronouced, and may be partly to blame for very high spindle speeds.
John,
I'll have a closer look at the graphs later when I'm not so tired
And on that note, I think I'll go and get some sleep...Cheers,
Pat.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
From: Sweden
Well I'm wating for JB's old MD304 to arraive, and I have a Samco inlet pipe I will post how it wil hold boost with that.
I'm now running a VF30 and I have problem keeping the boost down on that.. so I wil be happy if I dont get boost spikes ~1.7bar over 5000rpm
/Jan
I'm now running a VF30 and I have problem keeping the boost down on that.. so I wil be happy if I dont get boost spikes ~1.7bar over 5000rpm
/Jan
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 1
From: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Pat
It was YOU who told me ages ago that the FE TD05 was good for 400 bhp !!!!!
Brand new TD05 cores are available for less than £400 if you need that sort of thing.
It was YOU who told me ages ago that the FE TD05 was good for 400 bhp !!!!!
Brand new TD05 cores are available for less than £400 if you need that sort of thing.
Scooby Senior
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,105
Likes: 0
From: Zurich, Switzerland
Tried to stay out, can't
I first considered front entry td05 way back when Pat first talked about it - but I didn't have sufficient knowledge or engineering skills to do it.
I then got a cheap deal on a vf23. I then got the ability to remap and quickly slagged the turbo...it's not very strong when you're playing with boost maps
During this period AndyF/CC came along and blew us all away. By this time I had the skills to get a td05 made up - but I was still considering investing in a hybrid from Mark....I really wasn't sure, and lots of emails were floating around - everyone, without exception, was very helpful My intention was to whack the td05 on temporarily and get a 'proper' hybrid later. It hasn't happened yet....
But, I don't think we should get carried away too much with the td05 - it's good for power, but it's a brutal little b*stard that doesn't provide such a nice/smooth driving experience as my old vf.
It needs more careful inlet mods to get it to spool respectably, and even then it's slower than a VF to get up to boost (with my maps anyway, haven't tried a Dawes for comparison) - I put this down to the bearing.
I reckon it's very suitable for those that can remap their own cars and are on an ultimate power quest - but your average customer doesn't want this, they want to upgrade to something offering better performance without stretching the mechanical limits on their pride and joy.
If we were to set a limit of, say, 1.2 bar on a performance upgrade for a customer wouldn't an MD stylee hybrid offer more power and better driveability than a td05?
Maybe the problem is that more and more of us are after big power, so the hybrids that were designed with us (partly) in mind a year or two back are no longer sufficient.
I don't think anyone's been ripped off or sold short - as mentioned earlier by Andy, maybe it's just an issue of us not doing our research properly before investing in hardware, or even not understanding what we really wanted? Certainly, this is true for me. I was just very lucky to choose the turbo I did, mainly 'cos it was readily available (thanks again Danny!) - it's cheap, parts to rebuild it are readily available, and it's happy to take the sh*t my crap mapping gives it
One day, I'm going to set myself a lower boost limit and get the most power I can from it - I suspect I wont be using a td05 at this time. I'm sure if I truly understood compressor maps all this would become clearer to me.....
Now, who's the company that converts Evo 05's to roller bearing to give full boost by 2k? There's a real 'next gen' hybrid - roller bearing td05-20g
Richard
I first considered front entry td05 way back when Pat first talked about it - but I didn't have sufficient knowledge or engineering skills to do it.
I then got a cheap deal on a vf23. I then got the ability to remap and quickly slagged the turbo...it's not very strong when you're playing with boost maps
During this period AndyF/CC came along and blew us all away. By this time I had the skills to get a td05 made up - but I was still considering investing in a hybrid from Mark....I really wasn't sure, and lots of emails were floating around - everyone, without exception, was very helpful
My intention was to whack the td05 on temporarily and get a 'proper' hybrid later. It hasn't happened yet....But, I don't think we should get carried away too much with the td05 - it's good for power, but it's a brutal little b*stard that doesn't provide such a nice/smooth driving experience as my old vf.
It needs more careful inlet mods to get it to spool respectably, and even then it's slower than a VF to get up to boost (with my maps anyway, haven't tried a Dawes for comparison) - I put this down to the bearing.
I reckon it's very suitable for those that can remap their own cars and are on an ultimate power quest - but your average customer doesn't want this, they want to upgrade to something offering better performance without stretching the mechanical limits on their pride and joy.
If we were to set a limit of, say, 1.2 bar on a performance upgrade for a customer wouldn't an MD stylee hybrid offer more power and better driveability than a td05?
Maybe the problem is that more and more of us are after big power, so the hybrids that were designed with us (partly) in mind a year or two back are no longer sufficient.
I don't think anyone's been ripped off or sold short - as mentioned earlier by Andy, maybe it's just an issue of us not doing our research properly before investing in hardware, or even not understanding what we really wanted? Certainly, this is true for me. I was just very lucky to choose the turbo I did, mainly 'cos it was readily available (thanks again Danny!) - it's cheap, parts to rebuild it are readily available, and it's happy to take the sh*t my crap mapping gives it
One day, I'm going to set myself a lower boost limit and get the most power I can from it - I suspect I wont be using a td05 at this time. I'm sure if I truly understood compressor maps all this would become clearer to me.....
Now, who's the company that converts Evo 05's to roller bearing to give full boost by 2k? There's a real 'next gen' hybrid - roller bearing td05-20g
Richard
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 1
From: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
I'm now looking forward to seeing all these 400+ bhp vf turbo'd 2.0 cars at Well Lane on Sunday
I feel I'll be severely left behind with my outdated TD05 hybrid.
Andy
I feel I'll be severely left behind with my outdated TD05 hybrid.
Andy
Scooby Regular
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
I`ve run a VF30 for about a year now, 00MY UK. Got all the external stuff.
1 bar at 3000rpm 4th & 5th, with HKS headers and SS upipe that COST about 200-300rpm.
It is happy at 1.3bar until about 5500 - 6000rpm. Above 6500rpm at 1.3bar it is all over for the VF30...confirmed with turbo out thermocouples.
I think 1.5bar midrange would be OK, but no more than 1.15/1.2 at 7000rpm.
Nicley rounded turbo HOWEVER the biggest issue I have with it is the spool-up time, down to the slieve bearing I believe. VF34 will address the spool-up issue but the high rpm boost still won`t be there.....IMHO.
This spec made 280lbft/320PS at Powerstation with an uprated TMIC (Although I think Mr Banks did`nt rate it particularly!) with 60-70deg intake temps (Nice!).
A subsequent run at Clive Athowe in Norwich after FMIC, made 220KW at the wheels at 1.15bar at 7000rpm, although peak power was around 6500 at 1.2 ish.........
1 bar at 3000rpm 4th & 5th, with HKS headers and SS upipe that COST about 200-300rpm.
It is happy at 1.3bar until about 5500 - 6000rpm. Above 6500rpm at 1.3bar it is all over for the VF30...confirmed with turbo out thermocouples.
I think 1.5bar midrange would be OK, but no more than 1.15/1.2 at 7000rpm.
Nicley rounded turbo HOWEVER the biggest issue I have with it is the spool-up time, down to the slieve bearing I believe. VF34 will address the spool-up issue but the high rpm boost still won`t be there.....IMHO.
This spec made 280lbft/320PS at Powerstation with an uprated TMIC (Although I think Mr Banks did`nt rate it particularly!) with 60-70deg intake temps (Nice!).
A subsequent run at Clive Athowe in Norwich after FMIC, made 220KW at the wheels at 1.15bar at 7000rpm, although peak power was around 6500 at 1.2 ish.........
Scooby Regular
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,912
Likes: 0
Wise words Richard!
And I really didn't think anyone was foolish enough to aim for the regions of 400 hp with a turbo that's obviously specced to be a 350 one...without knowing things may go fubar.
I wouldn't really make a big thing out of it...
/J
And I really didn't think anyone was foolish enough to aim for the regions of 400 hp with a turbo that's obviously specced to be a 350 one...without knowing things may go fubar.
I wouldn't really make a big thing out of it...
/J
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 1
From: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Richard
By "brutal" do you mean lots of torque low down ? because to me this is a good thing and probably partly explains why my car is 1 whole second quicker over the 1/4m than /J's with similar power
By "brutal" do you mean lots of torque low down ? because to me this is a good thing and probably partly explains why my car is 1 whole second quicker over the 1/4m than /J's with similar power
Scooby Regular
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,912
Likes: 0
Andy - As impressive as your time slip may be - wasn't there a SIGNIFICANT weight difference between our cars? *cough*
Besides I still think your slip is PANTS - but that's my personal opinion.
/J
[Edited by SecretAgentMan - 1/22/2003 9:34:16 AM]
Besides I still think your slip is PANTS - but that's my personal opinion.
/J
[Edited by SecretAgentMan - 1/22/2003 9:34:16 AM]
Scooby Senior
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,105
Likes: 0
From: Zurich, Switzerland
Not really Andy, mainly aimed at the noise the bloody thing makes...should have been more specific I guess
However, while I appreciate the response, I don't think everybody wants such a power delivery - it can be a bit of a hand-full....and scares people silly who get a ride in it for the first time....can't imagine how people look when getting out of yours now
Richard
However, while I appreciate the response, I don't think everybody wants such a power delivery - it can be a bit of a hand-full....and scares people silly who get a ride in it for the first time....can't imagine how people look when getting out of yours now
Richard
I have made one post on this thread A.F.A.I.K. Everything I say I stand by absolutely.
My turbo requirements were the same whether the turbo came from Bob Rawle or Mark Aigin but I had concluded that a ported waste gate would be a retrograde step. Other than that I realised the turbos would be much the same but Mark said his had some "very special tweeks" Mark did offer to give me a turbo which I did not have to pay for until I was happy with it and he was quite persistent but neither Bob or Mark could satify me their offerings were what I really needed.
Jack at Ion found out I wanted a turbo and he was given the same info as Bob and Mark. He gave me information and confidence I did not previously have to order the turbo and I am glad I did.
When the car ran last at W.L. it was on a conservative map and improvements have been made/are being made and really it is a continual process of evolution.
Pat: This is not an STi2 but a car with enough power to make continual gearchanges unnecessary. If you are at W.L.that can be demonstrated per my original text.
Now I have also posted on two other threads,DIY 400BHP and front entry turbo. I have also received an e-mail from Mark Aigin and one from Trout but if these things are to be aired in public then there is no need for private e-mails.
In Andy's thread he makes reference to patent rights and in my deleted thread I apologised to Andy for my taking the credit for sourcing the TD05->06 upgrade kit and told him that imitation was the highest form of flattery but commercial plagerism stinks, which it does.
It is now clear that somewhere along the line I have touched a raw nerve because from the two e-mails sent by Mark and Trout they are clearly under a major misconception in that I am accusing Mark of copying my turbo. I have not accused Mark of copying my turbo and suggest they read the written word carefully.An acknowledgement would be in order.
Now when Trout made his post which he deleted in part he was accusing me of operating commercially. "you are making money out of supplying turbos-and so you attack other suppliers" I am making no money out of supplying any turbos so whatever information you may have been given is totally duff and in fact it is Mark Aigin who rubbished my turbo to a number of people on this board.
Trout, I understand your wish to help your friend but I think you do need to get your information accurate. Some of your posts sound very much like Mark talking.
"If you are entering this marketthen the best of luck to you-you know Simon will be after you for posting here without a banner ad-your posts over the last few days have not helped you"
Which posts do you refer to and why?
I am simply helping my fellow Scooby brothers in a fraternal way which is what this board is supposed to be about. There will be quite a few people who read this post who I have been happy to help selflessly.
I do not feel the need to explain myself to you or Mark Aigin but for the benefit of the wider audience I was asked by Andy Forrest to source a TD05->06 upgrade kit which I did. Andy thinks it has been such a success that a number of others want to try this option which is relatively inexpensive and may show good gains, very certainly in terms of bangs for bucks. So I am acquiring a number of kits so others can enjoy this option. In respect of price, Andy has the figures, direct from the supplier so ,if his word is good enough he can confirm there is no profit element. Not unlike a group buy really with me doing my bit to help Andy.
None of this has anything to do with Mark Aigin and Andy has been on with it since December or before.
And finally I do have an issue with Mark Aigin over his conduct in two matters that did not concern him but they are not for public consumption at present.
Mark you sent me a pressure regulator unsolicited. If you are at Well Lane on Sunday you will get it back but then I think it is best to steer clear.
Harvey.
My turbo requirements were the same whether the turbo came from Bob Rawle or Mark Aigin but I had concluded that a ported waste gate would be a retrograde step. Other than that I realised the turbos would be much the same but Mark said his had some "very special tweeks" Mark did offer to give me a turbo which I did not have to pay for until I was happy with it and he was quite persistent but neither Bob or Mark could satify me their offerings were what I really needed.
Jack at Ion found out I wanted a turbo and he was given the same info as Bob and Mark. He gave me information and confidence I did not previously have to order the turbo and I am glad I did.
When the car ran last at W.L. it was on a conservative map and improvements have been made/are being made and really it is a continual process of evolution.
Pat: This is not an STi2 but a car with enough power to make continual gearchanges unnecessary. If you are at W.L.that can be demonstrated per my original text.
Now I have also posted on two other threads,DIY 400BHP and front entry turbo. I have also received an e-mail from Mark Aigin and one from Trout but if these things are to be aired in public then there is no need for private e-mails.
In Andy's thread he makes reference to patent rights and in my deleted thread I apologised to Andy for my taking the credit for sourcing the TD05->06 upgrade kit and told him that imitation was the highest form of flattery but commercial plagerism stinks, which it does.
It is now clear that somewhere along the line I have touched a raw nerve because from the two e-mails sent by Mark and Trout they are clearly under a major misconception in that I am accusing Mark of copying my turbo. I have not accused Mark of copying my turbo and suggest they read the written word carefully.An acknowledgement would be in order.
Now when Trout made his post which he deleted in part he was accusing me of operating commercially. "you are making money out of supplying turbos-and so you attack other suppliers" I am making no money out of supplying any turbos so whatever information you may have been given is totally duff and in fact it is Mark Aigin who rubbished my turbo to a number of people on this board.
Trout, I understand your wish to help your friend but I think you do need to get your information accurate. Some of your posts sound very much like Mark talking.
"If you are entering this marketthen the best of luck to you-you know Simon will be after you for posting here without a banner ad-your posts over the last few days have not helped you"
Which posts do you refer to and why?
I am simply helping my fellow Scooby brothers in a fraternal way which is what this board is supposed to be about. There will be quite a few people who read this post who I have been happy to help selflessly.
I do not feel the need to explain myself to you or Mark Aigin but for the benefit of the wider audience I was asked by Andy Forrest to source a TD05->06 upgrade kit which I did. Andy thinks it has been such a success that a number of others want to try this option which is relatively inexpensive and may show good gains, very certainly in terms of bangs for bucks. So I am acquiring a number of kits so others can enjoy this option. In respect of price, Andy has the figures, direct from the supplier so ,if his word is good enough he can confirm there is no profit element. Not unlike a group buy really with me doing my bit to help Andy.
None of this has anything to do with Mark Aigin and Andy has been on with it since December or before.
And finally I do have an issue with Mark Aigin over his conduct in two matters that did not concern him but they are not for public consumption at present.
Mark you sent me a pressure regulator unsolicited. If you are at Well Lane on Sunday you will get it back but then I think it is best to steer clear.
Harvey.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 1
From: 32 cylinders and many cats
Sorry my post disappeared in adding a bit more info to it.
Pat, I was assurred that the MD304 was capable of 1.8 bar to the redline, I specifically confirmed that THIS WAS TO THE REDLINE on several occasions because experience with it did not bear this out. I was told that the compressor map was unavailable so I went off the above information and blew one up and the second one wouldn't make more power. I was assurred that Danny's was an MD304 running 1.6 bar to the red line.
Bob also said that the boost I was running (he knew what I was doing at high RPM in the 22b post) was a walk in the park for an MD304 and based on his knowlegde of the Garrett wheel is good for 1.8 bar held... don't know if he meant 1.8 bar held to redline.
But it backs up the over-riding information I was given that I was not pushing this turbo's top end and that at 350 BHP I should not be reaching a ceiling with it... in discussions with the supplier this was continually stated. I gave up with the conflicting info and just sold it to someone who I am sure will be glad of it because it doesn't have a snowball in hell's chance of boost creeping from what I have seen quite the opposite. Frankly I wouldn't put up with the lag and boost threshold of an MD304 if it was only good for 350 BHP. This was not an issue until I tried to make it flow more, like I obviously now realise is not possible, but this is contrary to all the information given to me by the supplier.
So when I am told this and don't have a compressor map what am I supposed to believe?
The TD05 on the AP22 traces was making about 1.4 bar midrange, 1.3 bar at peak power, and..... about 275 BHP at the wheels.... the same as the MD304 at about 1.25 bar. No it is not the most perfect turbo in the world, but it has not blown up in the circumstances that the MD304 blew up in and runs very happily so far.
Reaching 167 mph is all well and good, and it is the best top speed documented on that meet on that day. Presumably any 350 BHP Scooby could do similar?
Pat, I was assurred that the MD304 was capable of 1.8 bar to the redline, I specifically confirmed that THIS WAS TO THE REDLINE on several occasions because experience with it did not bear this out. I was told that the compressor map was unavailable so I went off the above information and blew one up and the second one wouldn't make more power. I was assurred that Danny's was an MD304 running 1.6 bar to the red line.
Bob also said that the boost I was running (he knew what I was doing at high RPM in the 22b post) was a walk in the park for an MD304 and based on his knowlegde of the Garrett wheel is good for 1.8 bar held... don't know if he meant 1.8 bar held to redline.
But it backs up the over-riding information I was given that I was not pushing this turbo's top end and that at 350 BHP I should not be reaching a ceiling with it... in discussions with the supplier this was continually stated. I gave up with the conflicting info and just sold it to someone who I am sure will be glad of it because it doesn't have a snowball in hell's chance of boost creeping from what I have seen quite the opposite. Frankly I wouldn't put up with the lag and boost threshold of an MD304 if it was only good for 350 BHP. This was not an issue until I tried to make it flow more, like I obviously now realise is not possible, but this is contrary to all the information given to me by the supplier.
So when I am told this and don't have a compressor map what am I supposed to believe?
The TD05 on the AP22 traces was making about 1.4 bar midrange, 1.3 bar at peak power, and..... about 275 BHP at the wheels.... the same as the MD304 at about 1.25 bar. No it is not the most perfect turbo in the world, but it has not blown up in the circumstances that the MD304 blew up in and runs very happily so far.
Reaching 167 mph is all well and good, and it is the best top speed documented on that meet on that day. Presumably any 350 BHP Scooby could do similar?
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 1
From: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Just to clear up a possible misunderstanding ?
Any comments (tongue in cheek or otherwise) I have made regarding patenting or copying have been in regard to the TD05/06-20G upgrade which I heve recently built.
Nothing to do with Harveys Ion turbo.
Any comments (tongue in cheek or otherwise) I have made regarding patenting or copying have been in regard to the TD05/06-20G upgrade which I heve recently built.
Nothing to do with Harveys Ion turbo.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 15,239
Likes: 1
From: Leeds - It was 562.4bhp@28psi on Optimax, How much closer to 600 with race fuel and a bigger turbo?
Can I have some figures??
How much is a td06 conversion?
How much is an ION?
How much is a 304 / 309?
David
How much is a td06 conversion?
How much is an ION?
How much is a 304 / 309?
David
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 1
From: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Depends how much you can DIY
Hazard a guess at
VF £1200 ??
Recon TD £600 ??
However it doesn't really matter how cost effective a td is, you don't need to look past a vf hybrid apparently. Not only do they have class leading low lag and blow cold air but the sun appears to shine out their orifice.
Can't wait to see them all do the 400+ with ease on Sunday Not forgetting the midrange torque of course, say, 360 would be a reasonable expectation on a 2.0 ?
[Edited by Andy.F - 1/22/2003 12:54:05 PM]
Hazard a guess at
VF £1200 ??
Recon TD £600 ??
However it doesn't really matter how cost effective a td is, you don't need to look past a vf hybrid apparently. Not only do they have class leading low lag and blow cold air but the sun appears to shine out their orifice.
Can't wait to see them all do the 400+ with ease on Sunday
Not forgetting the midrange torque of course, say, 360 would be a reasonable expectation on a 2.0 ?[Edited by Andy.F - 1/22/2003 12:54:05 PM]
Scooby Regular
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,271
Likes: 0
Do none of you have day jobs 
Trout
Yes it will be interesting to see what the MD195 gets!!. I was also fairly interested in a comment that Adam made about running less boost due to higher compression.... no probs so far!!
As you stated the car was mapped to hold 1.4 bar but never got more than 1.25 bar at Well Lane. (The boost was all over the place at PE due to a slipping clutch I noticed this on the 30 second HKS boost gauge profile...)
The pipe has been changed for an sti jobbie. The Samco had problems as Christians was as useless as mine at WL3. The pipe is not cheap though - typical retail is around £700 (inc) but you may be able to pick up cheaper
My car is the VF22 md195. Its rated at 420bhp at 1.8 bar... It does'nt choke at all, all the way to 8000 rpm..... but then the boost is tapered down slightly. (famous last words!)
The 1.2 bar actuator is being replaced for a 1.4 bar jobbie as the 1.2 bar is not up to it, saying that I wont have this fitted by the 26th
Anyhow I dont care.. the car is so damn quick on the road now I'm more than happy.. just hope the clutch holds out
I also found the comment about the lower compression on cossies interesting. I had the compression raised on my cosworth engine and it could run to 2 bar no problem, but not a large turbo as I didnt like lag!.. so peak power was not that great (over 400bhp and 400lbs torque though).. something I dont get the benefit of on the Scooby
I may take it further (water injection and headers still to go on) next stage is bigger turbo... I dont want the lag though so may stop prior to putting a bigger turbo on.. my injectors would only just be good enough as well... (puny 740's)
Trout
Yes it will be interesting to see what the MD195 gets!!. I was also fairly interested in a comment that Adam made about running less boost due to higher compression.... no probs so far!!
As you stated the car was mapped to hold 1.4 bar but never got more than 1.25 bar at Well Lane. (The boost was all over the place at PE due to a slipping clutch I noticed this on the 30 second HKS boost gauge profile...)
The pipe has been changed for an sti jobbie. The Samco had problems as Christians was as useless as mine at WL3. The pipe is not cheap though - typical retail is around £700 (inc) but you may be able to pick up cheaper
My car is the VF22 md195. Its rated at 420bhp at 1.8 bar... It does'nt choke at all, all the way to 8000 rpm..... but then the boost is tapered down slightly. (famous last words!)
The 1.2 bar actuator is being replaced for a 1.4 bar jobbie as the 1.2 bar is not up to it, saying that I wont have this fitted by the 26th
Anyhow I dont care.. the car is so damn quick on the road now I'm more than happy.. just hope the clutch holds out
I also found the comment about the lower compression on cossies interesting. I had the compression raised on my cosworth engine and it could run to 2 bar no problem, but not a large turbo as I didnt like lag!.. so peak power was not that great (over 400bhp and 400lbs torque though).. something I dont get the benefit of on the Scooby
I may take it further (water injection and headers still to go on) next stage is bigger turbo... I dont want the lag though so may stop prior to putting a bigger turbo on.. my injectors would only just be good enough as well... (puny 740's)
Scooby Regular
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 2,846
Likes: 0
Pat, as far as I know the BT270 was later renamed as the MD304.
I think I am correct in saying that I was one of the first to run this turbo, and it gave * ME * good results.
What is the point of witch hunts? Where does it get you?
Dan
I think I am correct in saying that I was one of the first to run this turbo, and it gave * ME * good results.
What is the point of witch hunts? Where does it get you?
Dan
as far as I'm concerned I've been keeping the debate technical not personal.