Denmark

iTrader: (2)

Mark,
When you say you are maxing out the injectors what dutycycle are you meaning above 85% or what?
Is it not 550cc injectors


Skassa



[Edited by Denmark - 2/14/2003 10:12:41 AM]

john banks

Results sound good Mark, nice gains from the manifold.

Are they 500 cc on the STi?

How rich are you running it Mark? The one I did the other day was peaking the IDC at 91% with a fuel pump. What are you finding with top end wastegate solenoid duty cycles?

[Edited by john banks - 2/14/2003 10:32:47 AM]

EMS

@skassa,

The injectors should be 500cc (though I didn´t measure it myself), they are running very close to 100% DC!

@John,

I don´t look at AFR, I use what the car "likes". You can easily check it with the knock correction. If the mixture is too lean (stil VERY rich though!) the ECU responds with more retarded ignition. The car should have somewhere between 10.5 and 11.0 AFR (a little leaner below 5.000 RPM)

With the wastegate ported to 27 mm we have no less than 33% wastegate DC at top end (at 1.0 bar)in 4th gear. Also in 5th gear @ 7500 RPM on the Autobahn with -10°C absolutely no boost creep!

Mark.

Denmark

iTrader: (2)

When i mountet the supersprint manifold the spoolup reduced from
1bar/3100rpm to 1bar/2900rpm,
This if a little strange when all on this board says that i´ll be raised

Skassa

john banks

Thing is Mark that my EJ20 seems to not suffer with timing as lean as 12:1 (but I have a FMIC) and it keeps making more power. EGTs are a sensible peak of 900C in the uppipe. Would add fuel if they were going higher, but the ignition is now very advanced which I guess keeps them in check even at nearly 1.7 bar at this AFR. Everyone seems scared to lean out the STi 7. If it was my car I would get EGT on it and see what it did - forgot to look if the STi had one as standard or is it only to protect the uppipe cat on the WRX?

Also noticed that the STi 7 would audibly detonate and not pull out enough ignition timing. I took the last four load columns on the timing map and stretched the load sites out, put in original values where they should have been and extrapolated out, and then subtracted 1, 2, 3, 4 degrees from midrange to high load in the last four load columns to initially sort it then it ran nice positive knock correction all the way up and behaved, and was not detting. But the active system was surprisingly incompetent at times.

carlos_hiraoka

BTW John, talking about group N engines, the new STi engines are the ones that have presented more failures (the grp. N Prodrive built WRX of Arai again had engine failure, in the swedish rally), according to one of the guys from the Subaru Rally Team - Peru is because these engines like to run richer than the previous ones (think the tolerances are tighter, specially piston clearance to the previous versions ..... ).

john banks

That means they will make less power which is bad news?

carlos_hiraoka

nope ..... I guess that they need a richer AFR, some good results have already been produced with a rich mixtures ~ 11:1 and with the smallest VF turbo, the VF35.
Don't forget that the new STi ver 8 type RA spec C will come with the IHI twin scroll turbo, now that will definetly not be cheap but much more capable of low end torque

StephenDone

Hi John,

The STI knock correction is not incompetent. It is that it switches off after a given load & rpm, since it can't distinguish noise from knock and would incorrectly pull timing at times. I'll send you a software update !

Steve

john banks

Thanks.

[Edited by john banks - 2/14/2003 5:32:41 PM]

StephenDone

6100/6200 with hysteresis. YHM !

EMS

John,

I have seen the ECU from MY01 "likes" rich mixture. If you are trying to lean up the mixture, the ECU is pulling (a lot of) timing through the knock correction. Perhaps the knock correction is a bit over sensible (I think it is!). I think it's better to have a knock correction which is over sensible than no knock correction. (at least for a road car) Even a different manifold seems not to have negative influence on the knock correction. (you can't say that for the MY99 and MY00!)

Mark.

jonno

Hi Peeps,
Seeing as everyone else has putting up their road dynos here's My JDM STi 7 Only very slightly modded

Dyno Test: jtrun2
=================

Maximum Wheel Power: 321.9 BHP @ 6555 RPM
Maximum Wheel Torque: 309.0 LbFt @ 5000 RPM
Power to weight ratio: 201.2 BHP per ton

Terminal velocity due to power: 187.6 mph

In Gear Acceleration:
30 - 50mph = 4.4 seconds
40 - 60mph = 3.3 seconds
50 - 70mph = 2.6 seconds
60 - 80mph = 2.5 seconds
70 - 90mph = 2.7 seconds
80 -100mph = 3.1 seconds

Speed per 1000 RPM:
1st: 5.3 mph
2nd: 8.1 mph
3rd: 10.9 mph
4th: 14.2 mph
5th: 18.0 mph
6th: 22.7 mph

Maximum Speed per Gear:
1st: 43.2 mph
2nd: 66.1 mph
3rd: 89.1 mph
4th: 116.6 mph
5th: 147.8 mph
6th: 186.4 mph

Vehicle Mass: 1600kg
Drag Co-efficient: 0.37
Frontal Area: 2.20 square metres
Wheel/Tyre Setup: 225/40/18
Rev Limit: 8200
Test gear: 4
Max Speed of gear: 117 mph


Jonno

Edited to say:
JDM STi 7 slightly modified
APS FMIC with APS Ind kit
Hybrid Turbo
SS Up Pipe/down Pipe
HKS Titip C&R
Ecutec Remap



[Edited by jonno - 2/18/2003 11:22:57 PM]

john banks

Can you list the spec? More that lightly modded

Damn, you're only 20 BHP away from mine (scurries off the fit a bigger turbo )

Bob Rawle

Jonno, just realised that the car weight is too light, since we had a full tank plus us two in the car in addition, that means in reality the figures were somewhat higher than we got ... so allowing for that the car weight would have been say 1690
That gave 313.1 wheel bhp and 300.1 wheel torque, 185.3 bhp per ton. Also bear in mind that Johns boost is still only 1.17 bar at the red line so max power was made at 1.2 bar.

If you open that file and substitute that weight you will get the same result. Need to do the same with the first file.

I think thats more like it.

jonno

Mods listed.....

Jonno

john banks

Superb results gents - my best result was at a rather less impressive 1.5 bar. Which turbo if you don't mind me asking? Is this another Allied Signal special ?

jonno

John,
the tubo was supplied by Mark @ Lateral Performance, IRC is MD321, Mark can explain better than me.

Jonno

john banks

That is a number I've not heard of before, not sure Mark would want to tell me what was in it anyway Are you planning on going higher with it? Would be interested in the DDF file if you wouldn't mind emailing it or posting a link to it so I can see what the torque delivery is like. It is weighing up using a larger turbo at lower boost but sacrificing the low down torque and getting similar midrange and better power?

Bob do the STi 7s have more drag than the MY00s or do you think we should use 0.37 cd for both?

[Edited by john banks - 2/18/2003 11:47:04 PM]

jonno

John,
Bob can probably comment better on the difference of spool up before and after as i dont have the DD log's.

I ran for a considerable amount of time decated plus Induction kit, with no remap.
Then remaped, spool up was greatly improved, and to be honest now with a few xtras it does'nt feel that the spool up is that far away from when it was remapped.

Sorry not that good at explaining stuff!!

Jonno.

Pete Croney

Jonno nice figures, I bet its damn quick

Here's some figures for a WRX with an MD304 running 1.3bar. Peak torque is at 4600 rpm but Pat is working on getting it lower. The log didn't capture accurately at the very top end but Pat was tailing it off there anyway so I don't think the overall power is affected. The in-gear times are very impressive and it leaves my car for dead. Then again, I love the near-instant full boost driveability of mine down the lanes

Vehicle Mass: 1600kg
Drag Co-efficient: 0.37
Frontal Area: 2.20 square metres
Wheel/Tyre Setup: 225/40/18
Rev Limit: 7100
Test gear: 3
Max Speed of gear: 99 mph

Dyno Test:
=======================

Maximum Wheel Power: 275.1 BHP @ 6087 RPM
Maximum Wheel Torque: 258.3 LbFt @ 4600 RPM
Power to weight ratio: 181.0 BHP per ton

Terminal velocity due to power: 181.3 mph

In Gear Acceleration:
30 - 50mph = 4.0 seconds
40 - 60mph = 3.1 seconds
50 - 70mph = 2.7 seconds
60 - 80mph = 2.6 seconds
70 - 90mph = 2.9 seconds




There's more to come from this one, so I'll keep you posted.

carlos_hiraoka

Nice results

john banks

Pete, maybe the torque delivery is due to the turbo? Wonder what this (or your )WRX would go like with a TD05, comparing to my graphs (assuming the WRX was also in third gear), the TD05 has the same torque at 2000 RPM (which seems a good baseline and suggests the weights and mapping are not vastly dissimilar?), 10 wheel lbft more at 2500 RPM, 40 wheel lbft more at 3000, 45 wheel lbft more at 3500, after that it is not comparable as I am running it at higher boost, it makes about 1 bar at 3100 RPM and 1.3 bar a bit later so the boost is not silly in the comparison area. Would be interested in your thoughts on this if you had a play, although I hear what you are saying that there might be a bit more from mapping it further, but probably not this much? It might be the compromise you are looking for between the lanes and outright power. Interestingly, the TD05 is the equal of a TD04 hybrid running a manifold from 2000-3000 RPM.

[Edited by john banks - 2/19/2003 6:13:56 PM]

Pete Croney

John, I think you are right and have been thinking of trying an 05 on my car. I love the way that my throttle response gives perfect mid corner yaw control and would hate to lose this.

I really felt that the car was perfect until the MD304 car left me for dead. I've driven it a couple of times now and it is starship quick, but its too laggy for me. The owner spends lots of time on A roads and dual carriageways, so its perfect for him.

I suspect that my car would have the advantage down the lanes as controlling that turbo coming onto boost, out of a tight, slippery corner would take some very large *********. If I were driving, I would be on the throttle later, in the hoping of being in a straight line when it spooled up. Hitting peak torque at the apex could be very messy

The 05 may well be the compromise I'm looking for.

Pete Croney

We'll try and get a log of the MD304 car in 4th, as this would probably give a better picture of just what this bad boy can do

Razor2001

Hi Pete and John,

I could talk about this turbo and DD dyno stuff for hours. Couple of questions.

Is it fair to say that a WRX with a 5 speed gearbox is comparable to a STI with the new 6 speed gear boxes, when trying to compare apples to apples with the DeltaDash dyno graphs ? Think this was answered before but not sure.

How good or bad is the stock JDM STI-7 turbo, I think it is a VF30 or something. I hear so much about this TD05 and see you guys egtting some excellent spool up results. Like you Pete I hate lag more that anything and at one point was thinking about having a smaller faster spooling turbo put on to get rid of lag. After the decat it is much better and I am hoping for even quicker spool up or should I say more low down punch due to better mapping after the EcuTek which I think should be no worries. I guess what I want to know is the OEM turbo in my car good enough and safe enough to be achieve 260 - 265 whp and 260 - 265 ft. lbs. on the DD in 4th gear after a good old EcuTek remapp ?

Cheers,
Ray

Promise to self: No more modding after remapp

carlos_hiraoka

The VF-30 is a fine turbo and should deliver the HP you are expecting. With some decent boost control + usual exhaust mods it should also be able to spool faster (I have seen 1 bar @ 3100 rpm on 4th gear on a non-STi car).

Razor2001

Hey thanks for that Carlos

john banks

Ray, just look at the gear ratios - 3rd in a UK car is like 4th in an STi so yes they are comparable if you put the right weight/drag etc in.

With a custom map of an STi7 with just an exhaust I reckon your request for 260 WHP is reasonable without changing anything else. Not sure if off the shelf maps would go this far, you'll need to see.

Deep Singh

Excellent job Jonno/Bob.A bit more to come yet I suspect...