thats without your foot on the brakes.

Makes the brakes last sooo much longer

David

 

It still wakes the dead though Pat...mind you it is quieter than the HKS on cruise...just get's a bit OMFG when you tramp on it...then again there's quite a battle going on then for noise supremacy between the induction kit, wastegate, turbo and recirc dumpvalve...which really is quite amusing

 

Thanks for the informative reply Pat, Much appreciated.

I'm sure I'll get used to the "new look" rear end.

and I'll be a much happier bunny when the thing is actually running.

I'm almost sure I won't be back to have it quietened

all I need is some injectors.
You have my money Pat, Do your best
Cheers

Andy

 

Andy F,

you're absolutely right, you don't *need* headers to get 400 BHP, the best figures I've seen on normal headers are around the 700 BHP mark, but that doesn't mean there isn't a benefit to fitting the headers!

I should be grateful though, if you could point out which cars running standard headers have made 400 BHP at 1.5 bar on the rollers ? Please don't include anything with a lot of head work, because that's not comparing like with like... and would most likely see an increase if headers were employed.

Cheers,

Pat.

 

Pat

My own car made 378 at 1.3 bar and 432 at just over 1.6bar on std headers with only a minor 'tickle' to the valve seats. So I guess 400+ would be on for 1.5 bar.
I'm surprised you can't remember that ? You were sitting in it at the time in order to try and help to stop the wheels spinning

I've now fitted the Gruppe-s headers and will be interested to see the gains (if any) I accept that I may need to wait for my new ECU to release the full potential. For Well Lane on Sunday I will still be on the totally standard original ECU.

Andy

 

Andy F,

I do recall you getting 432, but my memory must be playing tricks on me as I thought it was closer to 1.8 bar... so many cars, so many values to remember... Anyway, your car doesn't count since your heads are far from "standard", the early RA heads were a different casting, yours seem to be running top hat shims, I'de put money on it that the cam profile is wilder than stock etc.. not exactly the same as a non-RA car of similar age. Interestingly, this may go some way toward explaining why you get a lower boost threshold than others on the same turbo. So, can you think of any other car which has made 400 BHP at 1.5 bar on stock headers ? I cannot, but am genuinely interested... it's obviously possible to force a hell of a lot of air through them, as evidenced by the 700 BHP, but I do wonder at what price in terms of EGBP.

It will be fascinating to compare the power and torque curves with and without headers, sadly the fact that the weather will have changed between the two days renders any comparison pretty meaningless in terms of absolute values, but the shapes of the curves will still be interesting to compare

Cheers,

Pat.

 

Hi Pat

John Banks car will be running at that level, I can't get him to come to well lane though however deltadash dyno and the AP22 support my claim.
Tweenyrob made 419 at 1.65 bar at PE recently, working back from there, (419/2.65*2.5) he would have had 395 at 1.5 bar. That's on a bog standard internals Ph1 WRX.

Regards my cams, I measured the lift and it was 7.9mm This is the lowest lift cam made for the EJ20, as for duration both valves actually looked shut at overlap ! Increased duration is unlikely to give early spool anyway, perhaps timid cams is the way to go

ps Have you mapped any Microtech ECU's yet ?

Andy

 

As nice as it is to have the discussion going on.....

ok Guys.... Make another thread please !!




Andy

 

Sorry M8

Just keeping it BTT for you

 

Is that a nudge to say get on with it and post something myself


Andy

 

Yes

 

Forge motorsport: awaiting delivery
Samco Hoses, breather system filters.

Pat:awaiting delivery
Injectors.

Next Door: awaiting his return from hol so he can contact some mate of his that owns a... hmm I think it's called a press brake ??
anyway it bends sheet metal to desired shape.
What For? well, the end tanks of the intercooler.
I'm not convinced Davids "there boxy, but good" end tanks are any good for flow !!
I can't really make a piece of tube fit properly, because when it is cut shallower at one end, it wil also get narrower and will not fit the full width of the intercooler.
Apart from the fitment of the exhaust.... not exactly a huge undertaking, (famous last words)
The only major job left is the making of the intercooler, it's fitment to car and it's accociated pipework.
I am really thinking of sacking that inlet pipe abortion off and making another, that incudes the cold air box too, it looks hideous
no I don't want to give it away

Got to go and cycle 40 miles round the Cotswold hills now for "charidy mate".(Heart foundation).
any one throwing some money at me feel free (e-mail me).


Andy

 

Cancel that !
The people I was going to ride with are still in bed and not going !!
the other group are half way round already.
Oh well, back under the car then...

Andy

 

yeah yeah.. my end tanks were rushed.. they are due to be ammended when the carbon bumper arrives..

David

 

Fuzz,

can only apologise about the delay in getting the injectors, but I have said on several occasions that you can have an even bigger set pretty much next day.... no difference in cost.

Andy F,

the Road Dyno and AP22 don't always give the same (or even anywhere near) the power that's read on the rollers or on the bench dyno, so please let's not use those for comparison... if you want Road Dyno / AP22 figures I can give you some that indicate over 400 BHP at 1.4 bar on stock headers (and not just by fiddling the tyre size ), but I can't give you a printout from a rolling road day that would back up those claims. Of course there are people like yourself and tweenierob who have power runs at higher boost that would tend to imply that it would make 400 at 1.5 bar. Noone has run at 1.5 on stock headers and got over 400 though.

Getting almost back on-topic, I'de be amazed if you had no overlap on your cams! The early cams ran about 16 degrees overlap, the later ones dropped down to about 6, but then I think MY01 increased it again! Also, 7.9mm is greater lift than a Phase II head... sounds about par for the course on EJ20G but I'll verify tomorrow. I'de also suggest that a longer duration cam may indeed spool the turbo more readily since it will allow unburnt air/fuel mixture to enter the exhaust manifold thereby increasing the thermal energy and drive to the turbine wheel

Make no mistake, heads and cma profiles make a huge difference to power output. At the end of the day, air and fuel have to get into and out of the cylinder... it doesn't matter what you do to the bottom end if you can't get the air in and out, so the importance of headwork and cams is paramount.

Fuzz... since you've got it in bits anyway, it may be sensible to have a look at doing something with the cams

Cheers,

Pat.

 

Pat... Dont think he has split the block..

and if youve got the heads off you might as well throw some rods and pistons in it..

 

Not enough money left to purchase pistons, crank etc...

saving like mad and being somewhat of a hermit because of it

It is on the cards.... just not at this stage, I want to see what breaks first and replace as neccessary

I'll stick with the 740's please Pat, no real rush now Japfest is over. Tax is out at the end of the month too

No I didn't split the block or remove the heads (next step)
standard heads, standard cams....

Andy.

 

Re: gasket failures on up-pipes...

Another thought for you... in addition to the documented "slip joints" and expansion thoughts.

Is it possible up-pipe gasket failure on owners cars are due to manifold / up-pipe installation?

Reasoning behind it is that on the '99 cars at least, there are two brackets holding the up-pipe in position on the engine.
This is fine for the std up-pipe which is flexible and can accomodate for these brackets, but on aftermarket up-pipes and/or manifold/up-pipes with no "adjustment" so to speak, you would need to amend the brackets positions to relieve undue stress on the assembly which will occur if you just literally "bolt on".

i.e. If you just bolt up assuming the items were correctly made, you will probably be "pulling" the up-pipe section into position for the brackets, hence the blowing gaskets..

Just a thought

Alan

 

talking of up-pipe gaskets - mine failed the other day after a trackday in france. Seriously degraded performance, but still managed to knock a second off our record in the sprints for my class

 

I would have thought that if the bottom is bolted on first then you would bend the brackets to fit the up-pipe when tightening up?

David

 

Yep can agree with that David, but how many would think about doing it in the first place...?

Most folks would think these things are made to the same criteria as the original i.e. direct replacement, but of course this isn't the case with a lot of aftermarket products.

Alan

 

must admit the slip jointed lateral performance one that tweenierob had or dan had in the pics looked nice

 

You're correct Alan, if you locate the turbo too rigidly you will blow gaskets due to the expansion being limited. I run with only one locating bracket and I leave out the side bolt to the gearbox to allow vertcal movement of the turbo
Currently no worries running bar boost

 

Im fairly sure I didnt run all the brackets as andy.. but that might have been lazyness and a **** up-pipe..

David

 

both brackets are employed at the mo as there is nothing at the bottom of the up-pipe to hold it in the right place. shall be removing the gearbox one when the headers are on

Andy.

Come on stay on topic at least

 

We need a picture fix!!!!!!

R.

 

bump

 

lol getting that bad is it... needing bumps to keep it at the top

still waiting for the injectors David, it's outta my hands,

Andy

 

Just make something for the fun of it and post pictures:P

Rob

 

LMAO..

Know the feeling..

David