Andy

May as well add yourself to that list come springtime


Joking boys .......

 

Yea it's ok, I know you are joking Mark has been saying that to me for the past 18 months and Trout for the past year I got so fed up waiting that I've sold the more expensive parts off the car and now it's for sale at £6k...... Ideal donor car for your new 'time bomb' er I mean engine You could probably sell the existing Sti 2.0 CBD engine complete for a reasonable sum (still running over 430 bhp)

 

Andy

I prefer the term "grenade" Andy

Conrad

PS Whats next on the car front then???

[Edited by RSVR Racer - 1/5/2004 11:38:16 AM]

 

Just something with a substantially better P/W ratio, higher grip, lower aerodynamic drag and lower CofG.....still a 'daily driver' saloon car though

Andy

 

Glad you have seen sense at last and decided to buy a bike ! LOL

 

I have never read this thread before but...
Conrad:Why mislead fellow board members?

Where did you get this crap? Nothing secret about my turbo. It came from Ion Spec in Canada and you can have one too if you want.

Infact, not long after it was fitted to the car, a problem arose due to my having fitted it badly and against my better judgement it was sent to Turbo Dynamics for the penny valve to be replaced. Express instructions were given not to take the turbo apart but that is exactly what was done. At the same time, while the turbo was at TD, and when I did not know what was happening to it Mark Aigan phoned several people telling them my turbo had failed and generally rubbishing it. Mark Aigan was having cosy chats with Turbo Dynamics, General Manager about matters that did not concern him,not really surprised at Mark but totally astounded by the total lack of profesionalism from Turbo Dynamics. The folder is here and I can copy it to you if you have difficulty believing what I say.
So my turbo spec is not secret either from me or Ion and Turbo Dynamics have been all over it and M.A. was fully appraised and he rubbished it to several people.

Well you need to know what you are doing Conrad.



[Edited by harvey - 1/5/2004 2:43:31 PM]

 

Harvey

I have no intention of misleading anybody, I dont want to publish the spec of my new turbo until it has proved itself on my engine, if it doesnt achieve the figures I have in mind then the spec of the turbo will change and thus its pointless posting it until I know the final results.


The fact it came from ION in Canada is not the spec, to my knowledge I have never seen any detail relating to your turbo i.e. Compressor wheel, cover, core, trim, exhaust wheel, exhaust housing? Thats why I believe it to be a secret

I do thanks Harvey the point I was trying to get across was that I believe you would have had to do alot more grinding work to the bellhousing / turbo cover to fit it to the car than I did with my own turbo which required plenty of grinding modifications to make it fit, so a turbo that makes 585hp must have a substantially larger cover than mine and would need alot more grinding!



Conrad

 

I still wonder about this 'problem' with specs as well...

"It's from iON" seems about as vague as "it's from Lateral Performance" or "it's from Turbo Dynamics"... in my mind, these are all perfectly viable descriptions, as they are all companies that don't want to tell others how to reproduce their own products. Fair do's. But it would be nice if it wasn't asked eg "mine's from iON, what's the spec of yours?" and expect an answer in any more detail that eg "mine's from Lateral".

If a (professional/dealing) turbo designer, whoever they are, decide to let the buyer personally know exactly what the spec of the turbo is, then fair enough, but I suspect they don't want that person to go on & tell everyoneone else.

If the designer themselves is happy to broadcast it, be they simply speccing their own personal turbo or it's one they build to order & sell, then that's their choice, although I'm not convinced it's a good idea to broadcast it if they are planning on making their living out of it...

I shall butt out now so everyone can get back to their cams & stuff, which I'm still waving around some significant distance over my head

 

Ooooo....can of worms!

I'm not sure this is the best route to take.

If the turbo is not performing to your expectation on your new engine, i think it would be better trying to gain solutions/suggestions from as many knowledgable parties as possible to attain a unit best suited for your requirements rather than from the one outfit whoever it is you buy/have bought from.
Better to have many heads together as a team to find the solution, rather than from one person/company etc.

My reasons for this come from other comments made here with reference to professional manufacturers/developers/dealers, whatever, whereby those companies will endeavour to try and satisfy you, the customer, but need lids kept on under performing units as this may affect their reputation(s).

If a unit isn't suitable for your application, then sticking to the same company may well involve a lot of experimentation to achieve the desired result.

Something to think about.

Alan

 

RSVR
FWIW

I had to grind a lug away from the back of my engine to fit a Garrett hybrid VF turbo (MD324), but ironically i had to grind even more away to get the 05/06 in, both TMI-141S and TD05/06-20G.

Thank god i had a spare engine so's i could check i wasn't grinding too much away!!

Alan

 

With the TD05/06-20G on a Ph2 engine, it is the water pipe that fouls the extra bolt on the block/gearbox. This is nothing to do with the bigger compressor. The grinding mod would be required with a std TD05.
It is possible to rotate the centre housing slightly to reduce the interference (or indeed make it worse )
Aftermarket headers can also cause an issue by holding the turbo closer to the gearbox than the std set up did.

Andy

 

It would be worthwhile for Ion to keep the spec under their belt because they are supplying a turbo that exceeds expectation, something of quality that is over-engineered for the task at hand.

As for a lot of the underperforming and/or unreliable turbos in the Subaru market place I can't see what is worth keeping secret about.

Products that are unproven and untested should be supplied at cost. A customer should not be sold a product as proven that is not proven. A single part of a turbo being rated at x does not mean the whole turbo is rated at x on y car with z reliability.

 

Nom : There are no secrets about my turbo and even if there were, they were no longer secrets after Turbo Dynamics pulled it apart and broadcast the information to Mark Aigan.
Anybody with a serious interest in a turbo would do well to speak to Jack at Ion Performance who can spec a turbo for a specific engine requirement, 2 litre, 2.3, or 2.5 whatever. Jack will divulge thoroughly the spec of his turbos to any serious party.

I am aware that a number of people have had disappointments with their turbos despite subsequent rectification work much of which seems to have been experimental, so I still find it hard to believe why a proven unit from Canada has not been a popular option over here. Anyway, that will change this year as several people have now expressed an interest in Ion turbos and there are a couple on the way as we speak.
Alan : Very diplomatic but spot on.

 

Now you tell me......

Alan

 

Harvey: I'm fed up with this refusal to look at things from any other angle, so I'm finally going to have a yell !

- by your standards, there are secrets about the turbo you are running - there are no specs anywhere! There are nothing but secrets! Including how the vast amount of power it seems to acheive on RRs in correlation to the frankly appauling 1/4 mile times (irrespective of how badly the car is driven they can't be that bad if the car is set up properly); it makes no sense! That's probably why this unit from Canada is still not considered proven by many people in the market for this sort of power (whatever that power happens to be, it being apparently entirely subjective), so people don't consider it reproduceable. Hence they don't want to throw their hard-earned cash on that direction. Makes sense to me. It might be possible to call iON & talk to them about the specs, but if their products talk for them (which they should if the company's worth anything), then they won't make sense either.
Probably the most publicly proven/bandied about mid/high power turbo around these days is Andy's development - partly because it's spoken of so openly, but also because it gives reliably reproduceable figures, with on-track ones that correlate very nicely with RR type figures: they might not be as high (from one point of view, but higher from another...), but they are achievable, non 'pie in the sky' figures. The numbers don't physically look suspicious in any way whatsoever. This, to me, makes a very attractive looking product, and others seem to agree. I don't have one - it was a little too late to the market for when I was buying - so I am able to be entirely subjective here. So no whinging there
Andy's TD05/06 might be a different power range to the iON. It might not. Frankly, we don't know - the figures don't add up. Simple as that.

I'm not trying to compare the two products either - merely using them as a comparison in the way the present themselves.
I would, in all honesty, very much like to see the iON system strutting its stuff. So far it hasn't done anything other than look dodgy. Perhaps the new units on their way over will give figures that correlate - at that point, the system could most certainly start to look promising & be regarded as one on its way to becoming proven.
Until then, it's an oddity. And comparing it to units that give believable, reliable results and holding those in contempt seems faintly ridiculous.

 

nom,

just want to add that even if the r/r figures look questionable to you, or anyone else, it is worth noting that harveys have been quotes of shootout days, not private runs.

he has also invited any of the so called big power cars to name the rollers for a shootout but they always go silent.

 

nom
I see your point but i suppose if you look at it another way, Harvey's car has been doing over 400 for a long time now, since Well Lane 3 i believe, so despite all the doubts of the output in recent times, it would appear it's still a genuine 400 brake engine which is good for a 2 litre IMO.

Regards the turbo's referred to as being supplied by AndyF, my own figures have been disputed by a certain "professional" and because of the nature of the information supplied to me, i'm not willing to divulge which professional it was who basically said that there is no way these cars are producing anywhere near 400 horsepower and is all pie in the sky.

Now fair enough,this "company" makes a living out of what they do, but what gets my goat is that their heads are stuck so far up their **** that they cannot see the results from the likes of TOTB and rolling road days and also the sheer number of people who are using them with results and figures substantiating the claims.

Alan

 

One thing to remember - all of these figures are not by my standards. I don't believe RR figures one jot - they can so easily be fiddled they're not worth the bother.
AP22 results - a very good indicator of 'real life' numbers, as long as the data input (weight, drag, etc.) is correct. But only Andy seems to use this bit of kit, and it shouldn't be correlated to RR generated numbers.
Bench dyno - the only real measure, but then only for peak power, etc. as obviously the spool-up & stuff is way off.
1/4 mile times - excellent representation of the real world. Yes, it requires a driver - which can obviously vary the times - but I don't think as much as a RR is capable of.

Another thing to bare in mind - not everyone out there is obsessed by figures, or proving them. Things would be a lot simpler if they were but many of us couldn't care less, as long as we're happy with the car (I am in no way implying I have a powerful car here, as I don't - I don't think I need one either ).

You may have also noticed that people who 'have' usually don't feel they need to 'prove'... again, not very helpful, but there you go

Again, from my point of view, I don't really know (or care) what Andy's turbos actually do. And I'm not trying to sell them, so don't need to wave any figures about... but I do know that most people seem to be happy with them. I am, actually, a little suspicious about the actual (normal pump fuel) 400bhp, having looked at the compressions maps, etc., but people who have the units don't seem to care - they are satisfied with the unit. Is anything else important?
It was just a random turbo anyway - I could of picked any number of turbos for a comparison - they all have their friends and enemies, this one is just one that I don't happen to have, so I can be subjective, which was sort of the whole point...

I think the key thing is to stay away from RRs - they'll do your head in

 

Oh - Mr Pot here speaking to lots of Mr Blacks, I know , but could we sort of edge our way back to the topic? A bit hopeful I realise, but the reason I got annoyed & wrote the post in the first place was because I was enjoying this thread then it all started to go ****-up with the sort of junk I've just been spouting...

Apologies.

I shall not rise to any bait anyone offers folloing this note (although obviously please feel free to reply sweet nastynesses if necessary ), unless it's actually on topic, as I think I've caused quite enough disturbence already.

I shall leave quietly

 

It is harder to get in the 11s on a quarter than most would imagine!

If Andy got well into the 11s with about 350-370 BHP then where are all the other 11s cars?

There are so many "if only" cars about, but there are two Subarus in the UK with 11s results. The rest so far are only hot air and excuses.

There are only three turbos so far that have put cars into the 11s in the UK - Ion, TD05 (!) and TD05/06-20G, and one of these cars is using a short motor that is standard STi 4 spec! I expect there are other turbos that should be or will do the same and better, but at the moment they are not timeslips in the owners' hands or not that they are admitting to.

 

They are just as susceptible as all the other methods to errors. They are invariably collected in private sessions. They are known to vary by so much between engine dynos on the same engine that the figures are about as believable as Well Lane.

 

John,

Perhaps you can expand on your statement?

I think the owner of said bench dyno would be rather miffed that you compared his dyno cell the questionable/variable results from the rollers at well lane.

Are you going to tell me that your road dyno results are 100% accurate and repeatable, not open to abuse, and verified by independant sources? Why should we believe them? Is it because your such a nice and honourable bloke (and you are mind ), or because it's just unfair to suggest that anyone with a TD05/06 gets anything less than excellent results?

And while I am on the results soap box. If RR results are so bleedin unreliable, how is it that Star is a 'low reading' set of rollers? Low reading for std cars? For all cars? Is it because harvey has a single bad set of results that we can just add 10% or whatever to Star results? All very well saying they are crap, but don't expect us to beleive everything we read just because. And don't get me wrong, I really want to beleive good results from people I know that are working hard at it, and pushing forward where others follow, but you can't have it both ways.

On the subject of getting 11 sec 1/4 mile times, I too have wondered at how Andy's car managed to gain 70hp but only equal his previous times until finally shaving ooooh, 0.1 seconds off. Perhaps we should level the playing field and all get cars that weight 1100-1150kg and run close ratio boxes and semi slicks or whatever comes out of months of refinement with the AP22.

Somehow I doubt that Andy has been cosseting his car in the same way that others, who need their car day to day would.

You guys just crack me up. Nearly as much as Mycroft.

Paul

 

Paul

My 11.7 was on Toyos. 11.6 was on Yokos and STD UK gearing .... so you're talking ****

Oh and I drove it too and from totb....over 400 miles....so I drove it as anyone would that wants their car to take them home again !!



[Edited by Andy.F - 1/5/2004 11:11:54 PM]

 

I am saying that an engine dyno is not a holy grail for perfect absolute results, otherwise people that take the same engine to two different engine dynos should be getting the same results within tight tolerances. I am sure we can both list dozens of confounding variables, and would both agree that the more you think you know about measuring power output of a car the less you can believe any result.

It may be an expensive dyno run by the nicest person in the world, but it is still a warped ruler.

I am not asking anyone to believe my amateurish data collections. In addition most other people don't have anything to compare them with.

Star and Powerstation results being lower than G-Force, Well Lane and PE is hardly up for debate.

Take all the published results for standard cars of the same model year with and without decat exhausts and the results are of statistical significance despite the small n. Take the results achieved on given turbos at different rolling roads and a similar trend emerges, although the sample is too heterogenous to draw any stats from.

 

I wonder what effect the torque curve has on drag results? You could argue that giving up a really fat but modest torque curve for a peaky one leads to similar average power over the quarter given the RPM range used and the lag between gear changes, as well as more difficulty launching.

It is interesting that some mickey mouse AP22 results show that my 2.5 with approx 10% heavier car with 10% less power but wide power band is very similar in acceleration increments to a 2.0 with a far more favourable power to weight ratio.

 

Why would a bench dyno give a more accurate reading of flywheel hp than a roller dyno would of wheel hp ?
They both just use torque measured via a load cell * RPM....it's not rocket science
There is a standard correction for ambient temp and pressure which applies to both. (but is not used at all the rolling roads hence the major differences)
One may even argue that the engine in the car is more representable of its real world operating conditions.

 

Race ya

 

can't remember if andy ran the charge cooler or tmic + water injection to get those results on the TD05?

personally I do not think anything is 100% accurate but you can use a rolling road as a comparator between cars on the same day. the figures might be useless but the conditions should remain the same(ish) for each motor.

 

Andy,

This is a very fair point, but very few people seem to be interested in the WHP figure, just the software derrived flywheel figure from RR runs.

It will be interesting to see how the figures from a bench dyno'd engine compare to it's RR figure.

Maybe ATW's figures should be used, and compared, instead of flywheel figures ?

Mark.

 

The point i was trying to make in my last post concurs with what you are saying nom in a roundabout way.

I've worked on my car for long and weary trying to better the performance. Some things have worked and some haven't.
What pissed me off was to find out that a certain professional was rubbishing my car for his own professional and financial gains!.
Now at this point in time ( and i've re-read my post) I am saying quite specifically here, that it is NOT a reference to Mark Aigin or Lateral Performance in case anyone thinks this was who the professional was. It is another company altogether.

I had a lot of problems getting something suitable for my car but all credit to Mark for continually making the effort to satisfy a customer. What became unfortunate is that no one, myself included, could have foreseen how long it would take to get there.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing and yes if i had known it would take the length of time it did, then no i wouldn't have bought from Mark, but in the same light, Mark would agree, he wouldn't have sold me any bloody thing in the first place!!

My figures which i posted in another thread were one of anumber of repeated runs on the day and was done for my curiosity as to what the car was giving out as i have/had no intention of going any further on that engine. As it turned out, it made quite respectable figures and the way it feels on the road tends to tie up with what the rollers gave. With this in mind, I shared that with the community but to my dismay, it then gets shot down in flames (in private), so nom, you're right, rolling roads mean **** all. I certainly will not try and share my future experiences and results cause there's always some arsehole who thinks he's better than you and i can do without the ****.

I'm happy the way it's running now. And it's not solely because i'm using one of "Andy's turbos"... , as they are so eloquently known, though undoubtedly they offer very good value for your money.

If you actually look at my summer run compared to my last run, you can see that my "at wheels" figures are very similar to each other, but the car drives totally different with the 20G.
However, this is not down to the turbo alone, but is development of other items which make up the whole package to achieve these results.

The TMI-141S i felt was a smoother unit in operation during spool up over the 20G but because i had two TMI failures in a very short period of time, who wouldn't be wary of putting on another one and blowing up an engine???

I'm led to believe that issue has been sorted now, which is great, but all i want now is a car to enjoy the way it's meant to be enjoyed.

Is there anything wrong with that?

[Edited by AlanG - 1/6/2004 1:12:59 PM]