911

There's something wrong here?

All those mods for so little gain?

911

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

I really thought that spec would have got more than that?

Bob

Johnny50

When i ran on Dastek rollers...i acheived the same power 277bhp-255lb/ft
I was running, 440's , FMIC ,VF30 , HKS headers , a few other mods..induction, fuelling..and Gems..

I was really hoping to break 300bhp, but it didn't.

It was also noted on that day, that they had used the wrong software on the rollers...hence the low figure...

I too...would've thought that you would've reached more than 277 Carl.

PICKLE

Why did they run it in 3rd?? Everytime I have seen cars run they have used 4th (5th if they have too much power, and spin the wheels! )

Surely full boost wouldn't be as high in 3rd as it would 4th??

SamUK

iTrader: (1)

Carl,

I have looked over this again and again...
There is something very wrong here...

...your car should ealily be hitting near the 300 mark!

Getting my car mapped soon then on the rr...will let you know how i get on..

Sam

Power Junkie

iTrader: (1)

That is what I thought.
My Sti got 298bhp(first run) 290.1(second run) on the same rollers in 3rd. on different rollers in 4th the car got 304bhp, also the torque is much lower than the 4th gear run, 217lb's V 295lb's.

SamUK

iTrader: (1)

Just had a quick chat with Wallace Performance...they actually do mapping...at 60+ VAT per hour...on a rolling road..was thinking bout it, then found out there in Aberdeen

Sam

madou

Carl

On my MY98 UK I got 238 bhp / 242 lb ft on Powerstation rollers with Link, 3 port, full decat, original turbo. I was not that happy with the numbers, but the car is good to drive, main thing is that you enjoy it on road, dyno runs can vary, and you can always refine the car now that you have the changes in place

I have also been thinking about a TD05 FE, I would have expected a little more based on other applications, and a dyno run from deadbolt

http://www.deadboltspeed.com/images/Dynorun.jpg

ScoobyDuck

iTrader: (1)

Carl, excelent thread!
however, id have to say, that with the extra fuel and airflow/pressure you have, id be dissapointed with the results. Obviously there sounds more to come due to some DET higher up with any more boost.
the curves do seem dull/sluggish, which is obviously the difference between '04 & '05 turbos.
I think the jump between TD04 OEM, and TD05 PFC should be more marked.

but again, excelent thread, and the way im heading with mine, just in a different order ! (& i still want a VF35 instead! )

Steve

Houghton

iTrader: (1)

I had a similar 'surprise' early on and it was a disappointment, initially. I'd had the car RR'd with the original ecu. It was discovered that the fuelling was insufficient at higher revs so I fitted pump & pressure reg.

Later, when I went to Andy to map the PFC (which I'd got 2nd hand) he found that it was locked, this was pre-software and on the hand commander, so nothing could be altered. The map in the PFC was too agressive to leave so we re-fitted the original ecu. Andy needed to increase the fuel pressure to overcome the det from the original ecu but still not ideal.

Once Andy had the software and unlocked the PFC, it was fitted and mapped. Back to rollers and the power was slightly down. Very disappointing

But, it was now running that power safely whereas before I could light up the Knocklink at about 4K, now I could use WOT with little or no knock showing.

Andy.F

That's correct Gerry, as your last engine was consuming so much oil, the mapping was very conservative (read safe) this was with due consideration to you using it regularly on track


Carls car is still only running 1.2 bar of boost, thats approx 17.5psi.
On the PPP map previously IIRC it was running 17psi.
There is still much scope for improvement once a few low budget 'tweeks' which we discussed have been completed.
I wouldn't be surprised to see it hit target in the near future

Andy

WallacePerformance

Just to confirm that the two rolling road runs (before and after) were done using all the same variables so that the power gains will be accurate to the nearest 1%.

The run was done in gear 3 as this gives the most realistic acceleration rate in comparison to the road. The way the dastek dyno works means I can do the run in 3rd or 4th and achive the same flywheel power give or take 1-2%.

Carl, I think that your torque level could be gained a lot more at the low end by using an Apexi AVCR (as I'm sure AndyF will agree with me) as these units can hold the pressure away from the actuator until the last second (>90% Duty cycle) achieving a faster spool on the turbo.

As Andy says, I think the car has much scope for improvement.

See you again shortly

Gavin Wallace
Wallace Performance

WUZ

iTrader: (14)

EH???????????

Even if an AVC-R does improve the spool up by doing as you say, if the boost level remains the same (1.2 bar), then the torque will not increase, will it!

all it'll do is lower the spoolup point for the TD05 (standard is about 3400rpm in 4th for 1 bar AFAIK) but might need to consider getting a catch can so as to be able to run an extra degree or 2 of timing for top end power.

Russell

StickyMicky

it will give the same torque but it will make it do this lower in the rev range?

so you will get more torque at lower revs

Carl Davey

iTrader: (3)

Guys, thanks for the encouragement and support. Yesterday really was a big low for me having invested quite a substantial amount of money, not to mention time, into the car.

Lindsay, at least you had an excuse mate. I believe Gavins RR to be near 100% accurate. Having seen a wide variety of cars run all day on it during a recent SIDC event the only ones that didn't clock up the numbers expected were either broken or modified Imprezas. My car made an almost identical figure to it's run at Star (259 @ Dastek vs 261 @ Star) with the only difference being the H&S backbox.

Mark, out of interest where did your car make 304 and was that after the SIDC day at WP?

Ok, so with a new slightly more positive outlook on things and some guidance from Andy here's what i'm thinking. Basically i see two choices, go back to the old spec (260bhp/same torque/more £'s in pocket from sale of mods) or carry on regardless. Definitely swaying towards the latter atm.

Andy was concerned about the amount of warm air the K&N could be drawing in from the engine bay so either some sort of shield or box is in order to try and isolate the filter from the hot air. Also, upstream of the turbo my exhaust is OEM. So some porting of the headers will be in order to free things up a little and possibly even an up-pipe (if i see a bargain). Thirdly, they aren't exactly essential, but i still have these damn 550's sitting here...

The main benefit of all these mods for me is exactly as Andy says, they are all low budget. The filter shielding could be done for a few quid or less. I'm sure i could tackle porting the headers myself, the only cost then being that of the replacement gaskets. Densos are already paid for and the further benefit is all tweaks to my map now cost £50. Hell, i may even chuck in an AVC-R if Santa is good to me.

There's still a small part of me saying i must be mad to carry on after investing so much time and money already for naff-all results. The little lot above should keep me busy through the end of November and December though, all ready for a map tweak the next time i'm in Edinburgh.

Anyway, offshore for a fortnight on Tuesday but will be tackling the headers and filter box/shield upon my return. I hope you're all enjoying this, finding out how to really get 300bhp from a UK.

Power Junkie

iTrader: (1)

Hi carl.

304Bhp was before WP run, so different rollers. the torque is the main difference 295lbs v 217lbs(wp)?? I am still gonna use WP for my comparison runs as they did seem very accurate.
Carl I am sure you will get your target very soon, if you want to have a go in mine to compare, please just give me a call.

Mark..

911

Is the fundamental issue here that the engine is a UK spec?
My stock (decat only) Sti v3 was RR @ Power Eng at 314 bhp on optimax.
The 440cc injectors were max'ed out and the Blitz boost controller set at 1.25 bar.

My point is that the Sti overall spec is offering 314 as stock, and a secondhand motor is about £2K from API Engines. Instant result.

I will be bolting-on this xmas £2.5K of mods, and will be dissapointed if the engine doesn't show 360 bhp and a jump in torque to about 330lb ft.

Carl, why did you not fit the 550cc's before the map?
I have ported the cast iron headers and really noticed very little extra, but only took 1 hour with a good die grinder once they were off (had the engine out so was easy).

Have you considered keeping all your bits and getting an Sti engine as the next 'mod'
They do appear on Snet regularly. There was an Sti 7 long engine for sale 3 months ago for less than 1000.

Hope your enthusiasm comes back, we all felt dissapointed I think!

It's only (more) money.....911

markwild

I don't think the engine being UK spec is the issue - When I was mapped by AndyF in August, I had no cold feed to the filter either - I've since fitted a bonnet scoop and done some comprehensive heat lagging - the car feels much better....

Having said that, I'm also running 550s and a Hybrid FMIC, which is allowing me to pull 1.4bar from the TD05FE - I'd be shocked if mine was pulling less than 300, as I'd seen 281 on the TD04 previously - again at 1.2 bar. Also, I am running with an AVC-R...

I've no doubt that an STI unit would produce more power with less mods, simply due to the 'standard' unit being above a standard UK, but its certainly possible to make the UK produce plenty of power (Rich Wild is running 380+ from a TD05'd UK)

Also, I'm not convinced that replacing the UK motor with an STI, but keeping everything else UK (e.g. I/C) would give the 314 of an STI.

Not wishing to put down the idea, just a view........

Carl, get some cold air fed in and I'm sure it'll feel better - also, having got this far with the mods, I'm sure you'll be able to reap the benefits with a few extra tweeks - Don't be put off by the RR - You seemed pretty happy with the 'butt'ometer readings.....

Mark

PS _ Excellent, informative thread...

drb5

iTrader: (4)

Not that i've had a MASSIVE amount of experience modding, but the way it always seem's to go now, is when someone DOESN'T get the results, you should(in theory) get, they will carry on spending money, to get that figure.

When this happens however, the theory then becomes something else, like Carl's mods. The figure he should be getting, with the level of mods fitted, will only appear, when something else is fitted. Ie: aftermarket headers, FMIC and injectors, but then the figure which should be won, goes away up and is still not acheived!!

The way i see it, stick with a decat, dawes and filtewhatever else small cold air mods can be done and leave it at that, otherwise get an STI and start high up, before throwing money at it.

Maybe not what everyone wants to hear, but unless your gonna go the full hog, your not gonna see a figure, which equates to the money spent and mods bought. Just look at Johnny50.

Houghton

iTrader: (1)

Mini scoop makes a big difference as Mark said. Using the hand commander, it's possible to watch the temps drop. I get 50C+ reading from stationery but once on the move, it drops like a stone to a degree or two above ambient. This is measured using the OEM temp sensor in the K&N rubber section.

Andy.F

Dave

I know Johnny didn't get the results on the Steve Simson mapped GEMS ECU'd/fmic UK car that he was expecting and also you didn't see the numbers expected on your own UK car when you had the Link ECU with lots of mods and a BRD remap but look at Alan G's UK car, not that much different spec from your own and it made over 400bhp !
For whatever reason, some of these cars respond to tuning better than others, just as you get some std cars that are quicker than others despite an identical spec. These differences which I can only put down to 'production tolerances' are only likely to get greater as mileage, wear and tear, oil consumption etc have an influence.

For example, two virtually identical cars I mapped this week showed over 10% difference in airflow ! This equates to 10% power difference. Now the only difference between them was ported headers and a cold air feed. I can't guarantee that these mods will fully bridge that gap but it is a step in the right direction

Andy

Carl Davey

iTrader: (3)

Mark, i may well give you a shout next time i'm back, cheers.

Lol, talking engines my engine is actually from a MY99 WRX so is JDM already... The original UK's bottom end let go circa 92,000 miles and i had a second hand (not re-con) engine fitted from the above. Cheapest option at the time as i was still a poor apprentice. I agree, an STi 5 or 6 engine with the nice heads etc would obviously benefit the car but would kind of defeat the purpose.

I stuck to the 440's as i knew they would be able to cope with my target figure, as it is it looks as though i could have stuck with the 380's and been safe.

On the cooling side of things, i had considered going down the daft-scoop route with the initial round of mods. However, i like the car to look good so wanted to avoid the mini-scoop and taller main scoop if possible. This is now something i will be looking into along with the filter box/shield, possible lagging of the turbo and reinstating the intercooler splitter.

Davie, i agree with you totally mate. Before i started fitting the parts i began getting a little worried i wouldn't reach the figure i believed i would. At the SIDC day at Wallace i saw the following...

P1 (TD05/06-20G, ECUTek remap, APS TMIC etc) 317bhp
WRX (TD05/06-20G, Power FC, 550's, STi TMIC, filter etc) 297bhp

Not to mention other results i've been informed of where cars with further mods than mine (FMIC + 550's etc) have only just cleared the 300bhp margin. Now, we can make excuses for each of these cars till the cows come home but in my opinion there's alot more work to be done over and above bolting everything on. The mods in question appear, in some cases, to be able to make the numbers often claimed but i think in general there's a helluva lot of over-optimism when numbers are quoted.

To be completely honest, i'm now determined to get 300bhp from my car without going front mount. I'm not spending mega-bucks doing it though and will be drawing the line after changing the TMIC (if i have to) and it still doesn't make the numbers.

Gerry, unfortunately my UK doesn't have the temp sensor in the inlet but i'm looking at a digital one on eBay at the moment (Defi's Water Temp sender is no use ). Obviously this is a figure i really want to investigate and having an indication of the actual temp (hopefully after the interheater - if it's possible to mount it there) would obviously be a real benefit to me over the forthcoming months with the tweaks i have planned.

Looking back on the past weeks work we've achieved 16bhp over the previous spec with a turbo running almost identical boost to before and a remap. Differences from the TMIC are negligable at the moment imo and the K&N is most likely doing more harm than good. I see the fuelling side of things as being purely to add flexibility to aid mapping and support the turbo.

Carl Davey

iTrader: (3)

Hmmm, group buy at Dave Reid Motorsport?

WallacePerformance

Hi Russell

I'll just point out what I wrote in bold

Carl, I think that your torque level could be gained a lot more at the low end by using an Apexi AVCR (as I'm sure AndyF will agree with me) as these units can hold the pressure away from the actuator until the last second (>90% Duty cycle) achieving a faster spool on the turbo.

This will give a larger Integral between the two curves ie more torque.

Gavin

drb5

iTrader: (4)

Fair point Andy, but Alan had a TD05/06, big **** off FMIC and headers.

Don't get me wrong, at times, i'm in 2 minds, whether it is all worth it or not. You have done extremely well, but for the usual Joe Public, who can't do the work themselves, it's a harsh world, when you don't get the figure you were expecting and i use "expecting" in the context of, not just "out to get it!".

Andy.F

True Dave but there are also TD05/06 / fmic cars still not seeing the figures they 'expected'. Taking it a step further, there are quite a few big budget 2.5's with GT series Garretts that are not meeting expectations for whatever reason ??

I think a lot of the false expectations come from reading about results on
A - More generous rolling roads, up to 15% difference from one to another in my experience.
and B - Increased octane fuel being used and not always declared in the results, at least 10% gains to be had there too

You may be surprised just how many people pour in a bottle of NF or a gallon of methanol prior to a dyno day

I for one use octane boosters and always have 10% more power for less than £10 per tankfull, that seems like good value to me

Andy

drb5

iTrader: (4)

Viscious circle innit?! What one man's fortune, might be another man's mis-fortune, as they say.

It is nice to see a good figure produced, be it someone you know or not, but we all have experienced a slightly unhappy day after a rr day? Have you Andy?

Andy.F

No

drb5

iTrader: (4)

W@nk

911

Carl, if you are serious about a GB on the large bonnet scoop, could be interested in joining in. Have an Sti8 TMIC to cool.......
911