The Gaffer

Hi,
the black and white photo copy posted by Mark from Lateral performance is an old graph, since then the car has under gone many mods, inc the fitting of the SC50 turbo, however we have not had succesfull runs with Pauls car due to faulty shockers causing the vehicle to tramp on the dyno which in turn causes an error between front and rear rollers then the dyno screen flashs up a warning and the runs are aborted.

If you doubt the above ask the guys from WYIOC, and indeed paul himself, on their last rolling road day paul was saving his beast till last when the problem manifested itself, first thought to be a center diff problem, the dangers of s/h suspension from E. bay.

The reason I have offered to do a back to back test with the SC50 and the MD321t is because of the above, The test will be carried out on the same day on the same dyno with the same atmospherics, and I truly welcome experts and novices alike to come and watch.

Like I have said in previous posts the MD321T is a superb turbo, I should know there has been one on my car for well over a year and we have sold, fitted and mapped dozens of them, we are just trying to offer an alternative, good for the market place we think.

There are two SC 50 based cars and two SC46 based cars running on Sunday at the scooby shootout, lets see how they behave.

Cheers
Kev

alanbell

iTrader: (6)

It will be good to see how Pauls go,s against other fully stripped out shells with big turbo,s , are the other cars with your turbo,s in stripped out , Or are they road cars ??? As you know mine is a road going bugeye , But with the Latral Turbo > MD 321T , I got a 11.9, 120mph, not bat for a fully trimed Bugeye , >> good luck to every one with new and old turbo,s LoL , cheers Alan.

stuart148

iTrader: (12)

iv got a fully road going type r (might still have the kids seats in ),,and iv gone for the sc46 turbo,,as well as a few other mods

its on the rolloing road as we speak,,,so my bhp will be up shortley

stu

terryb

stu, what capacity engine have you got? If it's a 2 litre then will make an interesting comparison to my MD321T/ 2 litre combo

stuart148

iTrader: (12)

hi mate it is a 2.0l,,,it will be intresting to see,,



stu

ps,,,but please remember your combo is bigger than mine,,,
(for the time any way )

terryb

LOL - I have a graph somewhere of when it was run on V-Power and no funny stuff

stuart148

iTrader: (12)

the spec of your cars nice mate,,dont think im going to go that far due to £££ and need it to take the kids to school ,etc,etc

what did yours make on road fuel ??

and if the sc turbos turn out to be better than the md's your car would be v.v nice with one of them in

but best waiting till the b2b tests are out

stu

The Gaffer

Hi,
Alan,
we have the following

1. Andy Harvey in our Time attack car running an SC50
2. Simon deaton in his type R track car SC50
3. Joe lucket with his stripped out type r running SC46
4. Mikey singh with our other time attack car also SC50
5. stuart with a fully road going type r SC46, not yet finalised.
6. Paul Crafts running 2.33 with SC50 stripped out

In answer to a question raised earlier I can do a printout comparrison with an MD and an SC46 its Joe luckets but unfortunatly it wasnt a T it was a 321S or L, cant quite remember, if you want them posting I will pull them off the dyno Sat morning and post them up.

Bye the way nice time Alan can you beat it this time ?
Lets all remember its a bit of fun, like Alan says good luck to every one

Cheers
Kev

Lateral Performance

iTrader: (20)

Kev,

Yes the graph I posted is from his original mapping, and prior to the problems he had at the rolling road day.

Had it of been "tramping" on this run, it would be visible in the graph, but the fact that it's so smooth, shows how clean the run was, and the mapping must have been pretty much spot on.

With regard to testing, maybe a more relevant test, would be to test the Lateral Performance 500bhp turbo version against the SC50 ? as I have every faith in the accuracy of the Dyno Dynamics equipment, and your abilities to operate it, and have no reason to doubt the figures from the original graph you produced for Paul's car.

Testing on Paul's 2.35lt CDB car is certainly a good idea, because I wouldn't be happy running 500bhp/500ftlb + turbos on a standard linered 2.5lt engine, certainly not if I have to guaranty it staying in one bit

Good of you to say, and you've achieved some fantastic results with them

I agree, choice is a good thing.


By all means post a graph of the MD321S, and the SC46, but it's a bit pointless, based on the MD321S being superseded by the MD321T.

What will be interesting, is to see if Joe beats the 11.1 second 1/4 he achieved on the older version.

Is that Methanol, or VP109 I can smell...............

Bit of friendly banter never hurt anyone


Mark.

coulty

Nice to see different suppliers being friendly to each other. Certainly it bodes well for the integrity of them unlike so many others in the past.....

Good show guys !!

terryb

Mark - what's this about your 500bhp turbo???

What will that be like on my 2 litre with 109 RON race fuel

Think we can get one fitted for Sunday???

Tidgy

along with a couple of paddles? pmsl

heavy rain forcast lol

JAKbauer24

Hi Mark it's no secret I now work fot the clinic, but to throw my two penneth in (AND IM AT HOME WHILE I RIGHT THIS SO NOBODY OVER MY SHOULDER PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH) But paul's car from before was indeed tramping like a bitch when it had the MD on it took as far as i remember 2 plus hours to get it mapped and Im sure there is at least (if they are saved) 5 else 6 graphs where the back wheels jumped clear out of the dyno so much so the normally fearless andy stop the dyno and the car strapped the car down with the imfamous "CHICKEN STRAP" when you see that put on you know she's a fast beastie...

my point being I bet there was more in the MD from pauls car as it is now but not back then and on anothere note I seem to remember pauls car being on the dyno for a powerrun and it was down on power....


The simple fact is we had the MD it did 475 we put on The SC and it p1ssed 505bhp and there was more .....

my two penneth JB.


P.S we'll se whats she's like in the morn ... IT's gonna be good

The Gaffer

Hi,
just read jacks post, its not very clear
What he is trying to say is that Pauls car has had so many mods inc differant ratio gearbox that the old graphs are meaningless in fact it could be down to the mods and not the SC50 turbo that it has given us over 500 bhp this is why I will do a back to back next week.

One thing he does make clear that it did do 500 bhp, we think its the first direct fit turbo to do this on pump fuel, if its not I am sure someone will pick us up on it.

Cheers
Kev

Bob Rawle

Having read this thro' there are two different turbo's being discussed, the SC50 IS a 500 bhp turbo and sold as such, the 321t IS A 450 BHP turbo and sold as such, clearly more responsive and withing close proximity on mid range torque with the SC50 winning on outriught power as it should.

Thread is interesting but the one is different to the other and does job in a different way.

Your are wrong about it being the first direct fit turbo to do 500 bhp on pump fuel though, the RCM GT35-P20 did that in 2004.

Mark you are doing yourself down a bit, that 474 bhp graph actually does demonstrate the car was slipping, not differentially but all four wheels, the drop off after 5k and uneven (allbeit smooth) graph shape is typical of that.

Given good afr's of say 0.79 ish and boost in the right area say 1.8 mid and 1.6 peak then the car became edgy just after peak torque. So the power figures would have actually been a bit higher but for that. Given that then on road there would be nothing in it due to the better response the 321T demonstrates.

Kev you won't be proving anything back to back testing a 500 bhp turbo to a 450 bhp turbo, and who is mapping the car when the 321T is installed, you really need an independant (no not me) to avoid the "in house" comments.

all that said good thread

bob

borat52

Spot on,
I think you need to have a clear idea on what your after from a turbo when comparing the md321T to the SC50 (not from experience but as someone who's in the market for something to produce between 450-500 with boost as early as possible and been watching threads like this with interest for the past months), as they will potentially give very different cars to drive.

Having said that, its always informative to have a back to back test on the same car as it gives us customers the chance to see just how much spool we have to trade off to get the extra x horsepower. I'm torn between the md321t and either whatever lateral are coming up with for their 500bhp turbo or the sc50 and would really like to see some back to back comparisons before parting with my cash.
Will

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

would the SC46 and the MD321T be a fairer comparison?

borat52

I think it would, SC46 against MD321T, and then SC50 against laterals 500bhp offering as and when its available.

Of course, no harm in doing them all on the same car if somebody has the time and inclination to.

Bob Rawle

Indeed, apples for apples.

bob

The Gaffer

Hi,
the SC50 was never intended to go up against the 321, the SC46 is the 321T sized turbo, as yet no point in swaping a 321T for a SC46 other than as a test, and to be honest with scooby shootout last week and time attack this week its unlikly to happen for a couple of weeks.

Paul crafts car was fitted with a SC50 due to him requesting 500 BHP, as the turbo was a new product it was an ideal oppertunity to try one, if it was to work it would certainly do it on pauls car, and it did, we could have pushed further but didnt want to kill his gearbox before shootout.

We will still do a back to back with the MD321T for our own in house research, as borat52 states its interesting for customers to see the trade off in spool for that extra BHP.

Bob, the GT35-P20 RCM turbo, any printouts of the acheived 500, or is it just a claimed figure ?

Nice to see a sensible interesting and informative thread on scooby net.

Cheers
Kev

terryb

Kev

You had a good few cars at SSO on Sunday, would be interested to see how they faired on the 1/4 mile and what their relative specs were

Mine is a 2 litre with MD321T and on race fuel - 11.8s at 120mph

I know Paul Crafts and Kev's were quicker - how did the other cars get on?

Cheers

Terry

specialx

Here you go some of the results from yesterday as soon as we get more we will update this thread.


1/4 mile
mikee singh sc50 11.0 @ 127mph (in kevs car)
paul craft sc50 11.1 @ 130mph
andy harvey sc50 11.2 @ 126mph
joe luckett sc46 11.3 @ 122mph
kevin horsley sc50 11.5 @ 125mph
simon deaton sc50 11.6 @ 118mph

60ft times

3rd place over all pauls crafts sc50 1.700
4th place over all Andy Harvey sc50 1.700
10th place over all Simon Deaton sc50 1.770


What a great Day!

terryb

Some great times there - amazing to see how the same car can be 0.5s quicker with another driver - I should have let Paul drive my car

It's all good fun though - my best 60ft was 1.8 - was great fun when all 4 wheels lit up on the launch, but not so when hit the limiter in 1st as there's just so much happening

Kev - what engine sizes are those cars? Any on 2 litre still? Or did you have any running a 2 litre block?

IRC450STI

well ads you forgot me in that list or dont you love me enough
Iain Campbell MD321H 12.0 @ 117mph
60ft 1.900
not bad for a new lad, will be alot faster next time, i will see 11s
Was great fun being with the lads , thanks
Mr warburton

stockcar

terry your car most probably suffers on the 1/4 due to the short gearing you have.......................so may not be a fair comparison??

alyn

stuart148

iTrader: (12)

i thought the short gears would of made it better,,,???

but may be not on this occasion,,this might be down to the driver or the turbo running out of PUFF

stu

Bob Rawle

Kev there will be printouts somewhere but its old news, happened about 4 years ago. I don't have a paper record of it but I know it happened cos I mapped it. Car doesn't even exist in that form any more.

cheers

bob

terryb

LOL - that and my own inability to shift gears properly

Bob Rawle

Terry are you using uprated engine and gearbox mounts, I assume so but I'm not (until the weekend) and that caused me grief when trying to snap shift from 2nd to third and 4th to 5th, kept hitting the gate due to the box movement during the shift ? Only way to deal with it was to slow those shifts down.

bob

terryb

Hi Bob

Yes, both engine and gearbox mounts are uprated. This was the 1st time I had shifted in real anger from 2nd to 3rd with this ppg dog box. Some times it was faultless and others it struggled. It is a known problem with the dog kit when using an interlocker (which you need if you don't want to engage 2 gears at the same time ) I even messed up 4th to 5th once too

Having some nice new suspension fitted today so should see a good improvement at Silverstone this Sunday on the handling side of things