ex-webby

Since everyone is discussing turbo's.... I can add another one in to the melting pot.

I have just finished testing an AET bolt on single scroll turbo.

480bhp / 460lbft
Mapped on normal pump fuel (again no additives) with peak power being achieved at a lowly 1.4bar boost!

We have overlayed the power run from this turbo against my previous 2ltr engine (I now have a 2.5 Cosworth lump) that had the twin scroll turbo and the lowdown power/torque is actually better on this new set-up, then at 3400rpm the new set-up just takes off in to the sunset!

1 bar @ 2700rpm
1.5 bar @ 3000rpm

Need a stronger actuator, to see if turbo can hold the boost at the top end. If that happens we should just about bust 500bhp.

As a road car the driveability and power delivery is the mutts nuts. This new engine just pulls and pulls and rev's exactly the same as my old 2ltr did..... just a shed load smoother.

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

Sounds really good - Lets see the dyno runs then

ex-webby

You impatient person.

Dyno graphs are at hand (well they are at home), but I do not want to release anything on these as they will be part of the article due to be published within the next 4 weeks.

I may be convinced otherwise..... cheque in the post please.

One thing to consider is that I am using Cosworth ported heads and Cosworth CAMS (which are wilder than the 06 Spec C ones) as part of the new engine spec with twin scroll headers mated to a custom made twin scroll to single scroll up-pipe.

It pulls very well and in fact is only the second Impreza ran so far on PowerStation's rollers (after the Type 25 race car) that needs to be double strapped, as it nearly passed (and would of done if Rich had kept his foot in) over the top of the front roller set when we did the initial power runs....... it nearly ended before it started!

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

just thought I'd get the request in first before the 22b lot jump in

R4LLY

iTrader: (1)

Wow there are alot of BIG power figures!

How do these figures relate to road performance though?

Has anyone timed in gear acceleration times? i.e 40-100, 60-130, 60-100....
I think these figures are better to show how a turbo actually performs on the road, fairer than 1/4 mile as no launch is required....

On my Zen Powered RA with a tiny 18g\Meth I got the following results:

40-100= 5.02-5.3 Seconds Using 3rd-4th Gear

60-100= 4.01-4.2 Seconds Using 4th Gear

60-130= 8.5-8.9 Seconds Using 4th-5th Gear

The speed was measured using the PFC Commander as this was correct according to the Commander Revs, may not be accurate as using a VBOX or similar, but still a good guage....


The 60-130 is an excellent test, Alot of big power cars in the US use this test to guage a car's true on road performance.

(All runs were carried out approximately 6-8 times, which reflects the different times)

Main reason I ask is, in the future I may consider an MD or something similar, so just would like to see how much a bigger turbo may affect mid range acceleration.

ex-webby

Mark,
The graph you have put up for your MD321T (impressive graph) is presumably on "funny" fuel and/or mental boost?!

Kev,
Nice figures!

R4LLY,
You are of course correct.... I will hopefully be doing some formal testing at the weekend of in-gear, 0-60, 0-100 etc of my set-up.

R4LLY

iTrader: (1)

Good to hear Shaun, would be good good to see how the big power MD's would perform also. Maybe Terry or someone could do some similar testing and get the results up....

Amir

Lateral Performance

iTrader: (20)

Shaun,

I've been told that Paul's car was run on pump fuel, with no additives. He runs higher boost than you, but then he's got a smaller engine, on non VVT heads, and tamer cams, although the extra boost gave him about 70ftlbs more torque than you.

I guess the bottom line, is Paul's car with the MD321T set up did an 11.1 second 1/4, on only his second time out with the car


Mark.

stuart148

iTrader: (12)

are you on about paul crafts,,,,if so his he running the sc50 (scooby clinic's) turbo now,,,,as the md321t was running out of puff at about 475bhp

and i think his best ever time was at the sso with the new turbo (sc50)

any way it seems to me like you a bit scared of this new turbo scooby clinic have brought out,,,,as it

cheaper
faster

you also get every thing needed to fit it

and to top it all off ,,and this is what every one wants MORE bhp/torque

just my thoughts

stu

renno rannes

So your saying the more BHP the better, not for me its not. Id much prefer the more responsive aggressive car with a faster spooling turbo even if it makes 30 40 50 BHP less. Also was it not said that the SC50 is a larger turbo so obvisouly its going to make more power then a 321T .

If people where to look at it that way they would just buy a 35R because it makes more power then the SC50 and the MD321T. Doesent mean its a BETTER turbo to me.

Just my opinion and prefernce of course but I wouldent choose a turbo on a peak number alone.

Renno

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

Well said Renno.

Peak BHP figures are not what makes a car quick.

Give me early torque and flat curve anyday

stuart148

iTrader: (12)

the only thing pi**ing me off about this thread,,,is mr lateral,,,saying md this,md that

wish he would get it in to his head,,,paul crafts is NOT running a md turbo


i dont know a lot/well nearly nowt about turbo's ,,,but kev from the scooby clinic as already said the sc46 turbo matches the md321t

so whats mr lateral's problem,,,is it because they is going to be some competition in the market

stu

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

i think the problem is unless you can compare the turbos on the same engine/car then the rest is speculation.

A back to back dyno would be ideal to show who is king of the hill

borat52

So its scoobyclinics word against Laterals in that case, I dont see that Lateral are saying anything out of order here. Their MD321T has pretty much been the King of 450bhp turbo's for at least 6 months now its tried and tested and has many examples of proven power with great spool.

Scoobyclinics turbo's are new, that means its up to them to convince us customers that they are as good/better than Laterals. That means back to back dyno testing and also cars out there making the power they claim can be made. Scoobyclinics turbo's look good to me, and they have obviously got the cars out there making the power, but are they as good as/better than Laterals md321T? Well only back to back testing with an independant mapper will show this. Until then Lateral have the edge simply because their turbo has been proven time and time again over the past months.
I personally look forward to back to back dyno graphs before making a choice on what I'll be buying.

R4LLY

iTrader: (1)

I still don't think dyno figures and graphs will be able to tell the whole story of which turbo will be better for road use.

Apart from 1/4 mile has anyone tested the mid range figures for both cars?

I'm sure if we could compare the times for say 60-130, 40-100 of the said turbos, we could guage which Turbo delivers more useable power on the road and which is more responsive.

This argument will not be settled with just power figures and graphs.

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

The shapes of the graphs will tell the story though.

If some people want to chase peak figures then more fool them IMO

borat52

Agreed, you'll be able to tell with back to back dyno test which spools earliest and which gives the widest power band. If a turbo has a wider power band on the dyno its going to have it on the road too.

Tidgy

seems to me that all the turbos compared are various different versions,a nd in some cases desgined to provide different performance.

only real way to get a result, all parties get together and use same dyno, same day and same mapper.

fit first turbo, map the bollox out of it and see what you get.

car off the dyno and fit different turbo, map the bollox out of it and see what you get.

car off the dyno and fit third different turbo etc etc

no two cars are the same, and also you boys and girls no that two different days are uinlikely to have the same atmospheric conditions (in some cases hour to hour can be different). so the argument is a waste of time unless you do back to back tests with the latest versions.

whats the date gonna be?

The Gaffer

Hi,
as I have clearly stated before it is not an us and them argument, I run a 321T on my personal car, scooby clinic did all the testing when the 321 evolved into a "T" and then an "H", Scoobyclinic also are a stockist of the MD series, and without doubt the MD321T and 321 H are stunning turbos, we just want to offer an alternative product exclusive to Scoobyclinic, something a little different, in fact we are just having our own custom exaust housing cast at the moment to aid spool on an even bigger direct fit turbo.

Back to back testing will be done next week,to busy this week due to scooby shootout last weekend and time attack this weekend, oh, and a bank holiday thrown in the middle, graphs will be posted as soon as poss, and a bit of live testing will be carried out at the Pod next sunday, should show us some times.


Cheers
Kev

The Fixer

Kev, as an independent Dyno Dynamics owner and user I would like to see the following in your back to back test to get fair results for both turbos.

Same Car
Same Day
Idealy same Air Temp & Intake Temp for all runs
SC50 Vs Lateral MD(500 equivalent not 321T)
Dyno Dynamics Using RPM PICKUP not on gear ratio.
Independant mapper (PAT or Bob R)
Shell VPower No additives.

Now that would make for interesting results

Conrad

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

have these tests been done yet?

specialx

Not yet, we will keep you posted as soon as possible

Power Junkie

iTrader: (1)

will you be testing the MD321h and the SC42? so a 400bhp turbo on a 2ltr?
I will be after one soon,

IRC450STI

Some testing has been done on my car this week but all i can tell you at moment is that the SC42 made a lot more torque than the MD321H at same boost levels and spooled a lot quicker with no loss at top end. will know results very soon. thanks scoobyclinic

Bob Rawle

Guess thats only what you have been told, looking at another thread you mentioned that when you had the 321 on the car it needed the mapping sorting to get the best out of it, on that basis it's not possible to compare your car as a before and after.

Also, turbo spool and the level and achieved rate is dependant on TWO things, the turbo and the mapping, having mapped quite a few cars with the 321H I always have to profile the boost response to minimise surge, its very possible to map it well into surge with full boost achieved at ridiculously low rpm, however that is not the most effective use of it.

To my eyes and ears reading this thread and others there is a degree of "isn't this great because" attached to the SC42 and SC50, in practice I suggest they are both able to do a good job BUT are not any different to their equivelant competition with an unearned reputation being provided as of now.

Time will show, needs more than one car and more than one tuner to map in order to achieve a solid reputation for doing what it says on the tin. Personally I am looking forward to being able to do that.

cheers

bob

IRC450STI

ok then the MD321H was on my car for about 4 months when engine was rebuilt with a big spec and my aim was to have 400+bhp but was only mapped to 350BHP and torque was 330 due to standard gearbox, then i got a PPG gearset and mapped to 385BHP/340lbs ft because clutch was slipping at 400BHP/360lbs ft, now with twin plate exedy clutch the clinic ask me if i would like to try the SC42 so they could compare the two turbos so they did and the result was this,
At 1.2bar MD321H was 350/330
At 1.4Bar 385/340 but will do more.

At 1.4Bar the SC42 was 385/385
and now at 1.5bar its 400/400 but will do more.

I picked car up today and its just fantastic, it comes on to boost earlier and stays on boost longer and less lag, but i dont think there is anyone else to compare this to as i maybe the first to have this turbo as my car was used as a test pilot for the SC42. they did say if i didnt like the turbo they will put MD back on.
I will be at jap show this weekend and cant wait to see what it will do, will be in black classic with scoobyclinic livery down side.
If you there come and see.

Lateral Performance

iTrader: (20)

IRC450STI,


I'm sorry, but how on earth you, or anyone else would consider comparing two results, when one of them was with a slipping clutch, is beyond me.

And where did these figures come from, all posted by YOU

Posted 29th of May:

Posted on the 12th June:


Mark.

IRC450STI

That was me being very optamistic i guess before i got final results which is 400/396 to be exact thats it, could do a little more but im happy with that but dont get me wrong the MD321H is a exellent turbo its just i got more torque with the SC42 if it were the other way round i would of kept MD on, but not all cars are the same.

Northern Impreza Car Club

BITTER

alanbell

iTrader: (6)

BUT TRUE