MD321H Vs TD05 20G Vs Garrett GT2871R
21 March 2009, 12:26 PM
#121
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (20)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 8.95 @ 168mph. Zero to 1KM 194.1mph
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-15% meth, can, depending on the car/engine, be worth 3-6 degrees of timing.
As Martyn says, methanol can make a massive difference, and people should be aware of this when comparing figures, or deciding on a suitable turbo for their own application.
Mark.
As Martyn says, methanol can make a massive difference, and people should be aware of this when comparing figures, or deciding on a suitable turbo for their own application.
Mark.
21 March 2009, 12:49 PM
#122
METHANOL 10% gains
not in my experience-10% is in someone's imagination -if it gave that sort of gain there would be a lot more using it. I run 10% meth and the car is mapped for it, didn't make any difference to spool-up. What did make a difference was a water/meth injection system costing loads which allowed more timing resulting in the things you mention, spool-up 300rpm faster and gains across the rev-band- the ignition is nearly maxed now-you wouldn't do that by just adding 10% methanol. Might see 10-15% gains if the car was run on purly on ethanol
not in my experience-10% is in someone's imagination -if it gave that sort of gain there would be a lot more using it. I run 10% meth and the car is mapped for it, didn't make any difference to spool-up. What did make a difference was a water/meth injection system costing loads which allowed more timing resulting in the things you mention, spool-up 300rpm faster and gains across the rev-band- the ignition is nearly maxed now-you wouldn't do that by just adding 10% methanol. Might see 10-15% gains if the car was run on purly on ethanol
The resistance to det allows the mapper to get closer to MBT - this is where maximum power/torque is. Some would say each degree of timing is worth 6hp .... this could even be a low estimate. The subaru engine on boost is a LONG way from MBT as std - any additional timing is adding power.
21 March 2009, 01:44 PM
#123
Any (good) mapper that is mapping for these fuels will be using more timing and possibly more boost to achieve the result that the car needs. Each car is different but I have seen quite superb results on 10% e85 mix on others cars aswell as my own at 10%, 20% 40% etc.. I had similar improvements in spool up, torque and max power on methanol.
The resistance to det allows the mapper to get closer to MBT - this is where maximum power/torque is. Some would say each degree of timing is worth 6hp .... this could even be a low estimate. The subaru engine on boost is a LONG way from MBT as std - any additional timing is adding power.
The resistance to det allows the mapper to get closer to MBT - this is where maximum power/torque is. Some would say each degree of timing is worth 6hp .... this could even be a low estimate. The subaru engine on boost is a LONG way from MBT as std - any additional timing is adding power.
I might add that I recently started running some octane booster, first 3ml/litre then 5ml/litre. I thought the car had responded and took it down for a power run to find out the results, only to find that on the rollers, from the last map in november, it had marginally lost some power. The ignition can't be advanced because it's max
Even though I use methanol I remain sceptical of it's value as a way to extra power
Trevor
Last edited by trevsjwood; 21 March 2009 at 01:46 PM.
21 March 2009, 06:44 PM
#124
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: On my real nice push bike!
Posts: 1,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It needs meths to run at 400 plus.
And yes more timing went in along with the meths but not more boost, come to think of it the boost got turned down abit and we got more power
21 March 2009, 08:09 PM
#127
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hmmm im interested in one of these now after seeing your graph ash...HS380 or HS420 for my 2.5 STI
the 420 shouldnt be too laggy
anybody running one of these on a 2.5 have a graph?
the 420 shouldnt be too laggy
anybody running one of these on a 2.5 have a graph?
22 March 2009, 07:50 AM
#130
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Also known as The Gimp
Posts: 3,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Std V7 STI + MD321H + the usual bits made 390 bhp on BP Ultimate.
I honestly believe this turbo is crying out to be let loose on a forged motor....
dunx
P.S. ECU only able to cope with 1.55 bar as std. JGM suggests 1.7 with an AVCR is possible. It managed 2 bar with no boost control....
I honestly believe this turbo is crying out to be let loose on a forged motor....
dunx
P.S. ECU only able to cope with 1.55 bar as std. JGM suggests 1.7 with an AVCR is possible. It managed 2 bar with no boost control....
Would you be a gent and PM me your full spec matey? I've had naughty thoughts on adding a MD321h on my car now over the first plan of the 20g (which no one has in stock off the shelf at present).
Steve
22 March 2009, 02:02 PM
#132
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbo comparisons are so car dependant as to make most comparisons, including same car same day same fuel same mapper, irrelevant. It is the system as a whole that needs to work; a turbo is just one element and it must match the rest of the system for the best result.
Take a typical scenario. Start with an STi8 with its stock VF35 turbo and it's a good one making 340-350BHP. Great, you think it'de really fly on something like an MD321 or SC46. So you fit one and map it. Result : 385BHP at 1.7 bar. Ooops. Yet, another STi8 which doesn't work so well to start with, maybe only makes 320BHP on its VF35, fit an MD321H and it makes 420BHP at 1.55 bar on road fuel. It makes no sense, but more worryingly, it is not possible to predict the outcome. The car you expected to do well doesn't, and the one you weren't too optimistic about surprises you.
We know that the MD321T can and does make 450 BHP. We know that it's possible to get 1.7 bar at 3000RPM on a 2 litre with it. We know that we can hit 1.8 bar at 2300 RPM on a 2.5 litre with it. But on certain cars it just doesn't work. It clearly isn't the turbo's "fault" because it works on other cars. It clearly isn't the car's "fault" because it made 350 on its stock turbo. It's the combination that doesn't work, and you cannot predict whether any particular setup is going to work or not. To suggest, then, that comparing multiple turbos on the same car is going to provide meaningful information is also flawed... if you took the STi8 that made 350 to start with you'de conclude that the 321H is a laggy blower that doesn't make much power despite running a lot of boost, but if you did the same comparison on the one that started at 320 you'de conclude that the 321H spools about the same as the VF35 yet makes another 100BHP. So which comparison is correct ? What's to say that an HS380 wouldn't work well on the 350 car ? What's to say that an HS420 would make 420 on the 320 car ? All we can do is to look at potential, what we know a turbo is capable of in the right surroundings. Put it in the right place and it will reward you by working well.... if only you could actually quantify what those surroundings are.
This is the reason for the mixed views on tuning mods. What might work well on one car doesn't necessarily work well on another car. So the owner of the first car is over the moon whilst the owner of the second is left somewhat disappointed. The car is the same, the mod is the same, swap the bits between the cars and both continue to perform the way they did, proving there is nothing wrong with the components, yet you still have two cars notionally identical yet rather different in reality. And I do mean notionally identical. The example of the STi8s above is real. It has happened more than once. I've yet to find the root cause of it, but it is looking like it will require the engine to be removed from the car to figure it out because externally there is NO difference. I've seen all sorts of weird things. STi8s from the factory with EJ25 heads on (yes, 2.5 litre heads)... with that sort of variance from car to car, it's no wonder no two ever perform the same!
Cheers,
Pat.
Take a typical scenario. Start with an STi8 with its stock VF35 turbo and it's a good one making 340-350BHP. Great, you think it'de really fly on something like an MD321 or SC46. So you fit one and map it. Result : 385BHP at 1.7 bar. Ooops. Yet, another STi8 which doesn't work so well to start with, maybe only makes 320BHP on its VF35, fit an MD321H and it makes 420BHP at 1.55 bar on road fuel. It makes no sense, but more worryingly, it is not possible to predict the outcome. The car you expected to do well doesn't, and the one you weren't too optimistic about surprises you.
We know that the MD321T can and does make 450 BHP. We know that it's possible to get 1.7 bar at 3000RPM on a 2 litre with it. We know that we can hit 1.8 bar at 2300 RPM on a 2.5 litre with it. But on certain cars it just doesn't work. It clearly isn't the turbo's "fault" because it works on other cars. It clearly isn't the car's "fault" because it made 350 on its stock turbo. It's the combination that doesn't work, and you cannot predict whether any particular setup is going to work or not. To suggest, then, that comparing multiple turbos on the same car is going to provide meaningful information is also flawed... if you took the STi8 that made 350 to start with you'de conclude that the 321H is a laggy blower that doesn't make much power despite running a lot of boost, but if you did the same comparison on the one that started at 320 you'de conclude that the 321H spools about the same as the VF35 yet makes another 100BHP. So which comparison is correct ? What's to say that an HS380 wouldn't work well on the 350 car ? What's to say that an HS420 would make 420 on the 320 car ? All we can do is to look at potential, what we know a turbo is capable of in the right surroundings. Put it in the right place and it will reward you by working well.... if only you could actually quantify what those surroundings are.
This is the reason for the mixed views on tuning mods. What might work well on one car doesn't necessarily work well on another car. So the owner of the first car is over the moon whilst the owner of the second is left somewhat disappointed. The car is the same, the mod is the same, swap the bits between the cars and both continue to perform the way they did, proving there is nothing wrong with the components, yet you still have two cars notionally identical yet rather different in reality. And I do mean notionally identical. The example of the STi8s above is real. It has happened more than once. I've yet to find the root cause of it, but it is looking like it will require the engine to be removed from the car to figure it out because externally there is NO difference. I've seen all sorts of weird things. STi8s from the factory with EJ25 heads on (yes, 2.5 litre heads)... with that sort of variance from car to car, it's no wonder no two ever perform the same!
Cheers,
Pat.
22 March 2009, 02:32 PM
#133
Scooby Senior
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Slowly rebuilding the kit of bits into a car...
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like mine LOL, my V7 STI + MD321H is quite laggy and then all hell breaks loose and it's frentic till you "chicken out".... I quite like it as a "theatrical" experience, but my diesel driving friends don't !
dunx
dunx
22 March 2009, 03:51 PM
#135
There is a lot of disinformation or plain wrong assumptions made on this thread that need correcting before they enter the ***** of Scooby myth.
and
The HS 380 can be compared directly with the MD321H although it is several price brackets below.
The HS380 does not need meths to run over 400 bhp.
I do not run "meths" and I would not use it in any circumstances to benchmark a turbo.
There was no hole in the bottle.
I run the same amount of NF on a permanent basis and it does not change. This works out around 1.7/1.8 mls/litre depending on the amount of V-Power I can get in the tank when I refill. I keep a couple of small medicin bottles in the boot already filled with NF and add one of these per refuel.
Incidentally, I have found that after 3 mls/l of NF there is probably no gain to be had so anyone adding a bottle per fill up is wasting their time.
The 380 is certainly not based on an 18G, nor is the 420 an 05 20G. Any 18G achieving 400 bhp on road fuel is an exception to the norm.
BTW there are A LOT of 20G turbos being sold that are not the genuine article with power output of only 350-370 bhp. Some of these originate from Taiwan.
When Ash first contacted me for a turbo, my advice was to stick with the MD321T and let me supply a set of headers that would greatly improve his performance. The overall performance of the turbo relies heavily on the supporting mods. Ash opted to go with an HS380 turbo only.
The HS380 and 420 are supplied ready to fit. Buy one and come here for the fitting and it will be done for £50.
Refer to the graphs at post 23 or 28.
409.9 bhp @ 6720 rpm @1.52 bar. Fuel as described above.
On the road this car does 1 bar in 4th at 3,200 rpm on the level.
Car spec. STi 3 Wagon. 2 litre and O/E pistons.
3" Revolution exhaust.
H.S. 3" open neck down pipe.
H.S. Ported O/E headers and matched uppipe.
H.S. Hybrid GT FMIC.
H.S. Induction Kit.
Fuelab FPR and 550cc injectors.
Simtek ECU.
The same car previously ran with an STi 8 TMIC and was 392 bhp. There was no other spec change although fuel pressure was increased slightly after fitting the FMIC in advance of the remap. 401 bhp first run on the rollers and 409 after remap.
On Monday we are fitting one of these turbos to a P1 and it will be mapped Tuesday with a Simtek. We are also fitting an exhaust, (not our choice) D/P with a CAT, 550cc injectors, ported headers and matched up-pipe. Our induction system. This car runs V-Power only. (Also, incidentally, tyre pressure/temperature monitor) It is a disappointment the spec is not exactly the same and the results will be interesting.
A week after that we are doing a further P1, the spec of that car is almost identical to the STi 3 Wagon but it runs 1ml/l NF.
So we have lots of good feed back to look forward to. Interesting times.
From my experience the HS380 is an excellent turbo for 2 litre cars with standard internals giving good power and spool and all for reasonable money. The 420 is a good choice for forged internals where more boost can be run OR on an O/E 2.5 engine.
We did a package for a UK 2.5 owner from Sheffield a couple of weeks ago and both the owner and mapper (Bob Rawle) are surprised and over the moon.
Juice, drop me an e-mail and I will put you in touch with the owner. He was running a VF43 and had 1 bar at 3,000 rpm when we bench marked the car. After fitting the HS420 but before mapping he had exactly the same spool ie 1 bar at 3000 rpm but that was improved with mapping and Bob reported "No lag".
I have just read Pat's first paragraph and I agree 100%. A joined up approach is what is needed. We have found that the difference between something as mundane as an exhaust or just an up-pipe can make a clear difference to performance. I have spent a lot of time finding what works and what does not. Sometimes there have been big disappointments. Fitting something I know must make an improvement only to go backwards. That is why I want to stick with what I know has worked in the past.
As i said this turbo (HS380) can not be matched with the MD321H.
It needs meths to run at 400 plus.
It needs meths to run at 400 plus.
He said that it was with NF but it must of been the hole bottle
The HS 380 can be compared directly with the MD321H although it is several price brackets below.
The HS380 does not need meths to run over 400 bhp.
I do not run "meths" and I would not use it in any circumstances to benchmark a turbo.
There was no hole in the bottle.
I run the same amount of NF on a permanent basis and it does not change. This works out around 1.7/1.8 mls/litre depending on the amount of V-Power I can get in the tank when I refill. I keep a couple of small medicin bottles in the boot already filled with NF and add one of these per refuel.
Incidentally, I have found that after 3 mls/l of NF there is probably no gain to be had so anyone adding a bottle per fill up is wasting their time.
The 380 is certainly not based on an 18G, nor is the 420 an 05 20G. Any 18G achieving 400 bhp on road fuel is an exception to the norm.
BTW there are A LOT of 20G turbos being sold that are not the genuine article with power output of only 350-370 bhp. Some of these originate from Taiwan.
When Ash first contacted me for a turbo, my advice was to stick with the MD321T and let me supply a set of headers that would greatly improve his performance. The overall performance of the turbo relies heavily on the supporting mods. Ash opted to go with an HS380 turbo only.
The HS380 and 420 are supplied ready to fit. Buy one and come here for the fitting and it will be done for £50.
Refer to the graphs at post 23 or 28.
409.9 bhp @ 6720 rpm @1.52 bar. Fuel as described above.
On the road this car does 1 bar in 4th at 3,200 rpm on the level.
Car spec. STi 3 Wagon. 2 litre and O/E pistons.
3" Revolution exhaust.
H.S. 3" open neck down pipe.
H.S. Ported O/E headers and matched uppipe.
H.S. Hybrid GT FMIC.
H.S. Induction Kit.
Fuelab FPR and 550cc injectors.
Simtek ECU.
The same car previously ran with an STi 8 TMIC and was 392 bhp. There was no other spec change although fuel pressure was increased slightly after fitting the FMIC in advance of the remap. 401 bhp first run on the rollers and 409 after remap.
On Monday we are fitting one of these turbos to a P1 and it will be mapped Tuesday with a Simtek. We are also fitting an exhaust, (not our choice) D/P with a CAT, 550cc injectors, ported headers and matched up-pipe. Our induction system. This car runs V-Power only. (Also, incidentally, tyre pressure/temperature monitor) It is a disappointment the spec is not exactly the same and the results will be interesting.
A week after that we are doing a further P1, the spec of that car is almost identical to the STi 3 Wagon but it runs 1ml/l NF.
So we have lots of good feed back to look forward to. Interesting times.
From my experience the HS380 is an excellent turbo for 2 litre cars with standard internals giving good power and spool and all for reasonable money. The 420 is a good choice for forged internals where more boost can be run OR on an O/E 2.5 engine.
We did a package for a UK 2.5 owner from Sheffield a couple of weeks ago and both the owner and mapper (Bob Rawle) are surprised and over the moon.
Juice, drop me an e-mail and I will put you in touch with the owner. He was running a VF43 and had 1 bar at 3,000 rpm when we bench marked the car. After fitting the HS420 but before mapping he had exactly the same spool ie 1 bar at 3000 rpm but that was improved with mapping and Bob reported "No lag".
I have just read Pat's first paragraph and I agree 100%. A joined up approach is what is needed. We have found that the difference between something as mundane as an exhaust or just an up-pipe can make a clear difference to performance. I have spent a lot of time finding what works and what does not. Sometimes there have been big disappointments. Fitting something I know must make an improvement only to go backwards. That is why I want to stick with what I know has worked in the past.
Last edited by harvey; 22 March 2009 at 03:55 PM.
22 March 2009, 07:25 PM
#137
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 10.68 QT mile in 2007 2.33 Type R ** Current 2002 Spec C 2.33 Track prepped.
Posts: 1,658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The MD321T was mapped on what we suspect was a bad or mixed batch of fuel on that day, hence the amount of boost it took to achieve the power figures. Had we had good fuel the result would have been faster spool and more top end based on the timing map. For example the difference between the IGN maps on the HS380 and the MD321T in some parts is as much as 8 deg so not the best direct comparison obviously meth will account for some of this.
The HS380 was mapped with 10% Meth iirc 1.7 bar max falling to around 1.5 bar and couldn’t be pushed any further on “this car”, that’s not saying on another car similar set up it won’t make more power. Full boost on the road in 3RD was 3500.
Overall the HS380 performed well, a little down on the “graph BHP” maybe, but as Pat has pointed out there is no constant. More importantly on the road it’s a great improvement transforming the drive. Back to back on “this car” with both turbo’s the later would result in a faster road car figures aside, that’s not to say the result wont be different on another car.
The HS380 was mapped with 10% Meth iirc 1.7 bar max falling to around 1.5 bar and couldn’t be pushed any further on “this car”, that’s not saying on another car similar set up it won’t make more power. Full boost on the road in 3RD was 3500.
Overall the HS380 performed well, a little down on the “graph BHP” maybe, but as Pat has pointed out there is no constant. More importantly on the road it’s a great improvement transforming the drive. Back to back on “this car” with both turbo’s the later would result in a faster road car figures aside, that’s not to say the result wont be different on another car.
22 March 2009, 07:36 PM
#139
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
harvey, ive already sent you an email regaards choosing a hs380 or hs420...im very interested in the HS420 if figures will be good on my OE 2.5sti
sorry for this stupid question but how much air does the HS420 flow compared to the HS380 and comparing them to the stock VF43
sorry for this stupid question but how much air does the HS420 flow compared to the HS380 and comparing them to the stock VF43
22 March 2009, 08:20 PM
#140
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: On my real nice push bike!
Posts: 1,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just my 5 pence on this thread, (Just so you all know) I am very happy with my car and have no complants about the set up what so ever after the new turbo from Harvey and remap from slowboy!
Thought i better clear that up
Thought i better clear that up
23 March 2009, 01:10 PM
#144
Turbo comparisons are so car dependant as to make most comparisons, including same car same day same fuel same mapper, irrelevant. It is the system as a whole that needs to work; a turbo is just one element and it must match the rest of the system for the best result.
Take a typical scenario. Start with an STi8 with its stock VF35 turbo and it's a good one making 340-350BHP. Great, you think it'de really fly on something like an MD321 or SC46. So you fit one and map it. Result : 385BHP at 1.7 bar. Ooops. Yet, another STi8 which doesn't work so well to start with, maybe only makes 320BHP on its VF35, fit an MD321H and it makes 420BHP at 1.55 bar on road fuel. It makes no sense, but more worryingly, it is not possible to predict the outcome. The car you expected to do well doesn't, and the one you weren't too optimistic about surprises you.
We know that the MD321T can and does make 450 BHP. We know that it's possible to get 1.7 bar at 3000RPM on a 2 litre with it. We know that we can hit 1.8 bar at 2300 RPM on a 2.5 litre with it. But on certain cars it just doesn't work. It clearly isn't the turbo's "fault" because it works on other cars. It clearly isn't the car's "fault" because it made 350 on its stock turbo. It's the combination that doesn't work, and you cannot predict whether any particular setup is going to work or not. To suggest, then, that comparing multiple turbos on the same car is going to provide meaningful information is also flawed... if you took the STi8 that made 350 to start with you'de conclude that the 321H is a laggy blower that doesn't make much power despite running a lot of boost, but if you did the same comparison on the one that started at 320 you'de conclude that the 321H spools about the same as the VF35 yet makes another 100BHP. So which comparison is correct ? What's to say that an HS380 wouldn't work well on the 350 car ? What's to say that an HS420 would make 420 on the 320 car ? All we can do is to look at potential, what we know a turbo is capable of in the right surroundings. Put it in the right place and it will reward you by working well.... if only you could actually quantify what those surroundings are.
This is the reason for the mixed views on tuning mods. What might work well on one car doesn't necessarily work well on another car. So the owner of the first car is over the moon whilst the owner of the second is left somewhat disappointed. The car is the same, the mod is the same, swap the bits between the cars and both continue to perform the way they did, proving there is nothing wrong with the components, yet you still have two cars notionally identical yet rather different in reality. And I do mean notionally identical. The example of the STi8s above is real. It has happened more than once. I've yet to find the root cause of it, but it is looking like it will require the engine to be removed from the car to figure it out because externally there is NO difference. I've seen all sorts of weird things. STi8s from the factory with EJ25 heads on (yes, 2.5 litre heads)... with that sort of variance from car to car, it's no wonder no two ever perform the same!
Cheers,
Pat.
Take a typical scenario. Start with an STi8 with its stock VF35 turbo and it's a good one making 340-350BHP. Great, you think it'de really fly on something like an MD321 or SC46. So you fit one and map it. Result : 385BHP at 1.7 bar. Ooops. Yet, another STi8 which doesn't work so well to start with, maybe only makes 320BHP on its VF35, fit an MD321H and it makes 420BHP at 1.55 bar on road fuel. It makes no sense, but more worryingly, it is not possible to predict the outcome. The car you expected to do well doesn't, and the one you weren't too optimistic about surprises you.
We know that the MD321T can and does make 450 BHP. We know that it's possible to get 1.7 bar at 3000RPM on a 2 litre with it. We know that we can hit 1.8 bar at 2300 RPM on a 2.5 litre with it. But on certain cars it just doesn't work. It clearly isn't the turbo's "fault" because it works on other cars. It clearly isn't the car's "fault" because it made 350 on its stock turbo. It's the combination that doesn't work, and you cannot predict whether any particular setup is going to work or not. To suggest, then, that comparing multiple turbos on the same car is going to provide meaningful information is also flawed... if you took the STi8 that made 350 to start with you'de conclude that the 321H is a laggy blower that doesn't make much power despite running a lot of boost, but if you did the same comparison on the one that started at 320 you'de conclude that the 321H spools about the same as the VF35 yet makes another 100BHP. So which comparison is correct ? What's to say that an HS380 wouldn't work well on the 350 car ? What's to say that an HS420 would make 420 on the 320 car ? All we can do is to look at potential, what we know a turbo is capable of in the right surroundings. Put it in the right place and it will reward you by working well.... if only you could actually quantify what those surroundings are.
This is the reason for the mixed views on tuning mods. What might work well on one car doesn't necessarily work well on another car. So the owner of the first car is over the moon whilst the owner of the second is left somewhat disappointed. The car is the same, the mod is the same, swap the bits between the cars and both continue to perform the way they did, proving there is nothing wrong with the components, yet you still have two cars notionally identical yet rather different in reality. And I do mean notionally identical. The example of the STi8s above is real. It has happened more than once. I've yet to find the root cause of it, but it is looking like it will require the engine to be removed from the car to figure it out because externally there is NO difference. I've seen all sorts of weird things. STi8s from the factory with EJ25 heads on (yes, 2.5 litre heads)... with that sort of variance from car to car, it's no wonder no two ever perform the same!
Cheers,
Pat.
If the car to car variability is so massive, it's also a rather damning indightment of the car tuning industry as a whole, suggesting that we don't really understand enough of the fundamentals/variables of the engine and associated systems to be able to confidently predict what gains can be expected. Following this logic, prospective turbo purchasers would appear to have nothing to gain by seeking advice from tuning experts.
Having said all this, I'm a happy bunny. I was advised by Zen and Mark at Lateral that a 321H with the right supporting mods on an STI8 would comfortably deliver over 400bhp & 360lb/ft with a bar of boost at 3000rpm to make a very quick and driveable car and that's exactly what I got
23 March 2009, 01:19 PM
#145
If this is all true (and I don't doubt what Pat says), it's kind of worrying because the clear implication is that there's absolutely no way of knowing which turbo to purchase for a particular vehicle and therefore, the purchaser has to take a complete gamble on what will work best for his or her car.
If the car to car variability is so massive, it's also a rather damning indightment of the car tuning industry as a whole, suggesting that we don't really understand enough of the fundamentals/variables of the engine and associated systems to be able to confidently predict what gains can be expected. Following this logic, prospective turbo purchasers would appear to have nothing to gain by seeking advice from tuning experts....
If the car to car variability is so massive, it's also a rather damning indightment of the car tuning industry as a whole, suggesting that we don't really understand enough of the fundamentals/variables of the engine and associated systems to be able to confidently predict what gains can be expected. Following this logic, prospective turbo purchasers would appear to have nothing to gain by seeking advice from tuning experts....
However, I do hope I'm right when I say that the cars that (unfortunately for their owners
) do not deliver the goods are, thankfully, in a very small minority(?) 
. I sure hope so...
Last edited by joz8968; 23 March 2009 at 01:23 PM.
23 March 2009, 10:43 PM
#146
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Also known as The Gimp
Posts: 3,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to jump in like a turd down the hatch but,
On the MD321 are we saying the (T) spools a lot later than the (H) by approx 500rpm on the 2.0l block.
When you say laggy, how laggy? For everyday use like Bodski has stated is the T better?
Bodski, I am in the same boat dude. I use my car everyday but want some fun now and then.
Steve
On the MD321 are we saying the (T) spools a lot later than the (H) by approx 500rpm on the 2.0l block.
When you say laggy, how laggy? For everyday use like Bodski has stated is the T better?
Bodski, I am in the same boat dude. I use my car everyday but want some fun now and then.
Steve
24 March 2009, 08:15 AM
#147
The P1 referred to above was completed yesterday in advance of mapping today. Spec as above with HS 380 2 litre and obviously no VVT. I took it for a brief run last night to benchmark spool. If the Defi boost guage and car's own rev counter are to be believed, 1 bar in 4th gear at 3000-3050 rpm.
Very impressed. Let's see what mapping brings.
Very impressed. Let's see what mapping brings.
24 March 2009, 09:24 AM
#148
Sorry to jump in like a turd down the hatch but,
On the MD321 are we saying the (T) spools a lot later than the (H) by approx 500rpm on the 2.0l block.
When you say laggy, how laggy? For everyday use like Bodski has stated is the T better?
Bodski, I am in the same boat dude. I use my car everyday but want some fun now and then.
Steve
On the MD321 are we saying the (T) spools a lot later than the (H) by approx 500rpm on the 2.0l block.
When you say laggy, how laggy? For everyday use like Bodski has stated is the T better?
Bodski, I am in the same boat dude. I use my car everyday but want some fun now and then.
Steve
I'm seriously considering either the ST380/ST420 as supplied by Area52 or Harveys HS380/HS420. Unfourtunaly they are out of stock at present.
Jase from Area52 is gonna post some graphs of both the 380 & 420 when he gets a chance. Both fitted to a 2 Litre
24 March 2009, 10:42 AM
#149
I have had a T on a 2.0 STI4 previously and will do again on my current project build. IMO it is not a laggy turbo. Mine made 1.0 bar by 3300 and full boost by 3800. This was with standard STI4 heads also, every car is different as has been mentioned but it should not be ruled out if you goal is circa 450bhp and over 400ftlbs.
Clive
Clive
Last edited by Mad Hammer; 24 March 2009 at 10:43 AM.
24 March 2009, 11:36 AM
#150
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (20)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 8.95 @ 168mph. Zero to 1KM 194.1mph
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve,
If you read Pats post above, the T is capable of hitting 1.7bar @ 3000rpm on a 2.0lt (vvt heads), although clearly this will vary car to car, and depending on modifications, and 1.7bar @ 3000rpm was a particularly good result.
And amongst other reasons, this is why I favour the T on 2.0lt VVT cars, rather than the H.
Harvey is a stickler for detail, and spends hours on temperature control, and comparing any results should take this into account.
I very much doubt someone using the same turbo, but without all the temperature control, and attention to detail, would get the spool up, or peak figures.
Although to be honest, in the example above, I think using a Defi boost gauge, and factory REV counter will give an optimistic result, both notoriously over reading.
Mark.
If you read Pats post above, the T is capable of hitting 1.7bar @ 3000rpm on a 2.0lt (vvt heads), although clearly this will vary car to car, and depending on modifications, and 1.7bar @ 3000rpm was a particularly good result.
And amongst other reasons, this is why I favour the T on 2.0lt VVT cars, rather than the H.
Harvey is a stickler for detail, and spends hours on temperature control, and comparing any results should take this into account.
I very much doubt someone using the same turbo, but without all the temperature control, and attention to detail, would get the spool up, or peak figures.
Although to be honest, in the example above, I think using a Defi boost gauge, and factory REV counter will give an optimistic result, both notoriously over reading.
Mark.