MD321H Vs TD05 20G Vs Garrett GT2871R
25 March 2009, 11:04 AM
#182
It saves me time in responding to questions about what I have on there and if it helps people understand/believe what they can produce then great.
Independent mappers that don't sell any of the aforementioned turbos are an interesting point - it is quite easy to see what they think are best by looking at what they run on their own cars.
25 March 2009, 11:11 AM
#184
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
This thread has really lost it's way i feel!
The op started asking what was the best turbo looking at around the 400bhp power mark.
I think one of the first things i said was it is great wanting 400bhp but i feel the MD turbo is quite some money and can he really run the boost he needs to get the 400 on his none forged block.
They i told him to maybe look at the HS380 as it cost £700 less and could do the job he was looking for and that i was having one fitted and would tell him the results.
From then people have been talking about ST420, MD T, T+ and V's what in my book is way of the mark of what the op needs or asked for to start with?
For me im going back to the start and telling the "OP" if he is looking at 400 bhp on his un forged block look a the MD321H (£1600) or HS or ST 380 (£900).
Ash
The op started asking what was the best turbo looking at around the 400bhp power mark.
I think one of the first things i said was it is great wanting 400bhp but i feel the MD turbo is quite some money and can he really run the boost he needs to get the 400 on his none forged block.
They i told him to maybe look at the HS380 as it cost £700 less and could do the job he was looking for and that i was having one fitted and would tell him the results.
From then people have been talking about ST420, MD T, T+ and V's what in my book is way of the mark of what the op needs or asked for to start with?
For me im going back to the start and telling the "OP" if he is looking at 400 bhp on his un forged block look a the MD321H (£1600) or HS or ST 380 (£900).
Ash
25 March 2009, 12:21 PM
#185
Mark.
It is because I am a sticler for detail and accuracy of what I report, that I highlighted my results were on a Defi boost guage and the cars own rev counter when I reported 1 bar, in 4th, on the P1 in question at 3,000-3,050 RPM. I know the Defis tend to over read as does the Subaru Rev Counter. I also take trouble to state the boost at which the power is produced and the fuel in use. All very relevant.
This particular P1 does not have the benefit of hours on temperature control, it is a P1 with an engine built by Scooby Clinic some time ago before the current owner bought the car. It has Hybrid FMIC, 3" exhaust and ported headers and matched up-pipe, one of our custom induction arrangements and a Simtek ECU, just like anyone reading this can buy. There are no hidden extras or hours of temperature control.
This car spools earlier than I expected, is very responsive and pulls well from 2000 rpm in 5th. It may have a higher compression ratio than the other similar cars I have bench marked with similar specs. My own car achieves the same spool at 3,200 rpm and another P1 with almost similar spec is also 3,200 rpm.
Just like Pat said, similar cars, same spec will give different results and this particular P1 gets a prize for fast spool.
This car runs with no NF, has a CAT and at 1.45 bar yesterday, after mapping on the rollers, it produced 378.7 bhp @ 1.45 bar and spool to 1 bar was before 3,050 rpm. in 4th, (150 rpm earlier than 2 other examples above). No temperature control magic malarky.
On my STi 3, graphs at 409.9 bhp earlier, other than lagging the hard pipe to the inlet manifold, that is the only additional form of temperature control on either of the other two cars mentioned.
I am not interested in enhancing results to give a false impression or comparison. I am presenting the information and let whoever is genuinely interested in purchasing make up their own mind. However, I do put a fair bit of effort in to finding what works well and what does not (for my own benefit) so I hope potential purchasers way that up and are not swayed by glossy advertising claims or cult followings. Not talking about turbos in particular, just tuning products in general. Why pay over the odds for something when there is a cost effective alternative? Why buy something that does not enhance performance?
I drive numerous cars every month, some that are worked on and some that are mapping only, Classic and New Age so I get a lot of opportunity to sample various turbos and different specs. The MD321 T has always been a good performer on 2.5 litre cars as I have said on a number of occassions but for me but my experience on 2 litres for the 321T or 321H has never been particularly impressive and quite by accident I find that view is shared by two prominent mappers. I think it is not just about providing a turbo or whatever but marrying the best option to the clients requirements or aspirations (taking into account what he already has) and providing value for money. It follows therefore that the best turbo for one particular application may not be the best option for another and I would far rather tell someone that the product they want to buy from me is not the best option for their job than miss sell something which results in disappointment or dissatisfaction.
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.
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.
This particular P1 does not have the benefit of hours on temperature control, it is a P1 with an engine built by Scooby Clinic some time ago before the current owner bought the car. It has Hybrid FMIC, 3" exhaust and ported headers and matched up-pipe, one of our custom induction arrangements and a Simtek ECU, just like anyone reading this can buy. There are no hidden extras or hours of temperature control.
This car spools earlier than I expected, is very responsive and pulls well from 2000 rpm in 5th. It may have a higher compression ratio than the other similar cars I have bench marked with similar specs. My own car achieves the same spool at 3,200 rpm and another P1 with almost similar spec is also 3,200 rpm.
Just like Pat said, similar cars, same spec will give different results and this particular P1 gets a prize for fast spool.
This car runs with no NF, has a CAT and at 1.45 bar yesterday, after mapping on the rollers, it produced 378.7 bhp @ 1.45 bar and spool to 1 bar was before 3,050 rpm. in 4th, (150 rpm earlier than 2 other examples above). No temperature control magic malarky.
On my STi 3, graphs at 409.9 bhp earlier, other than lagging the hard pipe to the inlet manifold, that is the only additional form of temperature control on either of the other two cars mentioned.
Think about it? Number 1 guy sells the MD, 2 HS, 3 ST and they all say there turbo is the best so what is the out come for us the people looking to spend our hard earn money on one
I drive numerous cars every month, some that are worked on and some that are mapping only, Classic and New Age so I get a lot of opportunity to sample various turbos and different specs. The MD321 T has always been a good performer on 2.5 litre cars as I have said on a number of occassions but for me but my experience on 2 litres for the 321T or 321H has never been particularly impressive and quite by accident I find that view is shared by two prominent mappers. I think it is not just about providing a turbo or whatever but marrying the best option to the clients requirements or aspirations (taking into account what he already has) and providing value for money. It follows therefore that the best turbo for one particular application may not be the best option for another and I would far rather tell someone that the product they want to buy from me is not the best option for their job than miss sell something which results in disappointment or dissatisfaction.
25 March 2009, 01:39 PM
#186
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
This is what i do not understand? Ok Pat did say all car's are not the same but at 1.45 bar that P1 made 378 and at 1.5 bar your car (Harvey) made 409 with a little NF.
I guess the cat has a lot to do with it but that is 30bhp difference!
This buying turbo's and tunning stuff is crazy! I'm sticking to my X5 from now on
I guess the cat has a lot to do with it but that is 30bhp difference!
This buying turbo's and tunning stuff is crazy! I'm sticking to my X5 from now on
25 March 2009, 02:27 PM
#188
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
Yep that to...
All so i was always led to believe that Meth's are a lot stronger then NF?
Area 52 got 411.1 running meths and i got 411.8 all so on the funny stuff both at 1.7bar.
I think im just
Where are them X5 keys
All so i was always led to believe that Meth's are a lot stronger then NF?
Area 52 got 411.1 running meths and i got 411.8 all so on the funny stuff both at 1.7bar.
I think im just
Where are them X5 keys
Last edited by Going 4 400bhp; 25 March 2009 at 02:41 PM.
25 March 2009, 02:35 PM
#189
All the figures I have given are on the same dyno.
The difference in boost is 1.45 to 1.52. I think that is quite a big difference. It depends where each engine is happy. 1.7 mls/litre NF makes a big difference to ignition. This engine did not take a lot of ignition which is why it may have higher compression and why it spooled earlier. I think that "improved fuel" would make a big difference in these circumstances. The CAT makes a difference and the exhaust could also make a difference but the car is in accordance with the owners daily requirements.
I told the owner before we did the work that a similar spec that we had tested at Christmas did 382 bhp and I was expecting around that from his car. I am happy with the 378 figure and on the road the car is very good. I am also very confident that some NF and no CAT and the car will produce over 400 bhp.
The difference in boost is 1.45 to 1.52. I think that is quite a big difference. It depends where each engine is happy. 1.7 mls/litre NF makes a big difference to ignition. This engine did not take a lot of ignition which is why it may have higher compression and why it spooled earlier. I think that "improved fuel" would make a big difference in these circumstances. The CAT makes a difference and the exhaust could also make a difference but the car is in accordance with the owners daily requirements.
I told the owner before we did the work that a similar spec that we had tested at Christmas did 382 bhp and I was expecting around that from his car. I am happy with the 378 figure and on the road the car is very good. I am also very confident that some NF and no CAT and the car will produce over 400 bhp.
Last edited by harvey; 25 March 2009 at 02:39 PM.
25 March 2009, 11:36 PM
#192
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 700+ WR1 aka The Vuvu Zela...10.6 @ 136 weighing 1370kg....say no more....
Posts: 3,734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is what i do not understand? Ok Pat did say all car's are not the same but at 1.45 bar that P1 made 378 and at 1.5 bar your car (Harvey) made 409 with a little NF.
I guess the cat has a lot to do with it but that is 30bhp difference!
This buying turbo's and tunning stuff is crazy! I'm sticking to my X5 from now on
I guess the cat has a lot to do with it but that is 30bhp difference!
This buying turbo's and tunning stuff is crazy! I'm sticking to my X5 from now on
I know exactly where Pat's email is coming from. An example of this is my new age v8 Sti on std internals running on V POwer only and still producing a just over 400 bhp. Pat knows my car and was the one who mapped it. Spool up is pretty good and mid range is an animal.
26 March 2009, 01:11 AM
#195
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
Ash -
I know exactly where Pat's email is coming from. An example of this is my new age v8 Sti on std internals running on V POwer only and still producing a just over 400 bhp. Pat knows my car and was the one who mapped it. Spool up is pretty good and mid range is an animal.
I know exactly where Pat's email is coming from. An example of this is my new age v8 Sti on std internals running on V POwer only and still producing a just over 400 bhp. Pat knows my car and was the one who mapped it. Spool up is pretty good and mid range is an animal.
26 March 2009, 02:02 AM
#196
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: MY 10s blobeye 10.87@132 2.35/TO4Z next
Posts: 1,447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ash -
I know exactly where Pat's email is coming from. An example of this is my new age v8 Sti on std internals running on V POwer only and still producing a just over 400 bhp. Pat knows my car and was the one who mapped it. Spool up is pretty good and mid range is an animal.
I know exactly where Pat's email is coming from. An example of this is my new age v8 Sti on std internals running on V POwer only and still producing a just over 400 bhp. Pat knows my car and was the one who mapped it. Spool up is pretty good and mid range is an animal.
What turbo is it or is it the mapping that is really good?
26 March 2009, 01:35 PM
#198
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 700+ WR1 aka The Vuvu Zela...10.6 @ 136 weighing 1370kg....say no more....
Posts: 3,734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Banny said - see above and running as you know on the mighty Solaris ECU! 
. Sadly the turbo is coming off very soon to be replaced by......
Close m8.
Indicates two runs on the rollers. Inner red lines is without 3 bar map sensor, and outer blue line is with 3 bar map sensor. What Pat wrote was brill as usual and I was trying to give you an example of actual graph figs. Also the fact that you can achieve a decent power without going down the road of using additives
Hi Fai -
Trust me, it is an absolute animal of a 2 ltr block scoob for a 400 power level car - both Pat and Charlie at Surrey Rolling Road will tell you this (Charlie has actually driven it). Pick up is bloody quick but its the mid-range and how it keeps on pulling (graphs back this up) which really destroys others in the same power catergory.
Haven't yet got her on the 1/4 mile with current power level so would be interesting to see what I can get out of her from a time perspective especially when I use the mild ALS and Launch Control!
To answer your question re whether it is the turbo or not? I personally believe it's a combination of:
* Overall set up of the car including Induction kit
* Engine management system which is driven by Solaris S6 (to update by Pat)
* Mapping by Pat in terms of power delivery
* Good engine block
* Turbo which works with all of the above
I know people rave on about a turbo and how big it is but if the other components are not right then I guess you're not going to get the most out of that turbo's capability as we have seen on many an occassions on the drag strip? i.e. GT Hammers car must have a decent set up seeing the recent times he's been achieving both on the 30-130, top end and 1/4 mile.
Jag
. Sadly the turbo is coming off very soon to be replaced by...... Close m8.
Indicates two runs on the rollers. Inner red lines is without 3 bar map sensor, and outer blue line is with 3 bar map sensor. What Pat wrote was brill as usual and I was trying to give you an example of actual graph figs. Also the fact that you can achieve a decent power without going down the road of using additives
Trust me, it is an absolute animal of a 2 ltr block scoob for a 400 power level car - both Pat and Charlie at Surrey Rolling Road will tell you this (Charlie has actually driven it). Pick up is bloody quick but its the mid-range and how it keeps on pulling (graphs back this up) which really destroys others in the same power catergory.
Haven't yet got her on the 1/4 mile with current power level so would be interesting to see what I can get out of her from a time perspective especially when I use the mild ALS and Launch Control!
To answer your question re whether it is the turbo or not? I personally believe it's a combination of:
* Overall set up of the car including Induction kit
* Engine management system which is driven by Solaris S6 (to update by Pat)
* Mapping by Pat in terms of power delivery
* Good engine block
* Turbo which works with all of the above
I know people rave on about a turbo and how big it is but if the other components are not right then I guess you're not going to get the most out of that turbo's capability as we have seen on many an occassions on the drag strip? i.e. GT Hammers car must have a decent set up seeing the recent times he's been achieving both on the 30-130, top end and 1/4 mile.
Jag
Last edited by JP4; 26 March 2009 at 02:10 PM.
26 March 2009, 09:35 PM
#203
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
Mark.
It is because I am a sticler for detail and accuracy of what I report, that I highlighted my results were on a Defi boost guage and the cars own rev counter when I reported 1 bar, in 4th, on the P1 in question at 3,000-3,050 RPM.
I know the Defis tend to over read as does the Subaru Rev Counter.
It is because I am a sticler for detail and accuracy of what I report, that I highlighted my results were on a Defi boost guage and the cars own rev counter when I reported 1 bar, in 4th, on the P1 in question at 3,000-3,050 RPM.
I know the Defis tend to over read as does the Subaru Rev Counter.
I appreciate You know the Defi gauges over read, but some people won't, and however unintentional, to Them the figures could be misleading, and that's why I made the point.
The MD321 T has always been a good performer on 2.5 litre cars as I have said on a number of occassions but for me but my experience on 2 litres for the 321T or 321H has never been particularly impressive and quite by accident I find that view is shared by two prominent mappers.
I have no idea what experience, you, or your "prominent" mappers have had with the MD321 turbos. Very few experiences of T's on 2.0lt NON VVT cars, because I don't recommend it, and would deter customers not aiming for 450bhp.
As for the T on a 2.0lt STi with VVT heads, well it was after Andy Forrest mapped a car, and got some very impressive results, that I started to recommend the MD321T for these cars ! Other mappers get similarly impressive results !
And as for the MD321H on a NON VVT 2.0lt, well I guess different mappers will get different results. I've always valued the opinions of "prominent" mappers such as Simon (Jolly Green Monster), Pat, and Bob Rawle, who raves about the spool up, throttle response, & performance of the MD321H.
As discussed in this thread, there will always be exceptions to the rule, but one has to start with the combination of parts that consistently give excellent results !
Mark.
28 March 2009, 02:14 PM
#204
Mark,
We don't speak very often and you have obviously forgotten that after you PM'd me on a separate matter, I telephoned you and we had a discussion. I told you just how laggy a 321T on a New Age 2 litre with VVT had been just the previuos week. I also said this had been my experience on others in complete contrast to the same turbo on a 2.5 litre which was always imprezzive. This particular turbo was fitted by Andy Kinden and came to us a few days afterwards for mapping by Bob Rawle. I expect you will remember this now. From memory it was 1 bar at 4000 rpm but as the car will be back here very soon I can get the exact figure.
At least we agree on 2.5s and different cars with the same spec can produce different results but I am quite clear about my findings and the subsequent comments that surprised me relating to 321s on 2 litres, both Classic and New Age.
I agree and that is why I also put up graphs or send typical graphs to potential purchasers. These graphs are not the exception but what can reasonably be expected with a very similar spec and mapping. In the case above, after mapping the turbo was making 1 bar before 3050 rpm which is 150 rpm earlier than other typical examples.
Just another case of different car, different results I guess.
We don't speak very often and you have obviously forgotten that after you PM'd me on a separate matter, I telephoned you and we had a discussion. I told you just how laggy a 321T on a New Age 2 litre with VVT had been just the previuos week. I also said this had been my experience on others in complete contrast to the same turbo on a 2.5 litre which was always imprezzive. This particular turbo was fitted by Andy Kinden and came to us a few days afterwards for mapping by Bob Rawle. I expect you will remember this now. From memory it was 1 bar at 4000 rpm but as the car will be back here very soon I can get the exact figure.
At least we agree on 2.5s and different cars with the same spec can produce different results but I am quite clear about my findings and the subsequent comments that surprised me relating to 321s on 2 litres, both Classic and New Age.
I appreciate You know the Defi gauges over read, but some people won't, and however unintentional, to Them the figures could be misleading, and that's why I made the point.
Just another case of different car, different results I guess.
28 March 2009, 02:21 PM
#205
I've been reading this thread with much interest
[/QUOTE]
JP that is some serious graph you have !
Spool Up amazing
Torque unbelievable
overall must be an animal
has seriously got me thinking i'm looking for a new turbo for my classic and was thinking of going down the MD route but seems a bit common place to be honest i like something thats different.
what are your opinions on fitting one of these animals to mine ?
any other opinions ?
[/QUOTE] JP that is some serious graph you have !Spool Up
amazingTorque
unbelievableoverall
must be an animalhas seriously got me thinking i'm looking for a new turbo for my classic and was thinking of going down the MD route but seems a bit common place to be honest i like something thats different.
what are your opinions on fitting one of these animals to mine ?
any other opinions ?
28 March 2009, 03:35 PM
#206
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
Harvey,
I do recall our conversation, and I also had a conversation with Bob Rawle at the time, because he was shocked at the result. He even asked if the turbo could be a different spec'.
But that particular result of 1 bar @ 4000rpm on a T, is so far from the norm, with, or without VVT heads, that Bob considered something else was going on.
I'm really interested to know how you get on, so please let me know.
Mark.
I do recall our conversation, and I also had a conversation with Bob Rawle at the time, because he was shocked at the result. He even asked if the turbo could be a different spec'.
But that particular result of 1 bar @ 4000rpm on a T, is so far from the norm, with, or without VVT heads, that Bob considered something else was going on.
I'm really interested to know how you get on, so please let me know.
Mark.
28 March 2009, 04:10 PM
#207
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 700+ WR1 aka The Vuvu Zela...10.6 @ 136 weighing 1370kg....say no more....
Posts: 3,734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been reading this thread with much interest
JP that is some serious graph you have !
Spool Up amazing
Torque unbelievable
overall must be an animal
has seriously got me thinking i'm looking for a new turbo for my classic and was thinking of going down the MD route but seems a bit common place to be honest i like something thats different.
what are your opinions on fitting one of these animals to mine ?
any other opinions ?
JP that is some serious graph you have !Spool Up
amazingTorque
unbelievableoverall
must be an animalhas seriously got me thinking i'm looking for a new turbo for my classic and was thinking of going down the MD route but seems a bit common place to be honest i like something thats different.
what are your opinions on fitting one of these animals to mine ?
any other opinions ?
It is a pretty quick scoob I must admit. However, I don't believe it's down to my turbo but the whole set up and mapping of the car (most important!). As this thread is not about my car nor my turbo, I will PM you separately on my opinions.
That said I would approach Mark at Lateral P for proper advice/recommendations.
Last edited by JP4; 28 March 2009 at 04:14 PM.
