litchfield twin scroll turbo
about litchfield turbo.
06 April 2010, 02:00 PM
#454
Scooby Regular
Thanks for all the info Shaun !
I think all the Cosworth gaskets have the "stopper" ring. But as Alan has built more engines than I have had hot dinners (although I think that may be a close call as you dont get to be my shape by turning down hot dinners
) he will chose the best parts for the job. The objective of this engine is to make it reliable so compromises will be involved - so it may not have the CR that gives the ultimate in response, or the peak/held boost that would give max output.
I would be delighted to achieve similar output to Tim's fabulous results - but I believe my heads are different to Tims and may not flow as well.
I think all the Cosworth gaskets have the "stopper" ring. But as Alan has built more engines than I have had hot dinners (although I think that may be a close call as you dont get to be my shape by turning down hot dinners
) he will chose the best parts for the job. The objective of this engine is to make it reliable so compromises will be involved - so it may not have the CR that gives the ultimate in response, or the peak/held boost that would give max output.I would be delighted to achieve similar output to Tim's fabulous results - but I believe my heads are different to Tims and may not flow as well.
I totally agree with you on the reliability front.
The remit of any work on my car has always been to: a)ensure the car remains reliable as possible for the purpose of, b)that it can take the punishment on track. By on large the car has been very reliable, albeit having the HG's let go after 9k miles, but under the conditions that the engine had been subjected to, it was hardly surprising in reality.
It was not too long ago that people thought I wouldn't even make 500bhp on a standard fit turbo and VPower and that the engine would grenade itself within a very short period of time...... how things have changed and been proven wrong.
As you suggest, there is no point in pushing for maximum output and this is certainly something that moving to higher compression has helped me to achieve.
The low boost is 1.5bar peak and circa 1.4bar at peak power (485bhp).
As you say, Engine Tuner has built plenty of similar configurations and I am sure they will do you a good service.
Above all enjoy the car and engine.
06 April 2010, 09:11 PM
#458
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: www.Litchfieldimports.co.uk
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark, The original T25 had a hybrid garrett core as shaun says. One of the reasons we developed the new housings was because of the problems we had with the standard Subaru exhaust TS housings warping etc when running high egts.
If you want to upgrade or revert back to a VF36/7 just let me know
Regards
Iain
If you want to upgrade or revert back to a VF36/7 just let me know
Regards
Iain
13 April 2010, 01:07 AM
#462
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Swapped the car back to my mildy-ported OEM twinscroll headers and up-pipe today at S4U, followed by 3 hours of Simon-magic on the rollers and road, including setting up the "megarom".
Mapped for 1.7bar peak, holding 1.6bar.
470bhp@6500rpm, 460ftlb@4300rpm, >385ftlb from 3900rpm to 6300rpm. Spool on the road 1 bar at 2800, 1.6 bar 3200rpm (RR plot spools 800 rpm later, in 4th rather than 6th of course).
Still on the OEM ECU and with a centre cat
The drive is incredibly smooth and exactly the punchy, fast spooling drive I'd expected.
We got there!!!! At long last.
Also got a low boost map (1.3 bar) but not tried that yet
BIG BIG BIG thanks to Simon for his unerring patience in sorting this and mapping it again and again until it was right, and to Len for test piloting, as well as working with me on the issues.
I'm a very happy Easter bunny
Mapped for 1.7bar peak, holding 1.6bar.
470bhp@6500rpm, 460ftlb@4300rpm, >385ftlb from 3900rpm to 6300rpm. Spool on the road 1 bar at 2800, 1.6 bar 3200rpm (RR plot spools 800 rpm later, in 4th rather than 6th of course).
Still on the OEM ECU and with a centre cat
The drive is incredibly smooth and exactly the punchy, fast spooling drive I'd expected.
We got there!!!! At long last.
Also got a low boost map (1.3 bar) but not tried that yet
BIG BIG BIG thanks to Simon for his unerring patience in sorting this and mapping it again and again until it was right, and to Len for test piloting, as well as working with me on the issues.
I'm a very happy Easter bunny
Just curious if you could provide a little clarification about the spool characteristics of this setup. I'm in the US so there's been some differences in common tuning methods. You say "1.6 bar 3200rpm (RR plot spools 800 rpm later, in 4th rather than 6th of course)."
I was just confused what this means. I don't know what RR plots are. What gear did you get 3200 rpms for 1.6 bar? Was that in 6th gear and you're saying in 4th it's 4000rpm? Just trying to compare to some of the other setups I've seen without twinscroll. I tried emailing Litchfield but I never recieved a reply back. I don't know if thats because they're busy or maybe they have multiple emails or what. I was basically trying to get some graphs of the 450 and 480 models on a 2.5 liter motor to see the spool characteristics. Also I read your journal and stuff and saw you have mahle pistons, spec c heads, and some porting so those would affect spool as well. What is your compression ratio?
Last edited by kakarot09; 13 April 2010 at 01:23 AM.
13 April 2010, 09:29 AM
#463
On the road, with a greater load on the engine in 6th gear, the spool point is markedly lower. This is normal as I understand it.
Just trying to compare to some of the other setups I've seen without twinscroll. I tried emailing Litchfield but I never recieved a reply back. I don't know if thats because they're busy or maybe they have multiple emails or what. I was basically trying to get some graphs of the 450 and 480 models on a 2.5 liter motor to see the spool characteristics.
Some results from an LM450 were posted earlier in this thread I think, but that was possibly on a 2.0l not a 2.5l
.Somewhere around 8.5 I believe.
HTH
13 April 2010, 12:31 PM
#464
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: www.Litchfieldimports.co.uk
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kakarot try emailing again as I could not find any record of your email. Might be deleted from our spam filter.
More than happy to run through any questions you have
Iain
More than happy to run through any questions you have
Iain
14 April 2010, 07:28 AM
#465
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks a lot Tim you were very helpful I think I may have had some unrealistic goals about the turbo I want lol. I guess we'll see when Iain emails me back, hopefully I'm pleasantly surprised.
Iain
I emailed you from a different email this time. Also I Forgot to ask you how you think boost threshold would compare on your test car vs my stock USDM 2005 sti engine.
Thanks in advance.
I think I may have had some unrealistic goals about the turbo I want lol. I guess we'll see when Iain emails me back, hopefully I'm pleasantly surprised. I emailed you from a different email this time. Also I Forgot to ask you how you think boost threshold would compare on your test car vs my stock USDM 2005 sti engine.
Thanks in advance.
Last edited by kakarot09; 14 April 2010 at 07:39 AM.
14 April 2010, 07:39 AM
#466
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FYI - these turbos are physically quite large and fitting them necessitates a bit of chopping about. For example, you will probably have to grind away some of the bell housing.
These are probably not something you want to try fitting at home unless you have your own machine shop!
These are probably not something you want to try fitting at home unless you have your own machine shop!
Iain I know the turbo that Tim got has the larger housing compared to the LM450L60. Would the smaller housing still necessitate grinding the bell housing? Or anything else for that matter? Or would this be strictly install without machining.
Last edited by kakarot09; 14 April 2010 at 07:41 AM.
14 April 2010, 09:59 AM
#467
I left the chopping about to the specialist who installed the turbo/FMIC etc. I know they had to grind away some of the bell housing, and it took them a little while to get it to fit properly, but more than that I don't know I'm afraid.
I know someone who had an LM420 fitted, and I'm pretty sure that car need some grinding too.
Parallel fuel rail. The standard setup feeds fuel via sequential pipes feeding one injector after the other. The parallel mod feeds fuel to all 4 independently. You can buy kits or I think you can make it up yourself with appropriate fuel line - trying searching on here as I imagine there will be posts from folk who've done it: I left this to my installer too
I know someone who had an LM420 fitted, and I'm pretty sure that car need some grinding too.
Parallel fuel rail. The standard setup feeds fuel via sequential pipes feeding one injector after the other. The parallel mod feeds fuel to all 4 independently. You can buy kits or I think you can make it up yourself with appropriate fuel line - trying searching on here as I imagine there will be posts from folk who've done it: I left this to my installer too
14 April 2010, 10:16 AM
#468
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for helping out Tim
Iain
Is this the case for all of them then?
I know someone who had an LM420 fitted, and I'm pretty sure that car need some grinding too.
Is this the case for all of them then?
14 April 2010, 07:04 PM
#469
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: www.Litchfieldimports.co.uk
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kakarot, I have replied to your email
All the housings have the same external dimensions so will need a bit of grinding work to get a perfect fit. It can also vary slightly from car to car. It should be no problem for most installing garages.
All the housings have the same external dimensions so will need a bit of grinding work to get a perfect fit. It can also vary slightly from car to car. It should be no problem for most installing garages.
20 April 2010, 01:17 PM
#471
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: MY99UK-MY02STi-MY99Type R-MY06 T20-MY11 340R-MY05 TYPE25
Posts: 11,468
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
My car seems slow nowadays 
it not just me 
On acceleration it doesn't make my wife throw up as much now 
I need to get some more horses or she will never keep her weight down
Tony
it not just me On acceleration it doesn't make my wife throw up as much now I need to get some more horses or she will never keep her weight down
Tony
18 May 2010, 06:13 PM
#472
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi guys,
I have few question to ask about this litchfield LM450-S60 turbo as I'm very interest about it. And I'm currently owned a 2.0ltr Version 9 STI.
And the question are:
1) Can 450bhp achievable by using back standard STI TMIC ?(together with other supporting mods)
2) How many bar needed to produce 450bhp ? 1.5 ? or 1.6?...
Currently I have installed de-cat downpipe, cat-back exhaust, fuel pump, fpr, and also aps CAI...so my next step is bigger injector, turbo inlet hose(APS), and a tune to play with the turbo, am I correct ? I will retain my standard TMIC, if possible.
I have few question to ask about this litchfield LM450-S60 turbo as I'm very interest about it. And I'm currently owned a 2.0ltr Version 9 STI.
And the question are:
1) Can 450bhp achievable by using back standard STI TMIC ?(together with other supporting mods)
2) How many bar needed to produce 450bhp ? 1.5 ? or 1.6?...
Currently I have installed de-cat downpipe, cat-back exhaust, fuel pump, fpr, and also aps CAI...so my next step is bigger injector, turbo inlet hose(APS), and a tune to play with the turbo, am I correct ? I will retain my standard TMIC, if possible.
19 May 2010, 08:06 AM
#474
If you fit an air charge temperature guage, cost £82.50 inclusive of postage, Paypal to harveysmith1@btopenworld.com you can monitor your air charge temperatures and decide for yourself if your top mount is up to it. Fitting a front mount will gain you power at your level just for a start because the charge temperatures will be that much lower. When I went from STi top mount to Hybrid front mount I went from 392 bhp to 401 bhp without a remap and 410 bhp after remap.
19 May 2010, 10:57 AM
#475
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So probably get a bigger tmic or fmic is the best choice in order to reach the power. But, how many boost i need to produce roughly 450hp? Since standard internal I believe 1.5 bar is the safety zone. Btw, how much is the final price for the turbo(include VAT and shipping fee), cause I'm located Malaysia. And is there any additional part I need to buy or the price are include all neccesary part like oil line or etc.
19 May 2010, 11:18 AM
#476
Take a look at the Litchfield website as all the prices and options are on there...it does not come as standard with all the oil pipes etc 
19 May 2010, 12:40 PM
#477
Scooby Regular
IMO it is also down to intended use, turbo spec and boost.
Whilst I agree that from certain levels a FMIC will be better, you only have to look at the results that people like AndyF have achieved with a STi TMIC.
Also be careful (at certain levels) comparing the output benefit from a TMIC vs FMIC on a dyno. Dyno's will normally favour a front mount, whereas on the road the airflow will be a lot more for the TMIC boys.
As Harvey has suggested..... you really need to test / measure.
Whilst I agree that from certain levels a FMIC will be better, you only have to look at the results that people like AndyF have achieved with a STi TMIC.
Also be careful (at certain levels) comparing the output benefit from a TMIC vs FMIC on a dyno. Dyno's will normally favour a front mount, whereas on the road the airflow will be a lot more for the TMIC boys.
As Harvey has suggested..... you really need to test / measure.
19 May 2010, 05:40 PM
#478
i think you would need a fmic and a full 3inch straight thru zorst to achieve the 450....im sure another member achieved that with supporting mods...
mine made approx 415 on the road and thats with tmic and a zorst which tapers to 2.5....nice bit of kit though...
mine made approx 415 on the road and thats with tmic and a zorst which tapers to 2.5....nice bit of kit though...
20 May 2010, 07:27 AM
#479
Shaun :
Unless you are restricting your car to quarter mile running looking at what AFP have achieved is not relevant. Andy was unable to go for top speed runs with his top mount because it was not adequate for more than a 10 second burst. For road use, beyond a certain power level the FMIC is the obvious choice and if the temperatures are monitored before and after fitment of an efficient front mount any doubts as to the advantages of the front mount will soon be dispelled.
I normally agree with what you say but this bit is bollocks.
If the rolling road set up is done properly, as it is done at TEG Sport for instance, it makes absolutely no difference if you have a TMIC or FMIC. In the case of the TMIC there is a dedicated feed to the bonnet scoop which is sealed so the TMIC gets adequate air flow plus the normal frontal blast from the huge, fixed main fan.
The important thing to realise regardless of top mount or front mount is that for every 4 deg C change in temperature there is approximately a 1% power change. I havn't come up with these figures, somebody far cleverer than me has but over several years on forced induction petrol engines and not just Subaru that formula has proven accurate. So if you are running 392 bhp on a TMIC and then run 23 C on an FMIC expect a 5% power gain. 5% x 392 = 411.6 bhp. Actual = 410. The engine is not interested whether the air comes from a top mount or front mount, it wants the coolest air it can reasonably get and beyond a certain level the front mount is a no brainer.
Whilst I agree that from certain levels a FMIC will be better, you only have to look at the results that people like AndyF have achieved with a STi TMIC.
I normally agree with what you say but this bit is bollocks.
Also be careful (at certain levels) comparing the output benefit from a TMIC vs FMIC on a dyno. Dyno's will normally favour a front mount, whereas on the road the airflow will be a lot more for the TMIC boys.
The important thing to realise regardless of top mount or front mount is that for every 4 deg C change in temperature there is approximately a 1% power change. I havn't come up with these figures, somebody far cleverer than me has but over several years on forced induction petrol engines and not just Subaru that formula has proven accurate. So if you are running 392 bhp on a TMIC and then run 23 C on an FMIC expect a 5% power gain. 5% x 392 = 411.6 bhp. Actual = 410. The engine is not interested whether the air comes from a top mount or front mount, it wants the coolest air it can reasonably get and beyond a certain level the front mount is a no brainer.
20 May 2010, 08:23 AM
#480
Scooby Regular
Harvey,
I was referring to AndyF's Spec C which is used as a daily driver (so I believe) and he ran at last years ScoobySprint Championship. Depending on Turbo in at the time, he runs anywhere from 400 - 480bhp iirc.
Me talk "bollocks"
.... I understand what you are saying (PowerStation set-up is the same as regards to appropriate airfeeds), but I would rather see a power comparison with just the TMIC vs FMIC swap from something like "Road Dyno", as I feel the environment can be artificial to an extent in a dyno cell (regarding heat buildup).
I have not done any of these tests back to back myself and as you know, I don't believe much in life until I have tested it.
It would be good to complete road dyno runs for 350, 400 & 420 with and without TMIC/FMIC to see the differences.
I was referring to AndyF's Spec C which is used as a daily driver (so I believe) and he ran at last years ScoobySprint Championship. Depending on Turbo in at the time, he runs anywhere from 400 - 480bhp iirc.
Me talk "bollocks"
.... I understand what you are saying (PowerStation set-up is the same as regards to appropriate airfeeds), but I would rather see a power comparison with just the TMIC vs FMIC swap from something like "Road Dyno", as I feel the environment can be artificial to an extent in a dyno cell (regarding heat buildup). I have not done any of these tests back to back myself and as you know, I don't believe much in life until I have tested it.
It would be good to complete road dyno runs for 350, 400 & 420 with and without TMIC/FMIC to see the differences.