johnny_0

Hi,

My tuner has setted the sard 800cc injectors perfectly with a idle of 670/690 rpm (so like stock conf.). Thks for your advices Iain & Simon.

The base map comes from a stock RA-R. For now we have not changed the inj. timing, or other values. The temperature was 30°c so very hot. max boost was 1.4bar because we used the stock ra solenoid. The next time we will fit a pro-drive solenoid or a blitz boost controller for raise the pressure to 1.6->1.7.

In 5th gear (1.4bar peak)

Power was 380ps at 6.900 rpm max torque 46kgm at 4100 rpm.

I think it is a good starting point. What do you think?

thks

Carlo

Shaun

Your post is slightly unclear....

What has been changed on the base RA-r map? Fueling, ignition and boost? Your post suggests only the fueling.

What is boost at peak power?

I would of expected higher torque than that, even at only 1.4bar.

johnny_0

Actually all details are in the pc of my tuner and i have no the dyno sheet. So i cant reply for now. He said me that only few parameters has been changed for this first run (i have not the list what he changed). The only additional info that i know is that the boost at 7900 rpm was 1.2bar.

Then keep in mind that it is only a first run. The tuner did not insist because we have change the solenoid before and his goal was to set the sard injectors.

johnfelstead

why would you fit a blitz boost controller when you can remap the stock ECU to give you all the boost control you need?

How is your tuner remapping this car?

johnny_0

Because i want to set different boost pressure level. I dont want to use my car only with high boost. So i prefer to fit a stand alone boost controller and so i can select 3 pressure (1.3 - 1.5 - 1.8). The same thing i did with my 650ps bnr34

Perhaps it was not understood the sense of my post. It 's a very rough map; were adjusted only fuel parameters.

The mapping on the road then on dyno, when it was free, for check the power; so 380ps at 6900rpm and torque of 46kgm at about 4000/4100 rpm (1.4 bar, 5th gear and with 30°c of temperature). Like wrote the goal of this first map was to set well the sard injectors.

We did 3 run on dyno (a german maha dyno) and the values (power/torque) were costant on each run.

johnfelstead

You can run 2 different maps in the stock ECU switchable via the heated rear window button. The stock ECU gives you some very sophisticated boost control functions, so dont discount what it can do compared to running with an external controler.

scatty

iTrader: (1)

changing the subject slightly. has anyone with a lm450 had one billeted yet???

just weighing up the options as to is it worth it and is there a noticable difference????

thanks

Cannon Fodder

iTrader: (100)

My Spec C has now had it's LM400 Billet (bought from T5YNW) fitted and I'm taking it on Tuesday to Bob Rawle for a Simtek install and mapping session.

My engine and ancillary specs are as below:

Mahle Power Pack Plus 2618 Forged Pistons
Manley Sport Compact Forged Connecting Rods
Cometic Uprated Head Gaskets
ARP 11mm Head Stud Conversion
RCM Water Pump
Uprated Thermostat
Milltek 3" Exhaust System With Sports CAT
Cosworth Kevlar Timing Belt
RCM 12mm Uprated Oil Pump
Samco Connecting Hose To Induction Kit
Samco Turbo Inlet Hose
APS DR525 Front Mount Intercooler
APS Dual BOV
APS Cold Air Induction
Perrin Catch Can
Mocal/Setrab Competition Oil Cooler
Advanced Automotive Phenolic Manifold Spacers
Carl Davey Header Tank Spacers
Cold Air Feed To Induction Kit
CDF Racing Lightweight Pulley Set
NGK PFR7B Spark Plugs
650cc Flow Matched Injectors
3 Port Boost Solenoid

So anyone like to hazard a guess at the BHP/torque?

DoZZa

iTrader: (4)

Lots!!!

andythejock01wrx

Sounds awesome mate. Enjoy!

TimH

iTrader: (11)

Hmmm, it's an LM400, but on a well put together build...so I'll say 415bhp and 390ftlbs on a decent dyno

Toffee

iTrader: (3)

Here are the results from my rolling road run today >

Car spec
06 Spec C (standard engine internals)
LM420 S60
800cc injectors
FMIC & CAIK

417.7bhp / 406.3ft lbs

I aint no expert so (educated ) thoughts on what you see would be appreciated, the chap who carried out the dyno run did state the car has been mapped safely, I think he said its running slightly rich & the AFR @ 0.7 is very safe, and to be honest I am happy with this. The car is used every day so reliability is necessary

Lee.

johnfelstead

All engines vary as to what AFR is the best, yours is on the rich end of the scale, mine runs at around 11.3:1 on full load.

The setup is obviously laggier than stock, looks like you need it up above 4Krpm to really work, but it also makes the power higher up the revs when the stock setup would be strangled. So it looks like a nice setup as long as you are prepared to use 1000rpm more than on a stock setup.

Toffee

iTrader: (3)

Another chap (AndrewC) also mention the AFR as you have and made the same comment, he did add though that on the road it may be slightly better

Its been that long ago since it was stock I cant remember how it ran, from looking at the graph it does seem to kick in around 3800rpm, but I suppose its about balance, what you lose low down you get in higher hp & torque. To me it does not feel laggy when driving it, but I suppose I must have got use to driving like this, however the power I have gained IMO is a worth while trade off (This set-up was good enough to allow me to run near the front in club class @ Oulton and still is a daily driver )

I was suprised by the "low" bhp reading, when I first had the car mapped (18 months ago) it made 420bhp / 348 ft lbs, I thought it felt so much more powerful (since Richard mapped it) that this would show up on the bhp, to my surprise the bhp is virtually the same but its the torque that has shown a huge increase, you learn something new every day

The reason for getting the car on the rollers was to get this info, I am looking at going 2.1L and wanted to know where the car makes its power now, I am hoping to have the power starting in the same area (no later) but hopefully alot more torque and hp to go with it. Careful thought will be needed chosing a turbo to suit a 2.1L set-up

Cheers,
Lee.

johnfelstead

It depends on the use as to which turbo works for you. I think for a road car a 2.1 with your current setup would be superb, if you want more top end power on a 2.1 you would need to go bigger turbo.

As an example my own car is now a 2.1, but still retaining the stock externals, so running a VF37. this produces 400lbft @ 3550rpm and still has over 340lbft @ 5000rpm, the turbo cant flow enough air to produce top end power like yours, so only has 354BHP @ 5900rpm.

So going 2.1 for me gained very little in power, but brought the torque in earlier, which is what really matters if you want an easy to drive and very quick road car.

It's all about choosing the compromises you want to make based on the funds you have available.

Toffee

iTrader: (3)

Huge thanks for the feedback John it hadnt even occured to me to stay with the same externals The last map that Richard did on my car when I had the FMIC installed he did mention to go any further from here my MAF sensor is now maxed out, it will be time to go for an ECU upgrade. I have also spoken to Ian Litchfield recently and he advised my turbo can be altered to either of the LM450, 480 or 500 S60 models, that with the 2.1 should be nice

To be honest my motivation for going 2.1L is my Time Attack result in April, I ended up 0.033 off 3rd place but from the data I can see I was giving away up to 15mph down the straights! I am hoping to close this gap by having more power (torque or bhp?) for next years Oulton & Cadwell rounds.

Sorry for going off on a tangent > Great turbo though, for me its a great compromise between street use and track use

wrx9181

iTrader: (2)

Not trying to be funny but.........
Why isn't this in traders section ???

DoZZa

iTrader: (4)

Have you seen how old this thread is?!

TimH

iTrader: (11)

And the trader in question doesn't really come on here any more

Cannon Fodder

iTrader: (100)

I'm hoping it all makes for a very good road car, I 'downsized' to an LM400 as I was going for an SC46. I'm hoping I've made the right choice in terms of going for a quicker spooling turbo over a higher output turbo in terms of road ability.

One way or the other I'll find out on Tuesday. Will it be or ?

And I hope Tim is bang on the money.

scatty

iTrader: (1)

i dont think you will be dissapointed......

Shaun

Lee,
Has Richard always mapped the car as you state since Richard mapped it as opposed to "re-mapped" it? Where did you get the previous run done.... same rollers?

Are you sure Richard said the MAF is maxed out as I ran a lot more power than you (circa 480bhp) on my previous Spec C, prior to changing to a MAP based ECU. It required the MAF to be rescaled to get the next "hit" out of it.

I'm not surprised with your current figures to be honest, based on what I know of the spec of the turbo you have. You have 20bhp more than my LM400 (which is right) and a good chunk of extra torque. However, comparing different rolling roads (mine was done on a MAHA) is always dangerous though.

Based on my test drive of a LM450 equipped car (non Billet), I would suggest that turbo would be the obvious choice on a 2.1ltr. It went well enough on a 2ltr and based on how much "extra" John has received on his 2.1ltr even with the VF, I would of thought the same would be transposed over to the LM450 response / torque on the bigger capacity.

Cannon Fodder,
Depending on your expectations, I would suggest you will be suitably impressed with the Billet LM400. If I wasn't the kind of person I surely am.... I would not have any quarms with keeping the Billet LM400 as it does exactly what it says for a road car. It's a great turbo for this level of power. Couple that with the fact that all I worry about is how much petrol I have left..... it's perfect for the OE 2ltr (I know yours isn't) as a turn key level of modification. In that way it's a far cry from running a highly modded 2.5.

Jolly Green Monster

iTrader: (4)

will obviously depend on the size of the maf tube / induction used as you maxxing it at certain power output.. if it is close to max then this maybe why richard left it slightly richer than perhaps it could be, but also we are assuming the wideband on the dyno read correct and also every car is different.. it might make more power richer, always good to play and see on cars.. certainly bang on the money for an lm420

Simon

juggers

iTrader: (1)

JGM how do you compare these turbos to the SC46 you've mapped a few of each?

Toffee

iTrader: (3)

Shaun, (Simon)

No I originally had the car mapped by a local chap who fitted the Litchfield turbo & parts, not known as a mapper though, took the car to a RR @ Pro Sport and it achieved 420bhp/348ft lbs, spot on bhp but I thought (and was advised) that the torque was low? So took the car to Richard and he then re-mapped the car > never got RR results after this though but it was a lot better. I have since had a Perrin FMIC and cold air feed fitted to the already installed RCM cone, Richard has tweeked the map again, so now I have been up to John Clarkson Autos and had the car on the rollers again > 417.7bhp/406.3ft lbs. This chaps rollers have a great reputation locally for being consistent and spot on. He’s not a Subaru chap and has no vested interest in giving higher or lower read outs

Nope I am not certain what Richard said about the MAF, it was at the end of another fairly long day, I thought the point he was making is that the MAF would need to be removed for any further power to be achieved and replaced by an aftermarket ECU? But I could easily of miss understood this.

I have spoken to Ian Litchfield about getting my turbo altered to a different spec, possibly 450, 480 or even the 500? Need a lot more thought on this yet though.

As far as road driving goes I am really happy with the power and set up I have now, but as always (and I aint the first) I would like more!! However seeing all these comments about cars over 500hp not being reliable does not fill me with confidence, we will see what happens.

Cheers,
Lee

Ilya

went on to the rollers after the install and remap with lm400 billet and was very surprised and disappointed at the same time, 338 hp I will go on to other dyno tomorrow to check again, but my friends stock RA with VF36 on the same dyno showed decent results, which are shown on the second graph, me thinks the guy who tuned me did a poor job or something the funny thing is that my butt feeling says the car is much faster than before, so very confused at the moment

Shaun

Something certainly seems "weird" with the power figures.

That is around 333bhp as the dyno has read in PS not BHP. Not that it changes anything in reality.... figures are still massively low for what the turbo can produce.

That certainly needs further investigation as you suggest.

What boost is it running?

TimH

iTrader: (11)

FWIW, my LM480 dropped 40bhp after going billet, but don't as yet know whether it's the turbo or something else: given the history of problems on my build it's probably yet another leak in the Miltek...

Toffee

iTrader: (3)

Bloody hell fella, you've not had a lot of luck with yours to date good luck with the search for the issue causing the drop of 40bhp

Ilya

it peaks at 1.8 and then drops to 1.6/1.5 till 7.5k rpm
i'm confused at this moment if the dyno reading is faulty or i got a problem in my car, but as I said it is definitely faster than it was prior to the turbo change, so I will try another dyno and see what the results are