alan doesnt seem to think so so im trusting his judgement...like i said, weve got a lot of supporting mods which should help

 

I'd be very interested to see the results of a 35/42 on a 2.1

 

If you have nitrous to spool the turbo then it will be fine other than that, it maybe a touch laggy. I have one a 2.5 and the turbo only really gets into its stride once its over 3.5k revs.

Banny

 

hopefully wont be too long til it all starts coming together so watch this space....

 

not using nitrous on the car...i guess time will tell how laggy its going to be, hopefully wont be too bad....

 

Scott's isn't an "ordinary" road car build! He already has one of those..

 

 

Definately not, the inlet manifold for one is stunning A work of art

 

We should always question the "Remarkable", so we understand what makes it so, and can then make it "repeatable".

The strange VE clearly isn't down to the turbo, otherwise one would expect to see similar results with everyone using one, and that isn't the case.

It will be interesting to see the graph, and dyno "snap" file. Might help us understand the numbers a little better.


Mark.

 

There is only one 2.5 apart from those currently on our premises using an S206, so I don't know where you get the idea that you know all about the turbo! I fully understand why you want to know all about it however.
As I indicated, this is a work in progress, and as soon as we're done tweaking, you'll be the first on the list matey.

 

Alan,


Sorry for the misunderstanding. If a turbo has an odd quirk, it would generally show in some way on most engine types, not just one.

There have been several graphs posted for the S206 now, and I don't recall seeing any similar VE result. That implies that the odd result on this car, is unlikely to be related to the turbo, but something else in the spec'. That's all !

If you want to post figures for people to be impressed about what you're doing, you also have to expect people to want to know more about them. It goes hand in hand !


Mark.

 

Actually, we don't see the figures as THAT odd, certainly not compared to other 2.5's we've seen on the dyno, one of which made 545 lbs ft from one of your 321's after we'd mapped it. Obviously a 2.5 is going to have more torque, we are just seeing how much, and thought some of the petrol heads on SN might like to hear about it!
The car is very well prepared, but not technically explicit, using one of our engines, but no head or cam profile changes.
We aren't into ***** waving, as a motorsport competitor and sponsor I'm only into results.
Naturally we are interested in how the S206 compares to other turbos, and of course we are going to be closely examining worthy offerings such as the 321V when looking at 2.5's in particular. There wouldn't be any point in spending time on a new turbo configuration if we could just go out and buy a better one would there? I won't post any comparison graphs taken from our dyno without your express request, in case the results are misinterpreted, we all know the blind alley that can lead to! In any event, we aren't finished yet, being keen to further develop a very useful unit.

 

Harry, how did the mapping with JGM go today?

 

If I rob my turbo of .5bar of boost I know exactly what it does..... it only produces 485bhp at the fly at 1.45bar!

 

very pleased with the inlet manifold myself,cant wait to see it all on the car....

 

Alan,

I tried to make it clear that my comments were about "engine VE", and not anything to do with turbos, be it a S206, or one of the MD321 series.

An engine VE of 1.1cfm per BHP is unusual on a Subaru engine that's all !

 

looks very nice.

 

say it as you see it mark

 

Oh, I don't think we'll be seeing that any time soon.

 

and what at 2bar? or 1.95bar?

 

When it was run on Zen's dyno it only produced 519bhp running circa 1.8bar @ peak power (High boost). This was not a good run though, as ambients were through the roof and Tracktive have put in quite aggressive ignition adjustment based on inlet temps, because of the higher compression and VPower only for safety. The power drops like a stone on the Zen graph.... which it never did using Tracktives dyno cell. After seeing the graph, Richard Bulmer said it had undoutedly pulled alot of iginition, because of the shape of the curve.

At no point in time had the high boost power line dropped below the low boost power line on Tracktives Dyno Cell.... on Zen's dyno, it did!

Low Boost on Tracktives dyno cell it gave 415bhp at the hubs
Low Boost on Zen's dyno cell it gave 485bhp at the fly

High Boost on Tracktives dyno cell it gave 485bhp at the hubs
High Boost on Zen's dyno cell it gave 519bhp at the fly

It is expected that a High Boost run with adequate cooling would equate to 540+bhp on a flywheel dyno.

 

probably not my place to say..

Simon

 

u been in for a look then mate?sounds like its coming along nicely..

 

was down there yesterday, coming on well.

Going to fly when finished.

 

Hope there were no dramas

 

no no.. sorry didn't mean it to sound like that..

slightly less power than we had hoped for but then on a standard engine so not necessarily a bad thing

 

whats harrys engine spec or supporting mods??

 

alan gave me an update the other day there, certainly sounds like its coming on well, think they are making the i/c pipes this week so looking forward to getting the pics through to see the progress, certainly going to be in a lot better state than when he first got the car down there

 

did yours not do it then?

 

Nope, i was there but i'll let Harry say how he got on