Litchfield 800cc Injectors.

 

Hi Paul,
Sounds good.... look forward to your results.

Yeap... still loggin mafv. Currently up to 4.76v @ 6900rpm.

 

Shaun,

Even though mine's up for sale, it's been a great read from a fellow twinscroll owner. The response of the engine is the thing which has always blown me away, and to see the new billet match the original VF and then just leave it as the revs pile on must make it some drive as mine has never felt lacking!

Keep it up.

Adam

 

Hi Adam,
Sorry to hear your car is on the market.

 

Hmm..will be interesting to hear your opinions / comparisons between LM400 Billet & LM450 Billet, Shaun.

One on hand the OEM appeal of not having to change FMIC, CAIK, Inlet, & having the great low down spool characteristics (as the VF36/37) on the LM400 Billet.

On the other hand I keep thinking the MY05> 2.0ltr JDM engine can take up to 450bhp on std internals, so the LM450 Billet would seem the most cost effective turbo & a sensible stopping point, without going for an engine build?

We will have to wait & see

 

Well... whilst I have not had the Billet LM450 fitted yet, the Billet LM400 is proving to be very good in normal everyday driving circumstances.

I have pushed back the next stage, simply because I want to spend more time with what has been done till now, before making any further adjustments.

In many ways the Billet LM400 really is "enough" imo.

Let's see what the next few months bring as I suspect the next round of mods will start just after Summer, as I am enjoying the car too much at the moment when I get the chance.

I'm still undecided what to do about changing the FMIC and Inlet stuff when I make the move to the LM450. I really want to see what it can do with the OE stuff, but suspect I will at least have to change the inlet kit.

I have spoken to another "authority" that has given me some confidence in how much more is possible from the OE TMIC..... it will be interesting for sure to find out first hand.

For now though the Billet LM400 certainly provides me with everything I was initially after.

 

Hi at your current power level have you tested the air temp post intercooler ?

 

I feel there is little point in reality. I regulary log via DeltaDash during various types of "action" and temperatures and I have not seen any adverse effect on ignition timing, which would come about by issues with ACT's..... other than your normal high temps associated with the vehicle being stationary.

Please be aware I'm only running circa 1.32bar at the top end.... which only requires 56% duty cyle. The turbo is in the "happy" zone, so I would assume that ACT's post turbo are reasonable.

I do understand your possible train of thought with regards to monitoring ACT's and this is something I may do in the future.

 

Well it's been a couple of months since the last updates of any worth, so I thought I would just give some information on things being discussed at the moment.

I have just started conversations this week with Litchfield Imports on what we could do next.

My current train of thought is:

• Replace the LM400 Billet with a LM450 Billet
• Remap to suit (obviously lol)
• See where we are performance wise

This is all based on retaining the OE inlet side and OE TMIC.

The results will be interesting.

However I will be expecting that I may ultimately need a FMIC and/or Inlet changes, but I don't intend in doing that if I don't have to. My initial goal would be 440bhp on an OE inlet and TMIC. If it reaches this level with no issues I'm not about to spend well over £1k on the other bits to make the extra 10-20bhp.

This car is a road car... so let's not forget that. I have several options for running the car on track, which for me will only be normal trackdays. I can utilise switchable maps on the OE ECU with MegaROM and with access to EasyECU for as many maps as I wish. This "portion" of information maybe around lowering the power for track use (reducing heat) etc, if needed. Just thinking outside of the box.

Anyway... conversations will continue over the coming weeks with Litchfield's and Tracktive.

As soon as I have anything confirmed I will let you know.

 

Or you could try selling it

I think that 440 on a standard inlet hose is optimistic. The top mount may also hold it back, they are quite large, but those extra horses use a lot more air.

Good luck, David

 

David,
Don't tell me you're not surprised.

lol : If I didn't do one, I would do the other! The "other" won this time.

The inlet hose on the JDM MY05> STI is already of the larger type. It's the same size as the MY03 Spec C ones, which were quite a bit bigger than the same year STI one.

I have on good authority (someone not associated with this) that the OE TMIC can take over 450bhp..... safety margins (heat issues reducing ignition) appear to be effected by boost (and holding flat knacker in 6th don't help) and I have been given some very useful information to suggest I may well not have any issues. I also suspect use of ignition over boost will help as well...... certainly something Mr Bulmer seems to like doing.

I've also got information on when certain boost levels have caused issues on inlet temps for the OE TMIC, on a turbo that is around the same size as the LM450 Billet. I plan to stay under the levels I have been informed of.

You know me..... never take anything as gospel unless I have tried it myself. The testing is all part of the fun.

 

Dont use a FMIC, if you want to improve on the OEM TMIC install one of Chevron Motorsports F1 cored TMIC, Richard knows how good they are.

 

Good point John.... I had forgot all about that specific unit. Thanks for the reminder.

 

I read very good things about this unit, however never could find specific info on exactly y it is so good, what is the difference from other top mounts?

 

Quality and eficiency of the core material. The cores are hand made, they are used on current F1 cars for heat exchangers.

 

Surely John, any top mount purely by its location, cannot be that good, as it will always suffer from heat soak in an idle at the lights or traffic jam? Plus the problem of actually getting the air to flow into it at high road speeds. Shaun's car does have the large [ ish ] bonnet scoop which helps, but the air still has to turn through 90 degrees to get into the cooler and another 90 degrees to get out underneath

Even a cheap and nasty intercooler mounted away from the heat soak has benefits.

I too have heard good things about Chevrons piece of kit, but always worry about the above.

David APi

 

David,
There are always going to be some caveats.

There is also the argument that FMIC suffer from heatsoak, which I suspect is with regard to all piping within the engine bay. Whilst I suspect it is not as much of a problem, it still exists to a degree.

The biggest two caveats for me are price and performance, should I decide to go down the change from OE TMIC.

To me, the single biggest benefit to retaining anything TM based is the short pipe runs and theorectical sharper response. I hear some people say that "proper" mapping will negate this. I seriously don't understand that statement as we are referring to a physics constraint.... nothing more. OK, I fully understand a "crap" map may make a car run "crap", but that is not what we are talking about here. HOWEVER, it's very difficult to judge any worsened response between a TMIC and FMIC (in the real world) unless you have tested it yourself and been totally transparent with meaningful results / feedback.

I need to weigh all this up and decide on facts that I already know. It would be a different story if someone was willing to supply, fit and map all three solutions (OE TMIC, Aftermarket TMIC and FMIC) FOC. Unfortunately that is not going to happen..... even with my "marketing" skills! This car is not a substantial budget build like the Spec C was, so I need to keep that in mind.

The current potential "pick list" is:

Harvey's FMIC
Perrin FMIC
Hyperflow FMIC
Chevron's TMIC

At the moment Harvey's kit is streets ahead on price...... the question is, is it worth spending another £1k on top for an alternative. Based on straight price (being totally honest), one of the other options would certainly have to give me a lot to support the price difference (and let's be honest, the Hybrid kits are hardlt renowned for not working)!

 

As long as you are considering the Chevron TMIC, you might also want to add the Spearco/Turbonetics TMIC to the list

 

We use Harvey's Hybrid FMIC's on just about everything, as it works really well, fits well and is a great price.

I have a Perrin FMIC here to go on a Hatch and I am assured that it is a great bit of kit. Harv doesn't yet do a hatch one. BUT JEEEEEEEEZ is that Perrin heavy ?? !! The performance gains are going to be lost luggin' an extra passenger about [ so to speak ]

Clinic swear by Hyperflow, l have no experience.

Chevron I have commented above.

We have used HKS in the past with great results - but what a price ?

Ditto APS which fit well and look good, but that price is a killer.

David

 

Salmacis,
Thanks for the information.

David,
I wouldn't disagree with what you have said there.

I previously used the Hyperflow Monster kit on the Spec C. Performance wise it was very very good but it isn't cheap.

 

On the "physics" front, how long does it take air, under pressure, to flow through a couple of metres of pipe. Also, I was under the impression that Harvey, or the clinic had done some tests and found the response times between TM and FM to be negligable? (please dont shoot me down in flames if Im wrong... Im just trying to understand myself)

 

IMO....

The term "negligable" is open to interpretation and I suspect is part of any issue / understanding. Does the response decrease (assume) by 100th sec, 10th sec, 1sec etc?

However it's worth noting that I'm probably looking at the "pressure drop" over the FMIC when off and then back on throttle.

I also suspect this is why OE MAF ECU's can struggle with air volumes (coming off and on throttle etc) as more air may or may not exist in the pipework, but the MAF thinks something else from it's last reading. This can add to the "deadzone" feel and I suspect is one of the main causes perhaps.

 

I cannot comment on the Chevron item as I have never seen one but both the Hyperflow and Perrin that we have fitted are bar and plate which is why they are heavy but it is also the reason why they cannot match the low pressure drop across the core of the tube and fin Hybrid. Providing the core is adequately sized (and most are too big) the tube and fin is streets ahead in terms of pressure drop and with the adequate size of core cooling is not an issue.

 

The Chevron TMIC has been used for a few years now on 500BHP TA cars, as well as road cars.

If you want to get independant feedback on them, speak with Bob Rawle and Richard Bulmer, they have both mapped cars with these and have been amazed at how good they are.

There is a myth perpetrated out there that TMIC dont get good airflow at high speed, i've found that to be nonsense.

As to heat soak, the Chevron cores dont heat soak anything like a conventional cored IC, you can put your hand on them after they have been sat idling and the cores feel remarkebly cool.

The cores are nothing like any of the normal fare you find with these aftermarket IC's. You dont find anything but the best in terms of weight and eficiency used on modern F1 cars, and these cores are what is used on those for their heat exchangers.




These IC's are not cheap, but they certainly work.

 

Had a good discussion with Tracktive Solutions (Richard Bulmer) on Saturday about all of this.

I underlined the fact that whilst I'm assuming a change from the OE TMIC / Inlet will be required, I want to see what the OE item will yeild in the first instance. It was agreed this was sensible.

How the Billet LM450 behaves will be a major part of how this pans out. The LM450 (on a 2ltr) has already proved it produces around 460bhp @ 1.6bar and 450bhp @ 1.5bar (on VPower). Boost and revs can aid to the production of heat, so we know we have some constraints to deal with. The idea will be to try and produce absolutely safely, 440bhp at the least amount of boost as possible with the OE TMIC. 1.4bar would be awesome if it is achievable. Of course, it could very well produce more...... it could also produce a lot less, but I need some form of goal to aim for and judge against.

Obviously none of this is taken for granted until we test.

There is another potential issue..... the MAF (as part of the OE ECU). More details and explanation of this when we get to that part of the work.

I'm going in to this expecting the worse but hoping for the best. I now find that approach helps with any potential disappointment (regarding the OE TMIC / Inlet etc).

It's worth remembering that we are sticking with everything OE on the inlet side at this stage. That means standard turbo inlet pipe, standard pipework between the inlet pipe and standard airbox. The only alteration over OE is to use the already changed uprated panel filter. This will be able to show as back to back testing as I possibly can.

I have virtually made my mind up as to which intercooler I will be using, assuming a change is required..... but let's discuss what and why at the appropriate point.

I've been discussing the logistics of all this with Litchfield and Tracktive this week and the plan is as follows:

Billet LM450 is being fitted on Thursday 25th August by Litchfield's.
Remap will be done on Friday 26th August by Tracktive.
Report back on outcome and decide next steps.

Not long to go then!

Just a note as I received quite a few PM's when I upgraded from the LM400 to Billet LM400. The Billet LM400 will not be available to buy from me... sorry.

Quite looking forward to how this pans out. Whilst I'm not trying to break any new ground and certainly not looking at getting crazy BHP, I'm very enthused at what the results will bring.

Let's all keep our figures crossed for a favourable outcome!

 

400 plus on a standard air box ? Regardless of filter fitted, I'd be surprised if it'll flow that much air.

David

 

We'll find out next week!

My old Spec C flowed enough air sucking through a Hyperflow filter (inner wing kit), that I reckon is not much bigger (surface area) than a standard panel filter. Also that specific inner wing kit was not even ducted to. We found the limit of that filter, but it was over 500bhp. This was on a 2.5ltr engine breathing like a finely tuned athlete.

I appreciate it is also about the inlet tract as much as the filter though.

 

^^^ My thoughts for what its worth

I ran (past tense) a LM420 on my TMIC, and then had a FMIC fitted with no other changes other than (same mapper as you ) a remap, the increase in power (same bhp but more torque) was so significant that I would advise anyone to NOT stick with the OE TMIC and if they can afford it to go with a FMIC. I would also not use the after market TMIC fitted on the Chevron car that John has reffered to, I was at TOTB and watched with interest the team spraying the TMIC with water (I assume it was water) before each run out, I assume that this is because of the stationary heat soak already refererred to.

As for the lag from a FMIC, Richard stated to me that once you get to a certain size turbo you are waiting for the turbo to spool up, at this point the lag from the FMIC is no longer the limiting factor, assuming the LM450 billet will only spool up as quick as something like the LM420 again you have nothing to worry about with the FMIC. From my experience I never noticed ANY difference in response going from OE TMIC to FMIC > no difference at all.

If you do intend on doing track days you know it makes sense to not stick with the OE TMIC, unleash the torque and get a FMIC

My car is with Richard at present, hoping to collect this week? hoping for around 600/600

Good luck fella,
Lee.

 

Lee,
No point in me saying anything about how the OE TMIC will perform, until I have some of my own data hopefully by this weekend.

I always like to take the unconventional approach first though.

Good luck on your new engine (I saw your car and engine last weekend)...... I suspect you will crap your pants on the road with a proper 600bhp. I did when we ran that power on my old SPEC C. It will be poles apart from what you have been used to.

Have fun!

 

An absolutely rediculous statement to make Lee!

My own car isnt using an aftermarket TMIC (Chevron or any other type), it's using the 100% standard JDM TMIC with stock everything external to the engine.

I was putting ice on the TMIC as it makes sense to try and lower the charge temps when doing a competition like TOTB (you can't lay ice on a FMIC, so there is an advantage to the TMIC over the FMIC).

It may also have slipped your mind, but the stock JDM STi has auto and manual Intercooler water sprays, and quell surprise, i was spraying the IC manually on the start line and had the auto IC Spray system switched on during the run, which would have been giving bursts of water spray onto the IC every 5 seconds.

As my car uses a stock ECU, the only temperature measurement taken by the ECU is in the MAF sensor, not the IC, having a FMIC would make zero difference to how the ECU modified the engine performance during the runs based on charge temp.

For your information the banana with it's FMIC was having it's IC sprayed with water before every run, to help that reduce it's charge temps and improve the eficiency of the IC.

Going back to previous TOTB events, the RCMS Gobstopper always went to the start of it's runs with a dry ice blanket on it's induction system, to help reduce engine bay heat soak on that FMIC equiped car.

It's just simple common sense to maximise what you have, your statement to avoid the Chevron TMIC because of what you thought you saw is absurd, unless you know the facts behind the performance of these items and how people use them it's best you not comment in the way you did.

P.S my poxy Stock TMIC on the stock VF37 turbo, injectors, induction etc made 399lbft on Zens Rollers on a hot day with no provision for heat soak management, unleash the torque indeed.