Here are the results overlaid with the best possible I could get out of the TD05. I use medium smoothing on these graphs so you can see after peak power a bit better. Weights, octane, boost are comparable for each.



[Edited by john banks - 3/15/2003 7:25:35 PM]

[Edited by john banks - 3/15/2003 7:27:55 PM]

 

that is one nice fat powerband

gonna get fatter and wider though...

 

It's just not fair ! Although this has the same power it has so much more torque than my one ! Could it be the 99/00 heads and cams ? Or maybe I just need to find a decent mapper

With over 350lb-ft torque from 3900 to 6600 this thing just 'goes' wherever you hit the throttle and when you hit the peak of nearly 400 you feel it trying to break traction all the way in 3rd gear

 

What are the differences compared to the previously posted figures? Was it mainly boost? I thought the 20G was already very close to surge.

Mark.

 

Filled in a lean spot and got a bit more ignition out of it. I could fill out the boost by using pretty strong gear judge code in the ECU, so what I was running before in 3rd gear was suitable for 5th. Work in progress

 

And no surge???

 

No surge at all in 3rd with the power plot posted.

If I use the same settings in 4th and 5th it will surge because it comes in earlier and is under more load. The plot shows what the turbo can do, it is up to me to now try and control it to get it right in 4th and 5th gear. 1st to 3rd are silky and potent

If there is no gear judge on the ECU an AVC-R would do the trick I think.

 

With those figures the car SHOULD be potent in the low gears! As long as they keep their teeth.

 

John,

Do you have the data in terms of vehicle acceleration Vs speed?

If not what size tyres are you running, if you don`t mind!!!!??

Also assuming 1400kg-ish mass?

[Edited by JamesS - 3/16/2003 2:14:34 PM]

 

John have you and Andy F had any on the road/track acceleration comparisons? I'd be curious to know how they compare Andy's from memory feels massivly quick because of the short gearing but it must be getting close with the sort of power and torque your car has.

 

Assuming 1235 + 20 ICE + 80 me + 10kg/quarter tank fuel.

215/40R17

Saxo - no comment.

 

Saxo

Johns car is well up to the level that my RA was when you were in it last year (the key words there being 'last year' )

Andy

 

LOL @ Andy - are you feeling threatened yet? Snap, growl, snap

I love how well John's car hides its power It just looks like a fairly normal MY00 with a couple of bucks chucked at the wheels, zorst, etc. The FMIC isn't even that obvious......oh the fun you could have

 

And fun he has I'm sure there are a few M3's locally going cheap due to being severely embarrassed by a 'std' UK scoob

My Ra's not for sale yet though

 

Maybe he should take it stage further and debadge the car and then rebadge it as a sport. Add sport bonnet and rear spoiler and then tints to hide the seats. Hey presto the ultimate in 'didn't see that coming'

 

On the 20G...
Sorry about any piddling I may be doing on anyone's bonfire here, but isn't the standard TD05 doing really rather well in comparison here until post 5k - in other words, for 90% of driving it's going to actually "out-torque" the bigger compressor?
And using that rather basic (but interesting indicator) "area under the curve" thing, I think the TD05 comes out on top?
Just IMO - peak power's all very nice, but not when day-to-day is compromised...
Is anything going to be able to be done about the "lower-down" bit? Presumably this is still being caused by the fun with compressor surge (as in it's "no problem" as it's mapped around, but still there); that the 20G is just happier with a heavier-breathing engine? Or is it inherent in the design of something else?
Again, sorry for any piddling

 

Piddle all you like

Look at the graph again and the area under the curve... the advantage to the TD05 is small and over by 4000 RPM. The car is far more fun with the 20G, and there is far greater area under the curve - look at the bottom end wedge difference which is thin, and the top end wedge which considerably larger.

I looked down a few times at the tacho when blasting cross country today and the revs never once went below 4000 RPM for several miles. 3rd gear is a wonderful road eater.

I think you are underestimating just how good a turbo is that provides this breadth of power band. I have just compared the figures with a setup on an AVO "500" BHP turbo and the differences are as follows:

Power at 2000 RPM is identical,
2500 +25
3000 +40
3500 +75 (double the PAW!)
4000 +130
4500 +125
5000 +60
5500 +20
6000 +5
6500 -15

Peak power is the same at about 360 WHP

I have compared with the TD05 which is a pretty high standard.

On a 2.0 IMHO below 4500 RPM this is as good as it gets.

You may like to compare it with say a VF23 which flows nowhere near as much. It still way outperforms my previous hybrid VF across the whole RPM range. It even equals the best ever publicised results on a TD04 in the UK for bottom end torque.

I think it will be even better on the 2.33

NB: You need to note there are four curves here! Red is the 20G power and torque, Blue is the 16G power and torque. I suspect you were comparing a power curve with a torque curve to reach your incorrect and surprising conclusion. Please correct if wrong!

Maybe that was why your crossover was 5252 RPM

 

Nom, you crack me up

I'd be interested to see you drive your car Do you pull away in 4th gear then limit the rpm to a max of 3000 all the time Shouldn't you be referring to the area under the part of the graph generally used for performance use ie 3 - 7k.

I think I can say that there is no other turbo on an 2.0 Impreza that can produce the bottom end torque of a TD04, 1 bar boost by 3000 rpm and a 430+ bhp top end.

Go on take the challenge to prove me wrong but remember I will expect some evidence to back it up


Andy

 

Ah-ha. The colours helped I did get some lines back to front (rather a lot going on at 5250 which threw me) so you're ok again
Yep, seems to work rather nicely

 

John - what equipment are yo uusing with the TEk geat & Delta Dash to map out the lean spots? Wide band sensor? What detector? Surely not Lambdalink

Just need a few ideas to steer me in the right direction

What turbo is this? Standard TD05 with TD06 Compressor housing or a TD05 with front entry conversion? Or a little more

Russell

[Edited by WUZ - 3/17/2003 10:34:48 AM]

 

I am using the Oz DIY Wideband and running it at 12:1 richening to 11.7:1 at the top end.

One graph pair is the TD05 front entry, the other is the TD05 back end with TD06 20G compressor and cover.

Knock off 10 WHP to account for the fact that my tyres now have only 2mm tread I have calculated that this does inflate the figures by this amount. Knock off 20 WHP to account for pump fuel with no additives. I use *1.22 to estimate flywheel figures, but who knows Then add or subtract your chosen RR fudge factor

 

You gotta website address for the DIY Wideband M8! Does the standard Lambda sensor giva accurate info for you over short power runs (16-20 secs)or is that uprated too!

Russell

 

Don't have the standard lambda plugged in, but when I did I was running about 860-870 mV which is about 12:1 I reckon (it does fatigue after a quick run) - about as lean as you would want if you have a decent sized turbo and intercooler - if the intercooler or turbo are marginal or going for lower octane you want it richer. I always do customers cars richer than this. I don't need a safety margin as I can watch it all the time.

http://www.techedge.com.au/vehicle/wbo2/default.htm for the wideband. Don't forget to allow for the sensor, all the bits and tax, but it is still by far the cheapest I've found. It has helped Andy F's and my car no end. Particularly useful when you get into daft injectors and big turbos.

 

John,
Sorry to post this here but want your thoughts...With the talk of the need for Walbro fuel pump in STI7'S,thoughts turn to whether other models would benefit...My car is MY99 with downpipe,backbox,dawes,ecutek2(getting 1.1-1.2bar on defi gauge)no knock....so says knocklink!....

 

At that level don't bother. If you go over 300 BHP change it.

 

John,

Do you know what road-load assumptions the delta dyno is assuming for your runs above. Cd and A, tyre rolling resistance?

I`m trying to compare your td06 run to one I logged, but in terms of vehicle acceleration - need to know the roadload to calculate.........or if you have the data in terms of 5 - 90mph time or allready in terms of `g`?????????? Cheers.

[Edited by JamesS - 3/18/2003 8:17:37 AM]

 

Delta Dash uses "Drag Cd" of 0.35 and frontal area of 2.2 sqm. You put in your gearing and tyre setup.

 

John

Those are impressive acceleration curves. Better than my lowly MY99 in second gear!

Do you think you can take the 2.0 any further without going internal (as the receptionist said to the GP )

Simon

 

Note the shorter gearing of the STi (both in 3rd), but it can't make up for the weight and torque advantage. I am sticking with these gears, but with forthcoming 8K RPM limit and STi heads will mean I can hang onto them longer

Arguably the 2.0 can't take this without going internal... hence the 2.33 rebuild... this is just a dummy run with the 20g.

[Edited by john banks - 3/18/2003 10:58:33 AM]

 

John - Top Man, thanks!