Technical questions after reading Japanese magazine 771bhp Evo7 article??
24 February 2003, 12:47 PM
#1
Anybody read it? Some really technical bits in there, the writer must be a genius 
. I have a few questions tho.
Firstly.... he says that the boost is controlled by a Greddy boost controller then a few lines down he says that the Motec ECU controls the ignition, fuel and boost maps. How's that done then
.
He then says that the Motec controls the important engine parameters while the standard Evo7 ecu controls the raditor fan switch on and other 'boring stuff' . How does this work?
The best bit tho was when he wrote about the injector duty cycles... he said that 'the old ND Evo5 had IDCs of about 78% but the Evo7 has IDCs of 96%..... only 4% away from perfection. Even the Japanese would be impressed with that!!!!!!' So the guy thinks that we should be aimimg for IDCs of 100% and that would be perfection .
What did you guys think of the article.... very impressive car but i do feel the writer wasn't fully withit. Or is it me that hasn't understoof it properly?
Tony.
. I have a few questions tho.Firstly.... he says that the boost is controlled by a Greddy boost controller then a few lines down he says that the Motec ECU controls the ignition, fuel and boost maps. How's that done then
.He then says that the Motec controls the important engine parameters while the standard Evo7 ecu controls the raditor fan switch on and other 'boring stuff' . How does this work?
The best bit tho was when he wrote about the injector duty cycles... he said that 'the old ND Evo5 had IDCs of about 78% but the Evo7 has IDCs of 96%..... only 4% away from perfection. Even the Japanese would be impressed with that!!!!!!' So the guy thinks that we should be aimimg for IDCs of 100% and that would be perfection
. What did you guys think of the article.... very impressive car but i do feel the writer wasn't fully withit. Or is it me that hasn't understoof it properly?
Tony.
24 February 2003, 01:29 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Tony,
I was laughing when I read that article last night : just goes to show that a little knowledge is even more dangerous than none. Most of the article makes little sense.
As I constantly prove.
I was laughing when I read that article last night : just goes to show that a little knowledge is even more dangerous than none. Most of the article makes little sense.
As I constantly prove.
24 February 2003, 02:15 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Leeds - It was 562.4bhp@28psi on Optimax, How much closer to 600 with race fuel and a bigger turbo?
Posts: 15,239
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
laughed my ar$e off..
it contridicted (sp) its self when it mentioned the 1400cc injectors though.
Fuel pump arrangements look familiar..
ps tony, still want that fuel pressure reg?
Im removing it this week.
David
it contridicted (sp) its self when it mentioned the 1400cc injectors though.
Fuel pump arrangements look familiar..
ps tony, still want that fuel pressure reg?
Im removing it this week.
David
24 February 2003, 02:29 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 1999
Location: SSO2003 2nd, SSO2005 1st, SSO2006 2nd, TACC Rd4 5th 4wd: In my car ;-)
Posts: 2,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thought the artical was good for a giggle.........
It doesn't state at what RPM the figures were achieved, but based on the boost, and that HKS state that the GT3240 is rated to 580ps, it all seems a little optomistic IMHO.
Mark.
It doesn't state at what RPM the figures were achieved, but based on the boost, and that HKS state that the GT3240 is rated to 580ps, it all seems a little optomistic IMHO.
Mark.
24 February 2003, 09:34 PM
#7
Blitz, im not really talkin about hazy information but just wrong facts.... the 100% IDC statement really is pure bollox .
Tony.
P.s David.... don't really know what im doing with the car now. Im a bit pissed off with Subarus at the moment with yet more bits being stolen off my brother-in-laws car. If you get an offer for it in the mean time let it go. I'll be in touch.
.Tony.
P.s David.... don't really know what im doing with the car now. Im a bit pissed off with Subarus at the moment with yet more bits being stolen off my brother-in-laws car. If you get an offer for it in the mean time let it go. I'll be in touch.
Trending Topics
25 February 2003, 08:23 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contrary to popular belief - most of this article is true....
At 2.5 Bar boost this engine is said to have produced 771bhp on an engine dyno. I haven't seen it, but its probably not far off the mark.
At 2.1 Bar boost this car produced 543bhp at the wheels - which equates to 714bhp at the flywheel - it ran 715 at the flywheel on an engine dyno at the same boost pressure.
Boost is controlled by an electronic boost controller - blitz - as it makes the engine a lot easier to map, and boost control is more reliable compared to the original frequency valve method. The MoTeC ecu is run with the standard ecu - so that original ecu functions are maintained, and the MoTeC's extra maps are used to control fuel, ignition, and a few other bits and pieces.
1000cc injectors running 90%+ duty cycle is a recipe for disaster. Simon doesn't want to run two sets of injectors, so was waiting for 1400cc injectors so the duty cycle can be brought back to an acceptable %.
Are the numbers real? I've driven it - they are...........
_________________________________
1800bhp - No Wheelpsin - No Excuses
At 2.5 Bar boost this engine is said to have produced 771bhp on an engine dyno. I haven't seen it, but its probably not far off the mark.
At 2.1 Bar boost this car produced 543bhp at the wheels - which equates to 714bhp at the flywheel - it ran 715 at the flywheel on an engine dyno at the same boost pressure.
Boost is controlled by an electronic boost controller - blitz - as it makes the engine a lot easier to map, and boost control is more reliable compared to the original frequency valve method. The MoTeC ecu is run with the standard ecu - so that original ecu functions are maintained, and the MoTeC's extra maps are used to control fuel, ignition, and a few other bits and pieces.
1000cc injectors running 90%+ duty cycle is a recipe for disaster. Simon doesn't want to run two sets of injectors, so was waiting for 1400cc injectors so the duty cycle can be brought back to an acceptable %.
Are the numbers real? I've driven it - they are...........
_________________________________
1800bhp - No Wheelpsin - No Excuses
25 February 2003, 08:31 AM
#10
So the boost controller is Blitz..... the stuff under the bonnet has Greddy writen on it?????????
What i'd like to know is how the two ecus run along side each other?
I also wasn't rubbishing the figures, i was pointing out that the way it was written was complete crap.... every time i read the bit about 100% IDCs being perfection i **** myself laughing .
Tony.
What i'd like to know is how the two ecus run along side each other?
I also wasn't rubbishing the figures, i was pointing out that the way it was written was complete crap.... every time i read the bit about 100% IDCs being perfection i **** myself laughing
.Tony.
25 February 2003, 08:37 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 1999
Location: SSO2003 2nd, SSO2005 1st, SSO2006 2nd, TACC Rd4 5th 4wd: In my car ;-)
Posts: 2,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tony,
It's not uncommon to have one ECU piggy backed to another, in the same way a Unichip, or similar is used.
Aus73,
Can you tell us at what RPM the peak power was achieved ?
I think I'll be coming along to your dyno, when my engine is finished, it should be interesting to see how it compares to the bench dyno.
Mark.
It's not uncommon to have one ECU piggy backed to another, in the same way a Unichip, or similar is used.
Aus73,
Can you tell us at what RPM the peak power was achieved ?
I think I'll be coming along to your dyno, when my engine is finished, it should be interesting to see how it compares to the bench dyno.
Mark.
25 February 2003, 08:45 AM
#13
Cheers Mark (and Aus73 i wasn't being funny with the two ecu question.... i was genuinely interested and didn't know).
It seems quite common for high power evos, supras, skylines etc to run expensive ecus and boost controllers but less so on scoobies... any reason?
Tony.
It seems quite common for high power evos, supras, skylines etc to run expensive ecus and boost controllers but less so on scoobies... any reason?
Tony.
26 February 2003, 06:14 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry guys, just been on the rollers the last few days. You're right - greddy boost controller. Simon doesn't like all his tricks to get out, hence the blitz line to the magazine.
The Greddy boost controller is the cheapest one in their line-up - and the best of the greddy bunch.
Sorry - I can't tell you what peak RPM the max power was achieved. If you want engine details I will have to refer you to Norris Designs. This may seem a little extreme, but we have a lot of tuners doing development work on our rollers, and don't give out any information other than what is made public.
Using two ecus is quite common. Its the only way we can get around some Porsche Bosch systems to maintain functions like air-con and cruise control when we re-map using MoTeC. Basically you supply all the engine signals to both ecus, but only wire the MoTeC system to the fuel and ignition drivers. That way the factory ecu is happy and thinks it is controlling the engine, and the MoTeC ecu is free to make the required adjustments. You still have to map the car from scratch, but you don't have extra head-aches - like some systems will do odd things with fuel pump voltages, or ecu voltage will go open loop if the right signals are not in place. Its tricky, but this is a simple solution.
We have a new website in production at the moment, and a banner advert on the way. We have a rolling road day marked down for the 5th of April (saturday) to find the most powerfull WRX in the country - which will be covered by Banzai. Tell your mates now, as this will officially be announced in the next issue of Banzai in 2-3 weeks time.
We run serious Porsches and Japanese turbos on the rollers all the time. We are allegedly the most accurate in the country - so much so that we have just been appointed the official scrutineering dyno for the Britich GT Series this year. We run all the cars to ensure we get two runs within 1bhp at the wheels - whether its 100bhp or 600bhp.
1800bhp - NO wheelspin - NO excuses......its a fact.
Chris
The Greddy boost controller is the cheapest one in their line-up - and the best of the greddy bunch.
Sorry - I can't tell you what peak RPM the max power was achieved. If you want engine details I will have to refer you to Norris Designs. This may seem a little extreme, but we have a lot of tuners doing development work on our rollers, and don't give out any information other than what is made public.
Using two ecus is quite common. Its the only way we can get around some Porsche Bosch systems to maintain functions like air-con and cruise control when we re-map using MoTeC. Basically you supply all the engine signals to both ecus, but only wire the MoTeC system to the fuel and ignition drivers. That way the factory ecu is happy and thinks it is controlling the engine, and the MoTeC ecu is free to make the required adjustments. You still have to map the car from scratch, but you don't have extra head-aches - like some systems will do odd things with fuel pump voltages, or ecu voltage will go open loop if the right signals are not in place. Its tricky, but this is a simple solution.
We have a new website in production at the moment, and a banner advert on the way. We have a rolling road day marked down for the 5th of April (saturday) to find the most powerfull WRX in the country - which will be covered by Banzai. Tell your mates now, as this will officially be announced in the next issue of Banzai in 2-3 weeks time.
We run serious Porsches and Japanese turbos on the rollers all the time. We are allegedly the most accurate in the country - so much so that we have just been appointed the official scrutineering dyno for the Britich GT Series this year. We run all the cars to ensure we get two runs within 1bhp at the wheels - whether its 100bhp or 600bhp.
1800bhp - NO wheelspin - NO excuses......its a fact.
Chris
27 February 2003, 08:40 AM
#20
Thanks for that Aus73.... personally never heard of using two ecus. Then again i do have my head up my **** most of the time .
One last question tho..... do you ever think that the ND evo will ever achieve perfection...... 100% IDC?????? . Sorry couldn't resist....
Tony.
.One last question tho..... do you ever think that the ND evo will ever achieve perfection...... 100% IDC??????
. Sorry couldn't resist....Tony.
27 February 2003, 12:30 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have heard that the secret engine on the norris evo is built by Fraser , those who have had MR2 turbos or GT4s will know of his reputation. (ex Carlos Sainz rally car engineer etc etc)
27 February 2003, 04:03 PM
#23
from memory the norris evo7 makes peak power at under 7000rpm, with the boost coming in at around 4000rpm, max torque at around 4500rpm.
graphs were made available on the web.
paul
graphs were made available on the web.
paul
27 February 2003, 05:27 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 1999
Location: SSO2003 2nd, SSO2005 1st, SSO2006 2nd, TACC Rd4 5th 4wd: In my car ;-)
Posts: 2,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aus73,
I've just had a look at the Lancer register, and the RR results.
One of the things I noticed, is that the dyno was run in "shoot out" mode. Can you explain what this is.
I was under the impression that a dyno is either "accurate", or it's not. So if it's accurate in it's normal mode, why use an alternative, and what are the effects.
Mark.
I've just had a look at the Lancer register, and the RR results.
One of the things I noticed, is that the dyno was run in "shoot out" mode. Can you explain what this is.
I was under the impression that a dyno is either "accurate", or it's not. So if it's accurate in it's normal mode, why use an alternative, and what are the effects.
Mark.
27 February 2003, 05:29 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ChristianR,
I have your number - courtesy of Jo @ Banzai. Are you interested? The scooby scene in this country is coming along - but there is still a way to go. I personally know of a turbo 2.5 litre running 650bhp - interested?
Chris
____________________________________
1800bhp - NO wheelspin - NO excuses
I have your number - courtesy of Jo @ Banzai. Are you interested? The scooby scene in this country is coming along - but there is still a way to go. I personally know of a turbo 2.5 litre running 650bhp - interested?
Chris
____________________________________
1800bhp - NO wheelspin - NO excuses
27 February 2003, 05:51 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark,
This system is totally different to the other rolling roads in the country. It was designed to accurately measure force and bhp at the wheels - rather than extrapolate flywheel figures. Flywheel figures were shown to be accurate for standard bhp cars on other rollers, but once cars pushed over 400bhp, there were problems with wheelspin, and the flywheel calulation became in-consistent.
The easiest way to check dyno consistency is to make sure the bhp and torque curves cross over at 5252rpm. If they don't, you can throw the dyno sheet in the bin and dis-regard the figures. Wheelspin on the rollers will also make the figures read higher - not lower as some people might expect.
Since this dyno can handle big bhp, with very repeatable results, it has been used for power comparisons all over the world. Now to ensure the figures cannot be fudged - to read either higher or lower - we run the dyno in Shootout mode. This locks the operator out of applying external correction factors or inertia factors to the rollers (or anything else for that matter) which may affect the bhp figures. The power is corrected for intake temp, relative (or room) temp, humidity, and pressure - and the conditions are printed on the bottom of each run. We can also alter the loading on the rollers for each power run to ensure turbo cars generate the correct boost pressures.
For each car on the rollers we do at least two power runs - to ensure the figures are accurate and repeatable. We have 7 fans in the dyno cell so we can do a room change in the dyno every 4.5 seconds. We also don't have any problems with inlet temp (even on top mount intercoolers) as we have a 33,000cfm fan sitting in front of the cars.
We have software developed specifically for the subaru wrx, which gives flywheel figures with a 2-3% accuracy - but the only real measurement on a rolling road is at the wheels, and because of the load cell arrangement we are greater than 99% accurate. May not mean much on the surface, but we have just been doing some fuel testing today with BP on the rollers, and for the 4 cars tested, with different types of fuel we have seen 3 runs per car/fuel type within 0.5bhp at the wheels (on cars running 130-220bhp atw+). That gives us an accuracy/repeatability of around 0.004% or better - must be why they come here.
A lot of people are happy to quote bhp numbers, but I'm sure there is a lot of variance - and a lot of it has to do with the equipment or room condition stability more than the operators.
I could talk about dynos for hours but I probably shouldn't bore you.
Chris Davies
Motorsport Engineer
___________________________________
1800bhp - NO Wheelspin - NO Excuses
This system is totally different to the other rolling roads in the country. It was designed to accurately measure force and bhp at the wheels - rather than extrapolate flywheel figures. Flywheel figures were shown to be accurate for standard bhp cars on other rollers, but once cars pushed over 400bhp, there were problems with wheelspin, and the flywheel calulation became in-consistent.
The easiest way to check dyno consistency is to make sure the bhp and torque curves cross over at 5252rpm. If they don't, you can throw the dyno sheet in the bin and dis-regard the figures. Wheelspin on the rollers will also make the figures read higher - not lower as some people might expect.
Since this dyno can handle big bhp, with very repeatable results, it has been used for power comparisons all over the world. Now to ensure the figures cannot be fudged - to read either higher or lower - we run the dyno in Shootout mode. This locks the operator out of applying external correction factors or inertia factors to the rollers (or anything else for that matter) which may affect the bhp figures. The power is corrected for intake temp, relative (or room) temp, humidity, and pressure - and the conditions are printed on the bottom of each run. We can also alter the loading on the rollers for each power run to ensure turbo cars generate the correct boost pressures.
For each car on the rollers we do at least two power runs - to ensure the figures are accurate and repeatable. We have 7 fans in the dyno cell so we can do a room change in the dyno every 4.5 seconds. We also don't have any problems with inlet temp (even on top mount intercoolers) as we have a 33,000cfm fan sitting in front of the cars.
We have software developed specifically for the subaru wrx, which gives flywheel figures with a 2-3% accuracy - but the only real measurement on a rolling road is at the wheels, and because of the load cell arrangement we are greater than 99% accurate. May not mean much on the surface, but we have just been doing some fuel testing today with BP on the rollers, and for the 4 cars tested, with different types of fuel we have seen 3 runs per car/fuel type within 0.5bhp at the wheels (on cars running 130-220bhp atw+). That gives us an accuracy/repeatability of around 0.004% or better - must be why they come here.
A lot of people are happy to quote bhp numbers, but I'm sure there is a lot of variance - and a lot of it has to do with the equipment or room condition stability more than the operators.
I could talk about dynos for hours but I probably shouldn't bore you.
Chris Davies
Motorsport Engineer
___________________________________
1800bhp - NO Wheelspin - NO Excuses
28 February 2003, 08:14 AM
#30
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Wheelspin on the rollers will also make the figures read higher - not lower as some people might expect.
I don't think you can apply this to every set up. For example at Well Lane and Star Performance, any slip results in a lower BHP and Torque figure. This is due to the engine speed reference being taken from the rollers and not the engine.
Recently, on my own car when initially run up at Well Lane it slipped in 4th gear and recorded 330 bhp. To reduce slip it was then run up in 5th gear and recorded 360 bhp, 2 passengers were installed in the back seat and it was run up again, less slip and 417 bhp this time. Yet another 'big' passenger was installed and the tyre pressures were reduced the result was 432 bhp.
Each time some extra weight was added you could hear the note of the engine change as the load was increased on it due to less slip on the rollers.
Andy
[Edited by Andy.F - 2/28/2003 9:14:26 AM]