SR55 on EJ22 hybrid
23 March 2008, 04:44 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SR55 on EJ22 hybrid
What is your opinion, would a SR55 work fine on a EJ22 hybrid?
As well is a newage STI topmount intercooler fine for this turbo?
Rpmlimit is 8k.
As well is a newage STI topmount intercooler fine for this turbo?
Rpmlimit is 8k.
25 March 2008, 09:13 AM
#3
What power are you aiming for? general opinion is that the newage sti intercooler is good up to and around 400bhp but then you are pushing the limits.
That said Andy F is running one at 450bhp but personally at 400bhp I would swich to a fmic.
Banny
That said Andy F is running one at 450bhp but personally at 400bhp I would swich to a fmic.
Banny
Last edited by banny sti; 25 March 2008 at 10:31 AM.
25 March 2008, 10:25 AM
#4
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thatīs okay for me, I just want to have around 400 to 450bhp.
But a SR55 will add much lag I think.
Anyways I would be able to make more power with less boost...
Should I stick with the SR40?
But a SR55 will add much lag I think.
Anyways I would be able to make more power with less boost...
Should I stick with the SR40?
25 March 2008, 10:57 AM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Norway\Bergen
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You should get something else than APS. IMHO APS makes good products, except turbos.
SZ55 thick lines, SR55 thin lines
A journal bearing turbo, vs a ballbearing SR55, and the SZ55 makes much more power earlier, more midrange and the same topend. This is on the same dyno.
SZ55 thick lines, SR55 thin lines
A journal bearing turbo, vs a ballbearing SR55, and the SZ55 makes much more power earlier, more midrange and the same topend. This is on the same dyno.
Trending Topics
25 March 2008, 01:53 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Norway\Bergen
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why spend so much on a turbo that gives you a laggy, slow spooling car, which doesn`t make more power than another faster spooling turbo with better response would?!
And 450 genuine bhp, is quite violent on a daily driver. And you would need to get very high duty on 800cc injectors to get close to 450bhp.
25 March 2008, 01:58 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
25 March 2008, 02:25 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Norway\Bergen
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genuine BHP yes. An Ford RS500 is emptying 8 444cc injectors for 500bhp. A company here in Norway, with a dyno that reads actual bhp, made 310bhp and had 92% duty with 565cc injectors.
Thats 150bhp difference with a mere 100cc more. And everyone knows that you can`t make 150bhp with 100cc per injector on a 4cyl. So in short, you don`t have a genuine 464bhp.
Thats 150bhp difference with a mere 100cc more. And everyone knows that you can`t make 150bhp with 100cc per injector on a 4cyl. So in short, you don`t have a genuine 464bhp.
25 March 2008, 02:31 PM
#17
The funny thing is JD runs methanol meaning the injectors have to flow a little more than if you are running just petrol.
I will be running 740cc injectors and aiming for 450bhp possibly more with methanol, so your logic is wrong or maybe the uk just has better tuners
banny
I will be running 740cc injectors and aiming for 450bhp possibly more with methanol, so your logic is wrong or maybe the uk just has better tuners
banny
25 March 2008, 02:33 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Norway\Bergen
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jd5217: Care to explain about that setup? And 300whp and 464bhp is BS! you don`t loose 160bhp through the drivetrain. That is nearly 120kw of friction and heat! It might make 300whp, but real life bhp would be around 375 with normal drivetrain losses.
25 March 2008, 02:35 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
the drivetrain losses on this rolling road can be ignored due to the style of dyno this is.
webmaster can give more details on this, shaun where are you?
webmaster can give more details on this, shaun where are you?
25 March 2008, 02:40 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Norway\Bergen
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The funny thing is JD runs methanol meaning the injectors have to flow a little more than if you are running just petrol.
I will be running 740cc injectors and aiming for 450bhp possibly more with methanol, so your logic is wrong or maybe the uk just has better tuners
banny
I will be running 740cc injectors and aiming for 450bhp possibly more with methanol, so your logic is wrong or maybe the uk just has better tuners
banny
Numbers don`t lie. Tuning is a part of it, but if you calculate over 35% drivetrain loss, anything is possible of course.
And you will be having lower injector duty with meth, not higher. Meth makes up for some of the petrol.
25 March 2008, 03:05 PM
#22
Legacy Turbo EJ22G,
Don't confuse flow rates of injectors at standard fuel pressure, with flow rates of injectors at increased fuel pressure. I maxed out 800cc injectors at around 500bhp at standard fuel pressure. Up the fuel pressure and they will flow more....... much more. I am now currently running 1150cc injectors, since my preferred tuner does not go with increased fuel pressures. Needless to say, there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Is JD running standard fuel pressure?
As regards to the MAHA rolling road, I think you need to do some research on how the MAHA set-up works before you state the flywheel figure is BS. Put it this way..... it's no more BS than any other dyno.
This very same dyno is used by myself, with flywheel results comparable to a Dyno Dynamics rolling road as well.... much the muchness. MAHA's are designed to calculate flywheel figures. So this is the data that needs to be compared. JD5217 already has other readouts from two other different dyno's to substantiate this.
I have personally had 530bhp (repeatable) at the fly from the MAHA dyno discussed, with comparative figures from a Dyno Dynamics run and further backed up by 440bhp AT THE HUBS on a hub dyno (in fact the same manufacturer as the plot you have just put up). All seems reasonable to me and I admit I am starting to run out of dyno's to use and compare!
Don't confuse flow rates of injectors at standard fuel pressure, with flow rates of injectors at increased fuel pressure. I maxed out 800cc injectors at around 500bhp at standard fuel pressure. Up the fuel pressure and they will flow more....... much more. I am now currently running 1150cc injectors, since my preferred tuner does not go with increased fuel pressures. Needless to say, there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Is JD running standard fuel pressure?
As regards to the MAHA rolling road, I think you need to do some research on how the MAHA set-up works before you state the flywheel figure is BS. Put it this way..... it's no more BS than any other dyno.
This very same dyno is used by myself, with flywheel results comparable to a Dyno Dynamics rolling road as well.... much the muchness. MAHA's are designed to calculate flywheel figures. So this is the data that needs to be compared. JD5217 already has other readouts from two other different dyno's to substantiate this.
I have personally had 530bhp (repeatable) at the fly from the MAHA dyno discussed, with comparative figures from a Dyno Dynamics run and further backed up by 440bhp AT THE HUBS on a hub dyno (in fact the same manufacturer as the plot you have just put up). All seems reasonable to me and I admit I am starting to run out of dyno's to use and compare!
25 March 2008, 03:11 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
thanks for the explanation on the Maha dyno.
thank you banny
fuel pressure on mine..............still running standard fuel pressure regulator..............just.
thank you banny
fuel pressure on mine..............still running standard fuel pressure regulator..............just.
Last edited by jd5217; 25 March 2008 at 03:42 PM.
25 March 2008, 04:43 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canīt believe this, as itīs a dual ballbearing turbo... 
I have this turbo lying on my shelf, so thatīs why Iīm asking that much questions!
The SR40 works quite well at the moment and itīs not tuned yet!
Makes boost from as low as 3.000rpm...
But this one is a bit smaller than the SR55 and I wonder about the TMIC as well...do not want to change to FMIC!
I have this turbo lying on my shelf, so thatīs why Iīm asking that much questions!
The SR40 works quite well at the moment and itīs not tuned yet!
Makes boost from as low as 3.000rpm...
But this one is a bit smaller than the SR55 and I wonder about the TMIC as well...do not want to change to FMIC!
25 March 2008, 05:35 PM
#28
Canīt believe this, as itīs a dual ballbearing turbo...
If I were you, I would sell of the SR55 (if it's new I am sure you can get a good price for it) and go with a tried and trusted design like the MD321T or similar. The MD321H is also a very good turbo for around 380 - 420 bhp and should make excellent torque on your EJ22 engine with minimal lag if you want to keep the TMIC.
Last edited by STiFreak; 25 March 2008 at 05:39 PM.
25 March 2008, 09:56 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Norway\Bergen
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Legacy Turbo EJ22G,
Don't confuse flow rates of injectors at standard fuel pressure, with flow rates of injectors at increased fuel pressure. I maxed out 800cc injectors at around 500bhp at standard fuel pressure. Up the fuel pressure and they will flow more....... much more. I am now currently running 1150cc injectors, since my preferred tuner does not go with increased fuel pressures. Needless to say, there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Is JD running standard fuel pressure?
As regards to the MAHA rolling road, I think you need to do some research on how the MAHA set-up works before you state the flywheel figure is BS. Put it this way..... it's no more BS than any other dyno.
This very same dyno is used by myself, with flywheel results comparable to a Dyno Dynamics rolling road as well.... much the muchness. MAHA's are designed to calculate flywheel figures. So this is the data that needs to be compared. JD5217 already has other readouts from two other different dyno's to substantiate this.
I have personally had 530bhp (repeatable) at the fly from the MAHA dyno discussed, with comparative figures from a Dyno Dynamics run and further backed up by 440bhp AT THE HUBS on a hub dyno (in fact the same manufacturer as the plot you have just put up). All seems reasonable to me and I admit I am starting to run out of dyno's to use and compare!
Don't confuse flow rates of injectors at standard fuel pressure, with flow rates of injectors at increased fuel pressure. I maxed out 800cc injectors at around 500bhp at standard fuel pressure. Up the fuel pressure and they will flow more....... much more. I am now currently running 1150cc injectors, since my preferred tuner does not go with increased fuel pressures. Needless to say, there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Is JD running standard fuel pressure?
As regards to the MAHA rolling road, I think you need to do some research on how the MAHA set-up works before you state the flywheel figure is BS. Put it this way..... it's no more BS than any other dyno.
This very same dyno is used by myself, with flywheel results comparable to a Dyno Dynamics rolling road as well.... much the muchness. MAHA's are designed to calculate flywheel figures. So this is the data that needs to be compared. JD5217 already has other readouts from two other different dyno's to substantiate this.
I have personally had 530bhp (repeatable) at the fly from the MAHA dyno discussed, with comparative figures from a Dyno Dynamics run and further backed up by 440bhp AT THE HUBS on a hub dyno (in fact the same manufacturer as the plot you have just put up). All seems reasonable to me and I admit I am starting to run out of dyno's to use and compare!
Specific fuel useage (BSFC) and airflow is what tells the tale. Numbers don`t lie, dynos can and will, and tuners can make the dynos tell whatever they want.
As I stated earlier, almost maxed out 565cc injectors made 310bhp on a VF34 on one dyno. And an equal amount of fuel on another dyno shows "440bhp". Which one tells the truth?
500bhp is very possible on 800cc injectors at stock fuel pressure. You`re pushing it with the duty cycle though.
Actual bhp, and pub-bhp is two different things.
JD5217: Methanol is used as fuel. And AFAIK cars don`t run on pure oxygen yet. I think you have it mixed up with NAWS...
NOS oxygenates AFAIK.
26 March 2008, 09:09 AM
#30
Scooby Regular
I realise that meth is used as a fuel, why else would it be in my tank.
But from my knowledge, the methanol is more oxygenated hence more fuel mix (v Power & meth) is required.
But from my knowledge, the methanol is more oxygenated hence more fuel mix (v Power & meth) is required.