Notices
General Technical
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: CARiD

Twinscroll torque vs single scroll

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 30, 2013 | 04:53 PM
  #1  
toyney83's Avatar
toyney83
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
From: grimsby
Default Twinscroll torque vs single scroll

What is it that makes a twinscroll setup produce so much more torque than a single scroll? I've a 2005 uk sti with a built 2.1 and I'm looking at converting it to twinscroll. Is it the equal length headers or the twinscroll turbo that give the jdm's that bit more? Thanks in advance
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2013 | 05:33 PM
  #2  
dnc's Avatar
dnc
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
Default

Think the main point with the JDM set up is that it produces much more torque in the lower rev range, rather than much more peak torque. I believe it is mainly the twin-scroll set unit (it reduces interference of the exhaust pulses in the manifold by having twin feeds to the turbine) rather than the headers that gives this effect, though the EL headers are more efficient also.

Last edited by dnc; Nov 30, 2013 at 05:37 PM.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2013 | 07:50 PM
  #3  
TonyBurns's Avatar
TonyBurns
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 2
From: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Default

The equal length headers help with the increased torque and you get a better torque range lower down which is where you need it, they do produce more than a similar single scroll but that is all to do with the complete setup.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2013 | 08:03 PM
  #4  
ronjeramy's Avatar
ronjeramy
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 7,833
Likes: 0
From: Cas Vegas
Default

Don't the jdm's have different cams and poss heads or is that just the spec c?
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2013 | 09:04 PM
  #5  
toyney83's Avatar
toyney83
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
From: grimsby
Default

The jdm and uk heads are the same but cams are a different profile (don't know which). The spec c has big port heads I believe
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2013 | 08:01 AM
  #6  
craigyp's Avatar
craigyp
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,788
Likes: 0
From: Mansfield
Default

u still not happy with the torque then mate??
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2013 | 09:56 AM
  #7  
Tidgy's Avatar
Tidgy
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 23,118
Likes: 150
From: Notts
Default

Originally Posted by craigyp
u still not happy with the torque then mate??
should have gone 2.5 if torque was what was after.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2013 | 10:41 AM
  #8  
LegacySTi's Avatar
LegacySTi
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,785
Likes: 0
From: Dublin, Eire
Default

Originally Posted by toyney83
The jdm and uk heads are the same but cams are a different profile (don't know which). The spec c has big port heads I believe

Incorrect.

all jdm newage sti heads are big port.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2013 | 10:55 AM
  #9  
jura11's Avatar
jura11
Scooby Regular
15 Year Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,523
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by LegacySTi
Incorrect.

all jdm newage sti heads are big port.
+1


JDM WRX are too big port,cams are different on JDM WRX,both are AVCS

Jura
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2013 | 11:48 AM
  #10  
toyney83's Avatar
toyney83
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
From: grimsby
Default

Originally Posted by craigyp
u still not happy with the torque then mate??
Torques not bad mate but always looking for ways to improve

Originally Posted by Tidgy
should have gone 2.5 if torque was what was after.
Normally I'd agree, if it was just for road use. Seen some pretty decent results from the jdms lately so just looking into what makes them different
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2013 | 11:50 AM
  #11  
Tidgy's Avatar
Tidgy
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 23,118
Likes: 150
From: Notts
Default

2.35 if for track as well, 2,1 is just the latest fad.

the phrase no replacement for displacemet def rings true mate.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2013 | 11:51 PM
  #12  
MartynJ's Avatar
MartynJ
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,629
Likes: 3
From: Enginetuner Plymouth for 4wd RR Mapping Apexi Ecutek Alcatek Proper Garage More than just a laptop!
Default

Originally Posted by Tidgy
2.35 if for track as well, 2,1 is just the latest fad.

the phrase no replacement for displacement def rings true mate.
The other one that still rings true is "Horses for courses"
Toyney had a 2.5 and it didn't suit him.
In my experience, the 2.1 still offers the best balance when it comes to fast road/track day use. It's far from just a fad and as we've probably built more than anyone (Including Toyney's) I'm quite well placed to say that.

What turbo do you currently have again Mike ?
As we didn't set yours up I can't remember !
Reply
Old Dec 2, 2013 | 08:59 AM
  #13  
toyney83's Avatar
toyney83
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
From: grimsby
Default

Hi Martyn. I'm running an md321t at present. My 1st choice was to have this converted to billet. Then the more I looked, the better a twinscroll conversion looked (seen as I already have the sump etc) but would want to go the whole hog which would mean jdm heads by the looks of it. So figure it means I'll be after some equal length headers and up pipe. A new turbo (twinscroll sc46) downpipe and some jdm heads. I'd sell my current headers and turbo which would fund a good part of the conversion. Thanks Martyn
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JimBowen
ICE
5
Jul 2, 2023 01:54 PM
KAS35RSTI
Subaru
27
Nov 4, 2021 07:12 PM
crazyspeedfreakz
ScoobyNet General
5
Sep 29, 2015 05:04 PM
Phil3822
ICE
3
Sep 26, 2015 07:12 PM




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:57 AM.