my06 wrx power run.
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SWANSEA/BRIDGEND
Posts: 3,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my06 wrx power run.
Took above car to power station yesterday for a power run following andy f remap on tuesday, did'nt knowthat their known for conservative figures, apparently MLR & RSOC wont use them for that reson, anyway well happy she did 364.7bhp & 481.3nm (thats about 355flbs), chuffed, cheers andy.
#3
Those are impressive figures for a wrx - let us know what you had done
I was thinking of getting some mods done to my 2005 WRX PPP
I thought anything above 330/330 ish wasn't safe/reliable ?
I was thinking of getting some mods done to my 2005 WRX PPP
I thought anything above 330/330 ish wasn't safe/reliable ?
#6
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SWANSEA/BRIDGEND
Posts: 3,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It got to 329.1 & 476.5nm(350ish flbs), with 3" revolution system & sport cat, zero sports induction & pipework, walbro 255lph pump, iridium plugs,td05-20g turbo, andy forrest remap, after the map fitted an sti v8 intercooler, and then had a power run at power station, Then replaced the sport cat for a de-cat, magnex up pipe, and another andy f map, back to power station and 364.7 & 481.3 nm (355flbs ish), not bad for a humble wrx, thinking about bigger injectors now.
Trending Topics
#12
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^ That's close to my Spec C in standard guise. 242bhp should be about 295bhp at the fly though Certainly was the case when I went on a RR a few months back.
TX.
Edit - no offence intended fella.
TX.
Edit - no offence intended fella.
#13
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SWANSEA/BRIDGEND
Posts: 3,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try power stations rollers, as explained to me by Mr Cookson their rr operator they had a spec c rolling roaded at power engineering's rr got a figure drove it back to power station put it on the rollers (same tank of fuel) over 15BHP less, Andy forrest told me power station are up to 50% higher losses between fly wheel and wheels than some other rr's i,e. 120bhp loss would only be 60bhp loss, so could have made circa 300bhp@wheels,could have taken it somewhere else and got a hugely exagerated figure but i allways use power station to see true progress, who do you use?
#14
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
Your std WRX injectors are coping with that spec/turbo at the moment, I'd be thinking about uprating the std WRX pistons before stepping up to the next stage on turbo/injectors, then you can run some serious boost
ps If you would like to see 400bhp, I can simply recommend a specific rolling road to you
cheers
Andy
#16
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SWANSEA/BRIDGEND
Posts: 3,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice one Not far from that target of 363 bhp then
Your std WRX injectors are coping with that spec/turbo at the moment, I'd be thinking about uprating the std WRX pistons before stepping up to the next stage on turbo/injectors, then you can run some serious boost
ps If you would like to see 400bhp, I can simply recommend a specific rolling road to you
cheers
Andy
Your std WRX injectors are coping with that spec/turbo at the moment, I'd be thinking about uprating the std WRX pistons before stepping up to the next stage on turbo/injectors, then you can run some serious boost
ps If you would like to see 400bhp, I can simply recommend a specific rolling road to you
cheers
Andy
#18
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought that RR's measured power at the wheels then used a %age to convert to fly power ie to calculate trans losses So any RR should get the wheel power about right, it just depends what %age they use to convert to fly bhp. Right or wrong?
My Spec C was about 242bhp at wheels which %aged up to 295bhp at fly ...
TX.
PS
I went to Surrey Rolling Road.
My Spec C was about 242bhp at wheels which %aged up to 295bhp at fly ...
TX.
PS
I went to Surrey Rolling Road.
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North East
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Impressive figures! What did you get when Andy calculated the power for you on the road?
Not had mine on a RR but Andy said mine would likely be running 360/390 by doing some more wizardry on his laptop. I'm running an STI with a decat and uprated fuel pump... heavily modded lol
If you are still reading this post, cheer Andy. The car is so much more responsive and better to drive.
Not had mine on a RR but Andy said mine would likely be running 360/390 by doing some more wizardry on his laptop. I'm running an STI with a decat and uprated fuel pump... heavily modded lol
If you are still reading this post, cheer Andy. The car is so much more responsive and better to drive.
#21
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
Wrong I'm afraid. Rolling roads differ in design to the extent that none of the different makes will agree on a wheel hp figure. The DD you ran on tends to give the highest wheel figures (thats one reason MLR quote WHP ) The MAHA rollers show higher losses but comparing the two via flywheel figures, they are usually within 5% of each other.
If tested on a DD or Dastek rolling road, this car would show over 300 WHP.
Thanks Mikkel I normally only run the power prediction when mapping at home on my purpose built track its difficult finding a proper level stretch when I'm mapping away, Wales in this case.
cheers
Andy
Last edited by Andy.F; 08 October 2007 at 08:54 AM.
#22
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SWANSEA/BRIDGEND
Posts: 3,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks andy for sorting that out, was starting to feel abit harassed by mr.c & mr.d allmost asiff they where calling me a bull****er, anyway top job once again.
#25
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
Here is an example of the other end of the rolling road transmission loss level.
Does this do more to impress the WHP crew ? shouldn't it have 400 at the flywheel ?
Does this do more to impress the WHP crew ? shouldn't it have 400 at the flywheel ?
#27
Scooby Senior
iTrader: (41)
I know you made 242WHP on the RR, the question was "What was the WHP when you had it mapped ?" I thought AF did road mapping and would therefore have the power at the wheels whilst mapping.
Don't take offence people like me are genuinely interested in what mods you have done and what the real world power benefits have been. To congratulate you on a RR figure would be patronising in the least without knowing the road WHP. I found it interesting for example that your BHP was higher than the torque figure, generally the 2.5's I have seen mapped are higher in torque. (not a criticism, just an interested observation).
If I thought you were bullsh1tting I would tell you rather than take an interest in the modifications you have done. The fact that you have a modified 2.5 is of more interest to me than some figure from a generous or indeed conservative RR
Andy I think you are getting the wrong end of the stick, what I was after was road mapping data not more RR fiction.
Don't take offence people like me are genuinely interested in what mods you have done and what the real world power benefits have been. To congratulate you on a RR figure would be patronising in the least without knowing the road WHP. I found it interesting for example that your BHP was higher than the torque figure, generally the 2.5's I have seen mapped are higher in torque. (not a criticism, just an interested observation).
If I thought you were bullsh1tting I would tell you rather than take an interest in the modifications you have done. The fact that you have a modified 2.5 is of more interest to me than some figure from a generous or indeed conservative RR
Andy I think you are getting the wrong end of the stick, what I was after was road mapping data not more RR fiction.
#28
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope that you don't mean me! I'm just a simpleton really as I don't understand it at all & your explanation above hasn't helped, sorry
My standard car was RR'd at SRR as stated above when it got circa 242bhp at wheels & 295bhp at the fly. I then got a few bits & pieces done followed by a remap by Bob R where Bob quoted power as close to 300bhp at wheels & about 375bhp at the fly. Still doesn't mean a lot to me although I do know that the car is now fecking fast!
TX.
My standard car was RR'd at SRR as stated above when it got circa 242bhp at wheels & 295bhp at the fly. I then got a few bits & pieces done followed by a remap by Bob R where Bob quoted power as close to 300bhp at wheels & about 375bhp at the fly. Still doesn't mean a lot to me although I do know that the car is now fecking fast!
TX.
#29
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SWANSEA/BRIDGEND
Posts: 3,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a simpleyton too, i was just pleased with the figures cos it came out of the box with 227bhp @ fly and now its scary quick, dont know much about rr's only the one i used gives conservative figures, as for whp & transmition losses .