I've got my STi now, and it needs a turbo upgrade by the end of September, that leaves a month left in the local drag race season. I'm totally up in the air at this point on the sizing - I was originally considering a mild upgrade that would be better for auto-x, but the 2nd gear is so short on the the sti that you could run a turbo with a bit higher boost threshold than with a wrx gearbox. Plus it's really tempting to make a streetable 450 crank hp.

I have a catless 3" turbo back going on the car soon, an AVO intake pipe, and need to get a ball and spring MBC. I intend to start out by running the turbo on the stock ECU with the boost around 15.5-16 psi to redline, monitoring the results with delta dash. I will eventually get a custom ECUTEK tune by a local tuner, and also setup one of the higher end aquamist kits (running water/methanol), with a custom tune. Probably stick with the stock intercooler, stock injectors, upgrade the fuel pump to deal better with the boost increase.

Here's the list of turbos I was considering, and my comments:

18G: My original choice. Should spool like a stock car, given the other mods. Maxes out around 350 whp on race gas. Might have trouble holding 16 psi to redline on the 2.5, or at least would be really pushing it on pump fuel. Cheap price.

Used old style 1820: See a few available around $1000. Seems to be sized between the 18g/20g, considerably more lag than a 18g, but not much more power?

20g w/7cm hot side, 6 or 6h wheel. Should make some solid power (~375 txs WHP) with half decent, but not great spool.

AVO450: I believe Clark said it was making decent boost by 4000 rpm, but would also have very solid top end, over 400 TXS whp on race gas. State of the art GT3037 design, ball bearing center, water cooled. Very nice turbo, but expensive.

Green w/7cm/6h: Big bad mofo, on par with the AVO500. I think this turbo is just too big for my needs, both in lag and power output.

If anybody can help fill in the blanks, or help me make up my mind, I would apriciate it.

Thanks,

Kevin

whaaaaat? No love?

Kevin

The 18g would be a solid turbo for your car. Real nice spool up, half the price of an 1820, and decent top end. I have a feeling you might be wanting more though after awhile. I know I am (it's like an addiction) That is why this turbo kicks ass. When you do want more, you can send it in and make it a Green.

I say try the 18g out for awhile.

Originally posted by silverscooby
The 18g would be a solid turbo for your car. Real nice spool up, half the price of an 1820, and decent top end. I have a feeling you might be wanting more though after awhile. I know I am (it's like an addiction) That is why this turbo kicks ass. When you do want more, you can send it in and make it a Green.

I say try the 18g out for awhile.

That was my original idea, take the 18g get as much as I could out of it. Then sell it off when I'm ready to upgrade. It is very tempting to proceed directly to the AVO450, though, which is clearly the superior turbo of the bunch - I think it would give me the big power without being too laggy when fully tuned.

If the AVO450 makes full boost at 4000 rpms in 4th gear, how laggy is it - getting it to spool up? My vf29 would make full boost by 3000 Rpm's in forth gear, but would take until 4000 rpms to make full boost if you nailed it in 2nd gear. I guess it depends on the load.

Hum. I need to go and check the Rpm vs. speed for 2nd gear in my car.

Thanks,

Kevin

I think he meant, get the 18G and when you get tired of it, it can be upgraded to a 20G or probably a FP green.

No need to sell it.

I don't know how much you want to push the envelope, or even how much more the sti engine can handle. But if you raised your redline a little, that would make the 450 alot more manageable, and would be better suited to the 2.5 than the others with a higher redline. Just throwing the idea out there, good luck with your choice.

Well, honestly the stock turbo is very good... just the ECU calls it quits before the turbo can get happy. It seems like this turbo wants to run well north of the stock 14psi, and who knows where it ends because the fuel cut steps in way too soon.

being stuck with 16.9 psi for your max, would lead me to advise getting maybe a cheap VF22 till the ECU is cracked and the turbo market settles down?

The other thing you might think of is getting an aftermarket header for a 03 JDM STi with the twin entry turbo and then making a custom 3037 setup using the twin entry version of that turbo.

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
Well, honestly the stock turbo is very good... just the ECU calls it quits before the turbo can get happy. It seems like this turbo wants to run well north of the stock 14psi, and who knows where it ends because the fuel cut steps in way too soon.


I really have to strongly disagree with this. The evidence I've seen shows that the stock turbo can't hold more than 13 psi to redline. When Clark swaped their's out to an AVO450, which could very easily hold 16 psi at redline, it made 80 hp more at redline than the stock turbo, yes, 80 more hp on 2.5 more psi of boost....:eek:. That's a clear indicator that the stock turbo is maxed out and blowing hot air. The ECU and stock fuel system handles the bigger turbo and more boost just fine, up to about 15.5-16 psi, but it's really dependant on max airflow. Also, if you look at Dan's graph here, it shows the stock turbo can't make any more boost at redline even with a MBC, downpipe and intake:

http://www.godspeedinc.com/images/boostdphpbc.jpg

http://www.godspeedinc.com/images/DynoDPHPBC.jpg

What else do you expect from vf30 sized compressor? That 13.5 psi at redline is equivalent to 20 psi on a EJ20.....can a VF30 do more than 20 psi at redline on a EJ20? NO!

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket



What else do you expect from vf30 sized compressor? That 13.5 psi at redline is equivalent to 20 psi on a EJ20.....can a VF30 do more than 20 psi at redline on a EJ20? NO!

Kevin

If the EJ257 were flowing the same air, it'd make essentially the same power. In this case it's not making as much power as an EJ20 with a similarly sized turbo with 20PSI at 7000rpm.

25% more displacement doesn't = 25% more air though the motor; There is a lot more to it then that.

strange, I'm keeping almost 15 psi in 5th at redline.

I'm thinking its capible of holding alot more boost if you can kick it up higher to start with. my VF34 would trail like that if you set the peak boost to 16 or 17psi. Set the peak boost to 19psi and it would start to creep... BAD!

The important thing is to findout either by begging for a compressor map, or through real life data is to see if the CFM requirements of the EJ257 is dragging the VF39 off the peak efficency island at high boost or not.

has there been any talk of the det that has happening on the stock sti's? i would be afraid to turn up boost any more than stock where there is already det...
even if - i am hard pressed to find any tuner that has cracked the sti's ecu code... this would probably prove to be the best first upgrade for it in order to smooth out stock power and allow a safer application of boost..
IMO - wait for ECU reflash - then go nuts...:banana: (go you crazy banana - go!)

Originally posted by nmyeti


If the EJ257 were flowing the same air, it'd make essentially the same power. In this case it's not making as much power as an EJ20 with a similarly sized turbo with 20PSI at 7000rpm.

25% more displacement doesn't = 25% more air though the motor; There is a lot more to it then that.

Of course there is. But there's no way to know all the variables right now either. When sizing a compressor side, in general, displacement is linearly related to the rate of air mass you need to flow. So it is very valid rough comparison.

Of course the EJ257 isn't making more power - it's running pig rich with marginal timing.

Kevin

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
strange, I'm keeping almost 15 psi in 5th at redline.

I'm thinking its capible of holding alot more boost if you can kick it up higher to start with. my VF34 would trail like that if you set the peak boost to 16 or 17psi. Set the peak boost to 19psi and it would start to creep... BAD!

The important thing is to findout either by begging for a compressor map, or through real life data is to see if the CFM requirements of the EJ257 is dragging the VF39 off the peak efficency island at high boost or not.

That 15 psi is not suprising in 5th, I beleive those dyno's were taken in 4th. Regardless, I'm sure the turbo maxed out.

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket




Of course the EJ257 isn't making more power - it's running pig rich with marginal timing.

Kevin

Not on my dyno.

Originally posted by nmyeti


Not on my dyno.

So you're saying the sti couldn't make more power with a better tune? So we don't need utec's? :lol:

Please enlighten us to why else an EJ257 would make less power than a EJ205 at the same air mass flow rate? I'm sure the more restrictive exhaust housing on the VF39 vs. the VF30 is also hurting the sti's to end. Or do the cams just suck?

How do you explain the very linear tapering of boost that we see above on the above boost plot for the MBC car. To me, that looks like the turbo is maxed out in flow by 4000 RPM's and just can't pump enough air to hold the boost up as the RPM's rise.

Kevin

SR50

I have seen the same thing. The 257's have just not made alot more power then the EJ20's. I think with the right turbo you can certainly make alot of power with one. It will take the market a year before this really happens.

On to the turbo choice and my opinions:

I think the stock turbo is worthless. In fact I would not even run an MBC. I would replace it right away.

With the AVO450 on the STI motor a solid 80whp was gained at redline. In fact, peak power was made at redline. Around 7000 rpm. The AVO's are damn nice turbos. I wish people would use them more so we could see what they really can do. They also open up the idea of hybrids. The AVO450 is a Garrett GT3037-10. The AVO500 is exactly the same with a larger Exhaust turbine wheel. Since they use the -10 cartridge We (a bunch of us in the sidelines) agree that the compressor is a bit small. It uses a nice To4e compressor housing but the GT30 2 inch wheel.

I think from what we have all learned in the last month I would personally go with a turbo that had the largest and most highest flowing backside on the new STI. Its certainly going to need it and in the little experiment on the STI with 80whp at redline being gained at only 2 psi more.... People should take note.

My personal Choice for a bolt on turbo for the new STI would be these in this order:


1. An FP 20G with the 8Cm housing and 6H wheel (impossible to get but if you can get one do it)

2.An AVO450 or 500 with a -12 cartridge :banana: The big wheels the turbo needs to make Big power.

3.An AVO500 (Huge exhaust flow, Real GT center and wheels, To4E housing. Still bolts on.

4. An AVO450. Slightly less lag. Basically the same turbo. Smaller Exhaust turbine wheel.

5. An old style PE1820 with some port work on the exhaust side and a clipped wheel or a larger wheel. Increase the ehaust flow of this turbo and I expect you would make ALOT more power with it. These are popping up used now for $800-$1000. The old ones have the large Compressor. I will have one for sale in a few weeks.

Other then that I would do a custom setup using a 60-1 or a T series turbo.

Pic shows the AVO450 next to the US STI turbo the VF39. Notice the large and in charge backside to the AVO450. Its as large as the T04E compressor.

AVO450 0.6 AR 48Trim 2.08/3.00 Inch Compressor wheel 0.86 AR exhaust housing 84 Trim 2.03/2.22 Inch turbine wheel. This turbo is exactly this garrett GTR:

GT30 700177-0010 48Trim Compressor 2.08/3.00 84 trim turbine 2.03/2.22 turbine wheel. 44lbs flow.

AVO500 uses a 2.16/2.36 Inch turbine wheel but is the same otherwise. So.. The AVO500 uses the -10 compressor with the -12 turbine side. Very odd combo. Oposite problem of the PE1820... The AVO500 has a big caboose. The 1820 has a big front side but not much junk in the trunk.

Clark


http://www.wishbone.audi0.com/~clark/images/sti/turboswap/DSC02004.jpg

Originally posted by Red Rocket


So you're saying the sti couldn't make more power with a better tune? So we don't need utec's? :lol:

Please enlighten us to why else an EJ257 would make less power than a EJ205 at the same air mass flow rate? I'm sure the more restrictive exhaust housing on the VF39 vs. the VF30 is also hurting the sti's to end. Or do the cams just suck?

How do you explain the very linear tapering of boost that we see above on the above boost plot for the MBC car. To me, that looks like the turbo is maxed out in flow by 4000 RPM's and just can't pump enough air to hold the boost up as the RPM's rise.

Kevin

Kevin,
You are confusing a few things that I’ve said and or reading too much into them.

13psi on the EJ257@7000 does not = 20PSI on an EJ20@7000rpms.

That was my first statement. When you increase displacement 25% you don't automatically increase airflow 25%. This is a fairly common misconception that people have when they spend time calculating points on a compressor map. In the real world it doesn't quite work out that way.

As to why the STI with it's stock turbo is falling on it's face on the top end, I have 2-3 guesses, but nothing is absolute, and until I end up with a chance to actually test the car when I am in control of timing I won't be able to give you feedback on how well my guesses play out in the real world, and frankly I don't care to speculate aloud since sometime in the past year or so, my thinking out-loud privileges have been revoked.

The stock timing is fairly aggressive, and the stock A/F ratios (At least on our STI) are a bit on the conservative side, but not what I’d call pig rich. I don't think there is much to be gained by just leaning out the car. On a perfect day we'll say we could gain 20hp at redline by leaning the car out. That 20Hp still doesn't put the car on par with an EJ205 running 20psi at redline.

The point of my contribution to this discussion is simply to remind you that while it's nice and neat on paper to just add 25% to your compressor map calculations, it's not going to play out that way in the real world.

Do I think that the stock EJ257 has more potential then a stock EJ205? Yes! Do I think it has 25% more potential? Well if it does, it’s more because the rods and pistons are stronger to allow for higher peak boost pressures then it is because of the added displacement.

Assuming I build a 2.0L motor and a 2.5L motor both running “no holds barred” on heads, cams, turbo selection, boost pressure, which would I take? I’d take the 2.5L because it’s going to be more enjoyable with the extra displacement around town. The 2.0L may actually be capable of producing more peak HP. IIRC the world Subaru EJ dyno record is still held by a 2.0L motor.

This is not to say that I don’t think the EJ257 can’t be tuned, or that positive results can’t be had.

per my conversations with APS they recommend the APS SR40 with their 20.0 size turbine, good for up to 450hp. If you want stock-like spoolup then the standard SR40 should be the ticket.

AZScoobie
Thankyou for this information.

The AVO450.
As you have used this turbo on USDM STI did you find the stock injectors maxing out. STI rate them at 534cc.

I used delta dash at the last track day and recorded IDC at over 90% and my EGT's were 1550F in all gears using 94oct. 5th gear the car finally starts to go with boost set at 16psi.

The Road Course here is at 3600ft, altitude correction usually puts it at 4500ft. I found the VF39 is so bad in the first 4 gears that anything above 5000rpm the boost fell flat on its face using EBC and turboxs exhaust. My old Stage 4 would eat the STI to 100mph then the STI would eat the Stage 4 from 100mph on.

Nathan
The AMG SLK 32 with cam job and smaller blower pulley is killing me, 1.5sec a lap. Big big order to be placed when UTEC etc etc is finished.;)

http://jidoshaphoto.com/BeyondTrackDay-Aug0703/img_105_0581.html
http://jidoshaphoto.com/BeyondTrackDay-Aug0703/img_105_0582.html

Had him by 5sec a lap when it rained thou

Wombat. IDC's where in the 90's. Once the ROM file for the STI ECU is out or the UTEC is ready we can fix this. AF was 10.0 to 1 to 10.5 to 1.

Ditch the stock turbo. I personally think its to small for anything past stock, especially in a road race situation.

Clark

Thank's guys for all you input.

Any idea on the spool of the 20g with a 7cm/6h - RPM's to hit 1 bar boost on the sti?

Thanks,

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket
Thank's guys for all you input.

Any idea on the spool of the 20g with a 7cm/6h - RPM's to hit 1 bar boost on the sti?

Thanks,

Kevin


The US STI does not spool turbos much faster. Cams and ports cross out the advantages of the AVCS and Displacement to some degree. On the STI tests We ran with an MBC on the AVO450 200-300 rpm at max shorter to get to 14 psi for the EJ257 versus the same exact turbo on an EJ207.

Clark

Originally posted by AZScoobie



The US STI does not spool turbos much faster. Cams and ports cross out the advantages of the AVCS and Displacement to some degree. On the STI tests We ran with an MBC on the AVO450 200-300 rpm at max shorter to get to 14 psi for the EJ257 versus the same exact turbo on an EJ207.

Clark

Clark,
Very interesting info. As of a few hours ago I got hold of a rebuilt AVO 450.:D

I presume from your posts the 450 turbo will run on the stock fuel system at least upto 16psi. Is this correct

Originally posted by Wombat North


Clark,
Very interesting info. As of a few hours ago I got hold of a rebuilt AVO 450.:D

I presume from your posts the 450 turbo will run on the stock fuel system at least upto 16psi. Is this correct


ON the car we tested (which is owned by Rich) 16 psi is safe on the stock fuel system with about 94-95 octane unleaded fuel.

Clark

Maybe t67 or GT2835 will satisfy you?

Originally posted by calworld
Maybe t67 or GT2835 will satisfy you?

Isn't the T67 rather large, and not bolt on?

The GT2835 is smaller than the AVO450, which is basicly a bolt on GT3037. I wonder if AVO makes a bolt on version of the 2835?

Kevin

The AVO 400 Is according to one site a GT25 turbo.

Personaly I just ordered a AVO 500 and called it good. The stock turbo + boost controler I can get positive pressure at 1,500 and 5psi at 2K rpm. So I'm not really worried about it. Plus the motor pulls hard enough OFF boost......

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
The AVO 400 Is according to one site a GT25 turbo.

Personaly I just ordered a AVO 500 and called it good. The stock turbo + boost controler I can get positive pressure at 1,500 and 5psi at 2K rpm. So I'm not really worried about it. Plus the motor pulls hard enough OFF boost......

That's SICK, good for you! I'm just not sure if I need to shell out the big $$$ for an AVO unit just yet, maybe I'll just get a 20g and see how things turn out.

Thanks,

Kevin

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
The AVO 400 Is according to one site a GT25 turbo.

Personaly I just ordered a AVO 500 and called it good. The stock turbo + boost controler I can get positive pressure at 1,500 and 5psi at 2K rpm. So I'm not really worried about it. Plus the motor pulls hard enough OFF boost......

The AVO400 is indead a GT25 based turbo. The exhaust side is a .64 housing and the exhaust turbine is much smaller.

0.6 Compressor 48 trim 2.09/3.00 Inch wheel. 0.64 AR exhaust side 76 trim 1.85/2.12 Inch turbine.

Probably spools fast on a 2.0. Its rated at 39 lbs flow which is about like a PE1820. Its not that popular because its not a huge leap over some of the bolt on IHI units. At least not on paper.



Clark

local guy has/had a surplus one after getting his 20g w 8cm housing, and I wanted to get it from him for the drags tonight, but meh.


Anyhoo I already need to change the tranny fluid from all the dragracing and autoX so I'll give the car a weekend off.....

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
local guy has/had a surplus one after getting his 20g w 8cm housing, and I wanted to get it from him for the drags tonight, but meh.


Anyhoo I already need to change the tranny fluid from all the dragracing and autoX so I'll give the car a weekend off.....


I know that turbo! I felt its pull at 1.9 bar of boost down the back straight at PIR! Sick. Just Sick.

Clark

Originally posted by AZScoobie


The AVO400 is indead a GT25 based turbo. The exhaust side is a .64 housing and the exhaust turbine is much smaller.

0.6 Compressor 48 trim 2.09/3.00 Inch wheel. 0.64 AR exhaust side 76 trim 1.85/2.12 Inch turbine.

Probably spools fast on a 2.0. Its rated at 39 lbs flow which is about like a PE1820. Its not that popular because its not a huge leap over some of the bolt on IHI units. At least not on paper.



Clark

I bet that would make a nice little auto-x turbo.

Kevin

I've found a buyer for my sti wheels, so I've decided to order an AVO450 by the end of the week. Should be pretty sick. I see no reason to go for an AVO500, as the only difference is a larger turbine wheel.

I decided against the forced performance 20g or green because of the 7cm vs. 8cm exhaust housing issue, and their recent unwillingness to discuss their turbos......:lol: I have a distinct inpression that the FP guys will release a bolt on GT series turbo eventually, but they aren't saying anything, so I'm not going to wait.

Speak up now if you think I should do otherwise.

Thanks,

Kevin

The 500 has a bigger exaust side, not compressor side. Anyhoo there is only one 500 in the current shippment of AVO turbos comming in to the US and its MINE :disco: :banana: :disco:

But yes the 450 should be virtualy the same to most people, if not better.

How is the spool up from the AVO450 compared to the new PE1820? (That is a turbo I know)

Are there compressor maps available for the AVO400 and AVO450?

Mark.

Has anyone looked at GT32 or 35 flow maps: http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/servlet/com.turbobygarrett.servlet.TurboByGarrettCTR

Click Go on the picture to download the PDF

I was reading somewhere that you could get these turbos in a twin scroll setup.

Brad

Originally posted by Red Rocket


I decided against the forced performance 20g or green because of the 7cm vs. 8cm exhaust housing issue, and their recent unwillingness to discuss their turbos......:lol: I have a distinct inpression that the FP guys will release a bolt on GT series turbo eventually, but they aren't saying anything, so I'm not going to wait.






Half the guys griping about the 8cm vs. 7cm housings don't even know what that measurement actually means. If you want to put 550whp down you might want the 8cm, otherwise you'll be better off with the few hundred rpm earlier spool that the 7cm provides.

If you want an 8cm^2 housing and can demonstrate that you are capable of using it to it's penitential, I have no doubt that one can be provided for you.

What really kills me is watching guys that are not in the 12s talk about how they need an 8cm^2 exhaust housing. The wildly popular and highly successful Red turbo from Forced Performance has run 9 second ¼ mile times at 140+mph using the 8cm housing without n2o.

As for Forced Performance not talking about the recipe of their turbochargers, well I don’t blame them. Subaru guys, for the most part, are way too married to their slide rules and not familiar enough with a torque wrench. A lot of you guys are giddy with all the different options for the build of these turbochargers simply because it’s another “spec” to talk about in your mod list and are making assumptions about components that you have absolutely NO experience with. The guys at Forced Performance know what they are doing and build a fantastic turbocharger. When dealing with the black art of turbo charging, it’s nice to have a company who you completely trust to build you a proper system. They have real world experience with every combination that they’ve provided us and are the type of company that is very interested in seeing their turbochargers perform well.

The 8cm^2 housing was a compromise. It was NOT the desired choice, but it was available and cost effective when they started this project. Almost everyone that has used an 8cm^2 housing would be better served by the 7cm^2 housing unless they plan to run large shots of N2o though the motor. Spend a few minutes looking at their website and their DSM products to learn what housing is appropriate for you. The 8cm housing is used in 600whp turbochargers. While bigger is often better, in this case you are wasting a bit of spool up for no real gains on the top end since no one who has one of these turbochargers installed is at the flow limits of even the 7cm housing.

As for their future projects with Subaru; you’ll have to talk to them about that. Based on what we’ve know about the size of the compressor housing, I’d not expect to see more than another few lbs of air out of the compressor side anytime soon. If you are serious enough to want 65lbs of air, you should be smart enough to know that it’s going to require some additional fabrication work.

-Nathan
www.turboxs.com

How would a VF22 fair on an STi? They're so damn cheap and easy to get a hold of!

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
The 500 has a bigger exaust side, not compressor side. Anyhoo there is only one 500 in the current shippment of AVO turbos comming in to the US and its MINE :disco: :banana: :disco:

But yes the 450 should be virtualy the same to most people, if not better.

I knew that, I just miss-typed. It's the turbine wheel size, as far as I know the housings are the same AR.

Thanks,

Kevin

Originally posted by nmyeti


What really kills me is watching guys that are not in the 12s talk about how they need an 8cm^2 exhaust housing. The wildly popular and highly successful Red turbo from Forced Performance has run 9 second ¼ mile times at 140+mph using the 8cm housing without n2o

-Nathan
www.turboxs.com

:lol: Thats funny I feel the same way.

Back in the 3.8 turbo days I was running a TE-44... Tons of others were running 60's and bigger and were wondering why they were stuck in the 13's and I was running low 12's with a 44.

People like to do the same with injectors.

I cant tell you how many cars I have seen with HUGE injectors and a HUGE turbo that were running slower than my car with a TE-44 and 36lb/hr injectors.

BIGGER IS NOT BETTER people...

Oversizing a turbo is one of the best ways to make a car run like crap.

I cant wait to see this outcome... :devil:

~v6

Originally posted by nmyeti





Half the guys griping about the 8cm vs. 7cm housings don't even know what that measurement actually means. If you want to put 550whp down you might want the 8cm, otherwise you'll be better off with the few hundred rpm earlier spool that the 7cm provides.

If you want an 8cm^2 housing and can demonstrate that you are capable of using it to it's penitential, I have no doubt that one can be provided for you.

What really kills me is watching guys that are not in the 12s talk about how they need an 8cm^2 exhaust housing. The wildly popular and highly successful Red turbo from Forced Performance has run 9 second ¼ mile times at 140+mph using the 8cm housing without n2o.

As for Forced Performance not talking about the recipe of their turbochargers, well I don’t blame them. Subaru guys, for the most part, are way too married to their slide rules and not familiar enough with a torque wrench. A lot of you guys are giddy with all the different options for the build of these turbochargers simply because it’s another “spec” to talk about in your mod list and are making assumptions about components that you have absolutely NO experience with. The guys at Forced Performance know what they are doing and build a fantastic turbocharger. When dealing with the black art of turbo charging, it’s nice to have a company who you completely trust to build you a proper system. They have real world experience with every combination that they’ve provided us and are the type of company that is very interested in seeing their turbochargers perform well.

The 8cm^2 housing was a compromise. It was NOT the desired choice, but it was available and cost effective when they started this project. Almost everyone that has used an 8cm^2 housing would be better served by the 7cm^2 housing unless they plan to run large shots of N2o though the motor. Spend a few minutes looking at their website and their DSM products to learn what housing is appropriate for you. The 8cm housing is used in 600whp turbochargers. While bigger is often better, in this case you are wasting a bit of spool up for no real gains on the top end since no one who has one of these turbochargers installed is at the flow limits of even the 7cm housing.

As for their future projects with Subaru; you’ll have to talk to them about that. Based on what we’ve know about the size of the compressor housing, I’d not expect to see more than another few lbs of air out of the compressor side anytime soon. If you are serious enough to want 65lbs of air, you should be smart enough to know that it’s going to require some additional fabrication work.

-Nathan
www.turboxs.com



What happened to the "bigger is better" rule of thumb on exhaust housings? Is it out the window now that the 8cm^2 housings aren't as available? Why is all the testing you guys did and posted here with a 8cm, if most of the consumer turbos are going to be supplied with a 7cm? I personally have no idea if the 7 will make a difference vs. the 8, but you guys haven't even tested the 7cm seemingly?

I do know what the 7cm^2 measurement is - it's the crossectional area of the smallest area of the turbine inlet nozzle, before circumfential volute to the turbine wheel. It's basicly a restrictor, the smallest pipe the exhaust gas gets to flow through. It's a hole about 3 cm in diameter. Does the fact that the 8cm^2 is 14% larger in area matter very much? I don't know, but it seems to me that 14% is a big deal when you have 2 feet of exhaust piping before it on a subaru. Of course it's not as big a deal on DSM's because the turbo is bolted to the manifold right next to the heads. Backpressure, it's not good.

Maybe the 7cm^2 housing is fine, I don't know. I'd just like to see some test results. It's pretty hard to compare the mitsu housing sizes to Garrett's A/R measurement of the turbine side. Is there any way to make a conversion without measuring one directly? The AVO's .86 A/R is solidly in the middle of the range offered for the GT30 turbine housings, but the turbo still spools by 4000 RPM on an untuned sti.

I also managed to come across this compressor map for the GT3037-10:

http://www.slowboyracing.com/GT%20turbos/compressor%20maps/GT10_2.jpg

You can compare that to the 20g map:

http://cherrypicker.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/td06h-20g-cfm.gif

Conversion factor is 1 lb/min = 14.472 cfm. Very similar, but the 3037 is a bit bigger. Whatever. Though, that plot is for an A/R .70 compressor housing and the AVO450 is supplied with a .6. Hummmm. Maybe not exactly the right map?

As for the dig on guys that aren't fast yet - that doesn't mean we can't be fast in the future. At the rate you're going, I'll be into the 11's before you, and I'll autocross the same setup.

I placed my order for a AVO450 today, but they are backordered. The next shipment of them will be in a couple weeks, and there are a limited number coming in.

Kevin

V6, Nathan... My hat is off to you. Finally someone is trying to put some sence into the discussions on this board. I too can vouch for FP guys. I've been dealing with Robert since 96 and every single turbo he has made for me just RULED! If anybody know how to put a good performing turbo together it's him. Too many guys here do bench racing and count their horsepower based on how many stickers they have and by how much they paid for a part and how shiny it is. Those are the guys that badmouth someone/ something because they don't understand how things work but try to make themselfs sound smart by bashing good people/ products. Not good.:disco: I with they'd listen to those who know and have realy world experience.
Ok, done ranging.

Alex...

Originally posted by V6TurboTA


:lol: Thats funny I feel the same way.

Back in the 3.8 turbo days I was running a TE-44... Tons of others were running 60's and bigger and were wondering why they were stuck in the 13's and I was running low 12's with a 44.

People like to do the same with injectors.

I cant tell you how many cars I have seen with HUGE injectors and a HUGE turbo that were running slower than my car with a TE-44 and 36lb/hr injectors.

BIGGER IS NOT BETTER people...

Oversizing a turbo is one of the best ways to make a car run like crap.

I cant wait to see this outcome... :devil:

~v6

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here Brandon. I should be able to get full boost by 4000 rpm with this AVO turbo (hopefully even better eventually), have good responsiveness, and still have awesome top end. This setup should be alot more streetable than a 20g/8cm/TD06h on a EJ205, for instance.

Kevin

Originally posted by amelnikov
V6, Nathan... My hat is off to you. Finally someone is trying to put some sence into the discussions on this board. I too can vouch for FP guys. I've been dealing with Robert for since 96 and every single turbo he has made for me just RULED! If anybody know how to put a good performing turbo together it's him. Too many guys here do bench racing and count their horsepower based on how many stickers they have and by how much they paid for a part and how shiny it is. Those are the guys that badmouth someone/ something because they don't understand how things work but try to make themselfs sound smart by bashing good people/ products. Not good.:disco: I with they'd listen to those who know and have realy world experience.
Ok, done ranging.

Alex...

:lol:

Let's all be TXS and FP fanboys, yay! :lol:

If you hadn't noticed, this is a technical discussion. I personally like to know something about a product before spending $1000+ on it.

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket
What happened to the "bigger is better" rule of thumb on exhaust housings? Is it out the window now that the 8cm^2 housings aren't as available?

You are confusing the big turbine wheel with the big turbine housing.

Originally posted by Red Rocket

Why is all the testing you guys did and posted here with a 8cm, if most of the consumer turbos are going to be supplied with a 7cm?

I test what they send me, and as I stated before, if you are capable of demonstrating to the boys at FP that you can handle it, you are more then likely to be able to get an 8cm housing if its needed.

You make it sound as if we were trying to make a killing off the dyno numbers of the FP turbochargers. If you've ever seen how slim the margins are in FP goods, you'd know that is not the case. I would make more money promoting other snails, but these work so well that it’s brought a little excitement back to the Subaru world for me.

Originally posted by Red Rocket

I don't know, but it seems to me that 14% is a big deal when you have 2 feet of exhaust piping before it on a subaru. Of course it's not as big a deal on DSM's because the turbo is bolted to the manifold right next to the heads. Backpressure, it's not good.

The above assumption is false. The 2 feet of pipe and the horizontal layout of the motor make little difference in the required A/R of the turbine housing.



Originally posted by Red Rocket

I also managed to come across this compressor map for the GT3037-10:

They sure do look neat, but that -10 cartridge is a dog in real life. Compressor maps lie. Some of them, even ones that have Garrett stamped on them are flat out false. Turbochargers do things that are "beyond the map" every day in the real world. When real world experience conflicts with the published compressor map which should be disregarded?

Compressor maps are also only 1/2 of the story.



Originally posted by Red Rocket
As for the dig on guys that aren't fast yet - that doesn't mean we can't be fast in the future. At the rate you're going, I'll be into the 11's before you, and I'll autocross the same setup.


My point was simple. Based off of real world results with DSMs, if you want 600whp and 9 second 1/4-mile times you will want an 8cm exhaust housing. If not, it's not needed. We are not talking about running 11 second ¼ mile times, we are talking about the difference between shooting for 450-500whp and 550 to 600whp. Which camp are you really in? There seem to be a lot of people that think they are in the latter.

Nevermind. It's really not worth it.

I guess nobody cares about the GT32 - 35 turbos.:rolleyes:

Originally posted by nmyeti


You are confusing the big turbine wheel with the big turbine housing.



I thought that they both mattered for flow, correct me if I'm wrong?

I have nothing against FP, but it just seems funny that they would do all these prototypes with 8cm^2 housings, and then not be able to offer them. I think most people would like to see 7cm^2 housings tested ASAP.

On the turbine A/R, what does make a difference then, if not the additional backpressure of the exhaust layout? AVO obviously disagrees with you on the hot side requirements - they spec a mid sized hot side to a smallish compressor side (within the 3037 range). Big Al is running the same size hot side on his evo, but with a 56 trim compressor that flows about 8 lb more air. Maybe I'll dig out my fluid dynamics book tomorrow and calculate the pressure drop of the subaru manifold for the flow rates we're discussing.

As far as my goals, I'll re-state them. I want ~325-350 *dyno dynamics* whp on pump gas, using water injection, and other basic supporting mods, no internal mods - street trim. Go for a bit more power on C16. I think that is a very realistic figure for this turbo, given that it's already put down 285 whp untuned at 16 psi. 350 dyno dynamics whp is over 400 whp on the TXS dyno. I'd also like to see full boost around 3800 in 4th gear, and rev to ~7500 rpm or so. I'm going to try to take about 100 lbs off the car. That *should* be enough to get me into the mid-high 11's at least 115 mph, given my half decent driving ablity. I'm certainly not looking for 600 whp. I need to be able to autocross this car too.

Kevin

Originally posted by MY99 2.5GT
I guess nobody cares about the GT32 - 35 turbos.:rolleyes:

A little big though, huh?

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket


:lol:

Let's all be TXS and FP fanboys, yay! :lol:

If you hadn't noticed, this is a technical discussion. I personally like to know something about a product before spending $1000+ on it.

Kevin

I'm glad you noticed that this is a technical disicussion. I hope you also read the posts before mine. It seems that most people here scream rape not even knowing why, just because some else screamed. I certainly hope you're not like that. I personally have 6 turbo's done by FP ( and most were under $800) and they are still unmatched by anybody else. If you want numbers, there have been plenty posted.
And about being fans, well I am a big fan of FP because they always tooke care of me and no I'm not trying to be TX's fan (they told me flat out no when I asked them to tune my link) but I give credit when credit is due and Nathan has been providing good info that people here need to write down.

Alex...
and now a dancing banana:banana:

Muahhhahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

I snagged a great deal on a barely used XS-Engineering 500 hp turbo for $1250 from Nino's Auto Accesories! Hopefully I'll have it by Wednesday, Thursday at the latest. Since I have this Friday off, I'll put it on, have it dynoed and datalogged at the local shop, and then head up to the local dragstrip for street night...........:devil: !

I called XS about the turbo, the guy there found the specs and told me the compressor side uses a 52 trim wheel, while the exhaust side has the same specs as the the AVO500. So the compressor is the next step up from what the avo turbo's use. So I have one of the biggest bolt on turbos availble, probably compareable to the green, if not actually bigger. I hope it's possible to launch the damn thing....

Interestingly, their 450hp turbo uses the same compressor as the AVO turbos, but a .63 A/R exhaust housing. So it is actually a faster spooling turbo.

Kevin :D

sometimes I do not understand why would people put turbos that belong to big rigs into their daily driven automobiles.:p

Originally posted by zacek
sometimes I do not understand why would people put turbos that belong to big rigs into their daily driven automobiles.:p

This car is definitely not my daily driver.

Kevin

What are you going to do for fuel with that big monster?

Originally posted by DarthChicken
What are you going to do for fuel with that big monster?

Nothing this week, except a walboro pump and 100 octane. We have deltadash and datalogged the car on the dyno last weekend. I haven't gotten the logs yet, but we were seeing some fairly high IDC's on the top end, peaking at 100% around 6000 rpm - with the car bone stock. We'll see what kind of boost we can run on the stock ecu/fuel in the cooler ambient temps before the ECU shuts down the party, or things look dangerous. Basicly the same thing Clark already did, but in cooler weather.

We're not going all out this weekend, but I would like to get an xede on the car ASAP, and whip up a C16 map to use with the stock fuel system. I plan on going to water/methanon injection, so I'll get that on there and decide see what happens before deciding to upgrade the injectors.

Kevin

Do you have a fuel cut defender? If not your party may end very prematurely. Even if you do I bet that the ECU is going to freak when it starts seeing that much air flow.

From the testing Clark already did, we should be good for about 15.5-16 psi to redline, but it's cooler out here in MA than it was when they tested it in AZ. Regardless, we should be able to make about 280+ whp on the stock fuel system, but I won't know for sure until we datalog it.

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket
From the testing Clark already did, we should be good for about 15.5-16 psi to redline, but it's cooler out here in MA than it was when they tested it in AZ. Regardless, we should be able to make about 280+ whp on the stock fuel system, but I won't know for sure until we datalog it.

Kevin


The recently madd 295whp at redline at 16.5 psi and keep in mind this is a dyno dynamics dyno. After the test that was done on the dynos we know this will be around 340whp on most"other" dynos.

clark

Originally posted by AZScoobie



The recently madd 295whp at redline at 16.5 psi and keep in mind this is a dyno dynamics dyno. After the test that was done on the dynos we know this will be around 340whp on most"other" dynos.

clark

:D Weeee!

We'll see what we can get out of my car on Friday. I'll also have an AVO intake pipe on the car, run 100 octane, and the turbo I have has a bigger hot side, so hopefully we can make it up to 300 whp!

Thanks,

Kevin

I just followed up with XS abou the turbo. It is not a 52 trim compressor, it's a 48, the guy was wrong before. So it's exactly the same as a AVO500 - go figure. I guess I get to test it out then. I will pull it apart and measure the compressor wheel if I get a chance though.

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket
I just followed up with XS abou the turbo. It is not a 52 trim compressor, it's a 48, the guy was wrong before. So it's exactly the same as a AVO500 - go figure. I guess I get to test it out then. I will pull it apart and measure the compressor wheel if I get a chance though.

Kevin


What I suggest is that you send the turbo to a GT dealer and have the -12 or larger Cartridge installed or at least the -12 compressor wheel. Currently you have the -10 compressor wheel and cartridge with the -12 exhaust side. You could be leaving ALOT of power on the table otherwise. It should not cost that much...

Clark

In your first post you said the 18G maxes out around 350WHP with race gas, but did you know that there are Evos with their stock 16G turbo making more than that with race gas and no nitrous so how could the 18G max out so low?

Originally posted by AZScoobie



What I suggest is that you send the turbo to a GT dealer and have the -12 or larger Cartridge installed or at least the -12 compressor wheel. Currently you have the -10 compressor wheel and cartridge with the -12 exhaust side. You could be leaving ALOT of power on the table otherwise. It should not cost that much...

Clark

Belive me Clark, I have been thinking about that that quite a bit. I need to max this one out first though.......:lol:

What exactly do you mean about the compressor wheel vs. cartridge - don't they all use the same GT30 center section?

BTW, a little birdy told me some depressing news today. All the parts in the the STI long block are the same as in the Forester XT, except for the connecting rods. That's according to the subaru parts database. Heads, cams, valves, springs, retainers - all the same. So If you're hoping to rev those heads up to 8000 rpm or so, think again. I'll bump mine up to 7500 or so, but I'll let someone else be the guniea pig on that one. A little head work is not out of the question though.

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket


Belive me Clark, I have been thinking about that that quite a bit. I need to max this one out first though.......:lol:

What exactly do you mean about the compressor wheel vs. cartridge - don't they all use the same GT30 center section?

BTW, a little birdy told me some depressing news today. All the parts in the the STI long block are the same as in the Forester XT, except for the connecting rods. That's according to the subaru parts database. Heads, cams, valves, springs, retainers - all the same. So If you're hoping to rev those heads up to 8000 rpm or so, think again. I'll bump mine up to 7500 or so, but I'll let someone else be the guniea pig on that one. A little head work is not out of the question though.

Kevin

You can just buy a -12 cartridge that comes with the wheels attached. It bolts in. www.agpturbo.com can do this for you as well as Turbochargers.com. Or, it would be cheaper to get the -12 compressor wheel (if even possible) and install it.

I am not worried about reving these short blocks to 8k. The stroke is still pretty short. I have had my RA engine 700 over redline to 9000 without issue. If I had one and there was an advantage to reving it out, I would try :)


Clark

The turbo is here......

Damn, it's a big freakin' turbo alright. I sat it next to a TD04 and it positively dwarfs the thing. I am actually afraid of this car part.....:eek:

We're all set to put it on tomorrow. I'll also put on my AVO intake hose, velocity stack into the stock airbox, cut out the fender liner peice under the bumper, and I have a ball spring MBC - hopefully all these things will help the spool up. We may have to modify my godspeed downpipe to be compatable with the AVO split turbine housing. The oil line will either be drilled out, or they'll modify the AVO line, or make one up from scratch. Should be fun.

Clark, on the motor - the short block might be able to take high revs, but it sounds like the heads might not be up for the task, as many people have said before. What would you say would be a good basic (CHEAP) head upgrade - just better cams and heavier springs? Or just chuck the heads and swap to RA heads? Not that we're going to be able to rev higher in the immediate future anyway, unless we decide to put on an Autronic standalone, which we are actually considering.

Thanks,

Kevin

So the -12 compressor wheel will fit into a housing that will bolt onto a Subaru? Hmm.

Anyhoo I have seen alot that suggests the 03 JDM STi heads = the 04 USDM STI heads. Which makes sense since they are being sold in the same calander year.

Originally posted by Red Rocket

I thought that they both mattered for flow, correct me if I'm wrong?

I have nothing against FP, but it just seems funny that they would do all these prototypes with 8cm^2 housings
;)

, and then not be able to offer them.
who told you that? We have not officially released anything with specific exact "this is how it is" turbochargers yet. We have just given the market a taste of a few ideas.


I think most people would like to see 7cm^2 housings tested ASAP.
Things take time, we are working on it. We are gathering information and working on a few different idea's. We plan on offering a range of different turbo's, if only you guys knew how much R and D goes into building a hybrid you would understand why putting a final product on the shelf takes so long. I work @ FP and I don't even have one of our turbo's on my car because we are focusing so much time and energy on what you guys want, we don't have time to play. We sent some prototypes to Nathan because he has cars there begging for our turbo's, he give's us REAL feedback with hard numbers and tells us what he like's and what he doesn't. You guys get a taste of what we will be releasing, a few of you get some prototypes (Which very well may be how the production units are but who knows ;) ) and loved them. We want to bring to the Subaru market what we have brougt to the DSM market, cheap, rebuildable, upgradeable and fast turbochargers that you bolt right on and go. We only want to bring good, working products to the market. We got the interest in our turbo's (more than we thought :) ) now we are working on bringing them to your lap. We appreciate all of you guy's interest but don't put word's in our mouths or make assumption's on something that we have not even released to the market yet. You guy's will soon enough have what you want trust me :D


and now..... :banana:

Originally posted by Boost_Junkiee
who told you that?

You did, on the phone, a couple weeks ago before the information lockdown. Nathan also said it. That's why I ask. 7 cm^2 housings might be just fine, but we won't know until somebody tests one. I'm just a little put off by all the hype generated by these intital tests, when the final product will be materially different.

No matter. That GT3037 I have on my car now has a retardedly large nozzle diameter, I didn't measure it, but it's defintely BIG. The whole turbine is massive. Off boost the car is probably going to make more power than my '88 BWM 325 (2.5 L, 8:1 CR), due to the utter lack of exhaust restriction.

The compressor side is too big and the intercooler hose won't reach it. Car was down all weekend. We'll have a longer replacement hose tomorrow and will finally be able to test it out and throw it on the dyno.

Now I just need to get all the other stuff..........ASAP.

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket


You did, on the phone, a couple weeks ago before the information lockdown. Nathan also said it. That's why I ask. 7 cm^2 housings might be just fine, but we won't know until somebody tests one. I'm just a little put off by all the hype generated by these intital tests, when the final product will be materially different.

Kevin Who said it would me materially different, I also do not remember stating to anyone that the 8cm housings were not available, long time to get, yes, but not available. Just so not to confuse and everyone understands. :) COngrats on your new turbo!

Originally posted by Red Rocket
The turbo is here......

Damn, it's a big freakin' turbo alright. I sat it next to a TD04 and it positively dwarfs the thing. I am actually afraid of this car part.....:eek:

We're all set to put it on tomorrow. I'll also put on my AVO intake hose, velocity stack into the stock airbox, cut out the fender liner peice under the bumper, and I have a ball spring MBC - hopefully all these things will help the spool up. We may have to modify my godspeed downpipe to be compatable with the AVO split turbine housing. The oil line will either be drilled out, or they'll modify the AVO line, or make one up from scratch. Should be fun.

Clark, on the motor - the short block might be able to take high revs, but it sounds like the heads might not be up for the task, as many people have said before. What would you say would be a good basic (CHEAP) head upgrade - just better cams and heavier springs? Or just chuck the heads and swap to RA heads? Not that we're going to be able to rev higher in the immediate future anyway, unless we decide to put on an Autronic standalone, which we are actually considering.

Thanks,

Kevin


The heads are fantastic and the cams are the same as the EJ205 cams in duration but have higher lift of 9.55/9.75. You will likely make your power peak near the 7000 redline. I would have no issue in reving to 8000 if it was worth while in terms of power output.

A set of JUN or HKS cams/springs and retainers would certainly help but at that point the motor would have to come out... I do not think it would be worth the time and or cost to go to RA heads. I would rather get the JUN cams and spring kit, some mild port work and slap it back together with some ARP studs. Although I personally would not do this either if my motor was running.. EJ's are like Bic lighters. You use them up and throw them out.

On the oil line:

What I suggest is that you take the stock flare fitting that is near the cyl head and cut it off. Then braze it on to some hard line. We have had to do this a few times now using AVO turbos on STI engines that have AVCS oil lines. A local place does this for us for around $10.



Clark

Originally posted by AZScoobie
EJ's are like Bic lighters. You use them up and throw them out.
Clark


I prefer to refer to them in a toilet paper context... tareaways.

Originally posted by AZScoobie

A set of JUN or HKS cams/springs and retainers would certainly help but at that point the motor would have to come out... I do not think it would be worth the time and or cost to go to RA heads. I would rather get the JUN cams and spring kit, some mild port work and slap it back together with some ARP studs. Although I personally would not do this either if my motor was running.. EJ's are like Bic lighters. You use them up and throw them out.


Thanks Clark. That makes sense. We'll end up seeing how much exactly we can get out of the motor first, with proper engine management and supporting mods. If we can max out this turbo and make solid power to 7500 RPM, I'll be satisfied. But if the motor does go, I can justify spending a few grand for rods, pistons, and head parts.

Kevin

The turbo is on and pretty nifty. I'm only running wastegate boost right now, which turns out to be around 11-12 psi at the manifold. Spool/lag is not bad at all. Seeing full boost by around 4300 RPM or so in 3rd (third!!!) gear. When you shift at redline, you stay well within the power band and there is no perceptable lag. I should have no problem drag racing this turbo, autocrossing should be okay due to the short 2nd gear (32 mph at 4000 RPM's). Delta dash shows about 250 g/min (33 lb/min) or so peak air flow, and IDC are peaking over 100%. I haven't looked at the logs in detail yet, but I will soon. We should get a chance to put on a MBC tomorrow, and dyno the sucker. Hopefully we'll have an xede before the end of the week too, an maybe some injectors. I still need to decide on water injection or big intercooler, or both.

BTW, my stock and turboback dyno plots are up on KTR's website (the shop that's helping me out), you can see them here:

http://www.ktrperformance.com/services/Dyno_Graphs/graph_STI_stock.htm

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket
The turbo is on and pretty nifty. I'm only running wastegate boost right now, which turns out to be around 11-12 psi at the manifold. Spool/lag is not bad at all. Seeing full boost by around 4300 RPM or so in 3rd (third!!!) gear. When you shift at redline, you stay well within the power band and there is no perceptable lag. I should have no problem drag racing this turbo, autocrossing should be okay due to the short 2nd gear (32 mph at 4000 RPM's). Delta dash shows about 250 g/min (33 lb/min) or so peak air flow, and IDC are peaking over 100%. I haven't looked at the logs in detail yet, but I will soon. We should get a chance to put on a MBC tomorrow, and dyno the sucker. Hopefully we'll have an xede before the end of the week too, an maybe some injectors. I still need to decide on water injection or big intercooler, or both.

BTW, my stock and turboback dyno plots are up on KTR's website (the shop that's helping me out), you can see them here:

http://www.ktrperformance.com/services/Dyno_Graphs/graph_STI_stock.htm

Kevin


Thats a crap load of air for 12 psi Kevin. That turbo should really move some air at 20 psi or more. The Injectors are static not becuase you need larger injectors but because the map in the ECU uses MAF for load and with your 250 grams you are in the dump zone as I call it. I would throw a $299 SAFC on this thing and tune it out. It will pull the load back, remove the fuel and advance the timing. Then, When the ECu code or utec is released you can sell the SAFC.

Clark

Originally posted by AZScoobie



Thats a crap load of air for 12 psi Kevin. That turbo should really move some air at 20 psi or more. The Injectors are static not becuase you need larger injectors but because the map in the ECU uses MAF for load and with your 250 grams you are in the dump zone as I call it. I would throw a $299 SAFC on this thing and tune it out. It will pull the load back, remove the fuel and advance the timing. Then, When the ECu code or utec is released you can sell the SAFC.

Clark

Thanks Clark, we'll have an xede very, very soon hopefully to take care of the engine mangement end of things. Ami at KTR is calling Shiv tonight about it, they go way back. Hopefully that will work out for us.

Kevin

AZScoobie

I just picked up the AVO 450hp rebuilt and would like to know what the problem is with the oil line, why can it just bolt up with the stock hoses.
Also will the turbo fit with the stock intercooler.

Did you run a SAFC to control fuel on the STI you got 80whp more on or just boost it to 16psi.

FWIW
This car is used as a daily driver with lots of track days. Also I'm at 4000ft altitude.

Originally posted by Red Rocket
The turbo is on and pretty nifty. I'm only running wastegate boost right now, which turns out to be around 11-12 psi at the manifold. Spool/lag is not bad at all. Seeing full boost by around 4300 RPM or so in 3rd (third!!!) gear. When you shift at redline, you stay well within the power band and there is no perceptable lag. I should have no problem drag racing this turbo, autocrossing should be okay due to the short 2nd gear (32 mph at 4000 RPM's). Delta dash shows about 250 g/min (33 lb/min) or so peak air flow, and IDC are peaking over 100%. I haven't looked at the logs in detail yet, but I will soon. We should get a chance to put on a MBC tomorrow, and dyno the sucker. Hopefully we'll have an xede before the end of the week too, an maybe some injectors. I still need to decide on water injection or big intercooler, or both.

BTW, my stock and turboback dyno plots are up on KTR's website (the shop that's helping me out), you can see them here:

http://www.ktrperformance.com/services/Dyno_Graphs/graph_STI_stock.htm

Kevin

For reference, how much do the VF39 flow on your DD.

We saw a peak of 248 g/sec. Here's a couple datalogs of stock dyno pulls:

Manifold Absolute Pressure (psig)
Engine Speed (RPM)
Ignition Timing (°)
Mass Air Flow (grams/s)
Fuel Injection #1 Duty (%)
Knock Correction (°)
Manifold Relative Pressure (psig)
Primary Wastegate Duty Cycle (%)
Air/Fuel Sensor #1 (AFR)

Pull 1- car cool

7 1342 27 10.94 3.72 0 -7.7 6.7 14.57
16.3 1702 18.5 36.16 10.53 5 1.6 21.2 14.91
16.4 1804 21 39.51 11.55 6.5 1.9 22.7 14.91
16.7 1939 23.5 43.51 12.82 8.5 2.2 24.3 14.68
17 2076 24.5 46.43 14.17 7.5 2.5 25.1 14.45
17.3 2207 25 49.62 15.06 6 2.8 25.1 14.45
17.7 2278 24 54.02 17.01 5 3 25.1 14.45
18 2402 24.5 58.1 18.45 4 3.5 25.1 13.65
18.4 2509 23.5 64.79 20.34 4 3.9 25.9 13.54
19 2608 22.5 71.33 21.7 4.5 4.5 26.7 13.19
19.7 2727 22 78.71 24.44 4.5 5.2 27.8 12.96
20.6 2832 20 86.38 27.18 4 6.1 28.6 12.5
21.6 2930 19 93.15 30.62 5 7.3 29.8 11.82
22.8 3057 17.5 104.29 35.87 4.5 8.3 30.6 11.13
23.8 3147 17 108.85 38.94 4 9.3 31.4 11.13
24.5 3322 16.5 119.73 42.52 4 10.2 33.7 11.13
25.1 3474 17 129.39 47.44 4 10.6 40.4 11.13
26 3639 16.5 145.2 53.56 4.5 11.6 45.5 11.13
27 3653 17 151.81 56.11 6 12.3 46.3 11.13
27.4 3899 20 157.71 60.72 9 12.8 47.5 11.13
27.3 3967 23.5 160.62 60.09 10.5 12.6 48.2 11.13
27.3 4056 24.5 163.66 62.3 11.5 12.6 49.4 11.13
27.4 4177 24.5 168.82 64.16 11.5 12.6 50.6 11.13
27.6 4261 24.5 176.57 67.26 11 12.9 51.8 11.13
27.7 4380 24 180.22 71.01 11 13.1 52.9 11.13
27.9 4487 24.5 189.48 74.66 10.5 13.2 54.1 11.13
27.9 4588 25 194.76 76.34 10 13.3 54.9 11.13
28.1 4696 25.5 198.42 78.15 9.5 13.5 56.1 11.13
28.1 4791 26 206.57 80.75 9.5 13.5 56.9 11.13
28.1 4933 26 211.52 83.13 9.5 13.6 58 11.13
28.3 5043 25.5 216.51 86.06 10 13.8 59.2 11.13
28.4 5141 25.5 222.89 87.73 10 13.9 60.4 11.13
28.4 5222 25.5 225.33 89.12 10 13.9 61.6 11.13
28.4 5325 25.5 232.15 90.88 9.5 13.9 62.7 11.13
28.6 5443 25 235.15 92.89 9.5 13.9 63.5 11.13
28.6 5554 25 240.27 94.78 9.5 13.9 64.3 11.13
28.6 5662 25 239 95.42 9.5 13.9 65.1 11.13
28.6 5698 25 240.71 96.03 9 13.9 64.3 11.13
28.4 5834 25 244.99 97.08 9 13.8 63.5 11.13
28.3 5959 25.5 242 97.88 9 13.6 63.1 11.13
28.1 6059 26 245 98.24 9 13.5 62.4 11.13
28 6177 27 245.42 98.83 9 13.3 62 11.13
27.9 6248 27.5 244.99 98.64 8.5 13.2 61.6 11.13
27.7 6351 28 247.57 98.91 8 13.1 60.8 11.13
27.6 6452 29.5 245.43 97.73 7 12.9 60 11.13
27.4 6523 29.5 248.06 98.79 6.5 12.8 60 11.13
27.4 6624 30.5 247.62 98.92 5.5 12.8 59.2 11.13
27.3 6716 31 246.38 100.28 4.5 12.6 58.8 11.13
27.1 6908 32 248.07 101.68 4 12.6 58 11.13
27.1 6891 32 245.46 98.49 3 12.5 58 11.13
25.4 6964 34 232.66 87.65 2 11.3 18.8 11.13
20.9 6664 34 172.04 69.66 2.5 6.1 0 11.24
16.8 6952 39 115.48 4.45 0.5 -2.2 10.6 12.62


Pull #3 - a little heatsoak

9.6 1603 34.5 19.68 6.15 0.5 -4.9 10.2 14.57
13.5 1630 25 46.38 10.08 4 0.3 10.2 14.57
15.4 1679 19 34.25 9.31 3.5 0.7 19.2 13.88
15.7 1601 17.5 34.15 9.56 4.5 1.2 19.2 14.91
16 1626 16 34.87 10.06 4.5 1.5 19.2 15.14
16.3 1692 17 35.73 10.47 5.5 1.7 19.2 14.91
16.5 1751 18.5 38.4 11.2 6 1.9 22 14.91
16.8 1881 21 41.5 12.44 7.5 2.2 23.9 14.8
18.3 2328 22.5 56.28 16.89 4.5 3.8 25.1 14.45
18.9 2466 22 63.04 18.94 4 4.4 25.5 14.34
19.7 2581 20.5 70.1 21.47 4.5 5.2 26.3 13.77
20.6 2718 20 81.58 24.36 4 6.1 27.8 13.31
21.6 2848 18.5 89.54 29.16 4.5 7.1 29.4 12.39
22.8 3004 17.5 101.69 33.32 5 8.4 29.8 11.47
24.1 3245 16.5 108.03 39.46 4 9.6 31.8 11.13
24.8 3319 16.5 118.42 42.49 4.5 10.3 35.3 11.13
25.5 3411 16 126.04 45.85 4 11 38.8 11.13
26.1 3541 15.5 136.39 50.61 4 11.5 42.7 11.13
26.7 3658 16 144.32 53.85 5.5 12.2 45.5 11.13
27.3 3790 18.5 152.24 57.4 8 12.6 47.1 11.13
27.3 3932 21.5 155.9 58.71 10 12.6 48.2 11.13
27.3 4053 24 156.59 59.66 11.5 12.6 49.8 11.13
27.3 4103 24 163.09 61.27 11 12.8 50.6 11.13
27.4 4231 24 169.15 64.99 11 12.8 51.8 11.13
27.6 4406 24 181.52 69.56 11 12.9 52.9 11.13
27.7 4509 24.5 184.55 73.11 10.5 13.1 54.1 11.13
27.9 4670 25 193.47 75.72 10 13.3 55.3 11.13
28 4791 25.5 197.38 78.7 9.5 13.3 56.5 11.13
28 4804 25.5 199.76 78.92 9 13.5 57.6 11.13
28.1 4952 25.5 211.53 82.39 9 13.5 58.4 11.13
28.1 5058 25.5 216.15 84.17 9.5 13.6 59.6 11.13
28.3 5131 25.5 219.55 85.38 9.5 13.6 60.8 11.13
28.1 5250 25 224.61 87.35 9.5 13.6 62.4 11.13
28.3 5396 25 227.19 88.64 9 13.6 63.1 11.13
28.3 5531 24.5 234.08 92.04 9 13.6 64.3 11.13
28.3 5674 24.5 233.71 93.2 9 13.8 65.1 11.13
28.3 5714 25 237.64 93.87 9 13.6 64.3 11.13
28.1 5828 25 235.52 94.49 9 13.5 63.9 11.13
28 5961 25.5 240.27 96.64 9 13.5 63.1 11.13
28 6028 25.5 242.01 96.44 9 13.3 62 11.13
27.7 6195 27 238.15 96.47 8.5 13.1 62 11.13
27.4 6218 27.5 239.46 95.5 8 12.9 61.2 11.13
27.6 6355 28 241.61 96.26 7.5 12.8 60.4 11.13
27.4 6512 29.5 238.19 97.25 6.5 12.8 60 11.13
27.3 6601 30 238.25 95.75 5 12.6 59.6 11.13
27.1 6679 31 240.45 96.88 4 12.5 60 11.13
27.1 6842 31.5 239.99 97.79 3 12.5 58.4 11.13
27.1 6968 31.5 240.44 96.62 2.5 12.5 58.4 11.13
23.5 6957 31.5 184.56 77.18 1.5 4.8 20 11.13
22.2 7022 34.5 199.06 76.4 -0.5 8.4 27.8 11.24
18 6808 35 129.31 4.36 -1 -0.9 14.5 12.62


Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket


Thanks Clark, we'll have an xede very, very soon hopefully to take care of the engine mangement end of things. Ami at KTR is calling Shiv tonight about it, they go way back. Hopefully that will work out for us.

Kevin

Well, unfortunately the xede looks like it's not going to work out for us. At this point I'm considering playing around with a SAFC, or there is another option that might pan out, but will remain undisclosed for the moment. Clark - how do you think the ecu would react to running an AFC?

Thanks,

Kevin

why is the xede not going to work? i have been taking interest in this piece, so i would like to know its shortfalls too.

Originally posted by happasaiyan
why is the xede not going to work? i have been taking interest in this piece, so i would like to know its shortfalls too.

:lol:

It's probably not going to work out for us. Nothing to do with the product, there are other reasons. PM me if you want details.

Kevin

Originally posted by AZScoobie
I would throw a $299 SAFC on this thing and tune it out. It will pull the load back, remove the fuel and advance the timing. Then, When the ECu code or utec is released you can sell the SAFC.

Clark

BTW, where can you get a S-AFC II for $299, I've seen $315, but not $299. Or maybe we should go straight to apexi usa.

On the tune - I assume there will be some sore of "sweet spot" to be arrived at. Doesn't the sti still calculate manifold air temp? So if you pull out too much MAF signal vs. what the ecu sees on the MAP sensor, the ECU will think the intake charge is fairly hot and give you poor timing. I guess you need to find a spot where the ecu is seeing fairly stock conditions - which we already know what they are. I guess we could throw a FCD on there also, to trim down the MAP signal a bit.....hummm.

I'll have to ask the guys at the shop if they have any old unichips laying around - they have the programming software and we might be able to rig one up to suit our needs......wouldn't that be funny.....:lol:

Kevin

Originally posted by happasaiyan
why is the xede not going to work? i have been taking interest in this piece, so i would like to know its shortfalls too.

The shortfall is that they are backordered a couple of weeks.

Shiv

Originally posted by Vishnu Performance


The shortfall is that they are backordered a couple of weeks.

Shiv

And I'm not up for paying $700+ for something I'm only going to use for 3 months.

Kevin

Here's another data point. I just got off the phone with Guy at KTR, he was looking at some of my datalogs from yesterday. At one of the peak flow points it pumped 266 g/sec of air @ 6750 RPM, at 12.5 psi of boost, IDC at 103% (but not maxed out).

Poor timing: 26 degrees with only like +2 degrees of knock correction timing . Compared to my stock baseline, that's weaker base timing at that RPM - the timing map is probably a little soft up there....hum. The ECU had just been reset, so the midrange knock correction was really weak too, around +2 degrees.

Kevin

We had my car on the dyno yesterday, and I was debating on if I should post results yet. Now, here we go:

Currently I have on my car an XS500 turbo, Joe-p MBC, Godspeed downpipe and kakimoto-r catback (modified to be 3" straight through), and an AVO intake pipe.

We made 247 whp at around 5500 Rpm's, at about 14.7 psi of boost. Boost tapered to 13.5 psi by redline. So only 4 hp more than I made with just a turboback, and some boost creep to around 15.5 psi. That's the bad news. The good news it that the powerband is dead flat to redline....I mean dead flat. So we have 245 whp, +/- 2 whp, from like 5400 to 7200 RPM.........:D 245 whp at redline is 50 more whp than stock at redline! Needless to say, the car pulls hard all the way to redline now.

The injectors are maxed out at just short of 6000 rpms. AFR bottoms out there at like 10.4:1, then climbs to roughly 10.6:1 at redline. Rich enough, but we didn't want to push any harder on 93 octane. We didn't have deltadash available that day, so I have no idea on the timing. I am going to swing by the shop and do some datalogging tomorrow, to see how "ticked off" the stock ecu is about the car flowing 270+ g/sec of air at redline, and how bad the ignition timing is.

I've go a much better idea on lag now too. We made a 15+ psi boost spike on spoolup at 4000 rpms in 4th gear on the dyno........:eek:

On the steet, here's what I can remember from a little testing:

- It reaches 15 psi by 3000 rpm in 6th gear if you punch it at 2000 rpm.

- It reaches 15 psi by 3500 rpm in 5th from a ~2700 rpm punch.

- As on the dyno, 15 psi by 4000 in 4th if you start at 3000. A 3500 punch will give you full boost by 4300.

- 3rd gear you can get full boost by 4300 rpm from a 3500 punch.

- 2nd gear, full boost by 4500 from a 3500 punch.

So the turbo is very streetable. In fact, I don't think it's much laggier than the VF29 I had on my WRX - but that was running stock boost control and a more restrictive exhaust. Once you get it going, and shift at redline, it drops right back into the meat of the power band.

At this point, I have pretty much decided to install a SAFC II and a FCD on my car as basic engine management for the next couple months. The FCD works as a MAP signal modifier, and the SAFC will be used to control MAF signal (of course), and tweak fueling. If I can keep the signals from these sensors in areas the ecu likes, it should deliver good timing. We will deliver enough fuel by bigger injectors, upping the base fuel pressure, leaning out with C16 or water/methanol injection, or some combination of those options. Then tune it all up on the dyno with wideband O2, and deltadash. I think that should work alright, until we can get ecutek. We still have another far superior option we are waiting to hear back on though.

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket
We made 247 whp at around 5500 Rpm's, at about 14.7 psi of boost. Boost tapered to 13.5 psi by redline. So only 4 hp more than I made with just a turboback, and some boost creep to around 15.5 psi. That's the bad news.

I wouldn't consider that to be that bad of news. You're probably not seeing much gain in efficiency at that flow level by going to the big turbo. Once you get some fuel control and can crank up the boost you'll probably look like this guy :banana:

Originally posted by driggity


I wouldn't consider that to be that bad of news. You're probably not seeing much gain in efficiency at that flow level by going to the big turbo. Once you get some fuel control and can crank up the boost you'll probably look like this guy :banana:

Well, we're defintely making more power with less boost, which is always a good thing. The big turbo is already pumping alot more at on the top end, I'd estimate we are pushing ~275 g/sec of air near redline at 13.5 psi, based on the what we saw at 12.5 psi. That's about 30 g/sec more air than stock at redline, no wonder we're seeing more power.

Kevin

Red Rocket, you might be able to get away with leaning it out even w/o better gas. So far I'm fine at 11:1 in the upper range, but that was after a reset so timing was a little soft. Going to really start tuning once the ECU has a chance to get its ****e together.

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
Red Rocket, you might be able to get away with leaning it out even w/o better gas. So far I'm fine at 11:1 in the upper range, but that was after a reset so timing was a little soft. Going to really start tuning once the ECU has a chance to get its ****e together.

What do you mean by "tuning"......what are you running on the car?

Thanks,

Kevin

Trying out a Unichip to see how it works with the STi.

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
Trying out a Unichip to see how it works with the STi.

:lol:

I think I suggested that about 10 posts ago. My shop has unichip tuning capablity I think.......

BTW, when's your AVO500 coming in?

Kevin

Well supposedly it left AU this week. Never mind that it supposedly was in the shipment comming in.

It looks like the unichip will be great for those people who are friendly with the unichip dealer, as its cheap and not that far off the big name tuning aids like UTEC. I'd say that unless you set and forget the unichip is not for anyone who would have to mail it off for a retune. Then a gettobox like the SAFC is nicer even if it lacks the total feature set.

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
Well supposedly it left AU this week. Never mind that it supposedly was in the shipment comming in.

It looks like the unichip will be great for those people who are friendly with the unichip dealer, as its cheap and not that far off the big name tuning aids like UTEC. I'd say that unless you set and forget the unichip is not for anyone who would have to mail it off for a retune. Then a gettobox like the SAFC is nicer even if it lacks the total feature set.

"ghetto box" :lol:

At least the SAFC doesn't have the stigma of the unichip.... :lol:

I'll ask the guys tomorrow if they have any kicking around, and if we can adapt one to my needs. I am sure as hell not going to put a diode voltage clamp on the MAP sensor, that's for sure.

Thanks,

Kevin

from my understanding the unichip lacks a boost cut removal feature. Which is my main objection to it.

I think what I am going to do is run it for tuning mods for now, and "touchup" tuning once the reflashes are out, and just use a reflash for main tuning.

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
from my understanding the unichip lacks a boost cut removal feature. Which is my main objection to it.


Right. Most tuners use a diode clamp to flatline boost at like 13 psi. So the ecu freaks out. I think it should be better off with a HKS FCD type reduction on the signal.

Kevin

I got the turbo for you the new state of the art Garret GT Series turbo. True ceramic ball bearings. Get the GT3040 or 35R. Check out Dan "God" (His website is Godspeedinc.com) on clubwrx.net. He has done a ton of things to his STi. Also is addind GT35R turbo and 850cc injectors already had FMIC, BC, FM, Turbo back exhaust, & intake Blitz SUS. These GT series turbos are state of the art very bada@@.

On Honda-tech.com they have the GT3040 turbo on a SR20DET 92 240sx. Made 539WHP on stock internals. The turbo when shut off at an idle spun for 45-50 seconds.

Do the research this is the turbo.

My buddy is putting this turbo on his 01 Integra GSR. He is getting it from Full-Race.com. 350HP at the wheel he is going to get.

Dan "God" is going to go for 600HP with the GT35R turbo. Email him with questions and his opinion. He can probably get the turbo for you. Down the road this is the turbo I am getting want 500/500.

Matt

Here is Garret's website and them describing their Gt Series turbos in depth:

http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/kits/basics_index.html

HERE IT IS READ WHAT GOD SAYS:

http://www.clubwrx.net/forums/showthread.php?threadid=27403

Originally posted by PA04STI
I got the turbo for you the new state of the art Garret GT Series turbo. True ceramic ball bearings. Get the GT3040 or 35R. Check out Dan "God" (His website is Godspeedinc.com) on clubwrx.net. He has done a ton of things to his STi. Also is addind GT35R turbo and 850cc injectors already had FMIC, BC, FM, Turbo back exhaust, & intake Blitz SUS. These GT series turbos are state of the art very bada@@.


Seriously man, lets not be too much of a fanboy here......:lol:

I know what god is doing. He doesn't even have the turbo installed yet, if he even has the turbo. And he's going to use a piggyback to tune it. Christ. The only reason I'm considering a piggyback is that reflashes and PNP standalone's are not availabe yet, and it's only very temporary. If I was going as radical as his setup, I would not hesitate for a second to do a custom standalone install.

If you had read the rest of this thread, you would have noticed that the turbo I put on is a bolt on version of the GT3037-10. Yes, a full on gin-u-ine garret center cartrige is used, along with a T04E compressor cover and a custom turbine casting. I can get it rebuilt with a -11 or -12 compressor wheel, the -12 (56 trim) wheel is good for 55 or so lb/min. The exhaust side is plenty big to support that.

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket


along with a T04E compressor cover

Actually I don't think it's a true T04E compressor cover you are getting. As far as i know those are only offered with 2.75 or 3-inch inlets.

They are also large enough that you'll end up with the compressor cover touching the TGV sensor on the back of the manifold. Odds are, if it bolts on, it’s not using a T04E compressor cover.


-Nathan

Originally posted by nmyeti


Actually I don't think it's a true T04E compressor cover you are getting. As far as i know those are only offered with 2.75 or 3-inch inlets.

They are also large enough that you'll end up with the compressor cover touching the TGV sensor on the back of the manifold. Odds are, if it bolts on, it’s not using a T04E compressor cover.


-Nathan

Well, that's what Clark said, so maybe he wants to chime in and confirm that. It certainly looks like they machined down the 2.75" inlet to make it work with a 56mm inlet pipe. The T04S that normally comes on the GT37 compressor would certainly not work, nice 4" inlet. So they took the 2.75" TO4E and machined it to fit the GT37 48 trim wheel. I did take off the compressor cover and measure the wheel, it had the dimensions claimed. If you have some overall measurements for the housing, I would be able to check it.

Kevin

Originally posted by Red Rocket
If you have some overall measurements for the housing, I would be able to check it.

Kevin

Nevermind, I found some:

http://64.225.76.178/catalog/inst_dimensions.html

I'll check tomorrow.

Kevin

Mind you a GT35 is going to be too big for all but the most insane EJ motors. NMYeti was playing with one on his 2.5L wrx and was having massive surge problems.

Now get a 6cyl and you might be talking.

Originally posted by XT6Wagon
NMYeti was playing with one on his 2.5L wrx and was having massive surge problems.



99% sure I've fixed that with the new cams. If the project ever goes back together, I’ll put the 35R back on just to be sure, but based off the HP numbers I hit at the boost levels I was running on the dyno I should be well to the right of the surge line.

Without cams, forget it.


Red:
I don't think you can turn down a 2.75 T04e compressor cover to the 2.2 or 2.3-inch inlet required for a bolt on Subaru application. We have to move the location of the turbo to fit a T04E or T04S cover on a Subaru.

-Nathan
www.turboxs.com

Originally posted by nmyeti


Actually I don't think it's a true T04E compressor cover you are getting. As far as i know those are only offered with 2.75 or 3-inch inlets.

They are also large enough that you'll end up with the compressor cover touching the TGV sensor on the back of the manifold. Odds are, if it bolts on, it’s not using a T04E compressor cover.


-Nathan

Nathan,

I checked the dimension "A" on the drawings above, looks spot on. You are very observant on the TGV's, there is about 3/16" clearance between them and that part of the compressor. The AVO pipe is a very tight fit also.

Kevin

Oooh good, wonder if the US STi cams are enough. More lift but less duration than the RA ones.

Not going there though on the STi. Maybe something else though.

Originally posted by Red Rocket


Nathan,

I checked the dimension "A" on the drawings above, looks spot on. You are very observant on the TGV's, there is about 3/16" clearance between them and that part of the compressor. The AVO pipe is a very tight fit also.

Kevin

I am more interested in "F, B, and what is essentially J, but on the compressor cover only."

I have a T04E compressor cover in the shop. I'll shoot a few pictures and get some measurements for it. Even with a smaller GT (the GT centers are shorter then conventional bearing) center section that you'll have slim to NO chance of getting a real T04E compressor cover in there unless they have done something weird with the exhaust housing to set it farther back away from the intake manifold.

-Nathan
www.turboxs.com

Red rocket, Sorry for no replys. For some reason I no longer got Email on this thread.

The Compressor cover is a To4E unit. There are many different versions. This one is the "garrett Airesearch" version. 4 inch inlet would be nice but, we all know it will not fit.

I am going to drop mine off at Ben's in the next day or two and he can offer more input. I am going to stuff the largest cartridge I can in this thing. A local had the GT30R -15 and its spooling up nice so I am not worried... Depending on what Ben says I might just use this. The car was trapping 116-117 mph in the worst conditions the other week with my 1820 with Top mount and stock airbox.. All I am after is 120's and I know this turbo will do it. I am going to add in an FMIC and short ram and retune it. I just dont feel like running 25-30 psi on this RA motor and I know thats what its going to take to eclipse 500hp. I love this motor so much I just simply do not want to blow it up :)

Red, The numbers seem soft but that is a Dyno dynamics dyno... What does a stock STI do on that dyno? You need to get the boost up to 17. Running that GT wheel at those low boost pressures is a real waste of a good turbo. I think the SAFC and the FCD along with some good fuel is probably going to work out for you until the Utec or other option is out. Its really all you can do... When you pull some of that fuel out the IDCs will drop and you will get some of the advance back. Obviously be carefull.. Its the old school way of doing things and its not ideal but can work... You seem to have a good handle this this concept..

You do not need alot of advance up top. Your new turbo has a lot lower Preturbine back pressure so the effects of EGR are minimized. This stops the need or the ability to run alot of advance. Do not compare stock turbo logs and throw out any experience with EJ205 ignition curves. Also keep in mind that you have have ignition correction in the high RPM ranges on this ECU.. Next time you are in 4th gear at 6000+ keep this in mind :(

Its very interesting how the US STI's power band changes with a turbo that can flow some exhaust. Its like a table 5000-7000 and holds almost the same power... I cant wait to be able to manipulate the AVCS like I can on the JDM ECU in my Car now.

We will know how strong the blocks are soon. We are building two in my garage now. Both using V7 STI heads with the 2.5 shortblock. One has a 20G and nitrous the other has a Garrett T68. Should be fun!


Good luck and keep us updated!



Clark

http://www.turboxs.com/_images/txsgtrturbo.JPG

http://www.turboxs.com/_images/txsutecgtrkit.JPG

Standard T04E compressor cover.

No way it's even close to that size.

Clark,

Thanks again for the input. I wussed out and was afraid to push the boost any further on pump gas, that's why the power was soft - what do you expect from 14.7 psi tapering to 13.5 psi! It does have an excellent powerband though, making about 20-25 whp peak over stock, and 50 whp over stock at redline. I still need to go and datalog the car with the new setup.

I think we will try to rig up a unichip some time in the next two weeks. I need to stop by the shop tomorrow and talk to Ami. I also need a unichip manual to go over myself, and I need to figure out if there's anything I want to do different (such as with the MAP clamp vs. FCD). I can always just use the Unichip for fuel control, and use a FCD to trick the ecu's MAP readings. Then just make very minor tweaks on the timing as needed.

I'd like to get in an order for a water injection system ASAP, I've decided to install a WI setup now, before going to bigger injectors and a FMIC. Between leaning the car out to 12:1, and injecting 50/50 methanol/water, I would think the stock fuel system should be more than adiquate at substantially higher boost, like 18 psi or so. Considering the with WI, you inject 10-15% water for the amount of fuel injected, and then add 10-15%methanol on top of that - that should allow a considerable amount of fuel to be pulled out via the unichip. Maybe install an adjustable FPR and bump up the base fuel pressure, if I need a little more fuel.

Also, let us know how those 2.5 short blocks hold up!

Nathan - it's tough to get a sense of scale from those pictures, but that is what my compressor housing looks like. That must be a 3" inlet though. The inlet on mine is much smaller relative to the rest of the snail, and there is a flat area around it where machining has been done. I'll take some pics tomorrow.

Kevin

BTW, here's Clark's pic of the AVO450 from the beginning of the thread:

http://www.wishbone.audi0.com/~clark/images/sti/turboswap/DSC02004.jpg

You can tell the inlet area was machined down quite a bit. My compressor cover is polished on the XS500 turbo, however, and has no markings.

Kevin

Originally posted by nmyeti
[IMG]

No way it's even close to that size.





Confirmed by turbo builder to be a To4E cover from the picture. Jeff has "to4" housing listed. Lip is machined down to accept the inlet hose. I would not try to fit one with a stock inlet pipe. The more I looked into this there must be 20-30 To4E housings. Different AR's. Different Cast groups, Slightly different angles for certain applications, design revs ect... When I get my turbo over to Ben I will know more on exactly what it is.


Here is the same cover - To4E
http://store4.yimg.com/I/cheapturbo_1750_941297


here are some pics from jeff's site of his AVO500 which is the exact same GT30-10 compressor and housing. Notice his is different the the one in the picture I took of the AVO450...



VF22 left - AVO500 right. Clearly marked "t04"

http://www.wrxworld.com/projects/AVOTurbo/AVOtComp1.jpg

Another angle showing the bend in the compressor housing needed for this thing to clear the bell housing.



http://www.wrxworld.com/projects/AVOTurbo/AVOtComp5.jpg


Cya

CT

I have a AVO 450 as I've said before. It has a different compressor cover than these 2. Still a A/R 0.6 all looks the same.
If anyone can host some of my pics of it PM me with you email.

4 things I'm still unsure of.

(1)How much larger is the compressor inlet on the AVO that stops the stock intake hose from going over it.
or How big is the VF39 inlet outside diameter. The inlet hose fits over.

(2) I can't see the problem with the oil line that was mentioned earlier. Why can't you use the stock oil line with an inverted flare fitting that connects to the garrett centre with a little machining. Please help me here.

(3)Will the stock intercooler connect upto the AVO.(I live in the frozen north)

(4)Does infact the exhaust housing hit the TGV cover

Thanks

1. The inlet is larger to where if you are putting over a samco you have to fight a little. You could probably force a stock over the top but why?

2. The oil line is not an issue on non AVCS cars. On AVCS cars the oil line on the back of the engine splits into the AVCS system so you cannot just replace the stock turbo oil line. You need to cut and weld the AVO fitting onto the stock one... I have a local shop do this for me for $10.

3. Stock IC will work but again why? Flow rating of this turbo will be hindered by the stock IC...

4. I have never see the exhaust housing hit the TGV cover with these.. Thats new to me. They are a tight fit for sure.. sometimes you have to losen the compressor and rotate it a bit to get it to fit.


email me the picture and I will host it for you. C_turner@ix.netcom.com

Clark

Originally posted by Wombat North
I have a AVO 450 as I've said before. It has a different compressor cover than these 2. Still a A/R 0.6 all looks the same.
If anyone can host some of my pics of it PM me with you email.

4 things I'm still unsure of.

(1)How much larger is the compressor inlet on the AVO that stops the stock intake hose from going over it.
or How big is the VF39 inlet outside diameter. The inlet hose fits over.

(2) I can't see the problem with the oil line that was mentioned earlier. Why can't you use the stock oil line with an inverted flare fitting that connects to the garrett centre with a little machining. Please help me here.

(3)Will the stock intercooler connect upto the AVO.(I live in the frozen north)

(4)Does infact the exhaust housing hit the TGV cover

Thanks

Clark thanks for the quick reply.

You asked a few why's
FWIW
I live in Canada with -30f temp and 4000ft plus altitude.
(1) Intercooler cooling is not needed as much as Texas.

(2) UTEC will not be available till end of year maybe march 04. So only 16psi max till then. I'm first on the list for UTEC BTW.

(3) I use this car as a daily driver so 360 crank HP at this altitude will do till cheaper injectors and UTEC become available. I have maybe 290hp crank now with ebc/exhaust. First 4 gears with the VF39 making only 12psi maybe 270hp crank.

(4)The insurance companies void insurance with mods up here. Got to hide swaybars etc with underbody tar. FMIC game over.:furious:

Again thanks,
Mark

Alright, finally got to do some logging today. I had cranked dow the boost from where it was on the dyno, and made a 2-3-4 pull:



RPM Clnt Speed Timg IAT MAF Throt IDC Knk Cor MAP VVT R VVT L A/F BsTmng
4133 194 34 40 106 17.47 11.4 7.05 0 -10.7 7 6 14.11 40
4120 194 33 41.5 106 21.41 13.7 7.91 0 -10.2 7 7 14.8 41.5
4155 194 33 44.5 106 24.53 14.5 8.86 0 -9.6 7 7 14.57 44.5
4121 194 33 44.5 106 24.82 14.5 8.79 0 -9.6 7 7 14.45 44.5
4134 194 33 44 106 24.18 14.1 8.82 0 -9.7 6 7 14.68 44
4106 194 33 44 106 24.27 14.1 8.76 0 -9.7 7 7 14.45 44
4107 194 33 44 106 24.2 14.5 8.76 0 -9.7 6 6 14.68 44
4196 194 33 46 106 32.8 18 10.74 0 -8.4 6 6 14.68 46
4306 194 33 37.5 106 91.79 100 27.56 4.5 -0.1 5 5 14.57 33
4626 194 34 32.5 106 120.58 100 34.54 2.5 2.5 4 5 13.54 30
4960 194 34 30.5 106 166.45 100 60.32 7 6.7 4 4 11.93 23.5
5472 194 35 25.5 106 229.46 100 86.38 9 12 0 0 11.13 16.5
5852 194 38 25.5 106 239.81 100 89.89 9 12 0 0 11.13 16.5
6312 194 38 28 104 248.4 100 92.91 8 11.6 0 0 11.13 20
6742 194 43 31 104 254.55 100 97.8 5.5 11.6 0 0 11.13 25.5
6301 194 48 24 104 16.58 9.8 4.03 0 -9.4 0 0 11.82 24
5748 194 48 25.5 102 14.53 9.4 7.36 0 -11.5 0 0 14.34 25.5
5122 194 52 36.5 102 134.44 100 46.99 3 2.3 0 0 14.22 33.5
5260 194 54 28.5 102 194 100 72.94 7.5 8 0 0 11.7 21
5585 194 54 24.5 102 239.81 100 94.13 9.5 13.1 0 0 11.13 15
5799 194 56 25 100 241.49 100 91.54 9 12.5 0 0 11.13 16
6042 196 59 26.5 100 244.89 100 92.8 9 11.9 0 0 11.13 17.5
6326 196 59 27.5 100 249.16 100 95.81 8.5 11.9 0 0 11.13 19
6504 196 63 29 100 256.18 100 97.13 7.5 12.2 0 0 11.13 21.5
6665 196 63 31 99 261.46 100 99.53 6.5 12.3 0 0 11.13 24.5
6930 196 67 32 99 259.09 100 100.53 5 12.3 0 0 11.13 27
6939 196 70 34.5 99 175.73 31.8 4.44 2 3.6 0 0 11.7 32.5
6543 196 70 24 97 13.89 9.4 4.19 0 -10.4 0 0 14.22 24
6110 196 73 41.5 97 129.31 91.8 43.01 0 -0.1 0 0 20.31 41.5
5354 196 74 30.5 97 181.2 100 69.68 5.5 6.4 0 0 14.45 25
5565 196 74 25 97 243.43 100 96.16 9.5 12.9 0 0 11.93 15.5
5652 196 76 25 95 239.1 100 91.63 9.5 12.9 0 0 11.13 15.5
5825 196 78 25 95 240.35 100 93.2 9 12.5 0 0 11.13 16
5906 196 78 25.5 95 243.71 100 91.97 9 12.3 0 0 11.13 16.5
6040 196 80 26 95 250.18 100 95.34 9 12.3 0 0 11.13 17
6185 196 80 26.5 93 251.44 100 96.32 9 12.5 0 0 11.13 17.5
6301 196 83 27 93 254.87 100 98.12 8.5 12.6 0 0 11.13 18.5
6421 196 86 27.5 93 257.45 100 100 8.5 12.6 0 0 11.13 19
6548 196 86 29 93 262.87 100 101.97 8 12.8 0 0 11.13 21
6639 196 88 30 91 262.78 100 100.56 7 12.6 0 0 11.13 23
6700 196 91 31.5 91 265.59 100 101.48 6.5 12.6 0 0 11.13 25
6805 196 91 31.5 91 267.92 100 101.62 5.5 12.6 0 0 11.13 26
6943 196 93 32 90 258.87 80.8 100.71 5 12.5 0 0 11.13 27



I decided that boost was a little too low, and the feul system had more head room, so I cranked up the boost a little bit, a little bit too much:



RPM Clnt Speed Tmng IAT MAF Throt IDC Knk Cor MAP VVT R VVT L A/F BsTmng
1902 180 26 33 82 10.79 7.5 4.06 -1 -9.6 9 10 14.22 34
1906 180 26 32.5 82 9.63 6.7 3.66 -1 -9.9 9 9 13.88 33.5
1938 180 26 37.5 82 44.3 32.9 10.75 -1 -3.2 10 10 13.65 38.5
2136 180 28 27.5 82 45.53 100 12.76 7 0.9 18 18 14.57 20.5
2208 180 28 27 82 47.58 100 13.66 6 1.3 17 17 14.57 21
2314 180 29 26.5 82 51.61 100 15.3 5 1.7 16 16 14.57 21.5
2413 180 30 25.5 82 57.21 100 16.47 4 2.3 15 15 14.68 21.5
2520 180 30 24 82 62.79 100 18.28 4 3 14 16 14.22 20
2627 180 33 22.5 82 69.04 100 20.18 3 3.6 15 16 14 19.5
2726 180 34 21.5 82 75.66 100 22.1 3.5 4.5 15 15 13.77 18
2871 180 34 19.5 82 84.51 100 26.34 3 5.2 15 15 12.39 16.5
2989 180 37 19.5 82 94.77 100 29.96 5 6.4 16 16 11.59 14.5
3122 180 39 18 82 105.14 100 35.3 4.5 7.5 15 15 11.13 13.5
3275 180 39 16.5 82 118.68 100 40.52 4 9.1 15 15 11.13 12.5
3413 180 43 14.5 82 138.96 100 48.79 4 11 15 15 11.13 10.5
3639 180 43 12.5 81 166.54 100 60.56 4 13.8 15 15 11.13 8.5
3797 180 46 16.5 81 189.33 100 69.66 6.5 16.4 13 13 11.13 10
3984 180 49 21 81 192.54 100 70.55 9 16 11 11 11.13 12
4187 180 49 21.5 81 198.97 100 73.25 9 15.8 9 9 11.13 12.5
4391 180 54 21 81 214.95 100 79.61 8 16 9 9 11.13 13
4597 181 58 22 81 224.06 100 84.34 8.5 16 9 9 11.13 13.5
4842 181 58 23 79 230.34 100 86.77 9 15.7 9 9