I just wanted to say thanks to the guys at GruppeS, in particular Mike. He was not feeling well and he stayed to 8:30 to make sure my car was tuned right. These guys are more than just professional, they are true enthusiasts.

Here’s what I’ve done to my car:

Used SR40 Turbo (I ported it myself)
Godspeed High Profit Oil line with restrictor
Stone Mountain Header Jet Hot Coated 2000 inside & out( some may think this is analogous to gold plating turd)
K&N Baffled Short Ram Intake
Walbro Fuel Pump
Modified Stock Injectors
Invidia Downpipe
Partially Wrapped Downpipe
Themotec Turbo Blanket
Ecutek Flash

One of the things notably missing from this setup is a catback exhaust. I wanted to buck conventional wisdom and do this last to see how much a difference this would make. Mike, from GruppeS, believes that with a free flowing catback exhaust I will be in the 330 AWP/AWT. I will be getting a catback in the next couple of weeks, probably the Greddy EVO 2 and having a retune.

I did the install myself with the exception of the fuel injectors.

Mustang Dyno: For a frame of reference this dyno makes almost identical numbers as the Vishnu Dyno Dynamics.

Boost Response is phenomenal with this turbo. It hits .9 bar at 3250 in 4th which was better than stock. It hits 1.35 bar or 19 lbs at about 3750 in 5th gear. I would like to get the turbo to 20.5 lbs as I hear that’s the magic number. Plenty of Torque. According to Mike there is still more on the table.

The car is so driveable. Acceleration at freeway speeds is awesome. The car pulls pretty hard.

Couple of notes:

One of the modified stock injectors had the gray cap missing and the brass piston/valve at the top was pushed in effectively preventing fuel from flowing. We put the injector in and we knew there was a problem. Finally we pulled the injector coaxed out the piston with a pair of pliers. Problem solved. I purchased these from the nasioc forums as a candidate for the Perrin Modified Stock Injectors. It looks like the guy who sold them to me hacked them out with a crow bar. Get pictures of these before you buy them.

I decided to port the turbo myself. It probably makes a difference as I gasket matched the housing and smoothed out the inlet. No real heavy porting. I also rounded off the inside edge closest to the inlet of the turbo wastegate. No boost creep.

Stone Mountain headers. Yes they are cheap, but I wanted almost equal length headers. I got them from 175.00, the coating was more expensive than the headers. There were a few problems with these headers. Without a studded flange on the up-pipe the turbo is a kind of pain to tighten down. Fitment was an issue, the only way everything would match up is everything (headers, upipe) was loosened and slowly tightened. The upipe/header connection protrudes hangs low enough to scrape when going up a driveway transistion.. Some of the supplied hardware was useless, like the spring bolts that hold the up-pipe to headers together. I really couldn’t get them tightened enough to prevent them from leaking. I used a pair of 14mm bolts to ratchet them down and added an extra nut to keep the nut from backing off. The welding is very sloppy in places. I grinded everything down where I could to smooth it out. For example all of the weld on bungs actually protrudes into the pipe causing unnecessary obstruction. I grinded them down where I could reach them. However, the collector is the main problem with this header, it’s very poor the pipes come out in irregular shape, so it’s likely the exhaust is not merging very well. Compared to the smooth cast collector of the gruppeS header, this is clearly inferior. The sound coming from the exhaust definitely changed, kind of ricer Honda rasp. With the existing catback the sound sucks in the low to middle range. Despite all of this it still appears to work.

Needless to say I’m very happy with my results, as I was realistically shooting for 320s AWP/AWT on this dyno and I’m pretty close.

Here is some older runs about a month ago just with downpipe and K&N that was done during a dyno day for comparison. All runs were with 91 octane.

http://www.turneyco.com/10162004Asmall.jpg

and another

http://www.turneyco.com/10162004Bsmall.jpg


here's a couple with the APS SR40

We were making a lot of runs so there's heat soak in the second run but we cleaned up the curve a little and optimized AFR. We were shooting for 10.8. All runs were with 91 octane.

http://www.turneyco.com/11222004Bsmall.jpg
http://www.turneyco.com/11222004Asmall.jpg

There ya go people, someone who is happy with a SR40 on an STi. I have a used SR40 with about 6 to 8k miles on it so somebody buy it :D

What octane fuel was used?

Sorry forgot about that, 91 octane.

With 91 octane i'm impressed. Nice set-up.

SEAN

beautiful torque curve Me likey! :devil:

I was down at Gruppe-s all day and today and we talked about your run last night , great stuff! ;) I always new the SR40 was a hot turbo, and yeah get a nice 3 inch exhaust on that thing and uncork the POWA!!!!! :D

Congrats Miguel, looks like a winner. You'd definately pick up some more with a TBE, but who cares, nice, legal, power.

Thanks bboy. Actually, I have a catless downpipe, I just have stock catback exhaust. So not legal, but fun nonetheless. What's cool is that if you look at the original older dyno runs you'll see that I'm not losing anything down low vs the vf39. I'm gaining torque over the vf39. That's pretty impressive in it's own right.

Nice numbers. What are you using for boost control?

Using stock boost solenoid. We had to continue to use the stock pill, without we couldn't control boost.

I run a Gt-10 based hybrid which is roughly the same as a sr40 with a larger housing with an AVCR and depending on the setting I get 19lbs at around 3750 2-4th and around 3400 in 5th.

Change your boost controller and I'm sure you will be able to better my results.

I also run the stock axle back. ;)

What do you think about running the GM solenoid? Do you think that's comparable to the performance of the AVCR?

What do you think about running the GM solenoid? Do you think that's comparable to the performance of the AVCR?

If money is a concern and for most it is I would certainly try that out. Perrin is also coming out with something that will work with the stock ecu I think? Check out the Perrin thread in the 2.0 for details.

Good luck!

Just wanted to give an update here, I've got the greddy evo2 catback on now. The sound is way better. Not very loud and the top end feels like it's opened up quite a bit. I'm also putting in heat range colder plugs and getting some issues with overboosting addressed this Thursday in a dynotune session. Hopefully we will be in the neighborhood of 330/330 awp/awt which will be pretty impressive on this dyno.

Is this really good?
Shouldnt he get ~10-15 whp from the downpipe and ~15-25 whp from the headers?
So he gained 50whp. Isnt stock boost 14.7 psi. So he went up 4psi and also had the ecutek tune.
So if you take the low side of my numbers he got 25 whp from the headers and downpipe, so you guys are saying that 25 whp from a bigger turbo, increasing boost, and custom tuning is good?
I guess I am just curious as to what the numbers would look like by keeping the stock turbo with this setup and pushing the stock turbo to 19psi.
I'm not trying to piss on anyones cheerios, I'm just trying to better understand.
Can someone better explain the gains from the different components to me?

THanks
Ron

I found another STi on here with a 20g, utec and downpipe with 295 whp.
How big is the 20g compared to the sr40.

Here is another one:
Set-up 2005 STI 2200 miles
K&N typhoon
DC Headers
PDE Catted downpipe
DC exhaust
Put down 275whp/274lbs of torque. Can't wait to go back and get Ecutek.

No engine management and stock turbo and he's only 25 whp below. I guess he does have a full exhaust though.

And another one:
04 STI with the Harman Spec 3 package: UTEC, Catted Downpipe, Greddy EVO 2 TBE, FMIC Intercooler, Harman Spec 3 Turbo, High Flow Injectors, Fuel pump upgrade, Apexi AVCR, and a few other bits
Pulled 347whp/332wtq on 91 Octane.
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=654376

and another:
Drews -- My car was putting down 277whp and 290wtq with a UTEC, downpipe and TBE on 91 octane with a conservative tune (17psi or so). This set up is not in a final state of tune but already is plus 70whp and plus 42 wtq on 91 octane.

and another:http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=627543
Just got off the dyno.... 410 AWHp and 419ftlbs on pump gas @24psi
utec
Green
Headers
Turbo Back
PE 850s
PE BIG MAF

The green must be twice the size of the sr40.

The sr40 must be just a c*nt hair bigger than the vf39?

Actually, you have to know something about the relative difference between dynos to make a comparison between these dynographs between different machines. So given that this particular mustang dyno is pretty close to dyno dynamics, the numbers are pretty good. If you look at how the vehicle is generating power it's also pretty good. A 20g would also be a good choice as well, but actually referring to a bunch of different setups is really not a good comparison. For example a green on the Vishnu dyno dynamics is around 340/340 at 21# of boost. Also this car is an 11 second car. Here's a thread for reference: http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=626566&highlight=Vishnu+Stage+STI

Now if I can do 330/330 at similar boost levels on pump 91 I will be very happy. The car pulls very hard, much harder than cobb stage 2 with header. This is not the ultimate turbo grade but it works well on the STI. Also my new numbers will be including a 3 inch catback exhaust, so this was considered to be big restriction at these power levels. The turbo is a lot bigger than the Vf39 and flows more than vf22. You may think it's not the best, but it works and it works well.

The sr40 must be just a c*nt hair bigger than the vf39?

Tuned right *cough*, an SR40 will do an easy 350+WHP on pump gas.

I did 330's on mine on 93 and 360's on 100, on a 2.2L. STI's around here average 350-360 on pump.

Even 2.0's do 300-310 on 93 oct.

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

Thanks guys.

That last link I posted to Junior2JZ just seemed crazy. I mean the only differences I see are the turbo (Green instead of SR40), he's got a full TBE, and Utec instead of Ecutek and both are on pump gas.
So how is it that he has 110 more whp, I know they are different dynos, but that just seems crazy that they would be that different.
Also how big is the SR40 compared to an innovative t-60?

Thanks
Ron

isnt that what turbos are supposed to do. ;)

isnt that what turbos are supposed to do. ;)
Indeed :D

~v6

A good turbo is like a good woman
it shouldt make any noise unless its blowing.

Thanks for messing up this thread with a bunch of useless banter, all this information was meant as purely informational. And RiftsWRX, this does state a preliminary dyno results, so there will be more tuning to come but please keep in mind this is 91. Rather than ask me specifics about the tune to help me, you infer that it's a bad tune? How do you know it's a bad tune? You guys are a bunch of punk ass little bitches.

Sorry about that last post, I thought it was funny.
Anyways I am seriously interested about the differences between the dyno numbers with seemingly the same mods. All the ones are close enough to yours to be dyno differences but Juniorz is crazy.
So if any one knows about the differences between the sr40 and the green, I would like to know and how is that much power difference possible. The green has to be ginormous.

not to throw more fuel on the fire...but just by looking at the dyno plot, it could use quite a bit of cleaning up.

notice how the curves have subtle peaks? get rid of all but the big one in the torque curve, and the car should be noticably smoother. you should be able to run a little leaner than that, even on 91...and make sure your timing steps arent too big.

Sorry about that last post, I thought it was funny.
Anyways I am seriously interested about the differences between the dyno numbers with seemingly the same mods. All the ones are close enough to yours to be dyno differences but Juniorz is crazy.
So if any one knows about the differences between the sr40 and the green, I would like to know and how is that much power difference possible. The green has to be ginormous.
yes, the green is ginormous.

put it this way.

SR40 < SR50 < green.

i have an sr50 and its no match for the big bad greens...the sr40 is one step smaller still...

what about the green compared to an Innovative T-60?

im guessing

green < t60

but i dont know for sure. im sure there could be variations of the t60 that could be on both sides...and i dont know the specs of the innovative one.

My buddy's ECUTEK SR40 STi just pulled 360/350 on GRD's dyno w/ 93 Octane. It was less than what I would have hoped but oh well. The car supposedly spools like a mothertrucker.

you boys are making me extremely interested in what my setup puts down...

The curves have something to do with exhaust restriction, notice how the torque curve falls off. In the last dyno you can see that it is smoother. On thursday's tune I will get it fully logged and post the results from logs so that you guys can help me out.

My buddy's ECUTEK SR40 STi just pulled 360/350 on GRD's dyno w/ 93 Octane. It was less than what I would have hoped but oh well. The car supposedly spools like a mothertrucker.

Just for a frame of reference stock STIs put down 240-250 and on the GRD Dyno and Gruppe-s mustang dyno low 220s. So if my car is putting down close to 330/330 this is very close to GRD, on 91. This seems to me to pretty reasonable.

I think anybody that talks about AWP without referencing a stock baseline is really deluding themselves as to what that number really means.

I think anybody that talks about AWP without referencing a stock baseline is really deluding themselves as to what that number really means.

also not taking into consideration which kind of dyno and what octane was used, jeez how manytimes do we have to go over this :confused:

Im really interested to see what this thing does with the new exhaust, what time on Thurs are you going to be there, I want to come check this out!:)

also not taking into consideration which kind of dyno and what octane was used, jeez how manytimes do we have to go over this :confused:

Im really interested to see what this thing does with the new exhaust, what time on Thurs are you going to be there, I want to come check this out!:)

Well obviously the octane is an import number. It's like people just throw out these arbitrarily large numbers with out a point of reference. Certain people like RiftsWRX know better, but do it anyway, suggesting my setup/tune is bad, whatever.

I will be there at 11:00. They will put the plugs in and the tuning will commence. If I hit 330/330 it will be cool, but I won't be disappointed if I don't hit that number because I'm already very happy with how the car performs. I really would like to see what kind of trap speed I can get in the 1/4 mile because ultimately this is more telling than all of the Dyno BS.

V6, cut it out!

This guy spent time and mone to test thisout. He deservs thanks, not people posting useless stuff here!

Let's keep it clean please!

mnavarro,

Please post spooling info again when you have it all tuned out. Curious to see if you improve on this even more. I like the sound of "spools like a motherfvcker".

Just for a frame of reference stock STIs put down 240-250 and on the GRD Dyno and Gruppe-s mustang dyno low 220s. So if my car is putting down close to 330/330 this is very close to GRD, on 91. This seems to me to pretty reasonable.

I think anybody that talks about AWP without referencing a stock baseline is really deluding themselves as to what that number really means.

My buddy dyno'd 255awhp on a DD on stock turbo and UTEC before the SR40/ECUTEK/PE850s. I believe GRD uses a Dynopack.

Great numbers for 91 piss.

Wonder how much you left on the table.

you boys are making me extremely interested in what my setup puts down...

You really need to get that puppy on a dyno.

If for no other reason than to help me figure out if/why my car is such a dog. :lol:

To add some useful content here, my STi with:
Perrin Mod Injs
SR50
TurboXS Intake
TXS TBE (catless)

Made 325whp on 93 octane at 22psi.

I dunno why. I suspect some kind of leak somewhere. I'll be replacing headers and intercooler (front mount) in the near future, which should eliminate several more possibilities in the "why's my car so slow" adventure. :)

Tuned right *cough*, an SR40 will do an easy 350+WHP on pump gas.

I did 330's on mine on 93 and 360's on 100, on a 2.2L. STI's around here average 350-360 on pump.

Even 2.0's do 300-310 on 93 oct.

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

In california, all we have is 91 - so about the best that can be made on a 4 cylinder engine is around 330 ish safely, anything higher will be prone to knock in hot weather. Even to make 330 you have to really tune it pretty close to the edge.

The Mustang Dyno at Gruppe-s uses no correction factors at all, so the dyno reads lower than just about everything else.

Thanks for messing up this thread with a bunch of useless banter, all this information was meant as purely informational. And RiftsWRX, this does state a preliminary dyno results, so there will be more tuning to come but please keep in mind this is 91. Rather than ask me specifics about the tune to help me, you infer that it's a bad tune? How do you know it's a bad tune? You guys are a bunch of punk ass little bitches.

:lol:

Actually no, I was referring to a bunch of other people who I knew are reading the thread (Inside Joke). Trust me bud... this punk ass little bitch says exactly what's on his mind, so there's absolutely no doubt in your mind if I'm saying you're a chode. ;)

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

P.S. Chicago 93 is about a shake worth of piss better then cali 91... So that's why I still stand by my statement that there's more to be had. I personally don't like the way the curve is post 5200, either you're knocking, or you're doing something with either timing or fuel to drop torque dramatically. I.E. not smooth juju.

But I'd be interested to see the final log and plot, primarily AFR.

I whole heartedly believe that for someone who wants to maintain as close to stock drivability, the SR40, or the SBR GT30R-10 is the best bet out there. That comes from tuning everything on STI's from PE's and IHI's, to super fancy T3/T4 hybrids.

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

:lol:

Actually no, I was referring to a bunch of other people who I knew are reading the thread (Inside Joke). Trust me bud... this punk ass little bitch says exactly what's on his mind, so there's absolutely no doubt in your mind if I'm saying you're a chode. ;)

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

Thanks for pointing that out, you continue to be extremely helpful and add insite to this thread. This just confirms my original sentiment. Why don't you really take your secret society high school clique somewhere else and grow up.

P.S. Chicago 93 is about a shake worth of piss better then cali 91... So that's why I still stand by my statement that there's more to be had. I personally don't like the way the curve is post 5200, either you're knocking, or you're doing something with either timing or fuel to drop torque dramatically. I.E. not smooth juju.

www.ProjectWRX.com

Having the stock catback is part of the reason for the drop in torque, but not knocking.

Thanks for pointing that out, you continue to be extremely helpful and add insite to this thread. This just confirms my original sentiment. Why don't you really take your secret society high school clique somewhere else and grow up.

Because I like it here and it's cozy and warm, plus it's cold out *brrrrr*. Nah, I think I'll stay! :lol:

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

Having the stock catback is part of the reason for the drop in torque, but not knocking.

http://www.turneyco.com/11222004Bsmall.jpg

I'm not referring to the natural drop off, I'm referring to this drop post 5800.

That is a sign of massive enrichment (not smooth enrichment) and/or a taper or actual drop in timing.

That can be tuned out, no matter what the components on the car are.

But I'm anal like that when it comes to tuning peoples cars.

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

http://www.turneyco.com/11222004Asmall.jpg
Ok but in the second image (after further tuning from the dyno you're referring) you can see that it has been smoothed out post 5800. The HP is lower because of heat soak.

Looking at that one, It appears that you're spiking at around 4k? Like I said, I'd love to see the final outcome. Looks like you have a very nice thing going here, just need to try and flatten out that torque curve as much as possible (your powertrain will thank you).

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

http://www.turneyco.com/11222004Asmall.jpg
Ok but in the second image (after further tuning from the dyno you're referring) you can see that it has been smoothed out post 5800. The HP is lower because of heat soak.
i would also like to see logs if you got em.

i know different dynos behave differently, but like rifts said, that is a big spike. im actually wondering if it is primarily a spike from a boost spike.

those curves just dont sit well in my stomach.

this is more what i would like to see-
http://www.jasonyokoyama.com/misc/newsr40dyno.jpg

Besides all the bickering between everyone : P this thread has actually really helped me out in understanding TQ curves and the like, thanks guys! : )
And hey, either way, you guys are getting fastahhhhr, just keep that in mind....JK

See this is what I wanted to see. 300 whp with the stock turbo on pump gas.
GTSpec header, Perrin Uppie, TXS DP cut halfway, UTEC
Dynojet dyno.
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=681531
Yes dynos are different. But I still dont see where the gains are coming from this sr40 turbo and no one has yet to give me a good explanation.
I'm in no way criticizing your setup as I have a ITS T-60 turbo on a WRX and only put down 350 whp on 91 and I think my turbo is larger than yours.
It just seems as though we are all too quick to ditch the stock turbos. I really would like to see a WRX with headers, an uppipe, TBE, UTEC or Ecutek dynoed and then take off the stock turbo and run it with a VF22 and then a VF34. Compare the results with the same car and same dyno.
And do the same thing with an STi and a couple bolt on turbos.
Has anyone done this? I guess I should start my own thread to find out unless some tuners read this.

See this is what I wanted to see. 300 whp with the stock turbo on pump gas.
GTSpec header, Perrin Uppie, TXS DP cut halfway, UTEC
Dynojet dyno.
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=681531
Yes dynos are different. But I still dont see where the gains are coming from this sr40 turbo and no one has yet to give me a good explanation.
I'm in no way criticizing your setup as I have a ITS T-60 turbo on a WRX and only put down 350 whp on 91 and I think my turbo is larger than yours.
It just seems as though we are all too quick to ditch the stock turbos. I really would like to see a WRX with headers, an uppipe, TBE, UTEC or Ecutek dynoed and then take off the stock turbo and run it with a VF22 and then a VF34. Compare the results with the same car and same dyno.
And do the same thing with an STi and a couple bolt on turbos.
Has anyone done this? I guess I should start my own thread to find out unless some tuners read this.
As I said before, and it wasnt meant to be a joke. The SR/40 is NOT a good turbo imho. This is the zillionth time I have seen it perform fair at best.

An STi is capable of making much more power with the stock turbo than he is getting with the SR/40.

Not to mention the Sr/40 is overpriced too.

I would say its one of the last turbos I would put on an STi.

I hope others after reading this agree.

~v6

p.s. Sorry Leo, but I'm just speaking my mind and I dont think im too far off base here. If so just delete it like usual.

[QUOTE=V6TurboTA]

An STi is capable of making much more power with the stock turbo than he is getting with the SR/40.

Not to mention the Sr/40 is overpriced too.

~v6
QUOTE]

Actually on this dyno at this facility nobody has broken 300 with the stock turbo, typically 275-285, with similar mods. But again what you're getting is a partial picture of what's going on here. This is with the stock cat back, pretty much all numbers are given with a full turbo back exhaust, these numbers will increase (i hope around 20/20). On pump gas with 10.8 AFR this is really good and to be honest a vf39 can't come close. The most the vf39 has ever put out in another thread is 325 on c16 on a HIGHER reading dyno, mine will be doing this on pump. But there will be some that convinced it's not a good turbo. I paid 800 bucks used for this turbo and I would probably not buy it for full retail, because there are other turbos (20g/green) that will provide equal/better performance.

See this is what I wanted to see. 300 whp with the stock turbo on pump gas.
GTSpec header, Perrin Uppie, TXS DP cut halfway, UTEC
Dynojet dyno.
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=681531
Yes dynos are different. But I still dont see where the gains are coming from this sr40 turbo and no one has yet to give me a good explanation.
I'm in no way criticizing your setup as I have a ITS T-60 turbo on a WRX and only put down 350 whp on 91 and I think my turbo is larger than yours.
It just seems as though we are all too quick to ditch the stock turbos. I really would like to see a WRX with headers, an uppipe, TBE, UTEC or Ecutek dynoed and then take off the stock turbo and run it with a VF22 and then a VF34. Compare the results with the same car and same dyno.
And do the same thing with an STi and a couple bolt on turbos.
Has anyone done this? I guess I should start my own thread to find out unless some tuners read this.

Well to be honest C16 and 12 to 1 AFR, with a tuned downpipe that dumps right under the car, should produce some amazing torque. However this is not even close to an apples to apples comparison. The stock turbo is limited to pretty much 325 awp, no matter what fuel you put into it, even c16. I'm betting with this fuel in my car i would be at 360 or 370 on the GruppeS Mustang dyno.

The reason that nobody is explaining how much more power it's making is that it's difficult to say without swapping out a turbos, tuning it and performing an apples to apples comparison over stock. I would say that it's good for 25-50 more horsepower than the stock vf39 turbo. I'm sure someone can spout off flow numbers.

Well, boost curve will settle this debate!

To me, it looks like max boost around 4K and boost was tapered purposely or dropped gradually due to the fact that he did not have free flowing "CATBACK" exhaust. (Although, I don't think SR40 can keep up with 19.5 PSI at the top with 2.5L displacement).

Now that he has the GREDDY EVO2, we shall see the dyno graph again. I am sure it would be smoother toward high RPM zone.

Well, boost curve will settle this debate!

To me, it looks like max boost around 4K and boost was tapered purposely or dropped gradually due to the fact that he did not have free flowing "CATBACK" exhaust. (Although, I don't think SR40 can keep up with 19.5 PSI at the top with 2.5L displacement).

Now that he has the GREDDY EVO2, we shall see the dyno graph again. I am sure it would be smoother toward high RPM zone.

I held 22+ at redline with no issue...

FYI..

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

"The car made 281whp on the ECUtek tune on pump gas. With the new exhaust and a utec I was able to tune it to 300whp at only 17 psi. "

That other thread with the stock turbo was 300 whp on pump and 325 on c16. I think it proves my point that the stock turbo is capable of that kind of power. Even if that dyno reads higher it still made very close to the same power as the sr40 and the vf39 was at 2 psi less of boost.
I dont see it as apples to oranges at all. The only difference are the manufacturers of the headers and downpipes and the other guy had a full tbe instead of only a downpipe.
Its more like comparing a Red Delicious Apple to a Golden Delicious Apple, both are apples but there are suttle differences.
This is all pointless anyway. The only thing that really matters is that you are happy with your car.
I love my car but I have clutch problems so everytime I go to the track and run a high 12 at 110+ I get **** from my friends about not breaking a 12.5 or getting a very low 12. I just shrug it off and tell them that once they get their **** box civic that runs high 15's down into the 13's and run it consistently with no problems they can come talk to me.
Anyway just have fun with it.
Anyone know if you can save different maps onto the Ecutek ie 91 octane map and c16 map?

Thanks
Ron

There have been two cars with vf39 that made 325 AWP on higher reading dynos that I know of, the aforementioned Kingpin tune and god, but god was on a higher reading dyno. They are capable of this but tuned to an inch of there lives on premium fuels. So honestly they are not even close. There's also efficiency and the SR40 is far more efficient at these power levels than the vf39.

If anything it demonstrates that the vf39 is flow restricted to about 325ish awp. I saw a graph of 2.35 sti on 94 making close to 370 on a mustang dyno and it wasn't even maxed out yet.

Regarding the extra maps on ecutek, there is no feature for the STI. You can get a deltadash to make global changes but it's kind of a pain. If you're really serious about c16, you can use one of the piggybacks.

Well, boost curve will settle this debate!

To me, it looks like max boost around 4K and boost was tapered purposely or dropped gradually due to the fact that he did not have free flowing "CATBACK" exhaust. (Although, I don't think SR40 can keep up with 19.5 PSI at the top with 2.5L displacement).

Now that he has the GREDDY EVO2, we shall see the dyno graph again. I am sure it would be smoother toward high RPM zone.

Actually it want's to go beyond 19.5, I'm getting a little overboosting due to my current solenoid settings. This car is easily maintaining 1.35 bar to redline.

As I said before, and it wasnt meant to be a joke. The SR/40 is NOT a good turbo imho. This is the zillionth time I have seen it perform fair at best.

An STi is capable of making much more power with the stock turbo than he is getting with the SR/40.

Not to mention the Sr/40 is overpriced too.

I would say its one of the last turbos I would put on an STi.

I hope others after reading this agree.

~v6

p.s. Sorry Leo, but I'm just speaking my mind and I dont think im too far off base here. If so just delete it like usual.

V6 Im really gonna have to disagree with you on this one, Im still not sure people here are familiar with the realities of 91 octane and the differences between dynos. If you can find ONE vf39 that put down more HP on a Mustang dyno on 91 octante I would LOVE to see it.;)

As I said before, and it wasnt meant to be a joke. The SR/40 is NOT a good turbo imho. This is the zillionth time I have seen it perform fair at best.

An STi is capable of making much more power with the stock turbo than he is getting with the SR/40.

Not to mention the Sr/40 is overpriced too.

I would say its one of the last turbos I would put on an STi.

I hope others after reading this agree.

~v6

p.s. Sorry Leo, but I'm just speaking my mind and I dont think im too far off base here. If so just delete it like usual.


I'd have to disagree with that. My SR40 setup dyno'd 286whp....but at only 1bar. I plan on hopefully having it retuned this week. (This is on a WRX, not STI)

I'd have to disagree with that. My SR40 setup dyno'd 286whp....but at only 1bar. I plan on hopefully having it retuned this week. (This is on a WRX, not STI)

How was your spool? What'd it run in the 1/4 mile? I've seen a 2.0/SR40 break 300hp and not be able to get in the 12's on pump to save their life. Look at the 1/4 mile ET's of VF-powered cards.

I have SR40's and SR30's run mid to low 12's on average all the time. I just can't see what the massive problems people are having with this turbo are.

Actually, I think I can... people don't run the turbo in it's sweet spot. 20.5PSI. And I mean 20.5 PSI at redline.

Not 19, not 20.1, not 20.4, but 20.5 to about 22 PSI at redline.

NIGHT and DAY difference between 19 and 20.5. One of those, you "feel it" differences.

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

We will be shooting for a minimum of 20.5 pounds of boost tomorrow, maybe more if it looks good. I think with the heat range colder plugs we should be able to do this no problem on 91 with decent timing. So with a minimum of 1 pound more boost, a freeflowing exhaust, heat range colder plugs, a conservative estimate is 20/20 more.

GOOD LUCK mnavarro. Mayeb you can capture a boost plot this time for us all to peruse.

see you there:D

This should be really interesting to see what the gains are with the Greddy exhaust and the extra boost. You should do a run just running downpipe out too. I took my car to the track like that once and people thought I had done some kind of big block v8 swap into my WRX. Its sounds badass. Plus I would like to see what the power difference is.
Everytime I spout off about dyno numbers I always forget about my first experience with it about 2 years ago. I had a vf34, headers, uppipe, tbe, injectors, fuel pump, and utec and I had it tuned at XS Engineering. The guy obviously didnt know how to tune the utec and I was knocking like a mofo on the freeway. So I took it back and had them retune it for free and somehow the numbers went from 300 whp up to 350 whp on 91 and running 20 psi on a vf34.
I took the car to easystreet a week later and dynoed 205 whp.
XS Engineering blew so much smoke up my ass. They were telling me I had the most powerful WRX they had ever tuned. They also showed me a bent rod that was supposedly from their own WRX that put down 280 whp, and obvious ploy to get me all worried about mine so I would have them install some forged ones.
I better stop thinking about this again before I drive down there and bittch slap those guys.
Anyways good luck on the retune.

GOOD LUCK mnavarro. Mayeb you can capture a boost plot this time for us all to peruse.
Yeah...cause I still have a SR40 with your name on it ;)

Phatron what caused you to dyno 205whp a week later?

An inflated dyno plot from a questionable tuner

You should do a run just running downpipe out too. I took my car to the track like that once and people thought I had done some kind of big block v8 swap into my WRX. Its sounds badass. Plus I would like to see what the power difference is.

I was thinking of doing this if I don't hit my numbers just to see if there's anything more. It's pretty easy to remove, the vehicle will just have to come off the dyno for a bit. There was an an SR40 with APS 3.5 exhaust that was in the neighborhood of 340/340 on a mustang dyno, but I don't think it was 91 octane.

It seems to make sense that with these smaller turbos that any post turbo backpressure has a significant impact on flow when trying to maximize hp.

Miguel you are going to get more power from this turbo. RiftsWRX has done wonders with both his SR40 and his SBR. Your torque curve is very strange. Something is preventing you from getting torque even earlier and you seem to be either tapering boost or developing mucho backpressure as RPM rises. Solve those two problems and you'll see much more power and a flater torque curve.

For a sharper rise in torque I would make sure AVCS is functioning (I don't know why it would not be, but you car was at ESX). Also look a AFRs at low RPM, are you skirting 14.7:1 until you get boost up.

As for the trailing torque as RPM rises. If you are holding boost great, if not try to. Jorge (RiftsWRX) tried a number of boost settings and he did find that 20.5 was the best for his set up. I'd try to get there as well. Talking about the "sweet spot", the SR40 compressor map is pretty sweet at a PR of 2.4 (20.5 boost), it's most efficient across the whole range of compressor flow at that ratio. Jorge has a point there. Now if exhaust back pressure is rearing it's ugly head your only option is porting the waste gate for more escape flow. Of all the APS turbos, the exhaust housing on the SR40 is the largest relative to the compressor flow, so you have done as well as you can there.

And lastly, a mystery question: got headers? are the wrapped? are they coated? is that up-pipe nice and insulated?

Terminal,
The 300whp and 350whp I got at XS Engineering were definately inflated to make me feel good.
Easystreet used to dyno stock WRX's at 125-135whp. So on there dyno I had ~75 whp gain over stock with the vf34, tbe, headers and utec. Its almost like XS Engineering had their dyno setup to give stock WRX's ~250 whp. Its a common situation for tuners to up there dyno #'s and dyno gains from their products to increase their sales. How is the average Joe Schmo that never goes to a different dyno and doesnt know a thing about tuning going to realize that something is fishy? I mean they got me. I am definately a little smarter and more aware since I have been reading the posts on this site. There is a lot of garbage/bs to sift through, but usually there is good information to be had here.
I now put down 350 whp at Easystreet on 91 octane. 215 whp over stock is nice. But it was a lot nicer before the STi's came out in the states. Now they are hitting that number with little effort, same with the EVO's.

gotcha. I couldnt bring myself to believe that it was simply a function of the correction factor. insanity I tell you.

My car was at Gruppe-S...

The afrs seemed to do what what you suggest flirting with stoich but nothing was done special to get the turbo to spool. The headers/uppipe (Stone Mountain Racing) are jet hotted, the turbo wastegate is ported the housing gasket matched. But the problem could be the collector on the header which was of clearly poor quality. I can already tell tomorrows graph will be better because I already feel a substantial difference with the cat back as far as the smoothness of the torque. Definitely feels less peaky and pulls a lot harder up top. But I thought I was getting pretty good torque down low?

Look at this dyno from the vf39, particularly the blue on pump. Even if the dynos were equivalent the SR40 is pretty close.

http://www.kingpinperformance.com/main/images/04ChrisSTi.jpg
http://www.turneyco.com/11222004Asmall.jpg

Honestly, if I could change one thing about my setup it would probably be the header/uppipe, but the turbo is not an issue. If I hit 330/330 then even the header is not an issue, because on this Mustang dyno with 91 octance these numbers are really the equivalent of what everyone else is tauting as success.

Invisgards car with an externally gated gt30r is currently around 340 AWHP. This setup will clearly smoke the SR40 on premium fuels, but on pump my car will not be too far off, with even more downlow torque.

How was your spool? What'd it run in the 1/4 mile? I've seen a 2.0/SR40 break 300hp and not be able to get in the 12's on pump to save their life. Look at the 1/4 mile ET's of VF-powered cards.

I'm not a drag-racer so I dont know times. Spoolup is aight, full boost by about 4200rpm.

people don't run the turbo in it's sweet spot. 20.5PSI. And I mean 20.5 PSI at redline.

Not 19, not 20.1, not 20.4, but 20.5 to about 22 PSI at redline.

NIGHT and DAY difference between 19 and 20.5. One of those, you "feel it" differences.
yeah, I'd like to see that magical low end tq appear out of no where when you up the boost .3psi. jfwy

As I said before, and it wasnt meant to be a joke. The SR/40 is NOT a good turbo imho. This is the zillionth time I have seen it perform fair at best.

An STi is capable of making much more power with the stock turbo than he is getting with the SR/40.

Not to mention the Sr/40 is overpriced too.

I would say its one of the last turbos I would put on an STi.

I hope others after reading this agree.

~v6

p.s. Sorry Leo, but I'm just speaking my mind and I dont think im too far off base here. If so just delete it like usual.

^ I'm with stupid. I thought everyone already knew that. I'd argue the same for the SR50. SR55 or bust IMO.

Perhaps it's a little overpriced....but I'm such a fan of most of APS product line that I didn't mind paying a little extra for peace of mind. (in the event that something goes wrong...I have a very respected company to take care of my prolems)

Don't mind the animals.

Yes you have good torque down low, but I think you could get it earlier, and then keep it at around 330, but perhaps not. If you look at nearly every tuning of the STI with the stock turbo, torque is coming much earlier than stock. The graph you post is an anomaly. Go to PDXtuning or ElementTuning and look at those plots. Yes, the SR40 may spool a slightly slower than the VF39, but not by much (read Jorge's work). Scorch that up-pipe with high stoich AFR until you pull 5 psi (as long as det is held at bay).

I just don't understand that peak torque at around 4200. It's not that the peak is at that RPM, it's that it's only at that RPM, and falls away on either side. When are you breaking 1 bar of boost?

Search for RiftsWRX's logs with the SR40, they might help you out. Try to get some logs of your dyno run and compare them. No matter what anyone says, Jorge's wagon runs 12's just by stepping on the peda when the light goes greenl. There is power in this turbo, you just need to find that last 10-15%.

I think your header is probably fine. I'm sniffing around to learn if the exhaust is getting cooled too quickly and plugging up the turbo's hot side. That's a long-shot explanation of your sinking torque curve, but it fits the data.

As for the SR55, I haven't seen a single one outperform the SR40 on the STI, not yet at least.

Thanks for your insite bboy, with respect to the 'animals', it's clear that logic doesn't always prevail here. I think it's good that people back up there opinons with facts rather than feelings. If anything the graphs show that the SR40 has potential. Even if for some reason I don't reach my expectations at least we are going through an exercise where we will learn something that will be of benefit to the community. What is particularly troubling is the constant referring to peak AWP/AWT numbers on different dynos on different fuels with different climates with different parts and saying one is better/worse for the absolute peak. I just don't understand the lunacy of this. There's enough material out there for everyone to be educated on this but a few people continue to remain stubbornly ignorant. But I've been called pedantic before for this type of thinking, so I'm just trying to have fun with understanding and learning more about it. I don't have a personal preference or emotional attachment to any turbo, just trying to optimize this turbo for my application.

... so we will be tuning a more for spool, but honestly I'm not overly concerned about it. I probably could benefit from a different solenoid setup to increase spool as well. I will get logs for this, and also post AFR Charts. I'm looking forward to tomorrow.

As for the SR55, I haven't seen a single one outperform the SR40 on the STI, not yet at least.
Huh? MZM ran 11.8-9@119 with one at only 21psi in front of my eyes. It's an animal.

Huh? MZM ran 11.8-9@119 with one at only 21psi in front of my eyes. It's an animal.
ditto.

its performing on par with the green.

yeah, I'd like to see that magical low end tq appear out of no where when you up the boost .3psi. jfwy



^ I'm with stupid. I thought everyone already knew that. I'd argue the same for the SR50. SR55 or bust IMO.

Throw it on a dyno and spend hours playing with it and find out for yourself.

I can't explain it, but you see it, and FEEL it. There's a certain point where things just "work" with that turbo, like the magic number where things flow better and after that point they don't necessarily improve as you go up.

This GT30R is the same thing. 18.5's nice, but swing past 19.5 and it NOTICEABLY accelerates faster.

But like I said... try it and base your own conclusions.


/rant
Man, I'm really starting to tire of people who read, hear, and then talk, vs. doing and then talking. (and no... that's not just singling you out)

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

Man, I'm really starting to tire of people who read, hear, and then talk, vs. doing and then talking. (and no... that's not just singling you out)



He did say "jfwy", which I assume is Just F*ckin Wif Ya ;)

Somewhat related, I'm kinda with Jorge on this one. My SR50 didn't feel like much at 17-19psi. But at 22psi or so, it seemed to be a much bigger difference. I need to get back to a dyno to see what difference some of my other mods and tweaks have made, though - for now it's just butt dyno impressions.

Other people who have ridden in the car say it feels brutal, but since I'm always in the driver's seat, I'm kinda jaded.

He did say "jfwy", which I assume is Just F*ckin Wif Ya ;)


Oh... :disco: Whoops :p

Sorry hehe, too many bottles at night, not enough sleep.

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

He did say "jfwy", which I assume is Just F*ckin Wif Ya ;)

Somewhat related, I'm kinda with Jorge on this one. My SR50 didn't feel like much at 17-19psi. But at 22psi or so, it seemed to be a much bigger difference. I need to get back to a dyno to see what difference some of my other mods and tweaks have made, though - for now it's just butt dyno impressions.

Other people who have ridden in the car say it feels brutal, but since I'm always in the driver's seat, I'm kinda jaded.
a little off-topic- did you get your boost problems straightened away with the new housing?

what other tweaks have you done?

ditto on the jaded comment...people who have ridden in my car say its way faster than their stg2 STi's...i cant really tell. and i was only running 19psi at the time.

a little off-topic- did you get your boost problems straightened away with the new housing?

what other tweaks have you done?

ditto on the jaded comment...people who have ridden in my car say its way faster than their stg2 STi's...i cant really tell. and i was only running 19psi at the time.

Yeah, boost is straightened out, but I'm not toooo happy with it now. Boost control is twitchy and it'll be tough to flip between race gas boost and pump, so eventually, when I get motivated again, I'll pop a helper spring in there. (Hey, it took me 2 months to swap housings :lol: ) I'm installing headers, EGT gauge, and FMIC tomorrow. Other tweaks were just fiddling with the tune mostly. Also swapped mufflers. I have bumped up AFRs a bit and smoothed the timing out some more. It feels better, just tough to say how much of a difference it has really made. Airflow is actually kinda crazy now with the cool weather - a big MAF is definitely on the horizon. 4.8v from 5500RPM or so. That's some serious air.

cold air + sr50 + 20psi = 4.8 MAFV. lol.


4789 +2.7 4.4 100 30 00 +25.3 60.8 +26.1 -4.1 1.00 3.9 12.33
4938 +7.2 4.5 99 50 00 +21.4 70.2 +18.7 -1.6 1.00 4.1 11.65
5042 +12.7 4.6 100 70 00 +19.6 74.2 +13.2 -0.2 1.00 4.2 11.24
5120 +16.8 4.6 100 80 00 +19.5 79.7 +12.4 +0.5 1.00 4.2 11.14
5341 +19.0 4.7 100 80 00 +19.2 81.2 +12.8 +0.4 1.00 4.3 11.11
5527 +20.4 4.7 100 80 00 +18.7 83.9 +13.0 +0.6 1.00 4.3 11.11
5640 +20.4 4.7 100 80 00 +18.5 83.7 +13.2 +0.6 1.00 4.3 11.02
5767 +19.6 4.7 99 70 00 +18.6 85.0 +14.6 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01
5952 +19.6 4.8 100 70 00 +19.1 84.0 +14.7 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01
5963 +18.6 4.8 99 70 00 +19.3 86.7 +14.9 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01
6127 +18.8 4.8 99 70 00 +20.5 86.6 +15.2 +0.3 1.00 4.4 11.01
6313 +18.4 4.8 100 70 00 +21.6 86.4 +15.6 +0.4 1.00 4.3 10.96
6361 +18.2 4.7 100 70 00 +24.8 81.6 +15.8 +0.4 1.00 4.2 11.05


what are you running as far as AFRs are concerned?

also- whats the temp out by you? im getting creep. (as seen from the logs above). the mbc was set to 15 psi or so in the summer...should be running 18psi or so in the cold at most. definately not 20. eh, maybe i should just set it to 20 in the mid and taper up top. still cant get rid of the damn 1 knock events at 6000+ no matter how much timing i remove. ah well

cold air + sr50 + 20psi = 4.8 MAFV. lol.


4789 +2.7 4.4 100 30 00 +25.3 60.8 +26.1 -4.1 1.00 3.9 12.33
4938 +7.2 4.5 99 50 00 +21.4 70.2 +18.7 -1.6 1.00 4.1 11.65
5042 +12.7 4.6 100 70 00 +19.6 74.2 +13.2 -0.2 1.00 4.2 11.24
5120 +16.8 4.6 100 80 00 +19.5 79.7 +12.4 +0.5 1.00 4.2 11.14
5341 +19.0 4.7 100 80 00 +19.2 81.2 +12.8 +0.4 1.00 4.3 11.11
5527 +20.4 4.7 100 80 00 +18.7 83.9 +13.0 +0.6 1.00 4.3 11.11
5640 +20.4 4.7 100 80 00 +18.5 83.7 +13.2 +0.6 1.00 4.3 11.02
5767 +19.6 4.7 99 70 00 +18.6 85.0 +14.6 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01
5952 +19.6 4.8 100 70 00 +19.1 84.0 +14.7 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01
5963 +18.6 4.8 99 70 00 +19.3 86.7 +14.9 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01
6127 +18.8 4.8 99 70 00 +20.5 86.6 +15.2 +0.3 1.00 4.4 11.01
6313 +18.4 4.8 100 70 00 +21.6 86.4 +15.6 +0.4 1.00 4.3 10.96
6361 +18.2 4.7 100 70 00 +24.8 81.6 +15.8 +0.4 1.00 4.2 11.05


what are you running as far as AFRs are concerned?

also- whats the temp out by you? im getting creep. (as seen from the logs above). the mbc was set to 15 psi or so in the summer...should be running 18psi or so in the cold at most. definately not 20. eh, maybe i should just set it to 20 in the mid and taper up top. still cant get rid of the damn 1 knock events at 6000+ no matter how much timing i remove. ah well


My maps look surprisingly similar to yours actually. AFRs were in the 10.6 range. I've been bumping them up to around 11.0-11.1. With all the boost control changes I've been making, I have no clue if I'm having creep, since I don't really have a baseline to say "in warmer weather I was only making 19psi". The boost is stable now. My timing numbers are similar to yours, although mine don't climb back up as quickly as yours approaching redline. I haven't tweaked timing at all lately - been focusing on AFRs. My commute only gives me one or two changes to log a WOT run, so every day to and from work I tweak a small handful of sites. It's slow going lol.

I have some random shift knock, and I think I've also had an occasional knock around 6k that I can't seem to get rid of . Always a count of 1, never audible, and only rarely - maybe one in 10 WOT runs. I just ignore it now :)

cold air + sr50 + 20psi = 4.8 MAFV. lol.


4789 +2.7 4.4 100 30 00 +25.3 60.8 +26.1 -4.1 1.00 3.9 12.33
4938 +7.2 4.5 99 50 00 +21.4 70.2 +18.7 -1.6 1.00 4.1 11.65
5042 +12.7 4.6 100 70 00 +19.6 74.2 +13.2 -0.2 1.00 4.2 11.24
5120 +16.8 4.6 100 80 00 +19.5 79.7 +12.4 +0.5 1.00 4.2 11.14
5341 +19.0 4.7 100 80 00 +19.2 81.2 +12.8 +0.4 1.00 4.3 11.11
5527 +20.4 4.7 100 80 00 +18.7 83.9 +13.0 +0.6 1.00 4.3 11.11
5640 +20.4 4.7 100 80 00 +18.5 83.7 +13.2 +0.6 1.00 4.3 11.02
5767 +19.6 4.7 99 70 00 +18.6 85.0 +14.6 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01
5952 +19.6 4.8 100 70 00 +19.1 84.0 +14.7 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01
5963 +18.6 4.8 99 70 00 +19.3 86.7 +14.9 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01
6127 +18.8 4.8 99 70 00 +20.5 86.6 +15.2 +0.3 1.00 4.4 11.01
6313 +18.4 4.8 100 70 00 +21.6 86.4 +15.6 +0.4 1.00 4.3 10.96
6361 +18.2 4.7 100 70 00 +24.8 81.6 +15.8 +0.4 1.00 4.2 11.05


what are you running as far as AFRs are concerned?

also- whats the temp out by you? im getting creep. (as seen from the logs above). the mbc was set to 15 psi or so in the summer...should be running 18psi or so in the cold at most. definately not 20. eh, maybe i should just set it to 20 in the mid and taper up top. still cant get rid of the damn 1 knock events at 6000+ no matter how much timing i remove. ah well


Now I don't feel so bad with the timing. Jason, look at my timing at 6k, and yours, figure maybe you ARE knocking because it's too sharp a rise in cylinder pressure?

OK... here's one to add to the mystery... on weather one AFR is better then the other, or at the least weather the stock computer learns ignition advance worth a damn... ;)


~11:1 1-3 gear pull
1st
996 -10.4 1.4 0 00 00 W/B +12.1 30.5 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 2.7 14.08
1786 -8.1 2.3 100 10 00 W/B +32.4 5.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 2.4 14.08
2375 -5.9 2.6 101 10 00 W/B +45.1 9.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 2.7 14.45
2651 -3.6 2.8 101 10 00 W/B +43.5 12.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 2.8 14.96
2846 -1.4 2.9 101 10 00 W/B +39.5 14.5 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 2.9 14.83
2918 -1.2 3.0 101 10 00 W/B +32.8 16.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 2.9 14.30
2997 -0.6 3.0 101 10 00 W/B +25.7 18.3 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 3.0 13.65
3124 +0.2 3.0 101 10 00 W/B +24.9 18.5 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 3.1 13.23
3280 +0.8 3.1 101 10 00 W/B +24.1 21.3 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 3.3 12.99
3465 +1.7 3.3 101 20 00 W/B +23.8 23.7 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 3.3 12.83
3720 +2.3 3.5 101 20 00 W/B +21.6 26.3 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 3.4 12.52
3987 +3.1 3.6 101 20 00 W/B +19.8 34.2 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 3.7 12.11
4368 +4.1 3.8 101 30 00 W/B +17.7 41.8 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 3.9 11.49
4597 +5.7 4.0 100 40 00 W/B +16.6 51.8 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.1 10.74
5144 +7.6 4.3 100 50 00 W/B +14.8 65.5 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.4 10.24
5420 +10.4 4.5 100 60 00 W/B +12.5 74.8 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.20
5837 +12.5 4.5 98 70 00 W/B +14.9 79.0 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 10.45
6510 +15.9 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +17.6 80.3 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.05
6901 +15.7 4.6 99 70 00 W/B +17.6 80.2 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.18
2nd
4930 +15.7 4.5 100 70 00 W/B +12.1 78.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.4 11.27
4938 +15.7 4.4 100 80 00 W/B +10.7 70.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.4 12.71
4975 +15.9 4.5 100 80 00 W/B +10.5 71.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.4 12.46
5120 +17.0 4.5 99 90 00 W/B +11.1 74.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.87
5291 +18.0 4.5 97 90 00 W/B +11.3 72.5 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.96
5385 +18.0 4.5 98 90 00 W/B +11.8 74.0 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 11.06
5602 +18.2 4.5 97 90 00 W/B +12.2 71.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.12
5630 +18.0 4.6 98 90 00 W/B +13.3 76.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.14
5827 +18.6 4.6 99 90 00 W/B +13.9 75.8 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.12
5941 +18.0 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +14.8 79.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.14
5941 +17.4 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +15.2 78.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.18
6093 +16.8 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +14.9 78.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.17
6435 +16.1 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +17.7 76.9 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.23
6422 +16.6 4.7 100 80 00 W/B +17.5 77.2 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.24
3rd
4578 +17.0 4.4 100 90 00 W/B +7.3 9.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.4 11.49
4866 +17.4 4.4 99 90 00 W/B +10.0 71.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 12.53
5167 +18.0 4.4 100 90 00 W/B +10.7 70.2 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 11.98
5035 +18.4 4.5 101 90 00 W/B +10.4 74.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.83
5096 +18.6 4.5 100 90 00 W/B +10.4 74.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.86
5096 +18.8 4.5 100 90 00 W/B +10.5 71.9 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.87
5192 +18.8 4.5 100 90 00 W/B +10.6 72.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.89
5128 +18.8 4.5 100 90 00 W/B +10.7 74.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.89
5241 +18.6 4.5 100 90 00 W/B +10.8 75.0 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.87
5257 +18.4 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +11.2 77.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.86
5324 +18.8 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +11.0 76.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 10.86
5527 +18.4 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +11.7 78.0 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 10.86
5500 +17.6 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +11.5 74.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 10.90
5350 +17.0 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +11.6 76.0 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 10.95
5602 +17.0 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +12.1 77.0 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 10.96
5574 +17.0 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +11.9 78.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.01
5564 +18.0 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +12.3 79.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.01
5727 +18.2 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +12.5 76.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.01
5688 +17.4 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +13.0 77.9 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.05
5858 +17.2 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +13.4 80.3 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.05
5698 +17.0 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +14.0 78.5 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.06
5889 +17.4 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +14.0 75.8 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.08
5899 +17.6 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +14.6 76.7 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.06
5837 +17.8 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +14.8 81.3 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.11
5931 +17.6 4.7 100 80 00 W/B +14.4 77.8 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.11
6161 +18.0 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +14.8 79.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.08
6172 +18.6 4.6 99 100 00 W/B +15.1 81.2 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.05
6071 +19.0 4.7 100 90 00 W/B +14.7 79.5 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.12
6027 +19.2 4.9 101 90 00 W/B +15.0 79.2 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.12
6116 +18.6 4.7 100 90 00 W/B +15.4 79.8 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.02
6361 +17.0 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +15.1 78.2 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.01
6325 +17.4 4.6 100 90 00 W/B +17.6 78.0 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.05
6325 +16.8 4.6 100 80 00 W/B +17.4 78.0 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.05
6301 +17.2 4.6 98 80 00 W/B +17.5 82.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.01
6485 +16.8 4.6 98 90 00 W/B +17.6 78.8 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.01
6385 +17.0 4.6 98 80 00 W/B +17.6 79.5 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.01
6720 +17.8 4.6 98 80 00 W/B +17.4 76.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.01
4th
6447 +17.2 4.6 98 80 00 W/B +17.5 81.1 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.7 11.02
6038 +17.0 4.7 99 80 00 W/B +15.2 80.3 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.6 11.12
4990 +17.6 4.5 99 90 00 W/B +9.5 73.2 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 11.96
5096 +17.8 4.5 99 90 00 W/B +9.7 74.6 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 12.39
5035 +18.6 4.5 98 90 00 W/B +10.4 75.0 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 11.27
5089 +19.8 4.5 73 100 00 W/B +10.4 70.2 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 4.5 10.58
4251 +14.1 4.1 0 00 00 W/B +8.7 60.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 3.0 10.58
4110 +7.0 1.7 0 00 00 W/B +11.0 60.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 1.5 11.68
4151 -0.4 1.7 0 00 00 W/B +11.2 60.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 1.6 19.38
4065 -8.9 1.3 0 00 00 W/B +11.0 60.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 1.3 >25:1
4050 -11.4 1.3 0 00 00 W/B +11.1 60.4 ECU. +0.0 ECU. 1.4 >25:1


So... As you can see, in this case, the stock ECU decided to run the same type of timing values at almost 7/10th of an AFR apart.

There was a NOTICEABLE difference torque wise between the two.

Interestingly enough. In flash you can adjust parameters such as the knock listening "window", and the ECU's desire to aggressively learn.

I'm listening for knock all the way up to 7k RPM, and am learning more aggressive then a RA ECU. In about 3 pulls it will have established it's timing curve, tossing in race gas will elect a massive timing relearn in less then 10-15 miles. Pretty amazing. Is it as good as me setting up a UTEC map? Nope... but not having OLF support on the automatic, I really don't have a choice.

Anyways, moral is.... for some reason, my ECU thinks this is an approprate timing curve for the fuel, and it would appear that no amount of "fuel" is changing that.

P.S. at the load sites the ECU is seeing, it has enough authority to run almost 24 degrees of timing to the 17 it's running right now at redline.

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

did you mean between these 2 lines?


5640 +20.4 4.7 100 80 00 +18.5 83.7 +13.2 +0.6 1.00 4.3 11.02
5767 +19.6 4.7 99 70 00 +18.6 85.0 +14.6 +0.3 1.00 4.3 11.01


because otherwise, the timing steps are VERY smooth- .2-.4 steps at most. plus the knock usually comes a little bit higher in the band (i want to say 6300, but dont have them logged.)

with my latest map revision, im only running 18* at redline in my 60 col, 17* in my 70, 16* in my 80...im only at 1560*F at the top of 4th, so maybe i do have some more headroom to lower timing at bit.

like you, serendipity, i log on my way home, and i only get MAYBE 1 WOT pull and 2 if im really lucky. slow goings for me too ;).

NM, LOL I was looking at your ECU timing column shooting up to 24 :lol: I thought you were running 24 at redline.

Jorge (RiftsWRX)
www.ProjectWRX.com

thats kinda what i thought...but i didnt want to flat out say youre nuts. ;)

...and yes, the stock ecu is smoking the good stuff. :lol:

Ok, will give a quick update didn't have time to post all information last night. The temperature was almost 20 degrees warmer when we dynoed the car this time. Our best run was 317/332 awp/awt. We targeted afr to 11.2. The most boost Mike at Gruppe-s felt we could do was about 20.5 on 91. The afr graph that I have shows boost maxing at 20.3. tapering to 18.9. The torque holds a lot longer and the power is much smoother. The graph is pretty close to happasaiyan's drawing as to what he would like to see. I also put in some whiteline Group 4 coilovers, the ride is pretty awesome.

Ok, will give a quick update didn't have time to post all information last night. The temperature was almost 20 degrees warmer when we dynoed the car this time. Our best run was 317/332 awp/awt. We targeted afr to 11.2. The most boost Mike at Gruppe-s felt we could do was about 20.5 on 91. The afr graph that I have shows boost maxing at 20.3. tapering to 18.9. The torque holds a lot longer and the power is much smoother. The graph is pretty close to happasaiyan's drawing as to what he would like to see. I also put in some whiteline Group 4 coilovers, the ride is pretty awesome.
awesome. congrats! we knew you could squeeze a little bit more goodness out of her. :)

Ok, will give a quick update didn't have time to post all information last night. The temperature was almost 20 degrees warmer when we dynoed the car this time. Our best run was 317/332 awp/awt. We targeted afr to 11.2. The most boost Mike at Gruppe-s felt we could do was about 20.5 on 91. The afr graph that I have shows boost maxing at 20.3. tapering to 18.9. The torque holds a lot longer and the power is much smoother. The graph is pretty close to happasaiyan's drawing as to what he would like to see. I also put in some whiteline Group 4 coilovers, the ride is pretty awesome.


Nice numbers!!!

Ok here's the numbers. The best number we made was 317/332. The car was a lot more consistent in hitting numbers than the last time. The car is also a lot smoother in the way it generates power. While the gains are not huge it does show a nice improvement. When we did the first dyno temperature was right about 50F and when we did this dyno tune temperature was about 70F. I'm sure this has something to do with the numbers. I was unable to get any logging, but I will eventually get a delta dash and do some logging. I'm sure more could be done about spooling, when we eventually take a look at the logs.

http://www.turneyco.com/121604a.jpg
http://www.turneyco.com/121604b.jpg

oh yeah for those of you that think this is some how disappointing here's an externally gated gt30r on the same dyno on 91 for reference:

http://img12.paintedover.com/uploads/12/gt30r1.jpg

wow, you werent joking when you said it looked like my sketch. either way, awesome. looks much, much better.

how come the sti with the gt30 is cut off at ~6000rpm?
The peak numbers are comparable, but after the hp/tq crossover the your torque is still dropping off dramatically compared to the gt30.
I would like to see a pull on that gt30 out to redline to see the tq drop, if there is any.
I think u have the gt30 beat as far as area under the curve though. You are hitting peak torque almost a full 1000rpm sooner.
I bet she's fun to drive.

Looks better. I'm going to study that AFR curve more tomorrow. I still think there is even earlier spool there, but none the less it looks like a very nice ride, and smooth power. Congrats.

Great counter-point with the GT30R. :devil:

Yeah I know the comparison is not entirely fair as this is not the final tune and all but you can see that HP is pretty much in sync with torque in that graph, I don't think it's doing much more than this on 91 octane. The truth is we're both running these turbos out of there efficiency range on this car, but I'm a lot closer with the SR40. I know that they're shooting for 350 at the wheels, and will be tuning more aggressively as this guy will be going for a built motor next. I also think more can be done with spool on the SR40, the previous owner had issues with spool with this turbo.

I started researching the previous owners posts, it looks like this turbo could be a little tired as this was the turbo that an owner of Cobb used to run. It then shifted hands to jimgldn. This is the same turbo that V6 has some personal experience with. Someone else was saying that this turbo will do 1 bar at 2500 rpm, but I'm not seeing anything close to that in 4th.

Huh? MZM ran 11.8-9@119 with one at only 21psi in front of my eyes. It's an animal.


Actually Type C it was an 11.88 @ 120.3, sixty foot in the 1.8065. Yesterday the 18th I ran an 11.85 @ 121.16, sixty foot @ 1.9035 & then ran an 11.6830 @ 121.46 with a 1.7811 sixty foot.

Driving through the water & peeling out help with traction issues, anyway fourth round I broke something in my R180 differential. Good thing I was able to lock it 50/50 & was able to drive back to the shop, the beauty of the Subaru’s AWD system, ;) .


Anyway guys I know you probably know this, but all Dynamometers are not created equal. That statement is true to a certain extent. I can state this that all MD500 dynamometers are created equal as long as the correct weight to HP @ 50 information is inputted & it is calibrated properly regarding it parasitic file loses which are generated threw a simple roller speed test. Please understand I am not trying to criticize but help here, judging from the info on your dyno sheet with a 1.00 hp @ 50 you can throw those results out the door & in trash, especially your TQ readings. We were exposed to the same mistakes when we acquired the dynamometer due to lack of information available from Mustang Dynamometer at that time & also because of how new these vehicles are to the market. I suggest you have Gruppe-S contact Mustang & have them supply a VEHICLE LOOK UP DATA CD which gives you the correct information on the weight to HP @ 50. With out this info the dynamometers software cannot & will not load the vehicle up properly. There are other ways of acquiring this info through tests on the dynamometer to road load comparisons.

Pleas understand that I not implying that Gruppe-S did this intentionally, they probably didn’t know this due to lack of communication by the Mustang field techs & not their engineers. Have them contact Mustang; this info is very cruetail to the consistency & accuracy of this piece of equipment.

Example with our screwed up calibration & weight to HP @ 50 my personal car made 317hp/299tq on the VF37 twin scroll set up at apx 20 psi of boost. On the correct calibration & weight to hp @ 50 my vehicle on a SR55/ EcuTek Tune makes 338hp/271tq. Did I re-dyno it on the twin scroll with the correct info & calibration? Yes, it yielded a 255hp/241tq result.

I can also state this; accelerometers (Dyno-Jets or equivalent) may be a good power measuring tool, but not a tuning tool. Because the motor of any vehicle is loaded only by the weight of the drums, the engines thermal load in the combustion chamber will not be equivalent on the street as your vehicle would be accelerating it’s own weight against wind resistance, etc. Depending on your state of tune for example, if your ignition timing is optimized on a accelerometer then you will experience knock on the street or on a Mustang/Dynodynamics or any other actual dynamometers for example. Many other issues can occur..... I will leave it at that.

VF37= 370 max flywheel HP @ approximately 19.5 psi
SR40= 450 max flywheel HP @ approximately 23 psi
& these results depend on the VE of the motor/set-up.

Regards
Mohammad Jaloudi

Thanks for the information and I will forward this to Gruppe-s. My only comment is that all of the dyno runs were taken at the same settings so it's only the relative difference that I'm looking at. But I understand what you mean underload, so that there's consistency between the dyno and street. I believe that consistency exists, because the car feels good and there's no knocking.

Miguel do yourself a favor and just enjoy driving your car for awhile, the mod stuff is fun but you have reached a milestone with your car. You have new tuning and a new turbo, and the combo looks to be a blast--drive it and honk when you pass by Gruppe-S in tribute.

Thanks bboy, I'm heading out right now!

Driving through the water & peeling out help with traction issues, anyway fourth round I broke something in my R180 differential. Good thing I was able to lock it 50/50 & was able to drive back to the shop, the beauty of the Subaru’s AWD system, ;) .

it sounds like a rear halfshaft. that happened to me at the track, and i could drive home with it at 50/50.


I can also state this; accelerometers (Dyno-Jets or equivalent) may be a good power measuring tool, but not a tuning tool. Because the motor of any vehicle is loaded only by the weight of the drums, the engines thermal load in the combustion chamber will not be equivalent on the street as your vehicle would be accelerating it’s own weight against wind resistance, etc. Depending on your state of tune for example, if your ignition timing is optimized on a accelerometer then you will experience knock on the street or on a Mustang/Dynodynamics or any other actual dynamometers for example. Many other issues can occur..... I will leave it at that.

dynapack dynos are my favorite. ;) you can load it up however you like, the dyno itself requires less to get it installed, detects the most minute differences, you dont have to take tires into account, you cant slip while on the dyno, and you can hold rpms and do "testing."

it sounds like a rear halfshaft. that happened to me at the track, and i could drive home with it at 50/50.

That cracks me up cause I broke both my rear axles in my R160 and I won't put my R180 in untill I get a set of Driveshaftshop axles in the first place.

When I posted that some tool posted that I should learn how to drive cause he has never heard of people breaking R180 axles :rolleyes: :lol:

it sounds like a rear halfshaft. that happened to me at the track, and i could drive home with it at 50/50.

& you are correct, drivers side rear. :)


dynapack dynos are my favorite. ;) you can load it up however you like, the dyno itself requires less to get it installed, detects the most minute differences, you dont have to take tires into account, you cant slip while on the dyno, and you can hold rpms and do "testing."

Ok, but don't forget the same imposed load will give the best tune on the vehicle. If the vehicle is installed correctly depends on how familiar the dyno operator is with his set-up than it will most definitely give you the same imposed load you get on the street, Mustang or Dyno-Dynamics. One thing to remember here; you tire pressure is resistance on your motor (an imposed load), the tire not being in the equation can give you deceptive results, especially when you are tuning for optimum power & not being conservative on your tune. Good example would be bad tire pressure equals bad gas mileage; your engine simply works harder under acceleration due to the increased resistance of the tire pressure. Your tires need to be in the equation.

regards

mohammad jaloudi

That cracks me up cause I broke both my rear axles in my R160 and I won't put my R180 in untill I get a set of Driveshaftshop axles in the first place.

When I posted that some tool posted that I should learn how to drive cause he has never heard of people breaking R180 axles :rolleyes: :lol:


Maybe he has never driven an AWD 400 plus vehicle power by a boxer motor.
:lol:

later guys, have a good weekend & happy holidays to everyone.


mohammad jaloudi

Maybe he has never driven an AWD 400 plus vehicle power by a boxer motor.
:lol:

later guys, have a good weekend & happy holidays to everyone.


mohammad jaloudi
Probably not but, I broke em when I was only pushing mid to low 3xxWHP so it must just be me ;) :lol:

bringing this thread back to life! any updates, mnavarro still running the same setup? im looking into aps turbos trying to figure out whats best for me (sr40/sr50/sr55). if you can find them used, i think its a good option for a bolton turbo for those who dont want to go rotated and are looking for ~350whp (of course depending on dyno/octane)

on these pulls you were on the stock IC too i assume?

bringing this thread back to life! any updates, mnavarro still running the same setup? im looking into aps turbos trying to figure out whats best for me (sr40/sr50/sr55). if you can find them used, i think its a good option for a bolton turbo for those who dont want to go rotated and are looking for ~350whp (of course depending on dyno/octane)

on these pulls you were on the stock IC too i assume?
I still have a SR40 with 6k miles on it for sale if your looking for one ;)

subscribed!

Now that this thread has been resurrected here's my latest change, when I swapped out headers to gruppe-s. Spool up is better, but had to take out some boost on the top-end, probably due to this header flowing better. I will probably wrap the gruppe-s header/up-pipe. Stock IC. Stay tuned for race gas! Actually this change is a long story that I'd rather not discuss, but suffice it to say it started with a visit to Shiv after a trip to get a race gas map for an xede.

old:
http://www.turneyco.com/121604a.jpg.

new:
http://www.turneyco.com/dyno021005.jpg

Unfortunately I was never able to get a race gas map on the xede due to numerous problems with the harness that came with this unit and Shiv's pnp harness. I will end up selling the xede and waiting for the ecutek solution for my race gas map.

that latest dyno is look great!! table-top HP for certain!!

looks like it's hitting torque sooner, too!


nice!

((how's it, driveability-wise??)) pinning you in the seat?

ese

it's very nice driveability wise, everybody is impressed when they go for a ride, even people with the higher horsepower cars! It definitely pins, and pull long and hard.

it's very nice driveability wise, everybody is impressed when they go for a ride, even people with the higher horsepower cars! It definitely pins, and pull long and hard.

yeah I drove it and it def has that throw-you-back kind of torque that makes whoevers in the passenger seat pucker up :lol: :eek:

any1 want to elaborate on the differences between the different SR models(40/50/55)? aps site offers some info, was woundering about some real life numbers.

and is any1 running an ext. wastegate setup w/ one of these?

I know I should bring up old news, but this curve is awsome for California 91. Just reading old threads. Miguels car really is best driving Subaru I've been in, darn it. :D

Thanks, I've got a few mods on the way, I want to wrap my header/up-pipe, I have an aps TMIC ready to install (I tried installing it but I need a longer IC Hose), and a perrin electronic boost solenoid. I don't think the difference will be dramatic, but 10 awp would be nice. I will be getting the the ecutek personal tuner when it is available, hopefully in may and I will have a race gas setup. More than anything just interested in what this turbo will max out on better gas. I'm hoping for 350/360 awp/awt on the Gruppe-s dyno. I'm hoping that it will do a little more for spool up in interruptor mode and control boost a little better when I'm at 22 lbs on race gas.