I'm trying really hard to get over 300 ft-lbs of torque on the local mustang AWD dyno on 91 Octane.

So far the best car I've seen on 91 is MNavarro - he's got over 300 ft-lbs for 2000 rpms.

I will also admit that MNAVARRO's car is the best street driven subie I've ever seen - 2000 rpms over 300 ft-lbs of torque between 3700 and 5700 rpms....a Great ride.

I see lots of posts of 400-500 whp cars, but they aren't running 91 and many of them still don't make 300 ft-lbs.

Right now I'm over 300 ft-lbs, peak is 320 @ 3750, for about 1000 rpms :(

Note: (horse)Power = torque * rpm /5252

Thanks for the props to my car. actually it's 3500 to 5500. I saw a 20g here on an sti that looked very similary but it was a on a dynojet or dynopak. Here's a dyno chart of it. Also there have been greens on stis that have only done 300 awp with not nearly as much torque.

here's one that I saw recently! This is on 93 and 20g but dynojet.

http://images5.theimagehosting.com/Doug.4.jpg

and mine:


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

Is that 20G on 91???? I have very rarely seen 350+ ft-lbs on 91 on any 4 cylinder car.

That's 93, but it's also on a dynojet, and probably corrected. Honestly it's in the same neighborhood is mine, the dynojets can read really high. For example, Jeremy did on the same day 350 on atp and 307 on gruppe-s with a leaky blow off valve. I'm sure my car would look similar on 93 on atp's dyno.

There was a thread about an 18G that made around 300 w torque or at least real close.

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=735957&highlight=18G

It was Dynapack which is not as optimistic as Dynojet and also on 93 I believe.

cheers

Nick

It's called an LS1 :)

Really, with a small engine, you have to pick your poison. Sure you can slap a small turbo on and get loads of torque down low, but you won't be able to maintain it, and HP numbers will suffer. Pick a big turbo and you can have huge power, but not so much low end torque. There are some good combos that seem to yield a good compromise, but they are still compromises.

Now if only there were room to fab up a well-sorted sequential twin turbo system...

I know there is a compromise with turbos about low end torque vs. top end power. But, I'm kinda surprised I haven't seen more tuning geared towards the thought of good torque. But, that's the autocrosser in me talking ;).

I think that was the Subaru idea of using the VF39 as a good compromise.

I also think that it has to do with tuning as well. Off course it does have to do with the fact that in CA we have only 91 and not the greatest one either.

Nick

I got 310'# WTq on a Mustang dyno.

Mods at the time were

05 STI
GT Spec 2 headers
Injen cold air intake
Invidia N1 race TBE
ECUTEK tune by Subaru Specialists in Sacramento

running about 19.5 psi on 91 octane: 270whp/310'#tq.

The headers were the major factor in increasing the torque.

mine is close to doubleurx's figures...here's my dyno at Gruppe-S with:

UTEC
Helix catted dp w/ borla hush 3" back
borla headers

http://www.theyellowpress.net/sti/dyno/dyno11505.jpg

That's why I love my sr40 so much, I'm losing almost nothing in low end torque gaining midrange torque and have 40+ whp more. My best HP was 317!

That's why I love my sr40 so much, I'm losing almost nothing in low end torque gaining midrange torque and have 40+ whp more. My best HP was 317!


I'm getting re-tuned with my SBR GT-12, 850 injectors, walbro pump and Perrin FMIC this weekend. Without the FMIC I got 299 whp.

It's called an LS1 :)

Really, with a small engine, you have to pick your poison. Sure you can slap a small turbo on and get loads of torque down low, but you won't be able to maintain it, and HP numbers will suffer. Pick a big turbo and you can have huge power, but not so much low end torque. There are some good combos that seem to yield a good compromise, but they are still compromises.

Now if only there were room to fab up a well-sorted sequential twin turbo system...
Haha, he's been looking at the LS2! But you're right, a good compromise turbo is the SR40/20g. I'm wondering how a GT 3071 would perform It's supposed to spool pretty good and generate between 450-500 hp according to Garrett. My guess is though because these turbos are efficient at higher pressure ratios they may not have as much low end torque. This is just a guess though.

One misconception is that spool = low end torque. This in my opinion is not the case. For example the sr55 spools a few RPM later, but the torque curves are dramtically different, by more than a few hundred RPM. The green is suppose to see full boost at 3100 rpm but again the torque curves are dramatically different.

I'm getting re-tuned with my SBR GT-12, 850 injectors, walbro pump and Perrin FMIC this weekend. Without the FMIC I got 299 whp.

I think sr40 is probably closer to GT-10, but it really uses the GT28 chr. Garret GTR wheels like higher pressure ratios. You will definitely see more AWP, but I'm not so sure on the awt. I could be wrong though!.

If you take a look at my dyno and compare it the STI with the VF39, headers on the same dyno, you will see why are people are so impressed when they drive my car:

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

Miguel, are you running a FMIC or a stock STi TMIC?

In this dyno I'm running a stock STI TMIC. I put in an APS TMIC two days ago, which looks pretty well designed, and I may have a go of it on the dyno tomorrow to see if there's a difference. The IC seems a lot cooler now, maybe I can run more boost and retard timing up top as I'm tapering big time up top now. I will only do this if gruppe-s charges a nominal fee, since I will be doing some logging for them.

Nick,

How are you doing? I have an 18G and I make 320 on the Gruppe-S dyno...I just can't hold it for more than 1000 rpms :(



There was a thread about an 18G that made around 300 w torque or at least real close.

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=735957&highlight=18G

It was Dynapack which is not as optimistic as Dynojet and also on 93 I believe.

cheers

Nick

I see. from your profile, is your car a WRX? 2.0 or 2.5 with what heads? Or it is an STi?
Is the 18G a FP one or Deadbolt or something else?


Nick

PS: God daggit. You and Miguel are not from from me. We should hook up so I can take an idea how your cars feel since I am looking at an upgraded turbo.

i made 300 whp an 320 wtq, 93 octane full boost at 3400 in 4th gear......

I see. from your profile, is your car a WRX? 2.0 or 2.5 with what heads? Or it is an STi?
Is the 18G a FP one or Deadbolt or something else?


Nick

PS: God daggit. You and Miguel are not from from me. We should hook up so I can take an idea how your cars feel since I am looking at an upgraded turbo.

Sorry,

I am running a Crawford - 2.4 liter race engine.

I see. from your profile, is your car a WRX? 2.0 or 2.5 with what heads? Or it is an STi?
Is the 18G a FP one or Deadbolt or something else?


Nick

PS: God daggit. You and Miguel are not from from me. We should hook up so I can take an idea how your cars feel since I am looking at an upgraded turbo.

Anytime you want, no problemo!

Sorry,

I am running a Crawford - 2.4 liter race engine.

What kind of heads? Any head work?

this is a bada$$ engine. :)

Didn't you say that you are trying a bigger turbo?

Nick

He's running stock wrx heads/cams. I think with cams/headwork his car will come alive.

He's running stock wrx heads/cams. I think with cams/headwork his car will come alive.

I would think that with a set of V8 JDM heads he will be flying.

Cheers

Nick

You're probably right, that's what I recommended to him. But he's going to go a different route. A built 2.5 motor with cams/headwork, and a whole new setup.

I thought the 2.4 Crawford was very nice I guess there are even better :)
what is he doing with the Crawford or it is getting built?

Nice setup :)

Nick

No, I've had the Crawford for 18 months - very strong engine. The cost to upgrade to cams and heads though with labor is as much as replacing the whole engine! Seems I'm just in a bad way - I have tried several turbos and right now running the Greddy 18G and unmodified CAMS and WRX heads.

Is that 20G on 91???? I have very rarely seen 350+ ft-lbs on 91 on any 4 cylinder car.

Here's a dynochart of a Saab 2.3L on 91 octane. The engine is running water injection, but it's also running 9.3:1 compression on the stock block, head, and turbo (no upgraded pistons, no ported head, no cams, nothing like that) ... and it's 11 years old with over 100K miles for heck's sake! :lol: You oughta be able to match this torque with a good tune on an 8.2:1 compression 2.5L with a good turbo to match.

The car is a 1994 9000 Aero, and the only power mods are an intake manifold from the naturally aspirated engine, full 3" exhaust, better intercooler, Volvo "Green Giant" fuel injectors (ironic, eh?), an aquamist water injection system and, of course, a custom tune.

300+ lb-ft at the wheels from 2,500-4,700 RPM with a peak at over 370! :huh: Not too shabby for a stock TD04-15T and 9.3:1 compression ... shows how much water injection can help! ;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v14/SaabTuner/YanktonStockTurbo.jpg

Adrian~

I'm running 308/300 w/ a 20G at 18psi on the Gruppe-S mustang dyno. 91 octane. I think I can push 20psi w/ tuning just havn't done it yet.

_____________________
http://www.STifiles.com

Also 300 at ATP's dyno was about 254 on the Mustang Dyne.

Also 300 at ATP's dyno was about 254 on the Mustang Dyne.

It's not peak numbers I want, it's carry through.

I make 322 ft-lbs on Gruppe-s, good job Mike, but I am only above 300 ft-lbs for 800-1000 rpms...If you look at the Saab chart you can see that it is above 300 ft-lbs for 2200 rpms, that's what I want, but NOT on ATP's dyno, on Gruppe-s' dyno.

I think I'll run down to ATP real soon and get a dyno run on their system.

For clarification, here is my current dyno graph - new WRX's dyno around 155 hp

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/antiochcali/dyno11_1_04.jpg

I am guessing Miguel's car is the only car that has over 300lbs for almost 2k.

You said you tried other turbos? What other turbos. It seems that you need a bigger turbo?

But now that I am thinking about it you may need a custom turbo put together. which I am thinking can be trying again and again different conbos (cartridge, wheel, plate housing etc.. ) I am no turbo expert but this is what I think. Plus a very nice custom tune. By the way if you get it right the same turbo will not perform the same on say an STi since you have a different engine. Otherwise for the STi I would think we need to copy Miguel's mods :)

Cheers

Nick

My car (2005 STi) made 320ft-lbs @ 3500 on a mustang dyno. Stock turbo, GP Moto intake, Borla header, GP Moto downpipe, and GP Moto titanium TBE, running a UTEC tuned by Phil from Element Tuning. Peak power was 298.9 @ 6000. I believe peak boost was around 17psi on the dyno (the dyno printout was in

One of these days I'll get around to converting the .tif to a .jpg and posting it up.

-Mike

My car (2005 STi) made 320ft-lbs @ 3500 on a mustang dyno. Stock turbo, GP Moto intake, Borla header, GP Moto downpipe, and GP Moto titanium TBE, running a UTEC tuned by Phil from Element Tuning. Peak power was 298.9 @ 6000. I believe peak boost was around 17psi on the dyno (the dyno printout was in

One of these days I'll get around to converting the .tif to a .jpg and posting it up.

-Mike
This would be a lot less on the gruppe-s dyno, ask the boys from PDX tuning. They could get greens to barely break 300.

Here is one from 3500 RPM's to 6500 RPM's on 91 octane. It even broke 400 ft/lbs of torque for about 700 RPM's.
http://www.i-speed.us/gallery/subaru_13.shtml

Whit, didn't you have the HKS 3037? Why are the RPM's only going to 6400 RPM's on the dyno chart?

Cheers,
Bill

I know you guys hate it when I pawn Saab stuff off on you, but that's what I'm more familliar with, and Saab nuts with me have a similar philosophy to what AntiochCali wants. The engines also tend to be built in that direction too ... but I think you should be able to match them with the larger and lower compression STi engine. If not, then you could definitely match them with the 2.2L block with piston squirters. (Saabs have the oil-cooling piston squirters like the EJ22T.)

There are very few tuned Saabs in California, but here's a dynochart of a newer Saab 2.3L engine from a 9-5 Aero pumping out 300+ lb-ft from 2,700 RPM to 5,700 RPM (406NM = 300 lb-ft). This engine is running on European pumpgas which is roughly like 91 octane + Water Injection ... but NOT like straight 91. Sorry, but that's as close as I can get. :(

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v14/SaabTuner/ViggenData/95power2.jpg

IF nothing else ... you could always buy a Diesel. ;) 300+ lb-ft from 1,400 RPM to 3,200 RPM and over 300 bhp on "pump diesel" with water injection. (Calculated from hp = torque x RPM / 5252) :::

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v14/SaabTuner/ViggenData/DieselWaterInjection.jpg


How does 758 lb-ft strike you? :lol:

what kind of turbo is that Bill? TD06H 50 trim is like a an SZ47 (but 50)?
Is it a Deadbolt one? Is the TBE catted or not.

Cheers

Nick

Here is one from 3500 RPM's to 6500 RPM's on 91 octane. It even broke 400 ft/lbs of torque for about 700 RPM's.
http://www.i-speed.us/gallery/subaru_13.shtml

Whit, didn't you have the HKS 3037? Why are the RPM's only going to 6400 RPM's on the dyno chart?

Cheers,
Bill

HI BILL!

I ran the 3037, and just barely made 300 ft-lbs and 300 whp...hang on got the dyno here. With lag and everything it just didn't do it for me. I went to the Greddy 18G, and it is WAY more drivable.

My dyno sheet - Gruppe-S uncorrected Mustang dyno 3037.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/antiochcali/smalldyno12_13_04.jpg

Peak power is 300 whp, but torque peak is 0nly 300 too and it comes very late compared to either my old FP 18G or the new Greddy 18G. This big turbo made me realize that what I want is torque NOT hp. It also made me realize that I want something over 300 ft-lbs for at least 2000 rpms or maybe a little more.

Nobody with WRX heads that I have seen on the Gruppe-S dyno has anything up top - I was told by several people that it must be my heads, but after talking to Ben and looking over Nathan's old posts I think it is my CAMS that are holding me back. The US STi heads don't seem to flow much better :(

Here is one from 3500 RPM's to 6500 RPM's on 91 octane. It even broke 400 ft/lbs of torque for about 700 RPM's.
http://www.i-speed.us/gallery/subaru_13.shtml

Whit, didn't you have the HKS 3037? Why are the RPM's only going to 6400 RPM's on the dyno chart?

Cheers,
Bill

Bill,

Holy S**T that car ROCKS! even if it is on some other dyno.

Who's car is that? That is the kind of curve I'm looking for. Did you tune that? It is beautiful.

I know you guys hate it when I pawn Saab stuff off on you, but that's what I'm more familliar with, and Saab nuts with me have a similar philosophy to what AntiochCali wants. The engines also tend to be built in that direction too ... but I think you should be able to match them with the larger and lower compression STi engine. If not, then you could definitely match them with the 2.2L block with piston squirters. (Saabs have the oil-cooling piston squirters like the EJ22T.)

There are very few tuned Saabs in California, but here's a dynochart of a newer Saab 2.3L engine from a 9-5 Aero pumping out 300+ lb-ft from 2,700 RPM to 5,700 RPM (406NM = 300 lb-ft). This engine is running on European pumpgas which is roughly like 91 octane + Water Injection ... but NOT like straight 91. Sorry, but that's as close as I can get. :(

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v14/SaabTuner/ViggenData/95power2.jpg

IF nothing else ... you could always buy a Diesel. ;) 300+ lb-ft from 1,400 RPM to 3,200 RPM and over 300 bhp on "pump diesel" with water injection. (Calculated from hp = torque x RPM / 5252) :::

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v14/SaabTuner/ViggenData/DieselWaterInjection.jpg


How does 758 lb-ft strike you? :lol:


ST - Those are great looking curves and my engine is closed deck with squirters but there are some inherent problems in the subaru design. One of them is that the tubo is just too far from the input manifold and is unequal length so the Subies will have a little slower throttle response.

Someone needs to come up with a kit to move the engine back a few inches and put on a shorty manifold like the EVO guys have, that would rock! Maybe mount the radiator at an angle to give you another couple of inches?

You've given me some hope, so has Bill - I am looking for something like that on CA 91 - 2000+ rpms of torque over 300 ft-lbs. That will be a drivable monster.

A buddy of mine has a Cummings turbo diesel truck with 770 ft-lbs @ 3200 rpms but it doesn't carry torque either and the gearing really sucks :D

Whit,

Sorry to hear the 3037 did not make the torque and power you had hoped for. I was also expecting to see this turbo spool around 3700-3800 RPM's as this turbo is not much larger than the 18G that you/I currently have and it would have been a great choice.

When you want to make some real torque let us know, we are more than willing to discuss options with our customers.

Cheers,
William T. Knose Jr.
Lead Programmer
I-Speed USA

ST - Those are great looking curves and my engine is closed deck with squirters but there are some inherent problems in the subaru design. One of them is that the tubo is just too far from the input manifold and is unequal length so the Subies will have a little slower throttle response.

Someone needs to come up with a kit to move the engine back a few inches and put on a shorty manifold like the EVO guys have, that would rock! Maybe mount the radiator at an angle to give you another couple of inches?

You've given me some hope, so has Bill - I am looking for something like that on CA 91 - 2000+ rpms of torque over 300 ft-lbs. That will be a drivable monster.

A buddy of mine has a Cummings turbo diesel truck with 770 ft-lbs @ 3200 rpms but it doesn't carry torque either and the gearing really sucks :D



I'll make this short. Here are some ideas I would consider in the long run, and to people building engines: Inconel valves to widen the EGT envelope a few hundred degrees F, twin scroll to make up for the long exhaust route, and a slightly lower-duration exhaust camshaft to raise exhaust gas velocity a bit.

Diesel engines do usually have gheyazz powerbands and gearing, but I'm working on a patent for one that could revolutionize all that. Naturally, I can't get into that here ... yet. :D

Water injection will definitely be a necessity for those of us here in Cali, until the EPA lets us get more E85 at the pumps so that we don't need it. :(

Adrian~

p.s. Other than the oil-pan, what keeps you from running a set of exhaust headers back to the turbo, instead of forward? Is there a subframe piece in the way?

Whit,

Sorry to hear the 3037 did not make the torque and power you had hoped for. I was also expecting to see this turbo spool around 3700-3800 RPM's as this turbo is not much larger than the 18G that you/I currently have and it would have been a great choice.

When you want to make some real torque let us know, we are more than willing to discuss options with our customers.

Cheers,
William T. Knose Jr.
Lead Programmer
I-Speed USA
Whit, no offense, but haven't you been down this path before. Please validate those numbers for us, are they corrected. The turbo you're using is a 20g right? I'm assuming so given that the torque curve looks like a 20g. 400 awt on 91? No header either. With those mods on the car I'm very skeptical that car wouldn't be even close to that on the gruppe-s dyno which we all have been referencing. You have used the gruppe-s dyno before, what would it be putting down? A maxed out 2.5 vf39 on race gas pumped up by accidently 25 lbs of boost, hit 400 lbs of torque on the gruppe-s dyno. It was making 360. That posted car is no way near this on pump gas.

I'm running 308/300 w/ a 20G at 18psi on the Gruppe-S mustang dyno. 91 octane. I think I can push 20psi w/ tuning just havn't done it yet.

_____________________
http://www.STifiles.com
Those are good numbers for the boost you're running, but your car will turn into a completely different animal with 2 more pounds of boost. I'm sure you will be very close to where I'm at, maybe better.

Whit, no offense, but haven't you been down this path before. Please validate those numbers for us, are they corrected. The turbo you're using is a 20g right? I'm assuming so given that the torque curve looks like a 20g. 400 awt on 91? No header either. With those mods on the car I'm very skeptical that car wouldn't be even close to that on the gruppe-s dyno which we all have been referencing. You have used the gruppe-s dyno before, what would it be putting down? A maxed out 2.5 vf39 on race gas pumped up by accidently 25 lbs of boost, hit 400 lbs of torque on the gruppe-s dyno. It was making 360. That posted car is no way near this on pump gas.

Whit, mnavarro might be onto something. I could have mistaken your turbo for the 18G as the torque curve does look like a 20G. I apologize in advance if the turbo was a 20G as they are little slower than the 18G. Do let us know what turbo that is, it might help you get a little more power/torque out of it.

Just for reference here is my 18G turbo.
http://www.i-speed.us/images/x-wing/Dyno_Chart_48.jpg

Cheers,
William T. Knose Jr.
Lead Programmer
I-Speed USA

Whit, mnavarro might be onto something. I could have mistaken your turbo for the 18G as the torque curve does look like a 20G. I apologize in advance if the turbo was a 20G as they are little slower than the 18G. Do let us know what turbo that is, it might help you get a little more power/torque out of it...

Bill,

No - the first few times you tuned my car I had a Forced performance 18G. It is a smaller 18G than the Greddy unit most people are talking about. Spool was deadly quick, but it ran out of breath fast.

I let another tuner try and give me more torque on it, he got me to 330-350 ft-lbs with crazy knock on the freeway. I then went back to the original Bill tune.

I got a new Bill tune, smoother but still didn't make more than 260 ft-lbs. Very drivable strong mid range torque, but not that fast.

I then had a turbo problem and had to replace it as an emergency - installed the big 3037 that I had bought some time ago - this made 300 ft-lbs and 300 whp but the lag was beyond my ability to tolerate after my small 18G.

I only kept the 3037 for a month before I threw up my hands and replaced it with a new Greddy 18G. This is larger than the FP 18G and is the turbo I'm still running. My power curve isn't good, that initial 320 ft-lbs is awsome but it doesn't last at all.

Mnavarro is trying to get me to buy a 20G, he thinks this will fix all my ills.

Thanks for the assist - Bill your curves look Killer!
Whit

With cams and 20g, with that motor, you will be :)

I am tend to agree here. It seems that you do not have a bog enaough turbo for that kick a$$ motor. But on the other hand when we say 20g from which vendor? FP, Deadbolt, Greddy etc.. I am sure the combos are countless and no 20G from vendor A equals a 20g from vendor B. And I am sure the same applies for Miguel's SR40 as well. It maybe close to a 20g but the componets may be different and that makes it spool faster hold torque more etc... So the answer may not be as straight as that. Plus the WRX heads/cams could be a limitation.

I wish this was a straight answer, like get a green and you are cool or get a SZ49 and you get what you want.

Regards

Nick