Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday September 23, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > Proven Power Bragging

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-12-2010, 03:58 PM   #451
Scooby921
Merci Buckets
Moderator
 
Member#: 88606
Join Date: Jun 2005
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Clarkston
Vehicle:
2011 GMC Sierra
'13 JCW

Default

I think I'm still going to get the injectors, plugs, clutch, and bcs installed this weekend. Gives me a week to get used to the bcs and fine tune the maf for the larger injectors. Should make it a rather easy couple hours to get the turbo on next weekend too. That and having all the same parts for before and after pulls means we can see exactly what the 19T wheel adds.





And I decided to change the thread title slightly since we're discussing a lot more than just the Blouch upgrade these days.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Last edited by Scooby921; 02-12-2010 at 04:06 PM.
Scooby921 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2010, 04:37 PM   #452
Concillian
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 4414
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Dublin, CA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX Sedan
Midnight Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby921 View Post
That and having all the same parts for before and after pulls means we can see exactly what the 19T wheel adds.
Yes, thanks for this, it's always difficult to find good "back to back" style comparisons. I know why, I mean it's a PITA for sure, I've faced it myself. It's way easier to do half a dozen things at once while you already have things apart. Single mod changes with before / after are rare, but valuable.
Concillian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2010, 05:29 PM   #453
xsnapshot
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 170973
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lincoln, NE
Vehicle:
2004 WRX 4EAT
PSM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby921 View Post
Gives me a week to get used to the bcs and fine tune the maf for the larger injectors.
You shouldn't have to change anything related to the MAF for your larger injectors. Just the scalar and the latency.

And +1 to you having everything ready, to get a good back to back comparison.

You know I just realized this really is the ticket for guys at higher elevations. The smaller hotside won't hurt as much since the air is less dense vs sea level, the compressor will operate more efficiently generating worthwhile boost from the less dense air, and its small enough to spin up fast in the thin air.

I think this turbo would make more sense to guys at 5-6k+ ft than those of us closer to sea level, when compared to a larger aftermarket turbo. Just my .02$
xsnapshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2010, 06:05 PM   #454
ForesterWTi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 173892
Join Date: Mar 2008
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2005 OB EZ30R LLBean
champagne gold

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby921 View Post
Good luck with your DP idea. I don't think its going to do anything except make noise, but I've been proven wrong before . I just don't see how giving the internal gate an open dump is any different than blending it back into the exhaust stream. Putting a block-off plate between the wastegate and turbine openings isn't suddenly going to make it flow more and act like an EWG. I suppose it'll create more back pressure around the wastegate and perhaps helps its ability to stay closed. Even so you are still working with the stock internal wastegate actuator. The big difference between IWG and EWG is the performance of the actuator.

I know, I know, it's still a prototype. IMO I believe that it will help staying closed. Furthermore, I will be upgrading the actuator to a Forge Adjustable IWG, with the one bar spring.

But that will most likely be after this dyno meet...

Cheers, and always thanx scooby921 for your POV,
~Wolf
WTi
ForesterWTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2010, 06:18 PM   #455
ForesterWTi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 173892
Join Date: Mar 2008
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2005 OB EZ30R LLBean
champagne gold

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xsnapshot View Post
bummer! Good luck with the install when you get it though. Wish I was out there when you get ready to tune it!

In for results anyway. Damn being in the Midwest sucks. Out here in Nebraska most people think a tune is something you whistle, and look at me with this blank look on their face when I try to describe to them why my car doesnt sound like a normal honda, and yet doesnt have a V8 under the hood either. If its not a mustang or a camaro people get confused.

Oh damn! that sux wicked bad! I'm sorry to hear that...

I guess that's why I love colorado, well steamboat especially. I have an 82 BRAT with too many goodies to list (electric locker) and she is looking at 340K miles on the clock!!! Everyone in this town has or does own a subie. Most locals are die hard subie daily drivers, we do get 330 inches of snow on average per winter! We are also home to the bridgestone blizzak winter driving course. The road to get there is called "20 mile road" (notoriously known for no pigs and equally matched with it's curves and straights for 20 miles). Off 20 mile road is also home to the Cogg Rally Road of Rally America Series...

Steamy-B the only place to be

Cheers,
~Wolf
WTi
ForesterWTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2010, 08:34 PM   #456
knuts
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 116814
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Colorado Springs
Vehicle:
2003 wrx wagon
blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xsnapshot View Post
You know I just realized this really is the ticket for guys at higher elevations. The smaller hotside won't hurt as much since the air is less dense vs sea level, the compressor will operate more efficiently generating worthwhile boost from the less dense air, and its small enough to spin up fast in the thin air.

I think this turbo would make more sense to guys at 5-6k+ ft than those of us closer to sea level, when compared to a larger aftermarket turbo. Just my .02$
For me, a big factor in selecting the 19T upgrade was it's high PR capability relative to a small 16G wheel. At moderate PR (~2), the 16G outflows the 19T 520 vs 500 cfm. However at high PR (2.8 for example) the situation is reversed with the 19T now at 520 and the 16G at 460 cfm. This is very important because a PR of 2.8 is necessary to produce 18-19 psi of boost above 6000 ft.

Comparing compressor maps, An EVO III 16G will outflow the 19T by as much as 100 cfm at 2.8 PR, however I believe this extra capacity may be wasted on an EJ205 with stock heads, manifolds, and a TMIC. At 6500 rpm with an assumed VE of 90% (probably generous for stock heads, etc) the theoretical engine volumetric demand with an assumed DR of 2.5 (assuming 2 psi induction loss, 70% compressor efficiency, and 80% IC efficiency) is ~520 cfm. To make full use of the extra capacity of the EVO III, I believe further supporting mods would be required (head/manifold work, TGV deletes, FMIC, etc.)

In addition to better VE obtained with the larger hotside, the advantage the EVO III provides at higher elevations is the ability to push 520 cfm at 3.3 PR which would allow as much as 23 psi boost in the upper-range. With this capability, there is no doubt in my mind that the EVO III is a superior upper-range option to the TD04-19T (and most likely 18g and 20g as well by the way).

Of course all the above may be just theoretical hot air, but after discussing this with Adam at Revolutions Performance this past week, I believe it can be validated by hard data. As has been stated previously in this thread, in the absence of time slips, the best method of comparing performance may be back-to-back pulls on the same dyno using the same dyno calibrations and atmo corrections. Next best may be comparing pulls all done on the same dyno, and that data is what I present below.

Please do not evaluate this out of context. The data from these pulls was captured on a Dyno Dynamics at 6000 ft. elevation. For various reasons (which I agree with), the tuner (Adam) chose to apply only half of the atmo correction to the actual WTQ measured. Therefore, the results below may seem low compared to the numbers that some may be accustomed to comparing from say a Dynojet with full atmo correction applied.

The following data is from Adams recollection of best results obtained with E85 on stock block/head EJ205s with TMICs over the past several years.

18G 285-290 WHP
EVO III 16G 280
small 16G 245-250
VF39 240-245

Stock 2.0L 155 (gasoline)

So for comparison, my best pull with the clipped TD04L-19T on this dyno was 260WHP using a half correction (in this case 1.125) as was applied to the other data. Pretty much about where i expected to end-up when combining the very good high altitude performance of the 19T compressor with the VE penalty of the relatively small hotside. Not bad all things considered...

Last edited by knuts; 02-13-2010 at 07:30 AM. Reason: clarificaton of stock wrx fuel
knuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 01:56 AM   #457
ForesterWTi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 173892
Join Date: Mar 2008
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2005 OB EZ30R LLBean
champagne gold

Default Wiiicked

260awhp w/ e85 and a stock 2.0 w/ TD04
Cheers knuts!

Now we just gotta see what the TD04H wheel does w/ the 19T

~Wolf
WTi

p.s. Do you have the dyno graph?


Quote:
Originally Posted by knuts View Post
For me, a big factor in selecting the 19T upgrade was it's high PR capability relative to a small 16G wheel. At moderate PR (~2), the 16G outflows the 19T 520 vs 500 cfm. However at high PR (2.8 for example) the situation is reversed with the 19T now at 520 and the 16G at 460 cfm. This is very important because a PR of 2.8 is necessary to produce 18-19 psi of boost above 6000 ft.

Comparing compressor maps, An EVO III 16G will outflow the 19T by as much as 100 cfm at 2.8 PR, however I believe this extra capacity may be wasted on an EJ205 with stock heads, manifolds, and a TMIC. At 6500 rpm with an assumed VE of 90% (probably generous for stock heads, etc) the theoretical engine volumetric demand with an assumed DR of 2.5 (assuming 2 psi induction loss, 70% compressor efficiency, and 80% IC efficiency) is ~520 cfm. To make full use of the extra capacity of the EVO III, I believe further supporting mods would be required (head/manifold work, TGV deletes, FMIC, etc.)

In addition to better VE obtained with the larger hotside, the advantage the EVO III provides at higher elevations is the ability to push 520 cfm at 3.3 PR which would allow as much as 23 psi boost in the upper-range. With this capability, there is no doubt in my mind that the EVO III is a superior upper-range option to the TD04-19T (and most likely 18g and 20g as well by the way).

Of course all the above may be just theoretical hot air, but after discussing this with Adam at Revolutions Performance this past week, I believe it can be validated by hard data. As has been stated previously in this thread, in the absence of time slips, the best method of comparing performance may be back-to-back pulls on the same dyno using the same dyno calibrations and atmo corrections. Next best may be comparing pulls all done on the same dyno, and that data is what I present below.

Please do not evaluate this out of context. The data from these pulls was captured on a Dyno Dynamics at 6000 ft. elevation. For various reasons (which I agree with), the tuner (Adam) chose to apply only half of the atmo correction to the actual WTQ measured. Therefore, the results below may seem low compared to the numbers that some may be accustomed to comparing from say a Dynojet with full atmo correction applied.

The following data is from Adams recollection of best results obtained with E85 on stock block/head EJ205s with TMICs over the past several years.

18G 285-290 WHP
EVO III 16G 280
small 16G 245-250
VF39 240-245
Stock 2.0L 155

So for comparison, my best pull with the clipped TD04L-19T on this dyno was 260WHP using a half correction (in this case 1.125) as was applied to the other data. Pretty much about where i expected to end-up when combining the very good high altitude performance of the 19T compressor with the VE penalty of the relatively small hotside. Not bad all things considered...
ForesterWTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 12:10 PM   #458
knuts
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 116814
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Colorado Springs
Vehicle:
2003 wrx wagon
blue

Default

^Both pulls are with E85 on the TD04L-19T at 6000 ft elevation. 1.125 atmo correction applied for reasons stated in post #456. Red is before, Blue after adding IA while tuning for E85.

knuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 09:25 PM   #459
xsnapshot
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 170973
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lincoln, NE
Vehicle:
2004 WRX 4EAT
PSM

Default

Knuts I agree wholeheartedly on the pressure ratio thing. I too noticed that when I was comparing the 19T to the small 16G. That's why I believe anyone that lives above 6k feet or so should really look into this (well...at least anyone with a 2.0L motor).

Also ~260 whp is very respectable at that elevation with that correction factor. I still can't get over how awesome E85 is!
xsnapshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 09:32 PM   #460
Drivinwest
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 39124
Join Date: Jun 2003
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Houston, Texas
Vehicle:
2005 Saab 9-2X Aero
Satin Gray Metallic (CGM)

Default

I've had my 19T for a few months now and I'm very happy with it. I've got a road tune slated for early March which should bring the ultimate potential out of my setup (remote tuned so far). After that I'll get it dynoed for you guys :P
Drivinwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 11:58 PM   #461
ForesterWTi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 173892
Join Date: Mar 2008
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2005 OB EZ30R LLBean
champagne gold

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xsnapshot View Post
Knuts I agree wholeheartedly on the pressure ratio thing. I too noticed that when I was comparing the 19T to the small 16G. That's why I believe anyone that lives above 6k feet or so should really look into this (well...at least anyone with a 2.0L motor).

Also ~260 whp is very respectable at that elevation with that correction factor. I still can't get over how awesome E85 is!
E85 is nothing short of 2wicked
subie + corn = whoa fast

Cheers,
~Wolf
WTi
ForesterWTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 07:11 AM   #462
Audioexcels
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 104824
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Here and There
Vehicle:
1996 EJ20G OBS
Black

Default

So what kind of WHP would these figures above be if tuned at sea level and where would this Ebay turbo that uses the larger wheel theoretically sit in the mix of things? I.E. Would it be closer to the EVO III, somewhere in between a clipped 19t and EVO III or?

BTW, how much torque were the other turbos tested putting down? That clipped 19T produced a ton of torque that could easily shatter any trans shy of a 6 speed or PPG gear set.
Audioexcels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 09:44 AM   #463
xsnapshot
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 170973
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lincoln, NE
Vehicle:
2004 WRX 4EAT
PSM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audioexcels View Post
So what kind of WHP would these figures above be if tuned at sea level and where would this Ebay turbo that uses the larger wheel theoretically sit in the mix of things? I.E. Would it be closer to the EVO III, somewhere in between a clipped 19t and EVO III or?

Anywhere between 240-280whp depending on the dyno, your supporting mods, and your tuner. The turbo with the larger turbine wheel will perform better up top.

BTW, how much torque were the other turbos tested putting down? That clipped 19T produced a ton of torque that could easily shatter any trans shy of a 6 speed or PPG gear set.

Have you seen tune's guys with stock 13T's are putting out lately? Tons of torque! I don't see how this would shatter the trans anymore than a 16G. Guys with 16G's and most VFxx series are putting out close to 300 wtq. People have also broken their trans on stock power. This turbo is wont "easily shatter" the trans unless you drive like a moron.
.....
xsnapshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 12:53 PM   #464
knuts
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 116814
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Colorado Springs
Vehicle:
2003 wrx wagon
blue

Default

I spent some time yesterday evening and this morning further exploring the boundaries of the clipped TD04L-19T. I wanted to take advantage of the cold dry air passing thru. The temp was around -10C, giving a density altitude of < 5000 ft for my road test location.

On a 3rd gear pull , I was able to hit 24 psi boost (3800-4400 rpm) tapering to 20 at redline (see datalog below). MAFv exceeded 4.0 volts before 3700 rpm on this run. Peak MAFv was 4.36V at 6000 rpm. On a subsequent run, I turned the boost down to 19 peak tapering to 16psi to get a back-to-back evaluation of the increase in MAF with boost level.

At 4000 rpm, an 18% increase in absolute manifold pressure resulted in a 13% increase in MAF (g/s calculated by the ecu from stock intake calibration). At 6000 rpm, a 12% increase in AMP netted only a 4% increase in MAF. The efect on VE of the high EGBP required to drive the little clipped TD04L to very high PRs is evident in the upper range with less than 35% of the additional AMP turned into MAF.

Again, to be clear, the above data was only collected to explore the limits of the turbo. Obviously operating the little guy under these conditions for an extended period of time is likely to cause a failure. To reach the ~ 3.3 peak PR obtained during this run, the turbine speed was likely approaching 200, 000 rpm!

Code:
RPM	g/s	MAFv	Boost
2400	42.86	2.6	4.21
2429	43.6	2.6	4.35
2509	45.67	2.7	4.64
2516	46.63	2.72	4.93
2586	49.51	2.74	5.37
2618	51.59	2.8	5.51
2694	57.14	2.88	6.38
2726	61.55	2.94	6.82
2775	64.31	2.98	7.25
2846	71.15	3.04	8.41
2886	75.36	3.16	8.99
2972	83.91	3.24	10.44
3027	89.29	3.3	11.31
3133	102.28	3.46	13.92
3180	113.62	3.54	15.08
3349	143.62	3.78	17.84
3427	158.4	3.86	19.44
3595	174.11	3.96	22.19
3678	181.31	4.02	23.21
3844	188.55	4.04	24.22
3926	193.28	4.06	24.37
4134	195.11	4.14	24.22
4222	199.14	4.12	24.08
4360	206.91	4.18	23.93
4432	208.82	4.18	23.93
4601	212.26	4.22	23.79
4678	216.84	4.26	23.5
4767	219.51	4.26	23.35
4950	223.9	4.28	22.77
5036	227.67	4.32	22.34
5126	224.24	4.32	21.76
5255	229.39	4.32	21.61
5380	231.55	4.32	21.32
5411	229.39	4.34	21.18
5543	231.97	4.34	20.74
5651	233.26	4.34	20.45
5747	231.11	4.34	20.45
5800	232.83	4.34	20.16
5919	232.41	4.34	20.16
5975	232.41	4.34	20.16
6097	233.26	4.34	20.31
6097	234.12	4.36	20.16
6244	237.57	4.36	20.02
6302	233.69	4.34	20.02
6382	232.41	4.34	20.16
6437	233.69	4.34	20.31
6482	234.55	4.36	20.31
6533	231.55	4.34	20.16
6601	233.69	4.36	20.16
6654	230.69	4.34	20.45
6732	234.12	4.34	20.31
6750	231.55	4.34	20.45
6830	231.55	4.34	20.31
knuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 09:58 AM   #465
Audioexcels
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 104824
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Here and There
Vehicle:
1996 EJ20G OBS
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xsnapshot View Post
.....
Thanks.

I don't think driving like a moron has a thing to do with a transmission breaking unless you wanted to have this discussion with guys that have been in this game for 10-15 years and have broken gears under normal driving circumstances.

I have seen that tuned TD04 and it's crazy what it is producing...almost doesn't make sense by virtue of physics. I didn't see what dyno did this test, but if it was on a Mustang, again, it's almost defying or perhaps is defying physics since the 13T is so puny.

VF's cannot produce 300WHP on a Mustang w/exception of the VF22 w/EWG running 25psi boost perhaps. 16G's have been close, but only a few have succeeded at pushing them to 300WHP and I don't remember if the one and only thread I can recall was done on a Mustang or not. Even the Big EVO III cannot make that number or if it does, it is by a hair. And torque wise, they cannot produce the same torque as the 300WHP fineline they are approaching/borderlining.

I think the "only" turbo that one could safely say can produce 300WTQ on a 2.0L would be something in the 20G 8cm+ range. And safely saying 300WHP would require a larger sized 18G turbo.

Just all of my studying and also multiple discussions on people that have used and know these turbos extremely well. Now on Meth and E85, maybe the 16G's start making closer to 300WTQ, but I'd like to see one ftw.

Peace!
Audioexcels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 11:10 AM   #466
xsnapshot
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 170973
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lincoln, NE
Vehicle:
2004 WRX 4EAT
PSM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audioexcels View Post
Thanks.

I don't think driving like a moron has a thing to do with a transmission breaking unless you wanted to have this discussion with guys that have been in this game for 10-15 years and have broken gears under normal driving circumstances.

I have seen that tuned TD04 and it's crazy what it is producing...almost doesn't make sense by virtue of physics. I didn't see what dyno did this test, but if it was on a Mustang, again, it's almost defying or perhaps is defying physics since the 13T is so puny.

VF's cannot produce 300WHP on a Mustang w/exception of the VF22 w/EWG running 25psi boost perhaps. 16G's have been close, but only a few have succeeded at pushing them to 300WHP and I don't remember if the one and only thread I can recall was done on a Mustang or not. Even the Big EVO III cannot make that number or if it does, it is by a hair. And torque wise, they cannot produce the same torque as the 300WHP fineline they are approaching/borderlining.

I think the "only" turbo that one could safely say can produce 300WTQ on a 2.0L would be something in the 20G 8cm+ range. And safely saying 300WHP would require a larger sized 18G turbo.

Just all of my studying and also multiple discussions on people that have used and know these turbos extremely well. Now on Meth and E85, maybe the 16G's start making closer to 300WTQ, but I'd like to see one ftw.

Peace!
wow your a bit missinformed on the differences between how a turbo makes WTQ and WHP. WHP is just calculated from WTQ.

A small turbo, such as the TD04 IS COMPLETELY CAPABLE of making 300 wtq. It will take upwards of 22 psi to make that happen, on pump+ meth, or E85, but it is totally possible. Sure it can only make 250whp or so at max, but its definitly capable of high torqe. (Ever see a stage 2 WRX that has the 2.5L motor?)

VF's can ABSOLUTELY produce 300whp. (especially on E85 with the 2.5L STI motor) and upwards of 400wtq on a mustang dyno. Search through the proven power bragging.

In fact I would say the only turbo you claim to be capable of making 300 wtq on a 2.0L is one of the poorest choices for a daily driven 2.0L. With the 8cm hotside (presuming TD06 wheel but could be TD05) you won't see peak torque until around 4,500 RPM. To me that's pretty significant lag when your redlining at 7000 RPM. Not to mention a 20G is completely capable of rendering the EJ205 into a pile of broken metal bits.

You clearly have not done your research through the proven power bragging. Search for opposite locks dyno. He's the stock wrx turbo (2.0L TD04) record holder at 12.4 @ 109. (think lots of torque).
xsnapshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 03:18 PM   #467
AllAWD
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 17079
Join Date: Apr 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Alexandria, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audioexcels View Post
Thanks.

I don't think driving like a moron has a thing to do with a transmission breaking unless you wanted to have this discussion with guys that have been in this game for 10-15 years and have broken gears under normal driving circumstances.

I have seen that tuned TD04 and it's crazy what it is producing...almost doesn't make sense by virtue of physics. I didn't see what dyno did this test, but if it was on a Mustang, again, it's almost defying or perhaps is defying physics since the 13T is so puny.

VF's cannot produce 300WHP on a Mustang w/exception of the VF22 w/EWG running 25psi boost perhaps. 16G's have been close, but only a few have succeeded at pushing them to 300WHP and I don't remember if the one and only thread I can recall was done on a Mustang or not. Even the Big EVO III cannot make that number or if it does, it is by a hair. And torque wise, they cannot produce the same torque as the 300WHP fineline they are approaching/borderlining.

I think the "only" turbo that one could safely say can produce 300WTQ on a 2.0L would be something in the 20G 8cm+ range. And safely saying 300WHP would require a larger sized 18G turbo.

Just all of my studying and also multiple discussions on people that have used and know these turbos extremely well. Now on Meth and E85, maybe the 16G's start making closer to 300WTQ, but I'd like to see one ftw.

Peace!
On 93 octane pump gas with stock ej205 I agree with those statements. Talking to guys that have tuned lots of cars, I pretty much got the same information.

Modded TD04s are going to be disappointing on paper if all you care about is peak numbers (sadly I feel like most people are). The drivers of stock turbo and modded turbo cars will tell you they are an absolute blast to drive. Having torque below 4000rpm is fun.

E85 is not convenient in my area, I'm not shelling out the money for race gas, and meth injection is too risky (having injection fail and blowing an engine) for my daily driver.
AllAWD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 03:20 PM   #468
Big_DeWeY
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 37078
Join Date: May 2003
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: TH Motorsports
Vehicle:
95 L
Blue-ish

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AllAWD View Post
On 93 octane pump gas with stock ej205 I agree with those statements. Talking to guys that have tuned lots of cars, I pretty much got the same information.

Modded TD04s are going to be disappointing on paper if all you care about is peak numbers (sadly I feel like most people are). The drivers of stock turbo and modded turbo cars will tell you they are an absolute blast to drive. Having torque below 4000rpm is fun.
And fast too. My "stage 2" WRX runs down Stage 2 STi's all day. There is something to be said about stock turbos.
Big_DeWeY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 03:55 PM   #469
knuts
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 116814
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Colorado Springs
Vehicle:
2003 wrx wagon
blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audioexcels View Post
So what kind of WHP would these figures above be if tuned at sea level and where would this Ebay turbo that uses the larger wheel theoretically sit in the mix of things? I.E. Would it be closer to the EVO III, somewhere in between a clipped 19t and EVO III or?
I believe any TD04 turbo will always fall a bit shy of the peak power obtainable with the EVO 3 regardless of altitude. 280 WHP may be obtainable with an aggressive tune on pump 93 on a mustang or dyno dynamics at lower elevations. Certainly possible using E85. Any of the larger exhaust wheels available for the TD04 should fall somewhere between the clipped TD04L and the EVO3. With an EWG and the highest trim wheel (TE04H), performance could be very nearly as good as any of the larger 16g wheels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audioexcels View Post
BTW, how much torque were the other turbos tested putting down? That clipped 19T produced a ton of torque that could easily shatter any trans shy of a 6 speed or PPG gear set.
Sorry, I did not ask about peak torque values. Generally speaking though, the turbo that produces the highest boost near the peak VE engine speed (~3500 to 4000 rpm for an EJ205 with stock heads, etc.) will net the highest peak torque value. Any of the TD04 or 16Gs will be very similar in this regard...

Last edited by knuts; 02-17-2010 at 09:25 AM.
knuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 08:43 PM   #470
thefoos
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 144751
Join Date: Mar 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Granger, IN
Vehicle:
02 WRX BW EFR E85
7064 TS WRB

Default

So, anybody match a 19t compressor wheel with a tdo4h turbine yet? This combo should give a 18g a run for its money with much better spool...
thefoos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 10:10 PM   #471
AllAWD
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 17079
Join Date: Apr 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Alexandria, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thefoos View Post
So, anybody match a 19t compressor wheel with a tdo4h turbine yet? This combo should give a 18g a run for its money with much better spool...
ForesterWTi is running the largest turbine that fits in the housing TE04H/19t. And he's tuning on E85.

Run for the money in what terms? On the drag strip the 18g is still going to stomp an equivalent TD04 or TE04, autocross might favor a stock turbo, etc.
AllAWD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 11:57 PM   #472
xsnapshot
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 170973
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lincoln, NE
Vehicle:
2004 WRX 4EAT
PSM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thefoos View Post
So, anybody match a 19t compressor wheel with a tdo4h turbine yet? This combo should give a 18g a run for its money with much better spool...
Only in price and spool. The 18G will make considerably more power from 4500 to redline if you want it to.
xsnapshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2010, 04:39 PM   #473
ForesterWTi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 173892
Join Date: Mar 2008
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2005 OB EZ30R LLBean
champagne gold

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audioexcels View Post
So what kind of WHP would these figures above be if tuned at sea level and where would this Ebay turbo that uses the larger wheel theoretically sit in the mix of things? I.E. Would it be closer to the EVO III, somewhere in between a clipped 19t and EVO III or?

BTW, how much torque were the other turbos tested putting down? That clipped 19T produced a ton of torque that could easily shatter any trans shy of a 6 speed or PPG gear set.


It's not an "EBAY turbo", it is a turbo made by Performance Techniques in CA (building turbo's since 80's) that happens to sell some of their "Monstah" TD04's (TD04H/19T) on EBAY.

Sorry haven't been on the thread in a day or two...
...just wanted to clarify

Cheers,
~Wolf
WTi --- Steamboat Springs, CO
ForesterWTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2010, 04:51 PM   #474
ForesterWTi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 173892
Join Date: Mar 2008
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2005 OB EZ30R LLBean
champagne gold

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by knuts View Post
I spent some time yesterday evening and this morning further exploring the boundaries of the clipped TD04L-19T. I wanted to take advantage of the cold dry air passing thru. The temp was around -10C, giving a density altitude of < 5000 ft for my road test location.

On a 3rd gear pull , I was able to hit 24 psi boost (3800-4400 rpm) tapering to 20 at redline (see datalog below). MAFv exceeded 4.0 volts before 3700 rpm on this run. Peak MAFv was 4.36V at 6000 rpm. On a subsequent run, I turned the boost down to 19 peak tapering to 16psi to get a back-to-back evaluation of the increase in MAF with boost level.

At 4000 rpm, an 18% increase in absolute manifold pressure resulted in a 13% increase in MAF (g/s calculated by the ecu from stock intake calibration). At 6000 rpm, a 12% increase in AMP netted only a 4% increase in MAF. The efect on VE of the high EGBP required to drive the little clipped TD04L to very high PRs is evident in the upper range with less than 35% of the additional AMP turned into MAF.

Again, to be clear, the above data was only collected to explore the limits of the turbo. Obviously operating the little guy under these conditions for an extended period of time is likely to cause a failure. To reach the ~ 3.3 peak PR obtained during this run, the turbine speed was likely approaching 200, 000 rpm!

Code:
RPM    g/s    MAFv    Boost
2400    42.86    2.6    4.21
2429    43.6    2.6    4.35
2509    45.67    2.7    4.64
2516    46.63    2.72    4.93
2586    49.51    2.74    5.37
2618    51.59    2.8    5.51
2694    57.14    2.88    6.38
2726    61.55    2.94    6.82
2775    64.31    2.98    7.25
2846    71.15    3.04    8.41
2886    75.36    3.16    8.99
2972    83.91    3.24    10.44
3027    89.29    3.3    11.31
3133    102.28    3.46    13.92
3180    113.62    3.54    15.08
3349    143.62    3.78    17.84
3427    158.4    3.86    19.44
3595    174.11    3.96    22.19
3678    181.31    4.02    23.21
3844    188.55    4.04    24.22
3926    193.28    4.06    24.37
4134    195.11    4.14    24.22
4222    199.14    4.12    24.08
4360    206.91    4.18    23.93
4432    208.82    4.18    23.93
4601    212.26    4.22    23.79
4678    216.84    4.26    23.5
4767    219.51    4.26    23.35
4950    223.9    4.28    22.77
5036    227.67    4.32    22.34
5126    224.24    4.32    21.76
5255    229.39    4.32    21.61
5380    231.55    4.32    21.32
5411    229.39    4.34    21.18
5543    231.97    4.34    20.74
5651    233.26    4.34    20.45
5747    231.11    4.34    20.45
5800    232.83    4.34    20.16
5919    232.41    4.34    20.16
5975    232.41    4.34    20.16
6097    233.26    4.34    20.31
6097    234.12    4.36    20.16
6244    237.57    4.36    20.02
6302    233.69    4.34    20.02
6382    232.41    4.34    20.16
6437    233.69    4.34    20.31
6482    234.55    4.36    20.31
6533    231.55    4.34    20.16
6601    233.69    4.36    20.16
6654    230.69    4.34    20.45
6732    234.12    4.34    20.31
6750    231.55    4.34    20.45
6830    231.55    4.34    20.31

WHOA THAT IS KNUTZ! (pun intended haha )

Cheers,
~Wolf
WTi
ForesterWTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2010, 05:11 PM   #475
ForesterWTi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 173892
Join Date: Mar 2008
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2005 OB EZ30R LLBean
champagne gold

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thefoos View Post
So, anybody match a 19t compressor wheel with a tdo4h turbine yet? This combo should give a 18g a run for its money with much better spool...


...I might (YES! ) haha. Check out the rest of this thread.

This is a BIG deal to myself and a lot of people in here. This thread started as just the Blouch 19T compressor wheel upgrade to a TD04 on a 2.0 rex...

The Performance Techniques "Monstah" TD04 19T/TD04H could be the upgrade from the Blouch 19T upgrade. Time will tell soon!

Cheers,
~Wolf
ForesterWTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
td04 19t blouch upgrade. WhiteBgeye02 Private 'Wanted' Classifieds 1 06-23-2010 08:35 PM
WTB td04 for 19t upgrade tanner127 Private 'Wanted' Classifieds 3 04-13-2010 08:04 PM
Blouch TD04 19T upgrade on 4EAT. Opinions Brock31 Transmission (AT/MT) & Driveline 6 12-17-2009 10:35 AM
Blouch TD04 19T Upgrade lackofhp Factory 2.5L Turbo Powertrain 8 10-31-2008 01:57 PM
TD04-19T questions. ringe Factory 2.5L Turbo Powertrain 6 06-07-2008 07:19 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.