Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Friday December 19, 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 04-26-2014, 12:05 AM   #1
bl0wnb0xerbabiE
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 121722
Join Date: Aug 2006
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX tr
Obsidian Black

Default 06 2.5l WRX + Steamspeed Hybrid STX td05h-GTX2867 (Garrett) - 416whp/399lb-ft

Event: Custom Dyno tune
Location: Equilibrium Tuning in Fairfield, CA
Ambient Temp: 74 degrees Fahrenheit
Elevation: 100 ft above sea level
Weather: Blue and Clear
Tires: Dunlop Sport Maxx 225/45/17

Car: 2006 Subaru WRX
Tuner: Ed at Equilibrium Tuning
Dyno Info: Graphs for both Dynojet and Mustang below
Transmission: Stock 5 speed
Gear: 3rd
Peak HP at RPM: 416.6 whp at 6600rpm SAE corrected
Peak Torque at RPM: 399.6 lb-ft at 4050rpm SAE corrected
Baseline hp/tq for a stock on same dyno: Stock STI runs 210-220whp on the mustang dyno
Target Boost: 19 psi
Target AFR: 10.7
Fuel: Piss poor Cali 91 octane

Engine/Power Modifications

- Steamspeed's hybrid STX td05h-Garrett GTX 2867 journal bearing turbo - 8cm housing w/ 2.4 inch inlet - ported turbine and wastegate - IWG - Billet 11 blade compressor wheel and lightweight 9-blade turbine wheel
- KS tech 73mm CAI
- Walbro 255h fuel pump
- Greddy Evo catback exhaust
- Invidia 3 inch catless downpipe w/ DEI titanium wrap with high temp silicone coating
- Unknown brand uppipe w/ DEI titanium wrap with high temp silicone coating
- Tomei UEL
- PTP Turbo blanket
- Cusco heatshield
- Motive Autowerks TGV deletes
- Hallman Pro MBC
- Ebay BIG TMIC
- Block off plates
- Air pump delete
- Grimmspeed turbo inlet
- DW 850cc injectors

Driveline Modifications:

- ACT heavy duty clutch
- Streelight flywheel
- Perrin lightened crank pulley
- Kartboy short shifter
- Kartboy shifter bushings

Suspension and other modifications:

- Whiteline front fixed swaybar
- Whiteline rear adjustable swaybar
- Helix endlinks
- Hawk HPS brake pads
- Eibach Camber bolts
- STI rear strut tower bar
- STI powder coated black BBS rims 17 x 7.5
- Tein H tech springs
- aftermarket shocks
- Group N front tophats
- Greddy turbo timer
- Greddy shift knob
- STRI boost and oil pressure gauges

Soon to be...

- Grimmspeed TMIC splitter and shroud
- DEI Reflect-A-Gold wrap on heatshields, TMIC, and intake
- Hot coat UEL headers
- then maybe exterior mods yada yada..

Big thanks to Ed @ Eqtuning for a great tune. Him and his team were amazed and completely surprised at the power output of this turbo. We were originally going to go with the AEM CAI but the turbo was maxing out the MAF readings so we had to go with the KStech big maf intake. We also had to go with a slightly softer wastegate spring. Money well spent and the car pulls like a champ, especially up top.

I would have liked to have seen slightly faster spoolup but the amount of power mid to high more than makes up for it. The current wastegate seems to hit 18 psi and slowwwllllyyy get up to 19 psi. Ed believes that with an EWG, this turbo would "shiiinnnee." Our power expectations were surpassed and then some. I highly recommend this turbo (Garrett GTX compressor) to anyone looking for 20g typer power levels.

Below is the Dynojet graph:



And the more realistic Mustang dyno numbers:

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Last edited by bl0wnb0xerbabiE; 04-26-2014 at 12:22 AM.
bl0wnb0xerbabiE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 01:22 AM   #2
Equilibrium Tuning
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

I was extremely impressed with this turbo. This kind of power on 91 octane combined with such great spool is unheard of. They need a little refinement on the wastegate port and actuator and this is going to be an all out killer turbo. Can't wait to see it on e85.

-- Ed
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 01:30 AM   #3
Back Road Runner
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 60082
Join Date: Apr 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota
Vehicle:
2004 Forester STI
Silver

Default

What do you suggest for the wastegate modifications based on seeing this turbo? I'm curious because I'm putting one in this weekend and am curious about your input. Mine will be on E85, but I'm limited to an APS 65mm intake and 1000cc injectors for the moment for peak, and I'm pushing both on my 18G.

Also I'm curious what the difference is between the Dynojet and Mustang. Do you actually have two dynos there, or is this merely a software thing? Also your labeling says engine hp and engine torque. Is this a converted estimate or just a label but still wheel numbers?
Back Road Runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 01:31 AM   #4
NA STI
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 285083
Join Date: Jun 2011
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Newport News, VA
Vehicle:
2006 STi
WRB

Default

Those numbers and curves are very nice, especially for 91oct.

Im a little confused on this hybrid turbo thoe... what makes it a gtx2867 if it dosnt even use a gt28 turbine? Also if it used a legit gtx67 compressor wheel it wouldnt have 11 blades.
NA STI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 02:31 AM   #5
Back Road Runner
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 60082
Join Date: Apr 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota
Vehicle:
2004 Forester STI
Silver

Default

You're curious why it's 11 blades vs 10 blades I assume. You might want to ask Steamspeed about the reason. I could only make guesses. It's also a bit of blur with various sites stating both 10 and 11 blades for various options. For example, the GTX2863 is supposed to have 11 blades, but you'll find sites indicating both 10 and 11. The GTX2867 is supposed to have 10 blades, and again you'll see sites indicating both 10 and 11. I've also seen pics of the compressor wheels labeled as the GTX2863 and GTX2867 with 10 and 11 blades. So...what's right? I can't tell you. I don't know what's a typo and what's not. I also don't know what's a genuine Garrett compressor and what's an equal compressor blade profile but made by another company. For example, Kinugawa has GTX2867 compressor wheels. Guess what? They're 11 blades. This may also be a ball bearing vs journal bearing debate. For example, if you bought CHRA ball bearing GTX2867, you might have a 10 blade compressor wheel. However, if you bought a journal bearing version, maybe Garrett doesn't make a real version, so a manufacturer like Kinugawa steps in a makes an 11 blade version that fits the journal bearing application. I'm not really sure. At the end of the day, I don't really have an answer for you. My guess is that if you went the ball bearing route, you'd probably end up with a 10 blade version. If you did not go the ball bearing route, you probably have an 11 blade version with the 11 blade version being made by someone else, still billet and same blade profile. That'd be my guess, but it's a complete, blind guess based on zero fact or information to back it up. Again, ask Steamspeed if you want an answer.
Back Road Runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 07:05 AM   #6
A-man07
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 271525
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: BagEnd
Vehicle:
07 STi
424whp/382wtq GT3076

Default

Is it a bit disingenuous to label this as 416whp when there's also an apparently legitimate reading of 354whp? 62whp ain't chicken feed.
A-man07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 09:52 AM   #7
rexworx
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 103232
Join Date: Dec 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: GTX3076R-276/272, GTX3071R
Vehicle:
MY05 GDA,MY04FXT6spd
2.5ltr,PPG,Front LSD,4.44

Default

Very Nice to see another one of these on the dyno. I need to get my STX67 equipped fxt back on the rollers soon.

Great job tuning Ed!
rexworx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 10:08 AM   #8
HooliganSTi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 161608
Join Date: Oct 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Kittery, ME
Vehicle:
2004 WRX Wagon
PSM V8 STi swapped

Default

Nice numbers! I just installed my STX71 this makes me happy...
HooliganSTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 10:54 AM   #9
bilt2run
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 134211
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: LONG ISLAND
Default

very nice..It looks to make more power then the gtx3071 that Ed tuned a while back!! this thing should rock on corn
bilt2run is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 11:01 AM   #10
HooliganSTi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 161608
Join Date: Oct 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Kittery, ME
Vehicle:
2004 WRX Wagon
PSM V8 STi swapped

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A-man07 View Post
Is it a bit disingenuous to label this as 416whp when there's also an apparently legitimate reading of 354whp? 62whp ain't chicken feed.
I'd hardly call posting the results for two different types of dyno being disingenuous. If anything it being upfront. The differences in readings between the two types are well known and usually reflect what's shown above with the DJ reading a good bit higher. Varies by machine but nothing new here....
HooliganSTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 11:49 AM   #11
bswilmington
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 217563
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Eden NC
Vehicle:
2006 Sti 12.68 @ 108
321WHP 422WTQ dynojet SAE

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HooliganSTi View Post
I'd hardly call posting the results for two different types of dyno being disingenuous. If anything it being upfront. The differences in readings between the two types are well known and usually reflect what's shown above with the DJ reading a good bit higher. Varies by machine but nothing new here....
Yeah but real question is what type dyno is this? That should be the only dyno plot posted, not hypothetical numbers. There is about 15% difference in the numbers but in reality these type of dynos don't vary that much in real world unless you are refering to old school mustang dyno which is rarely used anymore. Sure most say dynos are only tuning devices but in reality hp and trq has exact definition that most dyno calibrations don't reflect the same results.

I thought it was funny how the dynojet numbers was listed in thread title but he post that mustang are the more realistic.
bswilmington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 07:41 PM   #12
bl0wnb0xerbabiE
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 121722
Join Date: Aug 2006
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX tr
Obsidian Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bswilmington View Post
Yeah but real question is what type dyno is this? That should be the only dyno plot posted, not hypothetical numbers. There is about 15% difference in the numbers but in reality these type of dynos don't vary that much in real world unless you are refering to old school mustang dyno which is rarely used anymore. Sure most say dynos are only tuning devices but in reality hp and trq has exact definition that most dyno calibrations don't reflect the same results. I thought it was funny how the dynojet numbers was listed in thread title but he post that mustang are the more realistic.
good point but the 418whp graph reading isn't some fake number that we made up; this is a legitimate graph just like the mustang is.

The reasoned I posted both numbers is 1) I had them 2) transparency 3) to show that dyno numbers are ALL relative. For all I know, maybe my car is actually putting out 375whp; there's know way to determine that but you can narrow it down by using different measuring calibrations, dynos etc. for the same setup on the same day. I personally believe that the car feels closer to 354whp but the 418whp comes from a Dynojet calibration which is what many people post on here anyways so I decided I would put it. So putting up both was meant to simply highlight that the dyno number is just a number without multiple comparisons; it's the area under the curve that is the most significant and I am very pleased.

My car smacks hard past 3800rpm and I can daily drive it around town without boosting at lower rpms. =D
bl0wnb0xerbabiE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 08:42 PM   #13
VladiWrX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 145658
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NorCal
Vehicle:
On my 5th scoob
and lovin it

Default

Looks solid. Good luck with that stock 5sp, I popped two after hitting these torque levels. Both shaved 3rd gear almost completely off.
VladiWrX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 09:01 PM   #14
bl0wnb0xerbabiE
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 121722
Join Date: Aug 2006
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX tr
Obsidian Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VladiWrX View Post
Looks solid. Good luck with that stock 5sp, I popped two after hitting these torque levels. Both shaved 3rd gear almost completely off.
eek. How were u driving when u broke it?
bl0wnb0xerbabiE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2014, 09:28 PM   #15
bswilmington
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 217563
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Eden NC
Vehicle:
2006 Sti 12.68 @ 108
321WHP 422WTQ dynojet SAE

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bl0wnb0xerbabiE View Post
good point but the 418whp graph reading isn't some fake number that we made up; this is a legitimate graph just like the mustang is. The reasoned I posted both numbers is 1) I had them 2) transparency 3) to show that dyno numbers are ALL relative. For all I know, maybe my car is actually putting out 375whp; there's know way to determine that but you can narrow it down by using different measuring calibrations, dynos etc. for the same setup on the same day. I personally believe that the car feels closer to 354whp but the 418whp comes from a Dynojet calibration which is what many people post on here anyways so I decided I would put it. So putting up both was meant to simply highlight that the dyno number is just a number without multiple comparisons; it's the area under the curve that is the most significant and I am very pleased. My car smacks hard past 3800rpm and I can daily drive it around town without boosting at lower rpms. =D
I understand your point. But what type of dyno is it? Doesn't appear to be DJ, so it would assume that is made up calibration and isn't the real calibration the dyno is set up for. I've never seen dyno that could post whatever dyno model numbers you request. It must be self made calibration that is suppose to resemble DJ #s. If that is the case then it is made up number and I would stick with the correct calibration that the dyno manufacture put into the computer.

Your graph shows roughly 15% difference in numbers but in reality mustangs and DJ now have closer to 5% difference. It is what it is, and I do understand your view point. Sorry I'm just stickler for real world numbers and I think DJ have got a bad name with people trying to show crazy numbers specially when made up correction factors are made to "resemble" a dyno that it even isn't. But I love DJ cause when you use real one on SAE correction it gives what I believe is real world numbers that auto manufactures come up with. (Yes I know manufactures rate at crank before someone tells me). For example my 381 hp tundra did 313whp on DJ which is 18% power train loss which is believeable for 4x4 on 32" tires when truck was in 2wd. Stock sti does 240whp and is rated 300hp which equals 20% power train loss, , which to me is believeable for car in AWD with heavy drivetrain components.

Sorry for the rant. I just hate to see DJ get make believe numbers cause everyone already thinks they read till the moon, but all mustang numbers are always the lowest. In reality the mustang numbers that are posted are possibly higher than DJ numbers.
bswilmington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2014, 05:57 AM   #16
northman
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 163631
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Seattle
Vehicle:
07 Forester XT
Dom 1.5XT-R

Default

All the BS aside, that Mustang graph looks nice. 350 whp, and peak torque before 4,000 RPM is not too shabby.
northman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2014, 07:26 AM   #17
A-man07
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 271525
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: BagEnd
Vehicle:
07 STi
424whp/382wtq GT3076

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bl0wnb0xerbabiE View Post
good point but the 418whp graph reading isn't some fake number that we made up; this is a legitimate graph just like the mustang is.

The reasoned I posted both numbers is 1) I had them 2) transparency 3) to show that dyno numbers are ALL relative. For all I know, maybe my car is actually putting out 375whp; there's know way to determine that but you can narrow it down by using different measuring calibrations, dynos etc. for the same setup on the same day. I personally believe that the car feels closer to 354whp but the 418whp comes from a Dynojet calibration which is what many people post on here anyways so I decided I would put it. So putting up both was meant to simply highlight that the dyno number is just a number without multiple comparisons; it's the area under the curve that is the most significant and I am very pleased.

My car smacks hard past 3800rpm and I can daily drive it around town without boosting at lower rpms. =D
You should edit the thread title to reflect both numbers. That was my point, otherwise it looks like "false advertising."

Surprised no one has pointed out the real way to tell how much power you're making is 1/4 mile times.
A-man07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2014, 12:08 PM   #18
Equilibrium Tuning
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

The dyno is a Dyncom brand chassis dyno. The "dynojet" calibration is how the dyno reads out of the box. I use a .85 CF to make it read like my road dyno software which happened to read just like the older mustang dynos.

On the mustang calibration, stock 08+ STI's put down 195-205whp. At these power levels I would expect to see 116-117mph traps.

Thanks
-- Ed
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2014, 05:45 PM   #19
Back Road Runner
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 60082
Join Date: Apr 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota
Vehicle:
2004 Forester STI
Silver

Default

I like curve shapes more than I like raw numbers. This should flow like a 20G, so I would expect to see a peak HP slightly higher than peak TQ. In this case, this is what we see. The raw number is whatever it will be. It's hard to quantify that without a direct comparison of other setups on the same car and on the same dyno. The other rough option is to know what base cars do like Ed provided. A STI putting down 195-205HP is rather conservative, so a high reading at such a configuration will also be conservative. 340TQ and 355HP would then be pretty conservative values, and the car is realistically doing a little bit better. Now 340TQ at 19psi seems high, but I'm used to smaller numbers a thousand feet up. Plus excellent efficiency can mean excellent torque. I'll actually have my GTX2867 in today sometime and will get to start playing around with it a little, zero WG to start and then tweaking during the week. Maybe I'll see some unusually (for me) high torque numbers per boost level. Who knows, lol. I'm just hoping it will stomp my 18G over the whole curve.
Back Road Runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2014, 01:07 AM   #20
Equilibrium Tuning
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

Just to give a comparison, 20g's and ATP GTX3071's usually do about 325-330whp on 91 on the mustang calibration. Hitting 350whp on 91 on this calibration is very tough. I hope this is standard for this turbo and not just a fluke because that is seriously impressive power!

-- Ed
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2014, 05:27 AM   #21
Back Road Runner
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 60082
Join Date: Apr 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota
Vehicle:
2004 Forester STI
Silver

Default

This turbo does seem to flow well up top, definitely a healthy bump up from my 18G, holds 24psi (E85) flat to 7k and moves 50 g/s more air. Mine's in and running, but I think I've got a leak to hunt down first unfortunately. High boost spool-up is quite...delayed...at the moment (worse than OP and I've got the smaller 7cm^2 hotside), not sure why yet. It'll produce low boost (2-5psi) slightly better than the 18G near 2k rpm but then ramp up oddly slow for no apparent reason. The responsiveness and early positive pressure seem to indicate more bottom end potential, but something's stopping me. I'm guessing a leak somewhere, so I gotta snug down some clamps and see if things improve.

I'm pretty impressed by the dynamics/transient behavior. The 18G's a reasonably quick turbo, not 13T-TD04 fast, but quick in its own right. The GTX2867 is noticeably quicker and a healthy step towards the transparently quick TD04. The low inertia bits show their worth pretty well. I'm looking forward to more quality time with it to really feel it out.

Last edited by Back Road Runner; 04-28-2014 at 05:18 PM.
Back Road Runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2014, 10:03 AM   #22
rexworx
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 103232
Join Date: Dec 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: GTX3076R-276/272, GTX3071R
Vehicle:
MY05 GDA,MY04FXT6spd
2.5ltr,PPG,Front LSD,4.44

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
Just to give a comparison, 20g's and ATP GTX3071's usually do about 325-330whp on 91 on the mustang calibration. Hitting 350whp on 91 on this calibration is very tough. I hope this is standard for this turbo and not just a fluke because that is seriously impressive power!

-- Ed
How did you feel lag and response is compared to a 20g etc? When did it hit full boost and and any issue holding it out to higher rpm? What rpm did you start the pull at? Seem like it would have quite a bit more in it with E85 Id assume.
rexworx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2014, 12:49 PM   #23
subaru_gc8
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 29292
Join Date: Nov 2002
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Orange County CA
Vehicle:
2004 WRX wagon
silver

Default

im sold on this turbo
subaru_gc8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2014, 05:30 PM   #24
spdracerut
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 269226
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

FYI, genuiene Garrett 67mm compressor is 10-blade and the 63mm is 11-blade. All of the Garrett GTX wheels are 11-blade except the 67mm.
spdracerut 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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:40 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.