Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Saturday December 20, 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 Technical > Normally Aspirated with bolt-on Forced Induction Powertrain

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 03-26-2001, 12:39 AM   #1
shiv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 607
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Post East Coast Tuning Session Dyno Day Results

Hi Guys,
Just thought I'd update the forum on the very first East Coast Vishnu Performance Tuning weekend. I flew into Boston just the other day (from CA) to engage in a four day tuning marathon with a bunch of east coast TEC-II turbo customers. Three of which actually converted their RSes to two wheel drive in order to dyno on a Dynojet yesterday at Pruven Performance in Milford, CT.

Here are the results:

Matt Cavanugh-- 5 speed MY99 Minnam turbo/TEC-II, 7psi, 3-inch exhaust, 93 octane pump gas:
224 wheel hp @ 5800rpm, 230ft-lbs @ 4600rpm.
Tested with FWD configuration

Edwin Foo-- 5 speed MY99 Custom turbo/TEC-II, 7psi, 2.5-inch exhaust, 93 octane pump gas, 228 wheel hp @ 5800rpm, 245ft-lbs @ 3750rpm
Tested in RWD configuration

There was another 2.5RS dyno'd that made even more power with a built motor and 10 psi of boost. But I'll post the results only when I get okay from the owner.

There was yet another car that I tuned this weekend (built motor, 10psi) that was even more powerful than the rest but the owner didn't want to go through the hassle of converting to two wheel drive. I think he was just satisfied with being gawdawful fast and making the rest of us feel inadequate

All in all, a great weekend! I got to drive the snot out of high hp FWD, RWD and AWD 2.5RSes!

Just for reference, a stock 2.5RS (in 2WD mode) dynos around 120-125 wheel hp. Pretty cool to almost double wheel hp with less than 1/2 bar of boost, never hear a ping and never see EGTs above 1500F on the dyno or even during a 200 mile flog fest between CT, NY and NJ

Cheers,
Shiv, still on the East Coast with the turbo boyz

[This message has been edited by shiv (edited March 25, 2001).]
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
shiv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 12:54 AM   #2
markus
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 438
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Location: St. Albert, AB, Canada
Vehicle:
2004 STi
White on Gold

Post



Wow! Almost double stock HP at ~7psi!?!?!?

WRX? What WRX?

Awesome news Shiv. Keep us posted.
markus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 01:15 AM   #3
kgb
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 1366
Join Date: Apr 2000
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Delta, BC, Canada
Vehicle:
2000 RS-T -> RSTi-8
Blue Ridge Pearl

Cool

With a built motor, it will have the new STi beat! If I had the money to keep 2 cars, and one of them the new STi, I would mod the hell out of the RS and keep the STi close to stock as my daily driver. Talk 'bout tunning the EJ25 - Good work Shiv!! GC8 + EJ25 + Turbo = 1 great stealth WRX killer
kgb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 06:34 AM   #4
Force[FED]
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 292
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Elmer, NJ USA
Vehicle:
2011 BMW 535i
Havana Metallic

Post

Awesome! Congrats MattC (even though I know he was shooting for 250hp to the wheels )

Anyone who doesn't believe in turbo setups before needs to see these numbers.

Kevin
www.forcefed4.com
Force[FED] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 07:27 AM   #5
scot
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 3953
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Durham, NC, USA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
Silver

Post

Just curious as to how easily these guys were accomplishing the 4-wheel to 2-wheel conversion? Is this something that takes hours with the car on stands or can it be done at the dyno with some simple tools?

scot
scot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 07:55 AM   #6
WRXRob
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 3087
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Post

Hmmm, a RWD 225whp RS sounds like a lot of fun to me.
WRXRob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 08:00 AM   #7
efoo
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 80
Join Date: Jul 1999
Post

If you have access to a lift, the job is much easier. But if you have never done it before, it can be a somewhat trying experience and there's a lot of little tricks that need to be figured out on the fly to get access to the right bolts.

I would estimate 2-3 hours for an experienced mechanic, and double that for a goofball like me. That's just to do one conversion - coverting it back to AWD takes the same amount of time.

The car is scary fast now to me. Maybe not to some of you high-hp freaks, but let me tell you, it's scary when you floor it in 3th or 4th gear on the highway and are able to induce massive wheelspin within a second of mashing the pedal. I desparately need a rear limited-slip diff if I'm going to play around with this RWD thing. I'm going to be much relieved when my car is back to AWD - the RWD is loads of fun but so much more twitchy IMHO. I don't know how those Porsche drivers do it with even more power and more weight hanging out past the rear wheels.

-Edwin
efoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 08:15 AM   #8
rao
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 52
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Naperville, IL
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT
98 BMW 540i LS2/T56

Post

260-270 hp at 7 psi is very impressive. As Shiv has said himself, double the wheel hp dosen't mean double the flywheel hp:
http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/Foru.../000400-2.html

Congratulations!
rao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 08:32 AM   #9
TR
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 28
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: now w/100% less turbo
Vehicle:
1997 M3 Sedan
Blue

Thumbs up

hmmmm....'built' TEC II'd turbo'd engine. hopefully they'll let you disclose a little about their beasts.
TR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 08:38 AM   #10
ColinL
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 114
Join Date: Jul 1999
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Wichita, KS and Whoring, OT
Vehicle:
'03 Evo, Rice White
'01 Erion CBR 929

Post

Edwin, the Porsches have a rear suspension designed to apply copious power to the ground. The RS simply does not. A LSD would help, absolutely.
ColinL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 09:35 AM   #11
shiv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 607
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Post

Force[FED]- To be fair, MattC's dyno results should have been at least 10hp higher than they were. Since he was converted to FWD, he had the nose of his car pointing towards the back wall of the shop with almost no airflow going through the intercooler. As a result, his manifold air temps during the run were logged between 125 and 160 degrees. Whereas Edwin, in RWD configuration, pointed his engine bay towards the great outdoors with cool fresh 60 degree air blowing over his engine. His intake temps where right around 80-90 during all the runs. The car was so cool, in fact, there there was essentially no need for a cool-down period. What's nice is that both these cars run even cooler on the street with intake temps being just around ambient.

Cheer,
Shiv, still in NJ
shiv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 09:43 AM   #12
Joe Hogan
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 699
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Green Mountain State
Vehicle:
2002 golf TDI
Blue

Post

Shiv,

Fell free to post up my results.

Joe
Joe Hogan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 09:44 AM   #13
Nick
The Godfather
 
Member#: 2
Join Date: Jul 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Rowley, MA
Vehicle:
2015 STI Launch Ed.
Rally Blue Pearl

Post

Shiv... I know you feel like flying south to Warm Sunny Fort Lauderdale for a few days... can I tempt you with bikini clad women at Ft. Lauderdale Beach? I really wish I was closer to that part of the east coast right now.

-Nick
Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 09:48 AM   #14
kyledooley
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 1055
Join Date: Mar 2000
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Romeoville, IL
Vehicle:
2005 No legacy for u
It's a diesel

Post

2 things:

1. Interesting that the 2.5in exhaust produced marginally more hp and significantly more torque than the 3in exhaust.

2. No significant difference in relative peak hp gain between a piggybacked Minnam and a TecII Minnam.

In http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/Foru.../000400-2.html

shiv said...
"Case in point: last year's UPRD dyno results showed 95 wheel hp (stock) vs. 183 wheel horsepower (with a stock 7psi Minnam turbo). 93% gain. Following your correction method, the car would have made 320 horsepower (165x1.93), which obviously, isn't possible consider the low boost and sate of tune. More likely is that it gained 183-95=88hp. And 88hp+165hp=253hp which is much more reasonable."

Using shiv's math the gains demonstrated by the 2wd cars above are...

120whp assumed in 2wd.

228 - 120 = +108 or 90% Gain at wheels
224 - 120 = +104 or 87% Gain at wheels

Now I quote whp gains because they are not tainted by the driveline loss debate.

However, the question remains, why is there no significant difference in %whp gains from a Minnam Stage II with piggybacks and a Minnam Stage II with Tec II (both running 7psi? By rights, the Tec II should have greater relative whp gains at 7psi of boost because, theoretically, it is in a better state of tune. One would be right to expect greater than a 93% gain in whp by replacing piggybacks with a TecII on an identical turbo system.

Now it will probably be argued that there are differences in the dynos and that there are differences in running 2wd vs 4wd. They would both be vaild arguments, but we are discussing relative gains here, not raw numbers. Raw numbers are only applicable when you are comparing runs on the same (or if we stretch, an identical) dyno. % relative gain is universal when comparing the same car. The reality is in relative gain. IF my car showed a 20% gain in whp at the dyno and yours showed a 35% gain, who's is faster? (+35% wins right?)

So why are the TecII numbers not more significant?

Kyle
kyledooley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 09:56 AM   #15
shiv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 607
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Post

Worry not Nick, I have some good non-CA maps to send you. Turns out that my previous CA-derived maps were too rich for you guys not running the Methenol-mix gas that we West Coasters hate so much. You're higher octane, as expected, also allows for some good ignition advance

I'll send you a couple of maps to try when I get back home on Wednesday. They should be just fine for you car. FWIW, both Edwin and Matt were running nearly idential maps. When Matt installed the jammy fuel rails, I had to lean the mixture out a bit. It also allowed for even more advance. The car, with the rails, ended up making the same power it did with the stock rails-- but with much less fuel and much lower EGTs. I suspect the upgrade would really come into its own at higher boost levels.

Cheers,

Shiv
shiv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 10:17 AM   #16
63Alpine
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 865
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: St. Albans, VT, USA
Vehicle:
2003 BMW M3
Phoenix Yellow

Post

Kyle,

I will let Shiv give his opinions on this subject but here is mine.

The TEC II/turbo combo is all about safe turbo tuning. I am absolutely sure that more horsepower can be gained from this system but everything I have seen Shiv write about tuning the PEMS setup is to leave some horsepower on the table in favor of having a margin of safety. You simply can not get the tuning flexibility from piggybacks that you can get from the TEC.

There may be other issues and as I said, I will let Shiv talk about them. For me it was about safety. I don't want my engine blowing up because some piggy back setup ahd a brain fart.

Kurt
63Alpine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 10:18 AM   #17
shiv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 607
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Post

Kyle-- Comparing the UPRD Clayton dyno results to that of a Dynojet isn't the best idea. Esp. considering UPRD shut down its dyno, making it impossible for me to look deeper into the situation.

But assuming that both stock ECU'd Minnam turbo cars made roughtly the same power as the TEC-II/Minnam turbo cars, I can point out a few important differences between the two. First of all, the TEC'd cars running 150 to 200F cooler EGTs. This goes far in perserving the motor. Two, the TEC cars aren't on the ragged edge of the fuel system. This means that they drive much smoother, happier, and do not knock even under the worst conditions. Three, they have much, much wider torque curve with peak torque at just 3800rpm and almost flat from there to 5000rpm. My stock ECU'd Minnam MY99 couldn't compare in the real world and was around 50ft-lbs shy at all engine speeds below 5000rpm. And most importantly, these TEC cars could safely run another 3psi and make another ~30 horsepower if the urge for more power should arise.

And finally, there is a difference between tuning my own car and tuning customer cars. I fully expect to push my own personal car to the limit and am willing to monitor it every day and every step of the way, listening for knock, looking at EGTs, running the best gas, guarding against heat soak, etc. I don't want to put my customers in the same situation. I set up their cars with a good deal of safety margin. I just want them to drive, not worry, and have fun smacking down some WRXes

Cheers,
Shiv
shiv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 10:30 AM   #18
rao
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 52
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Naperville, IL
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT
98 BMW 540i LS2/T56

Post

"Smacking down WRX's"? That sounds an awful lot like you are saying that the RS's would have quicker acceleration.

Since I am sure you don't condone street racing, that must mean the RS would be faster at the track. I guess we will never know, because acceleration tests don't matter - unless, of course, you are trying to "smack down" other cars.

rao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 10:38 AM   #19
kyledooley
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 1055
Join Date: Mar 2000
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Romeoville, IL
Vehicle:
2005 No legacy for u
It's a diesel

Post

Thanks, shiv. I see you've answered my question about the exhaust stuff, it was more the direction of the cars.

I know comparing dynos is not the greatest idea, in fact it is futile. This is why relative % gain is the only way to do it.

Kurt- The point about safely turboing something instead of having the piggybacks and dealing with some unreliability in them is most understandable. Having an integrated package for engine management is clearly a better way to go from that standpoint.

I guess the main point was if the engine is in such a better state of tune, why do the hp numbers not change. Lower EGTs, less knock, etc means greater efficiency. I just find it curious that there was no difference in hp where I would expect to see a gain.

Even if there was no peak gain, the smoother hp and broader torque curves and greater area under both of these curves would indicate the better car. i.e. faster, but probably less fuel consumption. I would be interested to see it compared in the "real world" as you say and not dynoland.

K.

kyledooley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 10:39 AM   #20
DLC
out back
Moderator
 
Member#: 1964
Join Date: Jul 2000
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: 84XXX
Vehicle:
05 OB XT LTD
Silver/Gray

Post

rao: I get the impression that he did mean that.

I also find that they're making more wheel HP and torque than the WRXen make at the flywheel.

Oh, then there's that weight thing.

So, yeah, i'd venture to make an educated guess that these cars are faster in a straight line and around the twisties than a WRX.
DLC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 10:43 AM   #21
efoo
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 80
Join Date: Jul 1999
Post

rao, i'm not sure why you feel the need to make snide comments, but i'll leave that to you. your own words can speak for yourself.

besides, it's fairly easy to see the evidence once you look at the torque curves for my car versus a stock WRX. my car weighs less (almost 300 pounds or more), gets to peak torque sooner, and makes more peak torque period. it stands to reason that acceleration will be better, excluding radical differences in gearing that favor one car versus the other. now, i don't know about 1/4 mile performance, as you are clearly alluding to, so don't take my words as a claim that my car will spank a WRX in the 1/4 mile. but I certainly do think I can out-accelerate a stock WRX. I may get a chance to find out for sure since the New England i-club chapter is having a meet very soon, and some WRX owners will be in attendance. We can find a safe place to do some runs if that satisfies your curiosity, no? Just promise to pay for my ticket if I get one.

and just to head off any questions, yup, i've got the dyno sheets in front of me for all 3 cars, and will be posting them once i get back to boston. i need to scan them in first, so please have patience.

-Edwin
efoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 10:50 AM   #22
RedDawgg
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 2566
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: West Seneca, NY
Post

Does it do anything permanent to the car when you switch it to RWD?? For example, if i wanted i could run my RS in RWD during the summer months and then change it to AWD during the winter months??
RedDawgg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 10:51 AM   #23
Imprezer
Dynamic Uno
 
Member#: 1
Join Date: Jun 1999
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Alameda, CA
Vehicle:
2011 Impreza WRX STi
Black

Post

RAO -- Full of sarcasm.
Shiv -- Good job.
WRX -- One fat car.
Turbo RS -- One fast car.
Nick -- Stop crying.
Imprezer -- Needs more power.

Just remember this, it ain't over until the fat car sings.

-Alex "who truely beleive that he will be able to have his WRX weight 2900lbs"
Imprezer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 11:09 AM   #24
jjp
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 2861
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Somerville, MA, USA
Vehicle:
2000 Impreza 2.5 RS
BRP

Question

Not that I actually expect to be ever be doing it myself, but what all is involved in changing a manual RS from AWD to RWD?
jjp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2001, 11:11 AM   #25
Imprezer
Dynamic Uno
 
Member#: 1
Join Date: Jun 1999
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Alameda, CA
Vehicle:
2011 Impreza WRX STi
Black

Post

Open the rear part of the tranny and insert a new "locked" center diff.
Imprezer 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
Benchmark Tuning - Chicago Dyno Day Comparison Results Benchmark Tuning Mid West Subaru Owners Club Forum -- MWSOC 26 04-05-2010 05:49 PM
PDX tuning dyno day results 06 STI_1287 Texas Impreza Club Forum -- TXIC 8 03-31-2010 04:02 AM
East Coast Tune Shots! BritneySpears Member's Car Gallery 2 09-22-2004 03:51 PM
Next Vishnu East coast tuning trip? LehighWRX Tri-State Area Forum 42 07-22-2004 02:14 AM
Dyno Day results 02_Forester Mid Atlantic Impreza Club -- MAIC 3 12-17-2001 12:35 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:18 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.