Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday September 18, 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 > Factory 2.5L Turbo 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 10-10-2005, 02:59 PM   #1
Christian.
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 87604
Join Date: May 2005
Default Cobb Tuning's initial test data and driving impressions for the 2006 Subaru WRX MT…

This post it intended to keep the concerned parties informed of some of our initial test results and to give you my driving impressions of the 2006 WRX MT. Take into account that I am not a professional car reviewer. I have not had sufficient time to review any other aspects of the vehicle other than the motor and how it has been tuned. So I will not be able to review or show pictures of the interior, exterior, suspension, etc. PLEASE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT that our dyno is different than other dynos, so comparing our test results to other companies’ 2006 WRX MT test results will not do much good.

I wanted to show you some data that we have recorded on the 2006 Subaru WRX MT. This motor in this vehicle has been compared to the Forester XT so I wanted to first show you the power difference we recorded between the two:

You can see the WRX is making more power across the RPM range which could suggest a different combination of motor hardware, i.e. turbo, heads, cams, static motor compression, etc. or a more aggressive tune. My guess is that the turbo is slightly larger than the one on the Forester XT. Although, this is just a guess…we have not had sufficient time to remove, measure, and compare those parts to verify our guesses. Please don’t get on my case if I am wrong, just giving you my perspective. I believe this to be so because the boost targets are similar for both vehicles, although the WRX makes more power across the entire RPM range and appears to have the ability to hold boost easier at higher RPM.

The fuel curve has more of a taper to it than the stock FXT fuel curve. The FXT fuel curve is close to linear, flat, once it comes out of closed-loop. This vehicle is leaner at lower RPM then richens up as RPM increases. You can also clearly see the closed-loop to open-loop delay. This vehicle had generated approximately 8 lbs. of boost by 3000 RPM where it was still running in CL at a 14.5-14.7 A/F ratio. I could feel this while driving on the street. Below 3000 RPM the vehicle feels like it has turbo lag and it also feels inconsistent. Torque tended to move more below 3000 RPM on the dyno as well. I could feel the car stumble trying to burn that lean on the dyno and on the street. At 3000 RPM the vehicle picks up then takes off at 3500 RPM. This car is deceptively fast. From 3500 RPM on the car drove smooth and accelerated quickly. I drive a 2005 LGT MT most of the time and the WRX felt as if it was going through the gears just as quick but w/o the 3.9 final drive. From the research we were able to complete, it appears that the ’06 WRX has a 3.70 final drive, yet it felt like it accelerated at similar rates as the mildly tuned LGT.

Below is a list of maps we are currently developing and testing…
Stage1 91 MTv100, intended for stock vehicles running 49-state 91 or 92 octane.
Stage1 93 MTv100, intended for stock vehicles running 93 or 94 octane.
Stage1 CA91 MTv100, intended for stock vehicles running CA-state 91 octane.
Stage2 91 MTv100, intended for vehicles that have a turbo-back exhaust system installed running 49-state 91 or 92 octane.
Stage2 93 MTv100, intended for vehicles that have a turbo-back exhaust system installed running 93 or 94 octane.
Stage2 CA91 MTv100, intended for vehicles that have a turbo-back exhaust system installed running CA-state 91 octane.
Stock Mode MTv100, intended for stock vehicles running 49-state 91 or 92 octane.
Economy Mode MTv100
Anti-Theft MTv100, will not allow vehicle to start.
Valet Mode MTv100, will have a soft rev limiter of 3200 RPM.
STU MTv100, developed within the SCCA rules, intended for vehicles competing in SCCA running 49-state 91 octane.
STU GT100 MTv100, developed within the SCCA rules, intended for vehicles competing in SCCA running Sunoco GT100, street legal 100 octane.

Constructive comments on the planned map development is appreciated. I do not have an exact ETA for the ’06 WRX MT or AT AccessPORTs, but I believe we are getting ready to release them at the end of November. The StreetTUNER software should be available shortly after that. No promises, just giving you a heads up.

Take care,
Christian.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Last edited by Christian.; 10-10-2005 at 05:27 PM. Reason: Added static motor compression as a variable, thanks Jaxx.
Christian. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 03:14 PM   #2
dwx
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 8343
Join Date: Jul 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Atlanta, GA
Vehicle:
2005 2012 Jeep
2013 DGM BRZ

Default

Were you testing it against an 06 FXT? There are a number of differences between the old FXT motor and the new one that is in the 06 FXT/WRX. Namely a higher compression ratio and the heads are a little different due to the air pump system.
dwx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 03:21 PM   #3
NattiRex
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 96738
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Nasty Natti
Vehicle:
96 Talon
Blue

Default

Great info, I was wondering how simmlar the new 2.5L WRX motor is to the current 300HP STI motor, looks like I will be keeping an eye on this post to see what you find when you have more time!!!

Question: The antitheft, as I understood it on the previous antitheft modes the car died if reved about 1,000rpms, now your saying it will not start at ALL?
NattiRex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 03:35 PM   #4
super-ru
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 90094
Join Date: Jun 2005
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Vehicle:
2002 Pathfinder
Merlot Perl

Default

As always good job christian. You'll have to tell us about the new incarnations internals and what not as soon as you get a chance. Does the new wrx have AVCS or parts of it?
super-ru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 03:42 PM   #5
parker/slc/gc8fan
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 46241
Join Date: Oct 2003
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Tinsel Towers. Apt. 29
Vehicle:
- RIP
SDF-1

Default

There are two versions of the anti theft map, one that will start, and one that will not.

Copy and pasted from the cobbtuning map notes:

Anti-Theft A Anti-Theft mode, option A. Does not allow vehicle to start. ALL Injectors. 1.30

Anti-Theft B Anti-Theft mode, option B. Allow vehicle to start and idle (if warm). Vehicle dies instantly once RPMs increase over 1000. ALL Injectors.
parker/slc/gc8fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 03:48 PM   #6
RUKnight
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 49898
Join Date: Dec 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Central NJ
Default

Wow thats nice to see...I figured my 06 was strong and had planned on dynoing it so I just wanted to say thanks for taking the time to post.

Put me on the list for accessport...that's something I need =)
Mike
RUKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 03:51 PM   #7
dwx
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 8343
Join Date: Jul 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Atlanta, GA
Vehicle:
2005 2012 Jeep
2013 DGM BRZ

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by super-ru
As always good job christian. You'll have to tell us about the new incarnations internals and what not as soon as you get a chance. Does the new wrx have AVCS or parts of it?
It has AVCS on the intake cam.
dwx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 04:26 PM   #8
Christian.
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 87604
Join Date: May 2005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NattiRex
Question: The antitheft, as I understood it on the previous antitheft modes the car died if reved about 1,000rpms, now your saying it will not start at ALL?
We used to have two different anti-theft maps as Parker stated. We are now going to just develop one that will not allow the vehicle to start...unless otherwise requested. I figured that should frustrate thieves most, and that requests for other performance maps would be a greater priority.

Christian.
Christian. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 05:08 PM   #9
Masta_Wu
Guest
 
Member#:
Default

Very interesting. With the 93 octane map option, would ~280-290 lb/ft torque be a realistic expectation? Will the gains be around the same as it was with the previous 2.0L engine?

This is my first subaru, however I believe in some of the gains this engine will achieve. VW/Audi's new 2.0L T , with just a chip alone is already at 300lb/ft of torque!
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 05:21 PM   #10
Jaxx
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 177
Join Date: Aug 1999
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Boise,Idaho,USA
Vehicle:
The 93 Imp W/EJ20K
flat black

Default

Quote:
You can see the WRX is making more power across the RPM range which could suggest a different combination of motor hardware, i.e. turbo, heads, cams, etc. or a more aggressive tune. My guess is that the turbo is slightly larger than the one on the Forester XT. Although, this is just a guess…
increased compression from 8.0to 1 to 8.4 to 1
mystery solved

sounds like the ecu is close to the STI ecu ..
seems ecutek already has base maps out
great to hear cobb is not far behind
-j
Jaxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 05:24 PM   #11
Christian.
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 87604
Join Date: May 2005
Default

The gains at lower RPM (and overall) will be significant. Since we can modify the CL/OL cross-over we can run more boost down low and not run into the lean burn CL control issues. As soon as I am able to organize some more test results I will post more dyno graphs that show the various stages and their differences. I would not compare this motor at all to the Audi 2.0t other than it has four cylinders. Those cars can make tons of torque but for only shorts bursts. I have never dyno'ed a 2.0t and seen anything but a mountain for the torque curve, peaky. This does not mean that they do not exist nor am I degrading that motor platform...that is a great motor. My point is, torque tends to die off as RPM increase which makes that car a blast to drive around at lower RPM, but they tend to struggle at higher MPH and RPM. With the WRX combination we should be able to hold torque as long as the heads and turbo allow.

Take care,
Christian.
Christian. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 06:04 PM   #12
Masta_Wu
Guest
 
Member#:
Default

I only refered to the 2.0T because my previous cars were both 1.8T powered (Passat and GTI). They were both chipped (APR), and did have a lot of torque, however as you mentioned, it only lasts for a few seconds and then it goes limp!

The new 2.0T has much better driveability, as I test drove both the new A4 and the A3 before ultimately deciding on the 06 WRX Wagon. I expect the chipped models for the 2.0T to behave just as you mentioned.

Right off the bat though, just by driving my stock 06 wagon, I already noticed the engines for both companies are very different. I'm definitely interested in seeing your early results, and will surely be an early adopter for the access port once its available!
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 06:17 PM   #13
sean10mm
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 96932
Join Date: Sep 2005
Default

Are those dyno numbers at the wheels, or estimated flywheel HP/torque? I ask because all the 2006 WRX dyno numbers posted so far by others have been estimated flywheel HP/torque.
sean10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 06:29 PM   #14
NattiRex
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 96738
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Nasty Natti
Vehicle:
96 Talon
Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sean10mm
Are those dyno numbers at the wheels, or estimated flywheel HP/torque? I ask because all the 2006 WRX dyno numbers posted so far by others have been estimated flywheel HP/torque.
202 BHP on a stated 230 BHP motor?!?! those have ot be at the wheels but as he stated, his dyno is different so you cannot compare between dynos!

Post 1:
Quote:
PLEASE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT that our dyno is different than other dynos, so comparing our test results to other companies’ 2006 WRX MT test results will not do much good.
NattiRex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 06:35 PM   #15
Dr. Zevil
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 7091
Join Date: May 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Wisco
Vehicle:
2011 DGM STi Hatch
02&06 WRX; '05 LGT Wagon

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NattiRex
202 BHP on a stated 230 BHP motor?!?! those have ot be at the wheels but as he stated, his dyno is different so you cannot compare between dynos!

Post 1:
Well, in his defense, for some reason other dyno runs of the the WRX have been corrected for flywheel numbers for some reason. This must be WHP. Seems like a damn strong car though!

A WRX might be in my future.
Dr. Zevil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 06:40 PM   #16
NattiRex
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 96738
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Nasty Natti
Vehicle:
96 Talon
Blue

Default

I know thats why I quoted the dyno disclaimer
NattiRex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2005, 09:26 PM   #17
sean10mm
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 96932
Join Date: Sep 2005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NattiRex
202 BHP on a stated 230 BHP motor?!?! those have ot be at the wheels but as he stated, his dyno is different so you cannot compare between dynos!
Of course you can compare them! You can compare ANYTHING. You just need to know what you are comparing so you don't jump to dumb conclusions. I want to know if I'm comparing apples to oranges, or apples to cats.

If it is getting 234 ft-lbs at the wheels, it reinforces other people's results that show that Subaru's claimed 235 ft-lbs SAE net torque for the 2006 WRX motor are rather drastically under-rated.
sean10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 09:58 AM   #18
NattiRex
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 96738
Join Date: Sep 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Nasty Natti
Vehicle:
96 Talon
Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sean10mm
Of course you can compare them! You can compare ANYTHING. You just need to know what you are comparing so you don't jump to dumb conclusions. I want to know if I'm comparing apples to oranges, or apples to cats.

If it is getting 234 ft-lbs at the wheels, it reinforces other people's results that show that Subaru's claimed 235 ft-lbs SAE net torque for the 2006 WRX motor are rather drastically under-rated.
Well you can if you want but when a dyno operator tells me outright his dyno numbers a going ot be different fomr everyone elses and that I should not compare them to others numbers I don;t question it

I will post it again, it is in the first paragraph of the first post:
Quote:
PLEASE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT that our dyno is different than other dynos, so comparing our test results to other companies’ 2006 WRX MT test results will not do much good.
NattiRex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 11:21 AM   #19
Jaxx
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 177
Join Date: Aug 1999
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Boise,Idaho,USA
Vehicle:
The 93 Imp W/EJ20K
flat black

Default

its also at 5000ft ... but i know that a 02 wrx vishnu stage 2 made 265whp on that dyno
Jaxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 12:07 PM   #20
travmn
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 10964
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Chi-town
Vehicle:
06 ForesterXT
'02 Triumph S3

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwx
Were you testing it against an 06 FXT? There are a number of differences between the old FXT motor and the new one that is in the 06 FXT/WRX. Namely a higher compression ratio and the heads are a little different due to the air pump system.
I have the same ?. Are the comparisons you are making to an 05 or earlier XT or the 2006? The 06 xt has the same higher compression ratio as the 06 wrx.
travmn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 12:29 PM   #21
root
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 55854
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Central FL
Vehicle:
2004 STi
Blue/silver

Default

Hey Christian, you want to hire an apprentice? I was going to say I want your job, but figured you probably want to keep your job, so...
root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 12:30 PM   #22
ronf
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 51034
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 49 north
Vehicle:
03 WRX, 02Forester
PSM

Default

06XT has the same 230HP/235ft.lb at the same rpm as the 06 WRX.
ronf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 12:39 PM   #23
Christian.
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 87604
Join Date: May 2005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travmn
I have the same ?. Are the comparisons you are making to an 05 or earlier XT or the 2006? The 06 xt has the same higher compression ratio as the 06 wrx.
The comparissons were to an '05 XT, we have not had the opportunity to test the '06 XT as of yet.

root, you don't want my job...I have to stay on the dyno all day testing revisions various '06 WRX maps. Gosh, then I have to load the '06 STi on the dyno

Take care,
Christian.
Christian. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 12:39 PM   #24
SilverSurfer04STi
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 71542
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 WRB BRZ

Default

Good thread. Thanks for the information Christian.
SilverSurfer04STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 12:49 PM   #25
sean10mm
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 96932
Join Date: Sep 2005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NattiRex
I don;t question it
Yeah, God forbid anybody think for themselves.

Is reading comprehension not a strong point around here or something? I said "apples to oranges" for a reason; I realize different dynos testing different cars won't produce identical results. So please don't lecture me on the CRUSHINGLY OBVIOUS anymore, thanks. I'm not an idiot.

But I do expect them to produce results that make some kind of sense in realation to one another. For instance, if everybody's dynos indicate some kind of power/torque increase in the 2006 WRX over the 2005, then we may be on to something, even if I can't draw sweeping conclusions from any one dyno reading.

OH NOES CRITICAL THINKING EVERYONE RUN HIDE! JUST DO WHAT COBB SAY, JUST DO WHAT COBB SAY!

(All meant in good fun. )

Last edited by sean10mm; 10-11-2005 at 01:00 PM.
sean10mm 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
Red Perrin Turbo Inlet and short ram for the 02-07 WRX, 04-08 STI & 04-08 Forester XT Moonbase Engine/Power/Exhaust 10 06-06-2010 11:34 PM
Looking For Feedback: 2006 Subaru WRX Passive Crossover Component Set? Psycareyo Car Audio, Video & Security 0 04-14-2009 09:21 AM
For sale - 2006 Subaru WRX TR with mods X WRX Private Vehicle 'For Sale' Classifieds 0 05-24-2008 10:52 AM
Cobb Tuning has released a FP16G specific map for the 2002-2003 WRX MT... Christian. AccessPort 23 02-13-2008 09:18 PM
Cobb Tuning has released a FP18G specific map for the 2006 WRX MT... Christian. AccessPort 76 07-23-2006 09:32 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:05 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.