Welcome to the SR20 Community Forum - The Dash.
Register
SR20 forum logo

Thread: Yada yada, more dynos.

+ Reply To Thread
Posts: 171-180 of 262
2009-09-24 09:56:06
#171
Originally Posted by Coheed
So there is some new results out. TS tubular manifold .78ar divided housing, vs a log manifold .63 housing. Both graphs are 24psi, 3rd gear pulls. All I did to make more power was put my timing back to where it was last year! I backed timing off by about 4-5* in order to have a more conservative tune. Well, let's just say the car loves timing.

This is twin scroll vs single. I switched intake cam sooner at 5200rpm instead of 6500rpm, that is the why the powerband is a lot better.


Here is a 3rd gear vs 4th gear. 4th made more power! Great to see the clutch actually holds 4th now! :biggthumpup:


So even though I didn't make a ton more power than before, it does spool faster slightly, and the transient response is killer!

I must say the extra timing really woke the car up. I went from 380whp to 440whp with just 4* of timing. The guys wanted me to keep going because they couldn't hear any detonation or anything, but i didn't want to push it lol. I am happy to see that the power is back where it was with no compromises. AFRs are amazing too. How's that for a JWT tune!


Ok your car reacted that dramatically to 4* of timming. Not suprising really, BUT JUST IMAGINE WHAT A FULLY TUNABLE ECU WOULD DO!

Originally Posted by Coheed
I wish I could log the boost. Hits 15psi easy at 3700-3800rpm, it just doesn't start charging hard until about 5000rpm still. I guess the Volumetric efficiency isn't in a sweet spot till then.

With more timing it would respond harder. I put the timing at exactly 15*, turns out when I dyno'd last week my timing was around 11* because I set the dizzy straight up. When I machined the head down a bit it retarded my timing a bit more than I thought. Either that or the crank gear timing mark is off a bit. But the motor really reacts harder to the more timing.

I did try switching the exhaust cam at 6800rpm, but it didn't seem to make any more power. The exhaust is still too choked up to get any better flow with the bigger duration. The VE cams still won't make good power with this turbine housing though. As the boost got turned up they didn't like it.

I think a 1.06 T4 housing would make power like a .63-.82 but spool even faster than this .78. The .78 moves air at low rpms, but the motor still seems choked up somewhere. The .78 does spool faster, but I have a feeling that either the cams or the housing is already a restriction past 7K. I needz mo flow!


once again this would be due to your tune! most mail order tunes have very conservative timing figures around 3000-5000rpm. if you are making the psi and not the power it is most likely your tune! get something that can FULLY tune your set up, whether it be a tunable remap or full standalone. You car WILL be much faster, spool harder and be a better car to drive all round.

I knew it wasn't your housing that was the core problem. You can not deny the difference a proper tune will make if 4* of dodgy ass dissy timing gives you 60whp!!!!! Think of the power band a tune will give you.
2009-09-24 12:47:43
#172
Originally Posted by DDSC
Ok your car reacted that dramatically to 4* of timming. Not suprising really, BUT JUST IMAGINE WHAT A FULLY TUNABLE ECU WOULD DO!



once again this would be due to your tune! most mail order tunes have very conservative timing figures around 3000-5000rpm. if you are making the psi and not the power it is most likely your tune! get something that can FULLY tune your set up, whether it be a tunable remap or full standalone. You car WILL be much faster, spool harder and be a better car to drive all round.

I knew it wasn't your housing that was the core problem. You can not deny the difference a proper tune will make if 4* of dodgy ass dissy timing gives you 60whp!!!!! Think of the power band a tune will give you.


True. The car reacted to 4* of timing. It is now at a true 15* base timing. The datalogs show 22* of timing at 7K with 24psi of boost. I honestly don't think I want to keep pushing it. 22* seems like too much for that boost as it is. When I get to it, I am going to back the boost down with some added timing in there and just keep adding timing until it stops making power. But I really want to invest in a knock-monitor to keep things safe.

The tune is the same as before, but now there is still a massive drop of torque now after 7K that wasn't there before. The AFRs are also less aggressive as last year. Perfect, but it shows another restriction in the system. I am going to give the stock cams another shot and see if they perform decent on this higher backpressure housing.

I would love to see a powerband like this on 18-19psi in the future, with 24psi yielding over 500whp. If cams really do help with the powerband, then I will continue on from there. But this turbine is very small, and the housing is even smaller . So I don't think it will react very hard until a much larger housing goes on. I still think the stock cams are going to lose power because there is simply too much backpressure still.
2009-09-24 14:36:43
#173
Originally Posted by Coheed
Sure, I'll throw them in on one of my days off. I'm thinking just the intake cam and see what it does.


Naw man do both intake and exhaust, so the rest of us that has them both will know where we stand
2009-09-25 00:48:25
#174
Ok you got it. When I get a chance I will do a back-to-back comparison of the VET vs the VE cams so we can all see how they do on this setup.
2009-09-25 07:33:05
#175
do both, but also do just the ve intake
2009-09-27 01:13:13
#176
off topic. new thread.
2010-02-22 05:43:48
#177
Bringing this one back. With an update...

I put the stock VE cams back in, but haven't gotten to dyno yet. I have since decided to change the setup slightly. But Datascan shows that maf voltage DID get a healthy bump from the cam changeover. Turns out the 268* cams make more power than the VET 248*. I did a log at 26psi and found that my injectors were too dangerously maxxed out. But the car felt incredible.

I have found that though I may be breaching the 500whp *unverified* mark, there is a lot of heat and other issues created from so much boost.
For one, my oil dipstick kept popping out under 4th gear pulls.

Two, the car has some severe surge issues in 4th and 5th gears. The boost builds TOO fast, and the motor can't swallow what the turbo wants to give. Even with the ported compressor housing.

I sold the .78ar housing, and bought a 1.06 divided T3 housing on ebay for $400 shipped. I got nothing to lose, if I don't like it I can sell the whole turbo and go with something else.

Looking at the .78ar housing compared to my old .63 revealed exactly what I had thought. The housing is really really small. internally the divider that splits the volute takes up a ton of room, and the casting finish is terrible. It doesn't take an idiot to see HUGE restrictions in this housing.

The .63 housing by far looks like it flows a ton more. a TON! So the 1.06 divided housing is *supposed* to flow a bit better than an open .63, but just less than an open .82. I am going to try it and find out.

I also want to test cams. The larger housing should lower bp a bit and allow the use of some larger cams. At least with the TS setup I won't have to worry much about reversion issues.

I want to make the same power as before, but with 5psi less boost. It would be great to nail 500whp this year. Cheers.
2010-02-22 20:57:10
#178
My Full race GT3076r twin scroll now works - Mitsubishi Lancer Register Forum

I have contributed some of my findings in this thread, but he has changed the 1.06 housing and a cam upgrade. Made over 100hp difference! I will get that housing on ASAP and strap her on the dyno and see what happens. Something tells me I am going to have to lower the boost
2010-02-25 23:45:43
#179
Originally Posted by Coheed

I put the stock VE cams back in, but haven't gotten to dyno yet. I have since decided to change the setup slightly. But Datascan shows that maf voltage DID get a healthy bump from the cam changeover. Turns out the 268* cams make more power than the VET 248*. I did a log at 26psi and found that my injectors were too dangerously maxxed out. But the car felt incredible.


Was this with the old .78 housing or the new 1.06? I'm very much looking forward to seeing what your car will do now
2010-02-26 03:20:12
#180
The old .78! I got the new housing showing up tomorrow. I will put it one and get the car road ready.

As soon as I get everything back together I will take it for a spin on 10psi and see how it does.

It makes me feel a lot better knowing that so many have had issues with this housing. Look at this dyno graph:

Before and after: 366whp to 500+!



Granted, he changed cams when he dyno'd too. But the majority of the gains had to be from the housing. Maybe 30whp from the cams. But I already have pretty decent sized cams. N1s will be going in this year I think. I wanna try them out.
+ Reply To Thread
  • [Type to search users.]
  • Quick Reply
    Thread Information
    There are currently ? users browsing this thread. (? members & ? guests)
    StubUserName

    Back to top