S4 Turbo w/ V-Band Clamps in the works
09-10-2009, 04:42 PM
#41
I just want to know...when you start thinking big...like 400+whp BIG...what's the real bottleneck.
I know JayL makes a lot of power through a stock intake manifold, but last I heard this was where the blame was placed for the yellow car's poor showing.
I'm still with the turbine A/R crowd.
I know JayL makes a lot of power through a stock intake manifold, but last I heard this was where the blame was placed for the yellow car's poor showing.
I'm still with the turbine A/R crowd.
Reply
0
0
09-10-2009, 05:01 PM
#42
Former Vendor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Bell Tuning & Performance
Posts: 1,337
Total Cats: -99
They are still thinking it is the turbine a/r and possibly the Intake manifold. At this point, the intake manifold is the easiest/cheapest/fastest part to fix and re-tune.
The car made 284 whp, and 267 ft lbs of torque at 4300 rpm. That is awesome until you see the torque taper off to red line and know what boost level it is running. If I told you that it was running 13-14 psi you would think it was THE bomb. But at 16-17 psi, you start to question it. It would appear that the lower a/r, which was chosen for faster spool up, will not be the ideal set up. It spools fast, so the lower a/r is doing what it is supposed to, it just does not meet the power goals.
The new intake manifold is installed. We need to run vacuum lines to it and it will be up and running. We will know for sure whether it is the turbine housing or IM after tuning.
Stephanie
The car made 284 whp, and 267 ft lbs of torque at 4300 rpm. That is awesome until you see the torque taper off to red line and know what boost level it is running. If I told you that it was running 13-14 psi you would think it was THE bomb. But at 16-17 psi, you start to question it. It would appear that the lower a/r, which was chosen for faster spool up, will not be the ideal set up. It spools fast, so the lower a/r is doing what it is supposed to, it just does not meet the power goals.
The new intake manifold is installed. We need to run vacuum lines to it and it will be up and running. We will know for sure whether it is the turbine housing or IM after tuning.
Stephanie
Reply
0
0
09-10-2009, 05:06 PM
#43
Former Vendor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Bell Tuning & Performance
Posts: 1,337
Total Cats: -99
We tried to make the stainless tube manifold work with the v-band. The problem is the support brace would still be needed and there is no where to put it that is solid. We had a solid flange before, but not now. So we are left with the more expensive option of making it in house, from thicker material. Plus the added expense of the v-band flanges and clamps. We also decided to include the turbo coolant re-route with the kit, as most people who track their car have a similar set up.
Stephanie
Stephanie
Reply
0
0
09-10-2009, 05:32 PM
#44
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
Steph, remember when we tuned my car? The torque died to0.
Remember that on my car, we're talking about the Dynojet you guy's use and the DynoDynamics that we tuned my car on...my DD read 12% lower. My 261whp/252swtq comes to 288/277 if we allow some fudge factor and use a 10% shift. I should also note that these #'s were done with a 3" exhaust...and a 2.5" exhaust gasket (duh) with your log manifold (it was much faster after pulling the gasket, and I had to add some fuel). Even with the big turbine, my torque dies too.
I questioned the intake plenum initially, then I reviewed my compressor map:
How much air are we actually moving, and how much frictional loss do we incurr? We may be at the limits of the compressor. Or...are we limited by the head? Its easy to look at at Honda or Nissan head and consider these questions when you compare them to a miata head...even one that's been ported.
Did you hit MBT in Rob's car, or detonation?
Can we see the tables and the log?
Remember that on my car, we're talking about the Dynojet you guy's use and the DynoDynamics that we tuned my car on...my DD read 12% lower. My 261whp/252swtq comes to 288/277 if we allow some fudge factor and use a 10% shift. I should also note that these #'s were done with a 3" exhaust...and a 2.5" exhaust gasket (duh) with your log manifold (it was much faster after pulling the gasket, and I had to add some fuel). Even with the big turbine, my torque dies too.
I questioned the intake plenum initially, then I reviewed my compressor map:
How much air are we actually moving, and how much frictional loss do we incurr? We may be at the limits of the compressor. Or...are we limited by the head? Its easy to look at at Honda or Nissan head and consider these questions when you compare them to a miata head...even one that's been ported.
Did you hit MBT in Rob's car, or detonation?
Can we see the tables and the log?
Reply
0
0
09-10-2009, 05:36 PM
#45
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
I also plan to tune my car on Sunday with the Absurdflow hot-parts and we'll see if the #'s change. I have a feeling they won't, and that torque will die, again.
Reply
0
0
09-24-2009, 04:05 PM
#50
Former Vendor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Bell Tuning & Performance
Posts: 1,337
Total Cats: -99
Well we have ruled out the intake manifold. That was not it. Has to be the turbine a/r. Back to back dyno runs and more accurate WG spring showed no dyno improvement. So the only thing left is the a/r ratio.
Stephanie
Stephanie
Reply
0
0
09-24-2009, 04:26 PM
#52
I just talked to Robert about this as he was scooping more free parts I need into trunk this morning. I was sorry to hear that's the case as I know he's ready to make big power.
Ya'll are still planning on running back to back dyno runs to test OEM manifold versus new one even after changing turbine A/R right?
This would give us 4 graphs of the same setup to judge effects of both variables. I was pretty well convinced from the get go that the turbine was the problem with HIS car...but I'm sure the intake manifold will make a big difference for EVERYONE.
Ya'll are still planning on running back to back dyno runs to test OEM manifold versus new one even after changing turbine A/R right?
This would give us 4 graphs of the same setup to judge effects of both variables. I was pretty well convinced from the get go that the turbine was the problem with HIS car...but I'm sure the intake manifold will make a big difference for EVERYONE.
Reply
0
0
09-24-2009, 04:49 PM
#54
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
According to all the big-brained people I've spoken with, you have to either pick long runner or short runner...which means mid or high-end torque. I'm fine with my parabolic torque...but it may be different now with my new goodies.
Reply
0
0
09-24-2009, 05:07 PM
#56
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
There's a mechanical blockage somewhere in there and as soon as I get back to the dyno we'll see if its the turbo kits or the throttle body.
Reply
0
0
09-24-2009, 05:13 PM
#57
I really dropped the ball when I ordered this with the .64, but at that time, I was planning to put it on a stock 94 block and only run 12psi or so. For that purpose, this turbo would have been great. Somewhere done the line, I decided I wanted to put my 2.0L in there and make my daily NA. Parts were already ordered when i changed my mind on engines and now I get to order more. For the 2.0L, there is no excuse why I shouldn't have gone with a 2871.
I will be putting the .86 housing on in December or January, so we will see then.
I will be putting the .86 housing on in December or January, so we will see then.
Reply
0
0
