litchfield twin scroll turbo
06 December 2010, 11:31 PM
#723
07 December 2010, 07:26 PM
#727
Somebody correct me if I am wrong.
17 December 2010, 01:18 PM
#728
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: MY99UK-MY02STi-MY99Type R-MY06 T20-MY11 340R-MY05 TYPE25
Posts: 11,468
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
As promised but late 
my LM400 RR graph
Mine car was very first on rollers on an "EVO" RR day. He only did speed set up and only one run as it got 404bhp so he didn't bother doing ought else.
A few evos after, had silly bhp but also had low torque
. he then played with load setting on the RR and torque readings were nearer what you would expect.
My car had been experiencing some intermitant starting/missing issues, Iain traced after the RR day to a badly corroded Earth lead and bad spark plugs
Car was running at 326g/s at peak power on the RR Day but now fixed 334g/s at peak power. 
Tony
my LM400 RR graphMine car was very first on rollers on an "EVO" RR day. He only did speed set up and only one run as it got 404bhp so he didn't bother doing ought else.
A few evos after, had silly bhp but also had low torque
. he then played with load setting on the RR and torque readings were nearer what you would expect.My car had been experiencing some intermitant starting/missing issues, Iain traced after the RR day to a badly corroded Earth lead and bad spark plugs
Car was running at 326g/s at peak power on the RR Day but now fixed 334g/s at peak power. Tony
Last edited by T5NYW; 17 December 2010 at 03:08 PM.
17 December 2010, 04:42 PM
#729
As promised but late my LM400 RR graph
Mine car was very first on rollers on an "EVO" RR day. He only did speed set up and only one run as it got 404bhp so he didn't bother doing ought else.
A few evos after, had silly bhp but also had low torque. he then played with load setting on the RR and torque readings were nearer what you would expect.
My car had been experiencing some intermitant starting/missing issues, Iain traced after the RR day to a badly corroded Earth lead and bad spark plugs Car was running at 326g/s at peak power on the RR Day but now fixed 334g/s at peak power.
Tony
my LM400 RR graphMine car was very first on rollers on an "EVO" RR day. He only did speed set up and only one run as it got 404bhp so he didn't bother doing ought else.
A few evos after, had silly bhp but also had low torque
. he then played with load setting on the RR and torque readings were nearer what you would expect.My car had been experiencing some intermitant starting/missing issues, Iain traced after the RR day to a badly corroded Earth lead and bad spark plugs
Car was running at 326g/s at peak power on the RR Day but now fixed 334g/s at peak power. Tony
17 December 2010, 05:45 PM
#730
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: MY99UK-MY02STi-MY99Type R-MY06 T20-MY11 340R-MY05 TYPE25
Posts: 11,468
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
Yes Torque is "Showing" low maybe due to these issues very niceMy mates EVO was 423bhp/396lbs he never left me and on a wider road i would have been by
RR's fiqures aren't as good as Bum dyno's IMHO
Last edited by T5NYW; 17 December 2010 at 05:54 PM.
17 December 2010, 06:30 PM
#731
Yeah I totally agree, the reason for my post was I always thought my torque was low but was assured by the original mapper that it was good/right for reasons X Y & Z, after a few months I thought I would get it mapped again by someone I had heard a lot of good things about. Once Richard mapped it, it felt twice as strong and was miles better to drive.If your cars feels great on the road well that's all that matters
pesky Evo's, move over 
19 December 2010, 11:56 AM
#732
Has anyone else had the ceramic coating flake of their turbo I have the LM420 and about 30% of the zircotic coating has come away > mine is 9 months old.
Lee.
Lee.
I think you have to accept the flaking as a limitation to ceramic coating after numerous heat cycles. It is OK on Formula 1 cars, they only run for 2 hours in an event so even on a well used system the ceramic may only be exposed to heat cycling over 100 hours in a whole season if the original exhaust is retained throughout testing practice and races.
Last edited by harvey; 19 December 2010 at 11:59 AM.
19 December 2010, 01:02 PM
#733
I made extensive use of ceramic coating several years ago, particularly on stainless, tubular headers as they are a pain in the butt to wrap properly. It was an expensive process and added a fair bit to the cost of the tubular headers, far more expensive than wrapping. We also did downpipes, uppipes and even had a try on OE cast headers. Using an infrared heat gun we did some tests and the ceramic coating did not appear to be any better than our DEI heat wrapping and after 18 months I knocked ceramic coating on the head because it was invariably flaking off anything that had been exposed to high EGTs ie. 930C or thereabouts in the uppipe.
I think you have to accept the flaking as a limitation to ceramic coating after numerous heat cycles. It is OK on Formula 1 cars, they only run for 2 hours in an event so even on a well used system the ceramic may only be exposed to heat cycling over 100 hours in a whole season if the original exhaust is retained throughout testing practice and races.
I think you have to accept the flaking as a limitation to ceramic coating after numerous heat cycles. It is OK on Formula 1 cars, they only run for 2 hours in an event so even on a well used system the ceramic may only be exposed to heat cycling over 100 hours in a whole season if the original exhaust is retained throughout testing practice and races.
20 December 2010, 11:36 AM
#734
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: MY99UK-MY02STi-MY99Type R-MY06 T20-MY11 340R-MY05 TYPE25
Posts: 11,468
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
Yeah I totally agree, the reason for my post was I always thought my torque was low but was assured by the original mapper that it was good/right for reasons X Y & Z, after a few months I thought I would get it mapped again by someone I had heard a lot of good things about. Once Richard mapped it, it felt twice as strong and was miles better to drive.If your cars feels great on the road well that's all that matters
pesky Evo's, move over LOL. I will also post up my old graph to compare with it.
Tony
Last edited by T5NYW; 20 December 2010 at 05:38 PM.
20 December 2010, 05:11 PM
#735
Scooby Regular
Tony,
All this is never straight forward mate, and what you acheive on the road (regards g/s) for a certain atmospheric condition, does not mean it will replicate to the same on the dyno.
Example in question......
1) On the road I managed over 330g/s with circa 13-16degs intake temps (higher intake temps would result in the g/s being reduced - as you would expect). This was back in September, so we know it will be much cooler now.
2) On the PS dyno I managed 324.84 g/s with 24degs intake temps.
All things being equal the g/s can give a good indication of WHP.
Did you log the run in DeltaDash when you were on the dyno?
If I went out and logged a run now, I would expect the g/s to be higher than 334g/s on mine.
I hope the spark plug changes have sorted your torque out mate.
All this is never straight forward mate, and what you acheive on the road (regards g/s) for a certain atmospheric condition, does not mean it will replicate to the same on the dyno.
Example in question......
1) On the road I managed over 330g/s with circa 13-16degs intake temps (higher intake temps would result in the g/s being reduced - as you would expect). This was back in September, so we know it will be much cooler now.
2) On the PS dyno I managed 324.84 g/s with 24degs intake temps.
All things being equal the g/s can give a good indication of WHP.
Did you log the run in DeltaDash when you were on the dyno?
If I went out and logged a run now, I would expect the g/s to be higher than 334g/s on mine.
I hope the spark plug changes have sorted your torque out mate.
20 December 2010, 05:36 PM
#736
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: MY99UK-MY02STi-MY99Type R-MY06 T20-MY11 340R-MY05 TYPE25
Posts: 11,468
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
Shaun LOL my iPhone reply And didn't know how to edit it
I am struggling to put 25bhp down as I still have the R2 I cannot get over to pick my car up
I am struggling to put 25bhp down as I still have the R2
I cannot get over to pick my car up
Last edited by T5NYW; 20 December 2010 at 05:40 PM.
20 December 2010, 05:39 PM
#737
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (100)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 13,684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone carried out a comparison of the Litchfield LM and Scoobyclinic twin scroll turbos? 
I planning on changing my VF36 in the late spring and I'm edging towards the Scoobyclinic SC42/46 based on the pricing.
I planning on changing my VF36 in the late spring and I'm edging towards the Scoobyclinic SC42/46 based on the pricing.
20 December 2010, 05:52 PM
#738
21 December 2010, 09:37 PM
#740
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (100)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 13,684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
31 December 2010, 09:45 PM
#745
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shame that as I'd really like to see a comparison between the Litchfield and Scoobyclinic units, before I hand over my hard earned to either supplier.
I thought the Scoobyclinic unit was made for them by Blouch in the USA, but they (Blouch) use IHI VF series compressor housings?
I thought the Scoobyclinic unit was made for them by Blouch in the USA, but they (Blouch) use IHI VF series compressor housings?
Their twin scroll unit uses a ihi vf36/37 twin scroll exhaust housing. Presumably machined to fit the larger blouch turbo.
Whereas the Litchfield exhaust housing is custom cast - options for 2.0 or 2.5
Blouch compressor housings would be custom as they are way bigger than any ihi.
01 January 2011, 12:46 PM
#747
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Moscow
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The car is not finished yet, rear wheels need some spacers, even thought it sits on 9.5 +22 rims, I'm planning to swap AST rally line for AST circiut and obviously LM400 with 650cc PE injectors that I already have
17 January 2011, 06:09 PM
#750
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southampton(ish)
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just thought I'd update this thread to say that :
I've had the 420 on with the injector upgrade for about a year now on my MY05 JDM STi (without CAI or FMIC - approx 400hp) and I still LOVE IT.
I drove a JGM mapped MY06 JDM STi the other week (ie in a good state of tune) .. and whilst still a nice drive .. it just didn't have the grunt or top end that mine does.
So .. my conclusion ?? If you're not into chasing numbers and want a bloody good drive without the severity of some of the more powerful cars, I'd say 400 is about the place to aim for.
Gotta go ... off to get some more smiles ........
I've had the 420 on with the injector upgrade for about a year now on my MY05 JDM STi (without CAI or FMIC - approx 400hp) and I still LOVE IT.
I drove a JGM mapped MY06 JDM STi the other week (ie in a good state of tune) .. and whilst still a nice drive .. it just didn't have the grunt or top end that mine does.
So .. my conclusion ?? If you're not into chasing numbers and want a bloody good drive without the severity of some of the more powerful cars, I'd say 400 is about the place to aim for.
Gotta go ... off to get some more smiles ........