Trader AnnouncementsAnnouncements (including special offers, product/service information) made by Authorised Advertisers
Welcome to ScoobyNet.com!
Welcome to the ScoobyNet.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, at no cost, 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 contact us.
Location: 1/4 mile PB 9.64@145 mph-2010/11 30-130 Winner- 2011 TOTB 6th place drag car 9.71@151mph
Posts: 3,435
Oops forgot to update this thread with some results from the weekend. I have not even driven the car since the Billet went on so we were keen to test on the drag strip before the 30-130 event in mid march.
Conditions were not good at the pod last Saturday, took them until 1pm to melt the ice off and dry the track ! Had a couple of installation runs then had a couple of full on attempts.
Grip off the line was awful, just full on wheel spin in first and needed to shift to second pretty much instantly! Both 60ft's were 2.1 ! Still power deffo there with 1 terminal of 134 and the other @ 135
Overall good to try the new turbo out, it certainly works and I reckon the car will easily do a low 10 second run now
You can see the vids here, just check out the wheel spin issues
As this is one of the "smaller" turbos your testing why not test it on a small capacity engine like a 2.0 or a 2.1? I didnt think it was a willy waving competition with the MD series? Was looking forward to the results of this but if your away to shove it on a 2.5 because you want to beat another turbo and nothing more then I might as well look elsewhere
__________________ Powered by SW Motorsport.
Tuned by Andy Forrest Performance.
Location: 1/4 mile PB 9.64@145 mph-2010/11 30-130 Winner- 2011 TOTB 6th place drag car 9.71@151mph
Posts: 3,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by RA Dunk
As this is one of the "smaller" turbos your testing why not test it on a small capacity engine like a 2.0 or a 2.1? I didnt think it was a willy waving competition with the MD series? Was looking forward to the results of this but if your away to shove it on a 2.5 because you want to beat another turbo and nothing more then I might as well look elsewhere
Who's willy waving mate ? In my eyes competition is good for all of us, the customer in the end is the one that benefits. Kev has asked to test against a T or and old SC46. He could say one of the RCM 400 series, does it really matter ?
Mark (Lateral) is working on improving his own turbos as well, the game always moves on.
I do in fact have a possible test mule if you look at my project thread which is a 2.0 with a T, unlikely this car will be the one used as it's nowhere near finished, my post was a little tongue in cheek.
Location: Tooling around in an API supplied JDM Hawkeye!
Posts: 6,190
The fact that Kev is willing to eye these turbo's up against another suppliers turbo is good in my book. It shows comparison and transparency which is only better information for any potential buyer in my book.
__________________ Keep an eye on the latest Project Thread "Starting again.... with a Hawkeye". Read all about it HERE
Sounds like my Hawkeye would be a perfect candidate. Forged 2.5 currently running 464bhp on an MD321t, problem is its taken me 9 months of hell and every penny I have got to get it running right !
I would be a little reluctant to risk upsetting it to test a turbo that I couldn't afford to buy anyway.
i suppose thats the best way to get a fair and true comparasion.....
Shame was going to offer myn up
lots of people willing to let you guys test on there pride and joys say something does that
Last edited by wrx9181; 25 February 2010 at 21:10.
the very fact I would like to put the billet up against its standard brother or an equivalent turbo proves this is not a p1ssing contest, its a fair test, if it works great, the market place has another choice, if it fails then we will post up the results and start again, at least this way untested products with "it should do around 500 bhp" labels wont be available soaking up some ones hard earned cash.
We have produced graphs for all our turbo's, at least this way you can see what is on offer, choice is then yours
the housing on our new twin scroll is standard but machined to take the Garratt core, if it works well our turbo supplier is following up with a custom cast housing.
This should show it more clearly.
The GT 3076 would be worth billetising (new word) if your turbo is brand new we can send it off, cost is around £300.00 + vat.
Here is a printout of a GT3076 billet we did yesterday on an EVO (dare I post this)
GT30 billet test after sorting pipework, blue trace overlaid on top of original GT35 trace, I must stress that no mapping has been carried out, thats still to come
Notice the gains not only in spool, torque shows a 150ftlb gain at 4700 RPM
Kev - is that a twin scroll or twin entry turbo like the lichfield one ?
Hi,
if you mean the last printout I posted then no to both questions, its the GT30 Billet test on the ex T/A car, when we first ran it with the 30 Billet it made more power than the GT35 it replaced and spooled quicker, but not as quick as we expected, it was noticed that the pipe work was a bit poor, so we have swapped it out for the RCMS pipe work kit and ran the test again, results speak for themselves
If your question is regarding the photo I posted earlier of a twin scroll exaust housing then the answer is it is a twin scroll not a twin entry, its a standard VF37 hot side machined to take a Garratt core with our billet compressor wheel fitted
we first ran it with the 30 Billet it made more power than the GT35 it replaced and spooled quicker, but not as quick as we expected, it was noticed that the pipe work was a bit poor, so we have swapped it out for the RCMS pipe work kit and ran the test again, results speak for themselves
cheers
Kev
Great result for the RCMS rotated pipe kit. Are you going to re-run the GT35 with the same pipework, so you can compare the two turbos ?
Location: 2010 Time Attack Club Pro Champion - Powered by ScoobyClinic
Posts: 36,827
My personal opinion is that you'd see a repeat result of the first test but with the improved spool seen with the new pipework, but i can see how you could misconstrue the latest graph if you hadn't seen the first back to back results.
Managed to get a video of the last run, nice flamage
It is really pleasing to see testing of new turbos done so openly and to put so much time and effort into knowing what works and what does not work. No bull****, glossy advertising and flowery sales spiv talk, just a demonstration of results achieved.
__________________
Specialists in : Hybrid FMICs Boost Controllers. Ported headers. Performance Uppipes. Tubular Headers.
Also available : Anodized Pulleys. Adjustable Quickshifts Turbos DEI Wrap Turbo Blankets. . Clutches and Flywheels
Fuel Pumps Fuel Pressure Regulators and more.
Full Workshop Facilities operated by enthusiasts. harveysmith1@btopenworld.com
Great result for the RCMS rotated pipe kit. Are you going to re-run the GT35 with the same pipework, so you can compare the two turbos ?
Mark.
Hi,
Great result for turbo's too.
Our GT30 BILLET has proven its self, remember this is a standard 2.0ltr spec C engine and we have yet to address the map, however even if there is no more to come from this set up you only need to check out the result on the evo to see just how good our GT 30 BILLET turbo is.
There is no point in trying the GT35 again, unless you want to pay for the labour Mark, at trade of course.
I'm genuinely interested in the turbo comparisons, and I have no doubts that the billet versions will perform very well.
However, if the original pipework was so poor, it will certainly have effected the GT35R results too ? Possibly having a bigger effect on the bigger GT35 ?
What would be interesting, would be to compare run JTJOIN.010 (Billet GT30 original pipework) to run JTJOIN.023, on the RCMS pipework, also showing boost, and AFR, in case the RCMS pipework effected these ?
Or maybe an overlay of all 3 runs, JTJOIN.006, 10, & 23 ?
I'm genuinely interested in the turbo comparisons, and I have no doubts that the billet versions will perform very well.
However, if the original pipework was so poor, it will certainly have effected the GT35R results too ? Possibly having a bigger effect on the bigger GT35 ?
What would be interesting, would be to compare run JTJOIN.010 (Billet GT30 original pipework) to run JTJOIN.023, on the RCMS pipework, also showing boost, and AFR, in case the RCMS pipework effected these ?
Or maybe an overlay of all 3 runs, JTJOIN.006, 10, & 23 ?
Mark.
Hi
will do all this after final mapping
The original back to back printout of the GT 35 R against our 30 Billet with the poor pipework clearly shows increases in power and much better spool, it shows the GT 30 Billet to be a clear winner regardless.
The pipe work was addressed for our customer who's brief was better spool and more power, as the original pipe work was such a state we thought there was more to come.
Come on Kev, it's already had 13 more runs since fitting the new pipework
Hi,
You are completely wrong Mark, its had just 4 runs on the new pipework
Run 06 was the best run on the old GT35 R, several more runs were carried out but run 06 was the best one, this is due to repeated runs warming up transmissions etc. and takes into account some runs from last year.
We swapped the GT35 R for the GT30 Billet, again several runs were made and the best one picked out, run 010.
Two runs were aborted due to strapping issue's, ask a customer, Simon Houndsly he was watching and needed a new pair of pants as the car climbed out of the rollers, runs 012 and 014, printouts available.
Before swapping the pipe work we drained the fuel and re-filled with V power and 10% meth mix, to give us a base line to work from, the car was run several times again best run picked, this was run 19, exactly the same results as run 10, Although no mapping was carried out Pat had a plug in for diagnosis reasons to try and see what was going on, this added several more runs.
The reason for this exercise was we realised we had no idea what fuel was in the car, turned out to be a mix of VP import and 50% V power, very potent.
Pipework swapped, and another 4 runs on the V power/meth mix were made, giving a total of 23 runs, best one printed, run 23, this is where the extra runs come from.
Next step is to address the map and see how much more there is to come if any.
Remember this is a standard 2.0ltr spec C engine.
What are you trying to say Mark ? we have printed all results honestly, good or bad.
I think this is what Mark is asking for "an all being equal comparsion".
GT35 and bad pipe work...done
Billet GT30 and bad pipe work...done
Billet GT30 and new improved RCM pipe work...done-graph shows excellent results
GT35 and new improved RCM pipe work...not yet
I know you have to factor in cost and such likes but it would of course give a true and fair comparsion.
You guys are doing some really interesting testing, and there's no denying that 482bhp on a standard engine is very good, and I have no doubt the graphs are true, and accurate !
But, to actually see exactly what's going on, between twoturbo/pipework set ups, people need to be able to see if there have been any changes in the boost, and AFR profile.
If you say they are exactly the same before, & after changing to the RCMS pipework, that's fine, but something has to have changed/improved to see the improved result ?
And ultimately, we have no idea just how much better the GT35R would perform on the RCMS pipework.
?!
at last !
