But your 390lbs.ft was the daddy, aye Ty, still not convinced:) and as for the offer, whats a grown man like you with an s202:notworthy doing picking on a youngster with a lowely wrx:eek:?
|
Originally Posted by scooby401
(Post 9005892)
But your 390lbs.ft was the daddy, aye Ty, still not convinced:) and as for the offer, whats a grown man like you with an s202:notworthy doing picking on a youngster with a lowely wrx:eek:?
And as for youngster Jarv, hmm... :cuckoo: |
Your on the ball:D
|
390 lbft on a TD04 :rolleyes:
Try 390 Nm which is 290 lbft |
mine is on a td04 and mine is 367lbft which is 498nm and yes it has been dyno'd
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_5d0...eature=channel |
I have to say I am amazed and slightly sceptical at some of these figures being stated for a stage 1 WRX. But that aside, is it safe running that kind of power through the WRX 5 speed box?
|
Originally Posted by hughes741
(Post 9006214)
mine is on a td04 and mine is 367lbft which is 498nm and yes it has been dyno'd
YouTube - 2006 wrx dyno
Originally Posted by Mikkel
(Post 9006333)
I have to say I am amazed and slightly sceptical at some of these figures being stated for a stage 1 WRX. But that aside, is it safe running that kind of power through the WRX 5 speed box?
Originally Posted by scooby401
(Post 9006057)
Your on the ball:D
As I have stated from the beginning despite Jarvis's doubts it is possible, and Bob did state at the mapping that it would outperform a standard STi and the drivetrain ie clutch and gearbox can handle the increased torque providing that you are not brutal with the clutch engagement and gearchanges and you should know all about that Jarvis (how many rebuilds now?). :) Thanks Hughes741 for your input. :thumb: |
Anyone got a graph for one of these high torque TD04's? It's not unusual in the States to get these figures, the torque is peaky though.
|
It's not really a useful discussion to get into the old "a modified car can out perform a standard car". That's obvious to anyone.
Fact is an STi is a better spec'd base car. STi's do cost more though, so it is six and two threes which way you want to go. There is more to an STi than simple power advantage over the WRX and to get a WRX to the same level as a standard STi will cost a lot of money. So, like I said it is six and two threes. I'd be interested to see a dyno graph of these WRX figures to see how the power is delivered in comparison with a similar torque output from a bigger bhp STi like my own. |
Originally Posted by Mikkel
(Post 9006672)
It's not really a useful discussion to get into the old "a modified car can out perform a standard car". That's obvious to anyone.
Fact is an STi is a better spec'd base car. STi's do cost more though, so it is six and two threes which way you want to go. There is more to an STi than simple power advantage over the WRX and to get a WRX to the same level as a standard STi will cost a lot of money. So, like I said it is six and two threes. I'd be interested to see a dyno graph of these WRX figures to see how the power is delivered in comparison with a similar torque output from a bigger bhp STi like my own. I went for a JDM STi S202 which like I have stated earlier in the thread is a much better car, revs higher, pulls harder right up to 8000rpm and has better handling and suspension. :luvlove: I have had a 3" bellmouth downpipe with a 100 cell sports cat fitted, just about to upgrade the panel filter to a Green filter and a further remap should see around 350-360 bhp, ok it will not have as much torque as the 2.5 but it will be a better car to drive IMHO. :cool: Of course the lighter weight of the S202 will pays dividends in the acceleration times as well. :thumb: The statement I made about a modified WRX outperforming a standard STi was not made to start a further line of posts but just to show what is possible from a 2.5 WRX. :poke: If I had researched the differences between a WRX and STi prior to buying my first Impreza I would have without doubt gone for an STi as it would have been cheaper in the long run. :brickwall |
1 Attachment(s)
Anyone got a rolling road print out of a wrx 2.5 td04, with an exaust/filter and re-map, i'd be intrested to see the power/torque delivery, spool up ect, here's an old one of mine with a td05-20g, its had a few tweeks and another Andy.F mapping sesion since but has'nt been on the rollers, its at powerstation btAttachment 52731w:)
|
wow thats got some power:eek: can the gearbox and clutch handle it:wonder:
if you want to look at a rolling road print out of a wrx with td04 go on the powerstation site:thumb: |
1 Attachment(s)
Here's my graph of my 06 hawkeye filter, exhaust & remap. Had a VF43 turbo fitted since and was mapped at 342 bhp & 380 lb/ft :D
Attachment 52732 Stuart. |
Thanks Stuart, so you got 277bhp/320lbs.ft ish from a td04 on a wrx 2.5, that sounds about right:thumb:
|
Originally Posted by ssssss
(Post 9008147)
wow thats got some power:eek: can the gearbox and clutch handle it:wonder:
if you want to look at a rolling road print out of a wrx with td04 go on the powerstation site:thumb: |
Originally Posted by Scooby_Stu_
(Post 9008356)
Here's my graph of my 06 hawkeye filter, exhaust & remap. Had a VF43 turbo fitted since and was mapped at 342 bhp & 380 lb/ft :D
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n...BHP7-3-092.jpg Stuart. |
Originally Posted by scooby401
(Post 9008464)
Was it road mapped or mapped on the rollers? you'll usually get better figures on the RR if they're mapped on the rollers but a better car on the road if its been mapped on the road.
|
:thumb:
|
Originally Posted by scooby401
(Post 9008398)
Thanks Stuart, so you got 277bhp/320lbs.ft ish from a td04 on a wrx 2.5, that sounds about right:thumb:
You can then no doubt point out to him how he comes up with the figures and no doubt give him the benefit of your mapping prowess. :lol1:
Originally Posted by scooby401
(Post 9008440)
Hi mate, the gearbox has failed twice, the first happend following a bad gear change by myself, flat in 4th, almost at the limiter, went for 5th but got 3rd instead:eek::cuckoo::o, its now got an ap racing clutch that was fitted during the last rebuild and i hate to say it but its not copeing aswell as the o.e one:(
|
Originally Posted by Cannon Fodder
(Post 9001283)
. As you might already know bhp does not directly relate to torque. :Whatever_
Power (BHP) = Torque (lb-ft) x rpm / 5252 Thats why on a dyno sheet that has the same scalling for torque and power the two lines always cross at 5252rpm. If they dont then the dyno plot is bogus. MY05 JDM STI 2.0 engine has more torque in standard trim than the 2.5 STI. The 2.5WRX is a great road car basis for a remap, bang for buck they are brilliant, but you'll get more out of a JDM 2.0 with the same type of remap, as you would expect with the base car being more performance oriented. |
Originally Posted by johnfelstead
(Post 9008723)
Actually, BHP does, 100% directly relate to Torque. Power is just a calculation based on the torque available at the rpm it is being measured at.
Power (BHP) = Torque (lb-ft) x rpm / 5252 Thats why on a dyno sheet that has the same scalling for torque and power the two lines always cross at 5252rpm. If they dont then the dyno plot is bogus. MY05 JDM STI 2.0 engine has more torque in standard trim than the 2.5 STI. The 2.5WRX is a great road car basis for a remap, bang for buck they are brilliant, but you'll get more out of a JDM 2.0 with the same type of remap, as you would expect with the base car being more performance oriented. |
It is only ever 1:1 at 5252rpm, it's a mathematical certainty. Torque has more than an influence, it is the only measurement of force taken that you then calculate the power figure from.
What you mean to say i think, is that how the engine produces it's torque will vary, you can have an engine that has lots of low rpm torque but doesn't produce as much torque as the revs increase, WRC for example, so the power figure will be relatively lower than the torque. Or you could have an engine that has very little torque capability, F1 for example, but it can rev extremely high, so the power figures are much higher than the torque because most of it's efficient work occurs at high rpm. |
Originally Posted by Cannon Fodder
(Post 9008666)
The common factor seems to be the steering wheel to pedals interface then Jarvis? :wonder: |
Originally Posted by johnfelstead
(Post 9008723)
Power (BHP) = Torque (lb-ft) x rpm / 5252 Thats why on a dyno sheet that has the same scalling for torque and power the two lines always cross at 5252rpm. If they dont then the dyno plot is bogus. |
Originally Posted by scooby401
(Post 9009784)
Cheers John, never new that:thumb:
|
Originally Posted by Cannon Fodder
(Post 9008666)
I tell you what Jarvis please come with me when I get the S202 mapped in December that way you can speak to Bob directly as you then take up your 'concerns' with him one on one. ;)
You can then no doubt point out to him how he comes up with the figures and no doubt give him the benefit of your mapping prowess. :lol1: The common factor seems to be the steering wheel to pedals interface then Jarvis? :wonder:
Originally Posted by scooby401
(Post 9009776)
:lol: You mean the squishy bit with the low I,Q
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:09 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands