hosrom_951

If you looked at the compressor maps for the 60-1, you would see the boost vs efficiency vs flow (lbs/min).

The HiFi flows 10%-15% less, and everyone is forgetting that the hotside also plays an important role in the turbo characteristics.

My point is that you guys keep comparing a highly modified car with $$$ spent, when you neglect the fact that Tony also ran 2 different 60-1HiFi's on a bone stock engine with "bolt ons".

Nevertheless, the point i am making is always ignored by some people here. Only time will tell in my situation.

daniel951

does anyone have dyno charts of tony g when he was bone stock with turbo upgrade. i am interested thanks

NZ951

Sorry Hos, but I really have no idea what you are trying to say.

As for the compressor map, the HIFI flows 90-95% of the 60-1. I had the 60-1HIFI turbo compressor map predicted by an engineering student friend of mine. But its a special SFR turbo obviously, so its not exact.

hosrom_951

You are correct there, but as you stated, the HiFi map is a predicted one. Since the turbo you have is from SFR, contact them and find out what CFM it flows since all the HiFi's flow differently due to "assembley".

My point was being directed to a particular rennlister, who "assumes" things very rapidly.

MildMax951

Hi all

I'd like to put forward a theory that might explain to some extent the slightly disappointing dyno numbers. Please feel free to tell me I'm spouting a load of hot air.

I went back to part 3 of the series on the European Car website. All the work was done at Kokeln. They fitted their stage V turbo and on the engine management side they fitted 50 lb injectors, adjustable FPR, Kokeln chipset and the Link AFMlink
unit. This combo removes the factory AFM but keeps the Bosch factory dme & klr.
ie it is essentially the same as a Guru Map Kit. It is in no way a fully programmable Link management system like the one that NZ951 runs.

They can only adjust A/F ratios, there is no control over ignition timing and to make it worse they are still using the original Kokeln chipset which probably wasn't even optimised for their own stage V turbo, but probably the std 951 S chipset they sell.

Now look at the people on this list making big numbers with turbo's very far removed from stock. For example Chris Prack, he uses fully programmable Tec II. Vitesse, uses MAF but with a chipset highly optimised for the specific MAF / Turbo combo and an SMT6 which is only used for very small adjustments ie fine tuning. This is definitely not the case with the European Car 951 S.

Duke

Their engine is getting more and more ready for high rpm hp but they're still using stock intake manifold and camshaft.
Those 2 components along with a proper chip or engine management would probably produce massive gains. Right now the engine components are still not a system that's fully working together.

Jason_86_951

I'd go back to the Koklen turbo if it were me.
The usable power was much more streetable, the new turbo had more but look where it was.
I'll take a broad torque curve anyday over the peaky thing, now if it had another 1500 rpms they'd have something there.

TurboTim

Oh boy, where to start? The first thing is that I dont care what other turbo you put on this particular car, it will not make more power at the same boost level then this turbo did with its current engine configuration! The fact is that there was a kick *** turbo from Kokeln on it before and it had trouble making over 300 at the wheels.The stage 5 turbo from Kokeln had a 60-1 hi-fi compressor,stage 5 turbine wheel and 8 cm housing.On most cars this turbo will make 340+ at the wheels,with the stock head and cam,etc.....running 17 psi.On this car it was only able to muster up 306 hp.Very dissappointing.So now we throw on another 60-1 hi-fi.The only problem is that this turbo came with a .68 A/R which was a bit lkarger for this application but it was the only hotside available at the time this article was written.Remember, European Car gets their parts for free, they dont buy them.So they are at the mercy of the companies who donate the parts!Unforturnately, Turbonetics didnt have the .58 A/R that I wanted to use, so we ran it with what was their and the was the .68 A/R housing.So when you get down to it, the only thing on the turbo that was changed was the turbine wheel and hotside.31 horsepower from this small change is kick ***!

Now in a perfect world, I would have done things differently on this project car.The main thing would be to do some testing on the motor to see why it was down on power to begin with!!!!Compression,leakdown tests, etc.......Apparently a compression test was done and it revealed very low compression in the the cylinders which could be why this car has never made the power it should have in the first place! To summarize, you can buy a crapload of performance parts for your car but if the foundation is bad you will never make the power you are expecing.In conclusion, we added a header,downpipe,turbo and wastegate and picked up almost 60 horsepower at the wheels as well as a massive increase of torque running the same boost level!If you look at it from that perspective, the gains were incredible considering we were dealing with a tired motor.

pieball

Tim just curious, what were the terrible compression numbers?

hosrom_951

Tim,
That is so true and happens often. That is why it has taken me almost a year to start the modifications path. If you think about it, you would be spending a ****load of money on parts and labour, when you end up not making the "average" power expected due to a worn out motor/fixes needed.

Example, you could get you're self a set of chips for $300 or so and not having the car perform as expected due to old and cracked vacuum lines, hoses and sensors. For roughly the same amount, you can "wake up" the stock car focusing on what is "really needed" and the car would drive smoother and be more reliable than chips.

Laust Pedersen

Hosrom, Tim,

Absolutely, it is almost impossible to add power to a bad foundation. Leaking combustion chambers (low compression / high leak-down) adds a certain amount of combustion randomness, so it becomes very difficult to optimize AFR and ignition timing.

I am also a little surprised to see almost no dyno-charts registering low rpm torque. This is exactly where you can easily detect the health of the combustion sealing (time for gasses to escape).

Laust

sl951

Tim,

Nice job.... why didn't Innovative Turbo step up with their dual BB? I'd agree .68 A/R is too big for 2.5.

The .68 A/R seems to work best on my 2.8L, I tried to run the .81 A/R... too big.

-S

TurboTim

From what I am hearing 128 psi across the board which is relatively low considering we are used to seeing 145-150.

TurboTim

Because they were getting freebies from Turbonetics and Innovative probably wasnt contacted.

streckfu's

Damn, I need some freebies.