TTurbine

Stock factory 530ps GT2 Idles around 11-13c above ambient..

If the 11c above ambient @ 260kmh is really true i am sold for there 68mm VTG kit..

earl3

Pretty sure CMS uses ~$400 USD Garrett cores. Not a bad core, but >90% efficiency (what you'd need to stay below 40C at 29C ambient with an 80% efficient compressor) up to 160mph?

Like Toby said, data please!

TB993tt

Without you posting the sort of data which I have shown above as example this really is just talk isn't it ?

I certainly don't believe that any VTG set up or even any conventional 600+hp set up can have IATs of 40C in 29c ambient when fully loaded..... my 993tt ran under 1 bar boost and even with proper Secan intercooler it still ran 20degC above ambient running very efficient 996 turbo based K24/26 blowers....

To your specific question, if you read all this thread you will see that they first tuned the engine to 728PS with smaller compressored VTGs but then used the biggest ones the KKK Motorsport dept (down the road from them and partners in providing for race engines and most recently a massive set of conventional blowers which powered the Alzen 997 to the world production car top speed record at Papenhausen) could make which worked without being too big to cause the sorts of stalling and drivability issues which happened when too large a compressor and housing was matched with the VTG hot side, so these XXL VTGs were tuned to provide similar engine dyno power 734PS and a bit more torque (although that was limited because of the clutch) with less boost than the 728PS units....

So they are very aware of the issue you are highlighting and have an engine dyno set up where they can can control all these parameters very accurately for the best outcome - but then you obviously think that Champion know better about turbocharged engines than Schmirler and KKK Motorsport.....

You must surely wonder if you have been fed some Kool Aid ? If I were you I would have the Durametric plugged in and go find an empty half mile and data log a 300kph run, it is not difficult and with this much power it is very simple to do....

On an anecdotal note (as that seems to be about all we can rely on in this discussion presently) the VTGs I have are massive, I know what big turbo compressor wheels feel like and these are big bad gnarly mo fos, right at the edge of being civilised, I cannot believe there are bigger working VTG ones out there - just IMO

Nick Wong

Toby-

I have said this before and I'll say it again, I don't post data publicly. What you choose to do with your data is your prerogative, please respect the boundaries I set for mine. Just because you have a bunch of Germans feeding you their "Koolaid" doesn't mean I haven't seen development from others. My experience with automotive tuning isn't just in Porsches, in fact I know the least about them.

I have already stated when I may or may not gather data- late March. Harassing me to get it sooner doesn't expedite things, in fact the opposite will happen. You may say I have provided you with just anecdotal evidence, but let's be honest, ALL data is anecdotal to some degree. Your data logs don't really tell me a thing since I don't really have a clue how your car and engine is set up- as you should expect from me as well since I would never provide the meat of the data in a public forum- that is my proprietary IP.

You really should find out what your turbos are spinning at under full boost.

And yes, I do think Champion Motorsport are the best in the USA at what they do. Anything else, for me, is immaterial. I don't buy into the notion that just because "so-and-so" is German they are automatically better. Maybe they are just as good, maybe not, but the line of BS about wearing out a motor over 70K miles to tune it is incredibly funny- more likely they had a serious tuning issue and had to rebuild it, and that statement really sheds light on what they are all about. Which further begs the question- if they are used to building such high performing engines why did they have such a low capacity engine dyno to begin with?

TB993tt

Maybe I wasn't clear in what I wrote, they didn't wear the motor out "tuning" it, they were learning "how to" tune for VTG and moreover combining 997tt and GT2 electronics with all their unique electronic aids, this was a learning session headed by a Porsche engineer they had subcontracted (these calibre of engineers would not even consider altering anything using a chassis dyno) -yes they used my engine for development and yes it was OKed by me and yes they did put new pistons and cylinders in such was the duration and stress of the testing.
It could be because torque measuring in the US is done on chassis dynos which always seem to give silly overinflated torque measurements that many people (inc you it seems) do not understand quite how much 900NM (663ftlbs) of braked torque actually is for a flat six Porsche engine to produce ? this is not a number extrapolated from spinning up a drum it is real torque and it is enough to bend the splines on Porsche driveshafts when it is dyno braked (see picture) and from what I understand it was the fact that the torque was produced at such low revs (and possible the savage way it ramps up at such low revs) which really broke the machine

Your (slightly gloating) comment about a "serious tuning issue" seems a little naive and I begin to realise how you may be a good target for the tuning you have..... of course they had "serious tuning issues" they had lots of them, companies like theirs who push the boundaries always have serious tuning issues !!
How do you think they are the only company in the world to know that the Carrera GT has a crank case casting flaw which affects a fair percentage of them causing them to require a new 30K crankcase - As part of their program for the CGT they found this out the hard way. They are the only real CGT tuner in the world with 6 litres of madness for those crazy enough to want to do it (and about 14 have !!) - They also did a unique similar conversion for the Ferrari Enzo for an American customer......Edit, found this and it was on the "low capacity" engine dyno

Point I am making is this is proper engineering Porsche factory style not chassis dyno tuning with GIAC () uploads..... and serious tuning issues abound with serious tuning

Anyway, if you or Champion are not going to provide any Durametric logs then this is a pretty pointless discussion - caveat emptor

pete95zhn

Nick, I'd really like to know your boost levels etc... PM?

GTRNICK

TB993tt

I really have no idea why anyone would not share their Durametric data other than the obvious reason that their engine does not perform how it is represented ?

I can't see how anyone can copy any proprietry "secrets" from this data ? OK you can see the fuelling, timing and boost etc etc which produces the acceleration represented but it still doesn't give you the instruction manual on how to achieve this ?

Anyway, I had been waiting for some cold weather so I could really test the potential of this engine. Remember in DIN ambient ~20C it ran up to 65C intake temps which limits the power to about 700hp.
This is about as cold as possible since getting traction under 90mph was not happening but for a 200-300kph run it was possible.

What is interesting is that the DBN file for this run has the run at 13.7s whereas the data below from the ECU shows 13.1s. The DBN file shows some odd looking blips in the long G trace and there is no indication of anything wrong where the blips are when I cross check it to the same point on the Durametric file so I have to conclude that the Durametric is more accurate.

So adding on a 0-200kph which I did before at 9.5s gives me a 0-300kph in 22.6s
which is pretty much right for my car and its 0.71CdA set up and 735PS

I did think it might be faster since this was done at a different track to my usual slow airfield but it seems that the programming only allows for the a certain amount of torque and holds it at that limit regardless of the quality of the cold air being ingested.

At 263.13 to 283.75kph you can see that the engine load drops back from the 99.61 peak whichto me looks like the engine is giving big overboost at the gear change 5th to 6th and this engine load number indicates the ECU is pulling the torque values back......

BTW the 3rd and 4th sheet below do not match up perfectly so you have to have a close look to follow the numbers

Nick Wong

Really...

TB993tt

Leave the horse out of it, this thread is for action not words

earl3

C-16 fuel (117 MON), 1.9 bar, STD correction factor on a dynojet, and about 4-6 seconds of loading.

Haven't had any luck here.

pete95zhn

Again somehow completely OT, but maybe not... I happened to visit yesterday a local speedshop and got again some info about backpressure I was talking about earlier. I forgot to ask about IAT vs backpressure details, but it's effect to power become quite clear.

Shop's owner has a Comp D/TA class drag racer, Europe's fastest:
0-402 m 7,52 s @ 290,26 km/h
0-100 km/h about 1,1 s
0-235km/h 4,79 s

He also has his own Dynomite engine dyno and was testing a new turbocharger for next season. It was top-of the-line BB Garrett but somehow a slight disappointment, because it gave out less power than his in-house developed hybrid turbo. So what numbers are we talking about? Garrett was pushing close to 1100 hp, last season's hybrid about 100 hp more. Reason for this difference was backpressure. At 3.2 bar boost (Yes! The engine is 2.2l 4-cyl M3 one...) the backpressure was 2.8 bar. With his own hybrid backpressure stays at 2.2bar...
Lesson of the story: Turbine side becomes restrictive if it isn't matched to compressor. No matter how big is the compressor there will not be big hp if the turbine doesn't flow enough. Neither there will be big hp if compressor is out of it'd comfort zone (so to speak), ie isn't working it's best effiency range (and most likely is about to overspeed). In both cases the result is just increased intake temperatures, and there will not be IC big enough to compensate this! Bandaid like meth/water spray system will help a little...

Virtala Racing

Jean

This thread has been so interesting to read so far, and now so extremely idiotic.

I don't have enough words to describe how disappointing it is from Nick Wong not to post his data under some mysterious principle that I am sure the chaps at Champion asked him to respect for "confidentiality" purposes.. The typical drill, you know how much we have spent on R&D blablabla..

There you go , people like RS Tuning and so many other tuners sharing openly all sorts of data..As if one could steal proprietary information from seeing datalogs. Nick, just plug a durametric and let's get done with so much mystery.

I was starting to get interested by what Champion claimed to have achieved, I should have known better after being here for so many years. I have rarely seen anyone/any tuner on these boards not supporting their claims as much as they do, or worse, using their customers it seems to market themselves while remaining protected from failing to stand behind their words.

What a joke and a waste of time for the readers. Nothing personal here Nick, I really hope you enjoy your car which you seem to have greatly upgraded, but for God Sakes, just do not make any claims that you do not want to provide support for.

Nordschleife

If the "chaps" at Champion spent as much time looking after the fundamentals as they do worrying about their Intellectual Property (which is nugatory, IMIO), then there would be no problem with being open with their data and what they do.

I have a very European perspective on Champion, and am extremely familiar with their RS6 program and how they managed their LMP1 R8 program.

All I would say is that if you want to quantify any improvements, its a good idea to baseline everything BEFORE you start tampering. I seem to remember some pithy epigram about learning to walk before trying to run.

I also have a neighbour in München who has an exceedingly powerful RS tuned car, the engine is completely rebuilt every year (30,000 kms or thereabouts). He lives in the real world and also uses my drive to southern Italy test to check the car's ability to cope when completely heat soaked.

R+C

Nick Wong

Jean and Nordscheife-

A. I already told Toby I would post data AFTER my event at Sebring, but with all the heckling I had decided against it. You can blame yourselves, not me. I live in the snow and rust belt in the US which means that at the moment there is both snow AND salt on the road. No way I am taking that car out until later.

B. 160+mph data for over 30 seconds is outside my scope of use. At the track. On the street. On the highways. It is useless for me. USELESS. I can't even do that at Daytona or Michigan International Speedway (and yes, I have actually raced at both of those tracks in the past so I have a point of reference). There isn't a place in the US that I can legally do it. And although I have ZERO interest in mile events, even if I did, the data Toby seeks is outside that scope too. Try to understand those issues. They are very real and despite your protests I have no great interest in seeing the outside world from behind bars. I was too old for that when I was a teenager and I definitely am too old for that in this day and age.

C. If anything, your attitudes are disappointing. It is my money I spent, and how I decide to share information is my prerogative- when I spend money on my car the associated IP belongs to me, however minor. If Champion wants to discuss my build with the public that is their prerogative but they have, at times, asked me prior to doing so as a courtesy. I have zero interest in asking other people about information they don't want to volunteer. If you want to get Champion's information, why don't you ask them yourself? They are only a phone call or email away. In fact that is how I first contacted them. I don't really know what Nordschleife is going on about, learning to walk before running. I am pretty sure you wouldn't have such bravado face to face with Champion. The time you wasted complaining about my reluctance to share could have been better used contacting Champion. Or you could have gone over to trainwreck.com and asked Paul Ganther about his build which is basically exactly the same as mine.
For what it's worth I too have a good perspective of the Audi R8 program under Veloqx Motorsport/Audi UK, having been to their workshop in Woking back in the day, and also being in the paddock and hot pit (spent over 10 hours overnight and a total of 20 hours in the pit) at Le Mans in 2004.

D. Jean- I have provided enough proof- for me. I really don't give a rat's *** whether or not you think otherwise. I guess that is decidedly NON-European thinking, eh?

E. You guys keep talking about data logs and proof. As far as I'm concerned you guys "across the pond" have not shown either- screen grabs and the ilk are no proof to me. You are just reinforcing the stereotype that most car guys are egocentric at best and downright condescending at worst. I don't expect Toby to start using Dynojet dynos that the ROW (esp. on US-centric bulletin boards such as Rennlist) sees as the tuning standard, so why do you expect me to conform to your so called standards?

F. In the end, it's just a car. You people need to relax, get some fresh air. and gain some perspective. We should be happy we have the opportunity to have such fun with these cars and arguing on the internet is really, really stupid.