Current setup is a GT2871R, Pro Alloy FMIC, PRV, K&N panel A/F, 2.75" straight through decat zorst from turbo-back, Walbro 255 FP.

1st runs will be with the original Novitec @ 1bar
2nd runs with Gtec 2 HF @ up to 1.4bar.

What power do you reckon I'll make? 900Bhp?

I'll be happy at around 340Bhp 300lb/ft, but may turn the boost down. Restrictions are the A/F and zorst diameter I reckon.

I dont think a 2.75" turbo back decat is restrictive.

I think you'd get the biggest improvements with a straight induction and a decent EBC though

What rpm do you hit max boost?

i'd be interested to see this graph as I may be going for the 2871R but would have a few more mods and would like to see when it spools etc! what housing have you got?

EBC would have been a good addition!

also, are you keeping the standard rev limit as I guess the power curve will still be rising? i'm you will be with standard internals.

.64 housing and it spools fully by anout 3.8krpm.

Oh yeah internals are std so I won't be pushing any more than 1.4bar I reckon (1.5bar on overboost is an absolute acceptable max to me).

AVCR is the next stop for sure. I'll no doubt be losing the max out of the car as the boost will always tail off towards the end, and it's the time after getting on boost, not how far up the rev range you are. e.g. floor it at 4Krpm and it will hit 1bar and tail off to 0.8 @ redline, but floor it at 5.5krpm and it will hit 1bar but tail off to 0.9bar at the redline... Just a feature the PRV and actuator, imo and ime.

so if you floor it at 1500 rpm when does it hit 1 bar?

3.7-3.9Krpm.

mid range doesn't really matter too much, its how much boost you have at redline. mine used to hold 1.25 when using 1.5 midrange. i would keep it under 1.2bar though IMO.

mid range matters to me, as I dont want to be driving around in 1st

I think I'll stick to my small turbos which give me 1.2 bar from 2300rpm to 5500 rpm

i meant with standard internals. its not the mid range boost that does the damage but how much you have at redline

1.2 bar at redline could produce 360bhp on that turbo with around 320lb/ft.

Ross

Really?! You reckon?! Ow! What do you think 1bar would make as I put that at 280-300 depending on other mods - the boost I had been running for a while?

Maybe not 1.4bar then! We'll see what happens when it's on the rollers.

i would put safety first in this situation! I'm sure Perfect Touch will keep this in mind though.

Well its all about having correct fuelling.

1.4 midrange and 1.2 redline is gonna be around that kinda figure. 1 bar across the range is gonna be around 270-280lb/ft and probably 300-320ish?

Its hard to tell as there has been only HIGH powered GT2871r's really.

Ross

As a side note, i doubt you will be anywhere near those figures. Torque will be down as i reckon it will be overfuelling and bhp will be lower due to lack of holding boost.

Ross

330bhp before you run out of fuel from the standard injectors.....

I think about 290 torque and 315/320bhp

Ben

Will you Livemap it?

Good luck and enjoy Rob's test drive

rob does like his test drives he told me he had to pull over for one bloke to be sick after drifting his skyline around a roundabout

PMSL

I don't think Welformed is having it mapped just a couple of power runs with different chips.

Well he's not replied... wonder whats happened...

Ross

...It's blown up...

Come on WF, want to hear how you got on

Sorry chaps, been too busy playing around with my toy to post on here. Save it for when I'm bored at work.

Right well, good and bad news.

Good news is that we got as much out of the car as possible and it's fuelling and running fine on the current setup. Bad news is I forgot Barbz had installed a 1 bar actuator on the turbo so I could run it with a std SMIC and Novitec. Either that or… he didn’t put a GT2871R in and more something like a GT28R/RS, which couldn't be surely? Rob, the guy at PT was confused. It was spooling like a GT2871R at around 4Krpm but only producing the power and torque of a smaller turbo.

What I don't get is that we/I can get the turbo to overboost to about 1.4bar, but it will steadily tail off to about 1.2bar. That suggests smaller turbo struggling to supply the air as the revs rise or maybe this weaker actuator is failing to hold boost and it tries to tail off to 1bar? I need to get the turbo off to identify it and the actuator. How can you tell? So a tad confused atm until more is done. Don’t suppose you can just buy GT2871R actuators separately and install? Also the std Airbox was restricting airflow costing 12bhp

Anyway, at 1.4bar and 1.2 to the redline on my gauge, it was making 301Bhp and 270lb/ft, from only 270Bhp and 230lb/ft. Suspect figures. This really doesn't explain on road performance at all. Put it this way, I had a play with an M3 the next day at 1.3bar. He got a good 1 second jump from 50 and pulled away a couple of car lengths from about 1 by 70. Come 4th gear I was slowly sailing by… Before the RR, assuming I had the lowly 270Bhp figure, I have matched M3's from 30 to 120 or they inch away, depending on who got the jump. So definitely faster. Much faster. 1.3bar according to PT is about 280Bhp max ( -12bhp for airbox, -about 10bhp? for the 0.1bar of boost less). Can you comfortably cruise past a top-up convertible E46 M3 giving away 63Bhp and a lot of torque? Oh and he was definitely trying - you can clearly see the double kickdown of his auto 'box and the hard auto changes into 3rd and 4th gears on the vid...

Adjust PT figures about 20 and it seems to make a bit more sense.

Also, wasn't that impressed with the service there. After clearly arranging what I wanted to do beforehand and confirming this before I set off - see power on current chip, then install new chip and run, then up the boost on that - PT didn’t seem at all keen even to put my car on the rollers! I had to verbally fight, plead and reason to get the to do what I asked. WTF? Even then they refused to change the chip over and do a run on that at all. "But this is what I had just driven 80 miles to get done, mate". I got the impression that it was a Sat and they just wanted to play with their own cars than deal with a customer. (btw, I had a sneaky check of their "very busy" saturday diary when they left me alone in the office for a moment. My booking was on the only entry for the whole day...) Once the first run was done though they seemed to be ok and settled into the work. Don't think I'll be going there again other than for the expertise feedback.

Northampton Motorsport was a whole much more enjoyable experience. PT was more like being their for the birth of your kid, but not being allowed into the delivery room, then they tell you the kid was ginger...

Pics of graphs to come when I get round to uploading them!

Did they check the charge temps ?

If barbz fitted a 1 bar actuator, the turbo would be able to hold boost better. Not the other way around.

There aint a lot more to say other than lets see the graph.

Ross

That's what I thought. I'd expect it to hit 1 bar and stay there. Maybe the 1 bar actuator is just an old temporary weak one? I've seen that before, if the diaphram isn't great, boost seems to bleed off. But surely Barbz wouldn't rip me off???

I need to see a graph of a GT28R/RS/RSR with similar mods to compare.

They didn't check the charge temps other than listening for pinking on the road. It was ok up to 1.5bar.

I think most people with those mods would normally have an EBC, I would say it will help quite a bit.

You definately have a GT2871R 0.64 turbo, I have seen it in the flesh The 1 bar actuator should ensure it doesn't go below that and by the sounds of it you are running 1.2bar at redline. You would expect a little pressure drop off i.e. 0.1-0.2bar by redline when running a PRV and you also have restrictions elsewhere like the airbox. Do you also use a v-band adapter for the downpipe?

If you can open up the induction and use an EBC then I would be confident in seeing 320bhp & 290lbs/ft.

another thing, you don't really want to be running more than 1.2 bar at redline anyway!

Yeah thats why i asked about temps.

Ross

Oh right, you saw this at Barbz's before it was fitted? I know he was working on your car just before mine. Well that makes me feel better!



Yep that's exactly what it's doing - 1.5bar overboost on a 1.4bar target that steadily bleeds off to 1.2bar at about 6.8Krpm IIRC.



No. You might have to explain that one to me - what for? Is that wideband Lamda?



Yeah EBC was on my list to hold the boost better, as is a decent airbox. Should've gone for the SIP from Pro Alloy!

Other good news is the injectors should be fine for more power as when the Gtec2 HF chip was put in at 1.4bar it ran massively rich.

This is still running on the Novitec. Weird thing is that PT wouldn't give me a air:fuel quote even with direct asking, (nor could I sneakily fine one on the RR results on a quick play when no-one was looking...) only that the fuelling was "fine". Why would they refuse that info?

That is GAY, that they wont give ya an AFR. U have paid for a service...

GThe v-band is used to connect the turbo to the stnd downpipe. Unless u have a 5 stud custom dp, this is what you'll be using.

Ross

If you know the AFR and have good fueling then you wouldn't be needing a remap

Can I ask how much your service was?

This reminds me about 007 and his visit to PT and he also didn't get or saw any AFR graph. They just told him that it was okay

How do they know it's ok if the AFR isnt recorded? or am I missing something?

They will be able to check it when the car is running. Whether they log it or not, is a different issue.

Ross

^ exactly my thoughts! Do they just go by checking for Det then turn it down a tad? Or, given my experience, simply not care and if you've signed the waiver what do they have to worry about anyway?

Every other RR I've been to have measured and reported the AFR.

Oh btw, they charged me £190 inc VAT for 1.5 hours. A bit annoying when I could've just whacked up the boost myself then driven the car with a mic on the engine...

Stop moaning and phone them.

Ross

And ask what? If the AFR wasn't logged, they would go by memory? I think he was too interested in playing with the skylines and going out down the pub tbh...

They were also insistent that the turbo was a GT28R, despite what I said, but fair doos if they go by what power/torque it was producing.

I'd rather just forget the whole experience. Happy that the car is ok. Happy that it's quicker. A bit confused than disappointed about turbo power/torque given boost levels = a challenge to find out, which is always fun.

I'll just stick with Northampton Motorsport from now on. Far better service, far more interested in the customer and even let you help out too.

I would personally (if you arent happy with one aspect) get the car rolling roaded again.

If you cant believe that the afr was ok, then why believe anything else.

Go and get another rolling road done, this time with full results and readings.

Ross

You could get yourself an AFR gauge? and an EGT gauge, and a charge temps gauge, save going to the RR every time you change something!

You're right, I didn't get an AFR graph. I don't think anyone has had one from them. What I can say is that everyone who went to the last South Coast RR who had had a PT custom map was happy with their AFR plots.

I think you have a point 007.

As long as the car is running ok and not blowing up, then can u argue?

I personally would wanna know the afr, and want it shown on the graph.

Ross

Graph: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/welformed/15042008001.jpg

Hi,

Something doesn't match, if I have understood right. You wrote that you had peak boost of 1.4 - 1.5 bar and still your torque is "only" 267 lb-ft. I received the same or a little bit more with GT28RS and 1 bar boost. My EBC was dirty at that time and it didn't work at all, only GT28RS actuator (1 bar) was controlling the boost level. My power in that RR was 280 bhp / 5900 rpm. So your 301 bhp in near 7000 rpm would speak to that, that there has been some 1 bar boost near peak power.

An other thing, which I have learned is that OE airfilter housing is very restrictive in RR. With that same GT28RS I could see 1.6 bar / 6000 rpm on street, but in RR I never got any more than 1.3 bar / 6000 rpm. The panel filter doesn't flow enough for high power.

OE SMIC will give you very high intake temperatures, in my friends Coupe with GT28R turbo we measured as high as 72 degC intake temperatures after short accelerations and in that point the ECU will go in safe mode.

I agree with the others that you should take an other RR to be sure, before you pay any extra costs for nothing or you can point your money exactly to the right things.

- Jari -

The shape looks ok... but i reckon its what flea has mentioned. Restrictions are holding back the power.

Ross

This is what I mean. The torque curve follows the boost basically, they both tail off at a similar rate and regardless of anything short of really bad airflow (K&N panel filter btw, not the std one! And which is wasn't as I only gained 12Bhp by having no airfilter at all, for which this is that graph I believe) I'd expect this turbo to hold boost much better.

So what boost were u running redline?

U had a compression test done?

Ross

having run a GT2871R for the last 50,000 miles and had rather more mapping sessions than I'd like wifey to find out about, Id say the Welformed's problems are threefold.

1) intake - the standard airbox is restrictive
2) exhaust - if you have a 2.75" downpipe, I'm guessing you also have a V-Band fitment (which is about 2.25" - no bigger than a stock downpipe)
3) Boost control - ISTR that you have a manual boost controller - you REALLY need an "intelligent" controller that will hold boost - a bleed valve will always be bleeding pressure - great in the midrange, but wasteful after about 4,500 - 5,000. If you have a PRV, I'd suspect that its sticking.

For what its worth, my boost also tails off - I'm getting about 1.3 - 1.4 bar at the redline - fairly sure the engine would handle more, but I'm happy with the safety measure.

Don't worry too much about the torque figure - the turbo is built for top end rush, rather than mid range grunt.

Cheers Nigel.

1 & 3 I expected before I went, tho I wasn't expecting the PRV setup to bleed off so much boost. Sometimes it seemed that even if I set 1.5bar it would bleed off to 1bar asap - almost like it was just overboost, but it does hold more boost to the redline now. As you say, I am quite happy for boost to tail off as I approach the redline purely for safety reasons.

Not sure about the v-band. tbh before this post I hadn't even heard of it! Is this is the bit that attaches directly to the turbo flange before the main exhaust? How can I check without taking bits off? Rog at PowerFiat told me what I had, but I forget already!

The custom downpipe was by powerflow, but probably most significantly, was fitted when the std turbo was there. So I'm guessing it will be whatever the std turbo would require. Er... what is that?

I'm 95% certain you have a v-band adapter. That's not so bad, I was running 360-370bhp on the same exhaust setup with my old RS. If you can sort out your induction and boost control you should see some good gains.

OK - that confirms it - you have a V-Band (yes, its the bit that joins the turbo to the downpipe).

The V-Band is actually good for towque, as it creates backpressure. However, its bad for top-end flow.

Your turbo is capable of flowing much more gas, but it will only flow what the most restrictive part of the exhaust is capable of flowing.

Thinking about it, you should be careful, as backpressure will give very high EGTs, which will kill your ringlands very quickly.

Conversion to a 3" H&S downpipe won't be too expensive, as you'll offset the cost by selling the 5-stud to V-Band adapter (should get £120 - £150 - maybe more) and the 2.75" DP - net spend should be less than £100

Or jump in on the blueflame group buy if it goes ahead, you'd probably end up with more money and a better exhaust setup

So a DP you can change the flange on the turbo, or should it be an internmediate that fits with the current?

It's more money. A progressive mod for after the summer then, except the airbox. I might have to sort that one out anyway.

I'd rather stick with the powerflow as it sounds sweet as.

you need a downpipe with a five-stud flange - this will bolt straight onto your turbo without any form of restrictive adapter.

My H&S DP cost about £300 - not sure what the RRP is now, but lets assume £350 - you should be able to sell your adapter for £150 and your 2.75" DP for about £100 - a net spend of about £100 will see one of your fundamental issues resolved - what are you waiting for? get them advertised

And I have a K & N Induction Cone and clamps for sale. All you'd need to add is a length of 76mm pipe - that'd be your induction sorted.

H&S downpipe £300, blueflame downpipe (if group buy goes ahead).... £125?

Heh and in come the offers from the anti-vultures!

I have no idea if 5-stud DP is going to fit on my Powerflow. This is a complete system so I'm sure it's going to involve some 'specialist' cutting and welding... Might check out the GB though!

Couldn't I just drill a hole in my current DP? I like that as a cheap option, especially if it adds to the noise level!

wow with this turbo i made 375bhp on my 200sx with well over 300 torque. my gt28r(baby turbo ) is putting out more power than your big one , maybe becuase my set-up is decent. no short cut v-bands ..... only joking with ya

I had no idea about the v-band adaptor, but it sounds straight foward enough to sort out, with the help of a mechanic...

I also don't believe their RR's tbh. At northampton motorsport I got 260Bhp @ base boost. The Coop has always been getting faster and each RR suggests that, except at PT.

The on road performance just doesn't match the power they say it has. I mean, would you expect a 289Bhp (-12Bhp from the 301 when the airbox is on) Coop to let a really trying E46 M3 get a jump on me at 55, but I'm then able to just cruise by, by mid 4th gear?

Yeah, because mid 4th gear is around 110-115mph (on 5 speed) and he probably didnt wanna stack it.

WF, PT rollers are used as a benchmark generally, because they are dastek rollers.

I personally would stop thinking they are wrong and start planning on how to release the extra power. If the airbox only released 12bhp, i would deal with the exhaust first and Nigels logic is pretty good tbh.

Ross

Doesn't it depend on the setup though, not the quality of the equipment? Northampton motorsport use Dastek rollers too. I think I've been on other rollers at other times though - Sun Microsystems workstations linked up to them?

Welformed - I am actually of the opinion that PTs rollers give deadly accurate wheels figures, but that their extrapolation for transmission losses is perhaps a bit low.

Just for a moment, completely forget the crank power figure and concentrate on power at the wheels. Now compare PTs figures with your previous RR.

FCCUK once had a RR day at G-Force in Aylesbury. My Coupe was running a stock (smoky) turbo and PRV - that's it. It gave 280bhp "at the fly" but about 200 at the wheels. Lots of people left Aylesbury with big smiles and pub bragging rights, but if I had gone to PT the next day, I would probably have been told I had about 230bhp at the fly (but 200 at the wheels)

So who was right?

Flea's experiences are probably the most telling. 429 at the fly at PT and 480 a couple of days later at PowerStation. The wheel figures were almost identical at about 395 (IIRC)

I will probably go to the Coupe/200SX RR shootout in July, and with about 390bhp at the wheels, I'm expecting to see anything from 430 to as much as 480 depending on what extrapolation settings they use.

Don't blame PT for your car having low power - blame all the otehr RRs for giving you an unrealistic (mis)calculated fly figure.

It REALLY is about time we all started using measured wheel power, rather than guesstimated flywheel figures

Yeah cause its that easy Nigel.

Maha Dynometer wheel powers are significantly lower but their flywheel figures are on par with the dastek rollers and others.

It comes down to the same thing again, that RR needs done on the same day with all the cars in attendance for a direct comparison.

Btw, i doubt you and flea have the same WHP figures, as his 1/4 mile is a full second quicker.

Ross

Well this is it. Some people use RR's to given them bonafide results, but I use them as just an estimate (and diag) as it's real world performance that matters. And as I say, I just can't see how a estimated 289Bhp Coop could be quicker at high speeds than an M3... and it's not like I've only compared to these lately either...

I just wonder how much my light wheels screw results (2 Kgs lighter per wheel with tyres than std). I'd expect the extra spin up of lighter wheels to be opposite and equal to the spin down when calculating transmission losses - cancelling each other out.

Sounds like G-force would've given me 330Bhp by that calculation (250Bhp atw @ PT).

I have spoken at length to the MD at Dastek with some interesting observations. The idea behind the Dastek rollers is to produce highly accurate, sensitive and repeatable flywheel figures. He admitted as much that their wheel figures are higher than the industry average which is simply a product of their technology. He had a lot of respect for the MAHA dynos (except on price as they cost twice as much!!) and was happy to concede that they are also designed for accurate flywheel measurement albeit with much lower wheel figures, again a product of their technology. This is in contrast to the American and Aussie dynos e.g. DynoDynamics, Dynojet, Mustang etc. which prefer to work with wheel power almost exclusively.

I have used two different Dastek dynos and consistently put out between 415-425bhp depending on boost level. I have seen 435bhp on the Dastek with pump fuel with 380lbs/ft but in general 425bhp is the max on my current setup as a rule. Regarding my 480bhp run at Powerstation, there are reasons for this and it is has nothing to do with the rollers. The day was 0-1 degrees on a cold December morning. The car was nicely warmed on the motorway and it went straight on the rollers with 1.7bar It was a simple power run, 4th gear all the way reaching 365lbs/ft, exactly the same peak torque as the Dastek rollers. The ONLY difference was the torque didn't drop off very quickly holding it to redline. This was due to a very dense, cold charge on a warm engine i.e. perfect conditions. The car didn't produce more torque it simply retained it longer i.e. more efficient.

Between rollers, especially in the UK, I would not be inclined to compare wheel figures at all. The Dastek and MAHA dynos can differ by as much as 15% at the wheels, in my case this translated to around 35bhp!! As a general rule Dastek read too high and MAHA too low for wheel power but the flypower should be very close all other conditions equal.

P.s. I'm still up for a comparison if you want WF.

Ross

Sure. Pop down whenever you're ready. We can go and hunt some pork(ers).

btw, "MAHA"???

http://www.falkland.co.uk/dyno.html

This is one fairly local to me.

Ross

IIRC, Fleas's very impressive quarter times were achieved on Mavrics Hoosier wrinkle-wall drag tyres and using race fuel

the fact remains that within a couple of weeks of each other, on the same dyno, Flea got about 395 wheel bhp (about 420 calculated at the fly) and I got 390 (405 at the fly)

Well then, i'll just head up to crail with hoosiers and get a 12.35 on my 28r

Ross

Yes my best 1/4s are with the Hoosiers (radial not wrinkle wall) and race fuel. My best time with pump fuel on road tyres is 12.35 @ 118mph.

terminal speed usually gives a better picture of outright power.

End of the day Flea and Nigel both have very well sorted coupe's.

...apart from the snapping belts!

"Flea got about 395 wheel bhp (about 420 calculated at the fly) and I got 390 (405 at the fly)". Surely those transmission losses are well out?

sorry but saying you beat a m3 so the rollers must be out is mad!!!????? welformed i have been telling you for a long time on the road doesnt mean a lot so many differnt things can happen , his car running bad , the bloke cant shift gears at redline , might be shifting at 5000rpm , bloke not 100% best driver in the world and maybe doesnt want to push his car to the limits but only to where he feels safe . i have seen funny things on the roads past week a saxo beating a s2000 down some twisty roads and as i got to the end of road he had spun out onto grass looking like he just shit himself, why not becuase the saxo is quicker or a better set-up car but the fact that the bloke was a better driver .........

Yeah I know. But you can only go by what happens. The M3 was clearly an auto (double kick-down was obvious), so that eliminates using or changing gear properly. And I'm pretty certain he kept it planted as he wasn't best pleased to see me go past!

I'm sure I'll get comparisons against other stuff in the near future... ... and that is where you start to build your real-world picture.

I've also played with many M3's in my time in various states of tune. They can't all be sick or not being driven properly, yet the performance of all of them was very consistent - certainly when I know I am consistent. Before these mods it was almost dead even until +120 speeds, now with the car running higher boost, feeling significantly faster, it's a different story so far. 289Bhp (IMO) just doesn't explain that at all. Not even close. 320+Bhp would be more like it...

Looking at my graphs I have one that shows 392 @ wheels and 420 @ fly so a transmission loss of 7.2% which is common for high powered cars on a Dastek. My highest run was 398 @ wheels with 435bhp which is 9.2% loss. Nigel, I think you must be out on your wheel figure as that would be a loss of only 3.8%

Welformed your transmission losses equate to 12.4% which is still lower than the industry average but to be expected on a Dastek.

Well i was 16.5% loss....

http://s19.photobucket.com/albums/b176/h2ypr/?action=view¤t=tmp86.jpg

Ross

Those losses still seem way too low. Anyone know what the official transmission loss is on a Coop as std? Yours looks about spot on tho Ross.

That depends on the rollers used...

Ross

That's the point. Transmission loss is transmission loss. It's only supposed to be working out the resistance when free-wheeling from the redline. It will vary car to car of course - with light wheels I'd expect my transmission losses to be lower than std.

It should be as calcuable as WHP and FHP.

It will vary on different rollers as they all use differet technology i.e. singe drum, twin drum, twin rollers, braked. With a twin roller the tyre sits in between, this can be deeper on some and the tyre also get's pinched more. These all affect transmission losses.

The only figure you should be interested in and that can be accurately measured and compared is the wheel horse power.

It's the power at the wheels that moves you not the power at the flywheel.

The rolling road I used here takes the wheels off and the machine bolts directly to the hubs. This avoids any slippage, tyre pressure or pinching issues. The weight of the wheels I think will only affect accelleration.

You can just as easily compare different mods using the wheel horse power. However you can't compare against another cars flywheel figure (manufacturers or calculated/estimated).

John

TBH, I don't think PT's rollers are that conservative. I got 317 BHP with a GT28RSR and a boost leak. I also have the benefit of comparing a std. E46 M3 back-to-back with the aforementioned Coupe and the top end of the M3 and N/A throttle response is better, although no match for the 1.4 bar on-boost midrange of the Coupe

What is your spec as from what I have read so far the turbo is overkill for your setup? I think the GT71R is for people who have gone all the way with their 2.0. You would be better of with changing to an RS.

i have the a gt28rs with the blue flame from turbo back

with the vband adapter and one of timpeons fmic and i had

my car map at pt and managed 340bhp fly 295bhp wheel figures

with the boost set to 1.4 on my avcr but doesnt see 1.4bar

on the gauge tho and it drops off to just under 1.2 and my

car dont stick around,would i be able to make more power

with the H&S down pipe not that i want any more power on my

standard internals,but to be honest i didnt think no one

ran the 2871r on standard internals and i cant beleive you

dont have a fmic or a air filter,they are a must on a

bigger turbo

he does have a FMIC now, pro alloy...

So you have the 5 stud 2.25" vband adapter?

See even with this supposed restriction and the airbox, my car doesn't seem to be making the power or torque it should.

Ive finally got 5 mins to myself so thought i would have a catch up on here.
As they say there is always two sides to the story

You arrived on the sat morn with a bad hangover, for this you are a legend ::D prob a bit of jealousy on my part

All jokes aside, before i did anything with the car i ran through the spec of it, now bear in mind i have mapped around 35-40cars not on the forum as well as a large number from here.
First thoughts were that the turbo was way too big for the injectors at the boost you wanted to run, after what i would call good advice you were happy for me to continue testing the car.
Without going to the dyno to check actual figures the first run was very low for the turbo. I came out and spoke to you about this, i still stick by what i said that day...
Even when we got the boost up your car was 70-80hp short of expected, i still question what turbo is on your car. I regulary (sp) see more power than yours with 28R's and RS's.
On the test drive after dyno your car felt low on power (and i have driven just a few ).
Your Hours dyno time was up and you asked me to try another chip, you kept on that you wanted to see what gains would come from it. I explained that the last chip had perfect fuelling and at 1.4bar was just starting to click on the det cans. Trying the other chip was going to be a waste of your money as any more advance would det, and less would be less power. You were adamant that it would be better and it was your money so i had to try some more runs with the new chip.
I was purely trying to save you money

Hey presto, 35hp less than the previous chip.

I even tried running the car with the intake off, this gave an increase but nothing like what it should be doing.

I'm sorry if you didnt get the results you wanted, I cant help that though unfortunately. I can only give the best advice i can (to the point of trying to save you money).

Regardless, from the offset you werent interested in anything i had to say and i still to this day dont know why you came to us in the first place mate??
Everything i advised you you thought otherwise?

If you truly have the turbo you think you have, there is a big problem elsewhere.. Everyone knows what sort of power you should be making and it is way above what the stock injectors can supply. So regardless of what you may think the car is doing, you only have the fuel the stock injectors will supply.

As for trying to get more money out of you as we werent remapping the car, you were booked for one hour which you have to pay for. I almost refused to run the car on the next chip to save you money... so you paid for another half hour which you agreed on. You were charged for what you asked us to do.

What more can i say?

Rob

Rob.

As usual 2 sides of the story.

However, the repeated "complaint" is that there is no afr graph given and that people are merely told "Its fine".

Is this incorrect or do you have a reason for not supplying?

Ross

I'll make a proper reply later. Thanks for the input and as said, there certainly is 2 sides to every story! I'm also not out for a slagging match.

Had I known you were on here, I would've probably sought you out directly. Ah well. What's done is done etc.

Suffice to say I suspect nearly everyone uses a RR for peace of mind and testing. I got the testing bit but not the peace of mind (AFR) and the results raised more questions, but for that the session was very useful.

The reason why the AFR is not given is because it is measured on a separate machine that isn't linked to the Dastek RR graph. (Please correct me if I am wrong). All you have to do is ask?!?

On my latest re-map I had a chat with Rob about my graphs and he explained to me exactly what’s what. I had different graphs for my different boost settings and I was told my AFR. I have never had a problem with PT apart from them calling me a Pikey for bringing a crappy FIAT

Whoever you get to look after your car is whose advice you should follow. So choose a RR and stick with them, I have always used PT even before they had their Dyno.

Ok here goes.

I think there is a difference of opinion (not all mine) on what boost can be run with that turbo and on what injectors. Whikle you have access to 35-40 cars worth of data, hundreds are available here. I believe there are several people running around 350bhp and even a bit more on standard injectors - so the standard injectors should be good for around 350Bhp, so this was the absolute max that I wanted to run, regardless of better internals allowing for a bit more than this - future mods.

The lack of AFR info had me concerned that the novitec wouldn't be able to fuel 1.4bar, yet that is how it was left - "it's fine". Despite the session, I still do not know what this is and if it is truly safe with this chip, only by what you say and by listening for det myself. NB: the Novitec should only be good for about 1.2bar on a standard GT28 turbo, so how come, in your opinion, mine can supply 1.4bar on a GT2871R (or GT28R or whatever)?

My issue comes from this basis:
What annoyed me is that when I arrived, despite driving all the way from MK, to be told that you weren't even going to put the car on the rollers because of the turbo I (claimed) to have, period. Implying that I should just go home. I had 3 conversations over the phone to expressly agree that I wanted to do, including one the day before, and what my current setup was - at least one run with the current chip and setup, and one with the Gtec2HF, then to use whatever is best/set good boost etc. It was even written as such in the diary - runs on old and new chips. I also never agreed just the one hour, as I expected the work to overrun 1 hour. I suggest you speak to the person who took the booking if you think 1 hour only was the case.

The question I have is how can someone agree this with a customer, only for someone else in the same organistion to flat refuse the work? Inconsistencies is something analysts (part of my area of expertise btw) expressely look for when offering solutions to an organisations' issues. It highlights a communication problem which would be serious if you were medium-sized or larger. Such inconsistency is never good service and always impacts productivity.

I had signed the waiver, so give your opinion if needed, but the risk is all mine. Given my research beforehand I didn't agree that it would not be safe on the first run. An opinion that you didn't appear interested in. I remember having to point out that I had been using the car for a year on this turbo as a final bargaining point. Maybe I should've brought some graphs down from the various other RR's I've been to, but I shouldn't be expected to do this as a customer. This however, is still ok and partly expected as far as I'm concerned. I went for the expertise as much as anything else. The car didn't immediately blow-up, so you know that I know what I was expecting/asking for was not unsound, also considering my personal experience of the car which should count for something. You know better than me that you can theoretically run any turbo, as long as the air-flow falls within the capabilities of chip, injectors, charge temps, internals etc.

You certainly didn't come across as wanting to save me money (saying it would've helped ) -but that's my concern not yours (I have plenty ) - but more as a lack of interest, which is documented here previously. You're an engineer, so I didn't expect you to be customer-focussed in a proper "yes sir" business sense. At the time I took this on the chin, but perhaps is something to work on? (I'm not the first to mention this)

I'm aware that you probably get people who expect the Earth and don't care of safety issues, so I expected you would not be keen on just doing exactly as I asked. It's part of your job of course. Again, I took it on the chin. But what could I do but plead/reason for you to run the car or turn around and go home? Even then you weren't keen and made that very clear. I'd have simply had to choose another RR to get the same tests done, so I fail to see how that could've helped me but delay what you thought was the inevitable blow-up? "Not on my turf"?

I also expected the other chip to over-fuel after the results of the first run but, and here's the point; I wanted to know this and to confirm that the chip was good. Exactly for a RR. I was no longer expecting or asking to see gains at this point. I always was not not interested in what you had to say either, but merely trying to get you to not send me home early before I had got some more test data. I also don't remember any conversation about timings at all with anyone - I took it as implicit and would pay for however long I was there. Certainly at no point was I advised that it will go past a supposedly agreed 1 hour slot and will cost more. I eventually got the data, so I was happy with that part. I'll accept all that as simple chinese whispers and differing perceptions though, so I'll say no more as it will degenerate into an unwinable argument.

If you have more input on what you think the reason for the results are then I would definitely appreciate it as I'm sure many others here would too. It would also be a good way to save face. The whole post was of two parts, my minor annoyance at the service as a whole (not yours personally per se) and also to work out what the issues are. All part of the fun when you have two cars, imo!

Here we say bottlenecks - gasses in via the standard airbox as I was expecting (but I like the noise it makes) and out with the v-band adapter. Until proven by making changes, I'm not 100% convinced, I never will be without empirical evidence, but that's never going to stop me trying... and asking other people to try too where duely arranged in advance.

Also, if the stock injectors were maxxed out at 300Bhp, how come the car was able to overfuel on the same boost with the Gtec2HF? If I had, say, clogged injectors, how could they push through more fuel than with the Novitec? Somesort of semi-intelligent over-compensation? That doesn't track to me. Again, without the AFR I just don't know.

I also have no problem with what I was charged, but there is far more to "service" than what something costs...

Maybe should have done that LONG post in pm?

Ross

Perhaps but it's no more than what has been said already, just in more detail and in one post.

Why p.m. ? This is a forum - I can't see the problem.

Exactly. Still waiting for a reply but I don't expect something straight away from anyone (not a dig).

WF - maxxed injecors can overfuel - IIRC, the definition of maxxed is running at above 80% duty cycle. Even at this level, if the chip is injecting too much fuel, then its overfuelling.

I have to admit that this aspect confused me for some time, so I can appreciate why you would think that a maxxed injector couldn't possibly overfuel (sounds like a contradiction in terms)

From my experience of PT, if Rob says the AFR is "fine", then its fine. If it wasn't he'd say so.

I can also understand Rob's stance that plugging in the second chip would make no difference - this is based on the first chip being close to optimal, and therefore NO amount of tweaking is going to make it any better (as was proved).

In respect of the Novitec, you say "so how come, in your opinion, mine can supply 1.4bar on a GT2871R (or GT28R or whatever)?"

The Novitec isn't supplying 1.4 bar, its merely supplying enough fuel to allow the engine to run at this level. If it wasn't, the AFR would have drifted and Rob would have pulled back the boost, or tried some more fuel. However, as the chip was fuelling perfectly, there was no need to adjust.

There becomes a point on any car where something is preventing better power. We all know its not your turbo, as there are many cars producing 330+ bhp on a GT2871. However, I can't think of any of them thats still running the very restrictive V-Band adapter

IMHO, this is costing you at least 30bhp, possibly more. It doesn't matter if you have a hundred gallon watering can, if the spout is tiny, you'll only get a trickle.

You mention that Rob posting another answer "would also be a good way to save face." - who with? As far as I can see it, Perfect Touch have been even better than usual - trying to advise you that the car was as good as it was going to get and that any further twiddling would be counter-productive. Rob wasn't trying to refuse your instructions, he was trying to give you advice.

As you know, with my mapping problems, I had many visits to PT. Some of them were very short lived, as within a minute of firing the car up, a problem became apparent that called a halt to the proceedings. On other occasions, I've had to drive the 160 mile trip home without my car (is that Civic still going Rob?) It's never nice for it not to go the way its expected to, but thats modifying for you.

You have to accept that if PT can get 1000+ bhp out of a Skyline, (and 400+ bhp out of a Coupe running a Motronic) they probably know what they're doing.

Change the exhaust Welformed. If I understand it correctly you are still using standard exhaust. I wanna see a full 3" system from the turbo and all the way back. You should also consider a proper EBC instead of a PRV

Just to answer an earlier question...

I had mine dyno'd at standard at Power engineering back in the day (when JohnS made too much power for the RR) and it made;
220bhp at the fly (FWHP)
175bhp @ the wheels (WHP)
This was at 6,283rpm.

That is just over 20% losses

nigel do you really think the v-band will lose that much power?

yes - the V-Band becomes more restrictive as the revs rise, so it will be worse at the top end, which is where the highest power is made.

If WF ditched the V-Band AND fitted a 3" DP, I reckon we would see 30+ bhp more, at which point, all the Veyrons in MK will sell up as they'll know they're beaten.

That's odd because when I was up there Rob gave the V-band credit and said that a 3" DP wouldn't make all that much difference if any.

Sorry if I've got that wrong but I'm 100% sure you said that as I was asking if I should get a remap if I brought one from the BF group buy.

If the rest of the exhaust system has been opened up then it doesn't make too much of a difference. When I was running the 2860RS 0.86 I made 360bhp with the V-band adapter and 370bhp without.

That must be it then as I already had a 2.75" from the turbo back with a V-band. Cheers.

Well that's what I was after. There has to be some industry explanation for it. It's like a CSMA-CD network in I.T. they should never go above about 10% utilisation really (can't remember the figure but call it 10%), any more is considered maxxed out even though there is room for more...



I should hope so! Otherwise I'd might as well just mod willy nilly. But it still doesn't tell me, just lift of fine, just right, right in the middle... I've been to 4 other RR's, all of whom I have had proper conversations about fuelling amongst other things.



...and as I expected myself too. The GtecHF is 2nd hand, so I needed to know if it work as it should. It overfuelled when the novitec was ok. I now know the chip is ok. So successful test. This is all I was after, after the results of the 2nd run @ 1.4bar with the Novitec.

I don't get why I have to keep repeating my intentions to people on this point. It's a process of elimination. I'm being anal. I always am. The detail is everything. etc. etc.

Clearly things are a bit more no-no with motors than with I.T.'s lets try it attitude, because if you don't test it, you will not know where you are.

When I get the v-band sorted, which I fully plan on doing, then I can put the Gtec2HF in and take it to another RR, without having to mess around doing other runs and opening the ECU, etc. The time I saved at PT is the time I will save here + I get some thinking time on it.



That's what I meant. If it can fuel for the air on a GT28 @ 1.2bar max, how can it fuel for the air on a GT2871R @ 1.4bar? That has to be pushing through much more air than a GT28 could ever do.

Anyway one AFR figure would eliminate this question altogether, but I didn't get it, despite asking several times.

When you get someone who doesn't seem interested, you start to wonder if they really are measuring AFR... comes back to that "service" point.



Yep and appreciated. I had no knowledge of the v-band adapter. When I asked for an exhaust from the turbo-back, I kinda expected it from the turbo and back, funnily enough... I didn't know they would just put it on the existing v-band. This was fitted when I had a standard turbo so any questions would not have been raised.



I WILL find out. If so I reckon it's translating into a heat build-up too. I notice my oil temps seem a tad higher and rise quicker on power to optimal operating temps and takes longer to cool, than before, even though I have a decent FMIC since and have messed around turning the boost down. I've never oil temps go past about 95 degrees though, so I don't know if the heat will keep rising until something goes pop. Heating up the turbo = heating up the oil?



With me. I say again, my bone isn't with the quality of the expertise, it's with the service as a whole, mainly due to the lack of communication between themselves and the customer, even after asking for information directly! Basically, it pist me off (yet whilst they're working on your pride and joy - basically have your knackers in their hand - would you start getting visibly annoyed and demanding? Besides I've learned it's always better to cool off and reflect.) and I do not care how pro they are, I see no point if you go there for diags/test and yet you can't even drag the info you need out of them.



It wasn't counter-productive (see above). When you arrive and you tell them what you want after telling them over the phone what you want, you tell them what turbo you have after telling them over the phone what turbo you have and they go "Ok, well I'm not going to put your car on the rollers today" I was so gobsmacked I stood there in silence for a moment. I haven't been stunned to silence for over a decade!


Which is why I went. Alas that is not the whole story...

possibly not completely relevant to your last post wf, but after reading the thread, a lot of which regards rolling roads, and in particular flywheel bhp taken from a RR, i'd thought i post this

rolling road coastdown losses

there are a few other interesting relevant articles which also discuss power readouts on RR's on the site.

may take a while to read, so put the kettle on.



personally, i've always been of the opinion to take RR figures about as seriously as 'car park' figures, the rolling road is usefull, to get fuelling set up etc, and is also usefull to get a figure, then see what difference any given modification makes to that figure.

comparing figures across different rolling roads gives about as much idea of a cars performance as asking the local saxo crew how quick their cars are. you'll get interesting results in each case, but neither will be'accurate'

Back again quickly, I explained in full what the AFR's were.
It is clear to see from your posts that you are very thorough (sp) with your car so can you honestly expect people to believe you would have left our premises without the only info you came for!! WTF!

Your car was running 10.5 midrange and 11.6 at the top. i also explained that this was one of the reasons your torque figure was so low.
Once again i stick by what i said, you were totally not interested in anything we had to say from the start. I still dont know why you came to us.
Also, as for customer service. When the customer really isnt interested in what i am saying, I will show no interest at all.
Nothing like talking to yourself eh .... The fact you cant recall what i told you regarding AFR's says it all for me.

Funnily enough i have had two owners in since your day here, was ineteresting to hear their thoughts on your posts and their thoughts on our service. It definately paints a different picture.

Regards

Rob

Welformed - you are running a turbo that is all about top end power, you can get more torque at 300bhp with a hyrbid. I would put money on your car spooling quicker and making more torque and similar power on a GTI-R hybrid. On a GT series turbo you HAVE to have the car breathing right if you are going to make the figures the turbo is capable of. That means ditching the airbox and getting a proper exhaust, and prefereably a flowed head / port matched manifold. I gained around 40 bhp on my 28R from swapping out the V-band and going from a 3 inch downpipe and 2.25 supersprint. The restrictive exhaust is also going to have your in cylinder temps higher than they should be....so I'm not suprised that your oil is getting hot coupled with the extra boost.

If I was in Rob's position I would have been very cagey about running your car on the standard internals + injectors and breathing on a GT2871 with a plug and play chip. For what it's worth I would not have been willing to run your car if it was my business on your spec. There are plenty of people that have slapped a big turbo on a car to get the power and it's all ended in tears on the dyno. Rob does not delight in blowing up engines - he is very enthusiastic about what he does, whether it's a lowly coupe or a GTR. There are plenty of people that must turn up with poorly maintained heaps expecting the world....and then blame the mapper when it goes pop. (I'm not saying that that is you.....)

For the benefit of anyone else going down to PT - listen to what Rob has to say, if there is something he is not sure about regarding a coupe he is very up front about it. You know the car and how you have tuned it so give him information he can work with, and regardless of the car there is not always straightforward answers. Make sure that when you go down for a mapping session or even a power run, that the car is as perfect as you can make it: no oil leaks, boost leaks, the correct clutch for the power, correct cooling, cleaned injectors that will supply enough fuel....etc.

The std intake run itself is a big restriction, not only the airbox. That's why the Straight induction pipe came about. Sometimes you have to trust that some of us have invested a lot of money into tuning coupes so you don't have to instead of re-learning the same mistake other people made.
I don't really understand the point of having a GT2871R on your car as it is a huge mismatch, and short of fitting forged internals you will never realise its potential. So all of the lag with none of the power benefit.

i think you should sell your turbo to me WF

@ tweenierob, so AFR is 10.5 to 11.6, a tad on the rich side at lower revs? That sounds about right for a Novitec.


@ JohnS, well I did consider the SIP, but given I like the noise of the std intake, I thought I could always upgrade that later. I was not worried about that, pre or post RR. This mod will be coming.

The point of the GT2871R was to get the turbo now but run it at low boost until I get other mods sorted out. I wasn't too worried about losing performance initially. Progressive upgrade based on cash I had to spend. I was going in eyes wide open... or as wide open as they can be. And just to reitterate, I'm not disappointed (frustrated) at the results when I know it's something correctable.


@ Suba, cool. That's the first report on here of someone talking of the gains Nigel was talking of by removing the v-band. Also I like your point about the restrictive exhaust increasing cylinder temps. That's what happens. It thought it might have been related to extra pressure on the turbo and it heating the oil and internal temps that way. Removing the v-band could equate to a lot of gain due to that alone, extra to the breathing restriction.


btw, who's the best mod to speak to about this section? There seems to be a few to choose from!

I've very recently been to Perfect Touch and had my Plus mapped. This was to complement a list of tuning modifications made by the previous owner. I can only comment on my own experience with team at PT and have to say I found Claudio and Rob polite, helpful and very enthusiastic. My only complaint is that I missed out on Rob's test drive, sounds like it would've been a hoot!
Having been there, I'm now running more power with better delivery, have every confidence in my engine and as a bonus, know that my boost controller is setup correctly.