Slow Spool on the 2.3

[44pirate]

Surely you have access to a logger to compare?

 

[Auto RS T]

Andy is a human logger. Updated version 2.3

Does Auto Zones scan tool have a data list option? You could always ask them if you could borrow it and compare the MPH to your speedo and tach. My 2 psi.

 

[andymoraitis]

Good idea SlimJim. I have a few pals at the local VatoZone that I can ask so maybe I'll try that.

Paul and Keith: Thank you for the offer. I'll be sure to let you know. I may peg the limiter tomorrow (7400) in neutral and see what the tach shows. From there maybe we can figure out how off it is before I swap clusters.

Dan: You can bring the cover and leave it with me but this weekend is all about chillaxin and making the XBox catch fire from excessive play. We'll try to pull the cover with everything on and if it gets too complicated, we'll go have a drink and do it in the spring. If Ty can do it with everything in the car, maybe we'll get lucky as well.

 

[andymoraitis]

Here's yet another update guys:

We did manage to pull the B cover off without having to remove the turbo or the manifold. This took a few trips to Vato Zone to get the right 1/2" ratcheting wrench that would fit, but other than that there were no problems. Once the cover came off, we could see it had been RTV'd with copper gasket sealant all the way around. As tight as it was, I doubt it was leaking.

We started denting the water pipe and as we went to size up the E cover, we noticed that NONE of Dan's bolt holes lined up. Guess a cover from an SBR G50 doesn't fit on a Garrett/Bullseye housing. So, the project was a waste of time. In any event, we re-sealed the cover with RTV (grey this time) and it worked fine. I may pick up a Bullseye cover over the winter and swap it out.

What we did notice during a test drive is that the motor builds the first 22 psi of boost very quickly (before 4000), but the last three psi take almost 400 rpm after that. I'm not sure if this is from having the gate shimmed, but I wouldn't think so. I also have better spool starting from 3000 RPM in third than I do starting from 2000 RPM in third which I find wierd. All I can say is that spool on this car is what it is and I'm not going to concern myself with it anymore. In talking to Keith last night, the slower build of the last three psi could be from the aggressive nature of the cam change or the use of a B cover. Adjustables will follow before next season so that I can dial everything in to where it's really supposed to be.

Regarding the accuracy of the tach, I warmed the motor and pegged the limiter (set to 7400) and she hit 7500. 100 RPM off is nothing to be concerned about so we can rule out the cluster.

In the interim, the car's a rocket ride and once it has a fresh clutch and some methanol injection I'll get together with Jake Hanhardt and work out some timing maps to bring back the torque and really rip the tires loose.

Other than the cover not fitting and some broken t-bolt clamps, everything went pretty smooth and I got to spend a great weekend with my little bro. Guess I can't complain in the least.

Peace out.

 

[nanokpsi]

FWIW, usually a compressor cover switch requires a new backplate as well, and can't be done on the car. I know it is that way for switching from an E to an S cover. The B and E covers may use the same backplate, but i doubt it

 

[andymoraitis]

FWIW, usually a compressor cover switch requires a new backplate as well, and can't be done on the car. I know it is that way for switching from an E to an S cover. The B and E covers may use the same backplate, but i doubt it

I wish I had known that earlier. I had called SBR earlier in the week and they said it would work. Before I go through the trouble of trying another cover I'll call Bullseye, see what they say and post the results here. Thanks for the heads up!

 

[99gst_racer]

Upon purchasing that 50-trim, there wasn't an option for an "E" cover. I requested it, but it was not available that way. The backplate it uses may have the reason for them not offering the option.

I always thought the backplates for the B and E cover turbo's were the same. I guess I was wrong. I wonder if it is a Garrett/T'netics thing.

 

[92awddsm]

Upon purchasing that 50-trim, there wasn't an option for an "E" cover. I requested it, but it was not available that way. The backplate it uses may have the reason for them not offering the option.

I always thought the backplates for the B and E cover turbo's were the same. I guess I was wrong. I wonder if it is a Garrett/T'netics thing.

Most of the time, covers will interchange(b to e) withing the same manufacturer. Now days, a manufacturer will use the same plate for both covers for the simple fact that if someone wants the b, all they have to do is bolt it on. The difference comes to the manufacturers. They all machine their plates to a different size and have their covers to match. Therefore, a turbonetics/garrett cover will not work on a bullseye or pte backing plate. And for the most part, garrett and turbonetics are usually the same.

 

[project_tsi]

And for the most part, garrett and turbonetics are usually the same.

Yea but not this time!

 

[92awddsm]

Yea but not this time!

Thats why I said "for the most part". Thats why I expected it to bolt up with no problem. What turbo did the e cover come off of?

 

[project_tsi]

The E cover came off a SBR G50, turbonetics.

 

[andymoraitis]

It's no biggie. I want a damn 60-1 now....

 

[andymoraitis]

In a final attempt to work with some more aggressive tuning to see if it aids spool, I ran the following setting by Luke who gave them a thumbs up. I've sent these to Jeff and he's burned them for me in a new chip that I'll be trying towards the end of the week. This is much leaner than the flat 11.5:1 map we're currently using so we should see some difference:

2400: 14.0:1
2600: 13.8:1
2800: 13.6:1
3000: 13.4:1
3200: 13.2:1
3400: 13.0:1
3600: 12.8:1
3800: 12.6:1
4000: 12.4:1
4200: 12.2:1
4400: 12.0:1
4600: 11.8:1
4800: 11.6:1

We're going to keep peak timing at 8 degrees for now and then step it up once I add a better clutch and methanol to the car. I'll keep everyone posted as to how this affects spool time on a 3rd gear pull.

 

[topstreet]

It's no biggie. I want a damn 60-1 now....

cough 35r cough

 

[andymoraitis]

cough 35r cough

I love you man, I really do.

Anyway, I tried the new chip today. Other than showing some knock up top from being a bit leaner, there was still no difference in spool. I do want to thank Jeff for soing such a great job for me and once again reiterate the fact that I'm not disappointed. I'm officially calling off any more attempts to spool faster, but since there's a 1G TB going on, it may help a bit.

Either way, I'm very happy with the way the motor performs and I know I've got a great car on my hands so there's no worries. Spool is overrated anyway.

 

[mavisky]

Downshift ya sissy, this ain't no powerglide 2 speed

BTW, I may be free this Sunday if you're not doing anything. Let me check with Kendal tomorrow.

 

[andymoraitis]

I had my dear friend Jim Hutte (Auto RS T) come by this weekend and spend the day with me so we could trade injectors (I took his 750's and gave him my 650's) and install a 1G TB he had kindly built for me. Porting was a pain in the butt with a dremel and while it wasn't the prettiest port job, everything was ready from the night before. The TB elbow was smoothed on the inside previously and this netted me a boost rise with no MBC from 26 to 27 psi so I was interested to see what the larger TB ported elbow outlet and ported intake opening would do.

On to the good: On our first test pass, the turbo shot straight to 28 psi and held it like a rock with ambient air temps at 30 degrees. I still picked up 7 counts of knock but with a boost increase I didn't expect that the knock would go down, even with larger injectors. I'll have go one step colder on the plugs to see if that helps a bit with heat dissipation since mine are still stock heat range. Throttle response is fantastic and the car breathes much more easily in the mid to upper RPM ranges as expected. Without logging equipment to verify the actual airflow increase, I would have to say that based on a seat of the pants feel the results were dramatic. While I still have to play with the idle a bit, throttle tip-in was not affected in the least.

And now the bad: At a PR of 2.66 (25 psi) and airflow of 46 lbs/min the turbo still fairly efficient. Now running a PR of 2.87 (28 psi) it's off in la-la land at a conservative estimate of 50 lbs/min. While this is likely the max boost at which I would have run this turbo, I wasn't expecting a 2 psi boost increase from a TB swap and porting of the elbow and intake manifold inlet. What's worse is that she can take one full pull before the clutch starts to slip at 5000 RPM in third gear.

Those of you familar with my setup know that I run no MBC choosing instead to use a Tial 38mm external shimmed with two flat washers on this inside to hold more boost. I may pull one of those out to see if it drops the boost back to 26 psi. I'll also be logging the car next weekend to see if she shows me airflow in the 50-51 lb/min range which is about what I'm expecting. This would put me pretty far off the map.

I have to confess that we were too busy having our heads thrown back when the boost hit to monitor spool, but the turbo felt much more responsive and much more willing to make boost earlier. I'll see if I can run a pull later and see if spool has improved at all. All of my runs were also done using Jeff's spool chip with the lean settings from 2400-4800 RPM on straight 93 at 44 psi base fuel pressure so the knock counts were more than acceptable. And yes, it's still only at 8 degrees of timing. I don't even want to think about what this thing would feel like at 16-18.

Time for a better clutch and then I can really have some fun.

 

[drivemusicnow]

Awesome!

A) I wish every newbie/new to turbo cars/etc should read this post and see JUST HOW MANY THINGS really go into making a fast car. It's not just bolting up parts which is what a lot of people think.
B) 51 lbs/min on a 50 trim would be pretty impressive! I'm interested to see how it all looks on a log.
C) Methanol and a bit more timing would probably be a big kick in the ass as far as power goes. I'd like to see some dyno results of before and after the timing/methanol.

I'm seriously considering using a methanol injection for my track car as with the new NASA rules it really comes down to hp/weight. I'd like to be able to get the WIDEST torque/hp bands possible, with a lower peak hp value to keep me in lower class, while having available power from 3500rpm to 7k. Just because I know me, I know I'll make a second tune just to see how much power I can put down, but that will be more for fun than anything else.

 

[andymoraitis]

Thanks for jumping in Greg. I have to admit that I made a lot of the same mistakes as others by slapping parts on and hoping that they would somehow work. Tuning has created most of my power on the old 2.0 but this motor, while it still cares about a great tune, is highly sensitive to airflow enhancements. I grossly underestimated what it's capable of and have to deal with more upgrades to handle the power. I will likely dyno the car on straight 93 and 8 degrees and then once again on 110 leaded and 16-18 degrees. I know she'll pick up some horsepower, but the torque gains should be massive.

Now if only I can scrape up enough for that 2600-2900 I've been needing!

A new turbo is simply out of the question at this point, but an SCM 4431E or a Switzer S256 would be a great upgrade.

 

[andymoraitis]

I just spent some time on the phone with Paul Volk (99gst_racer) since there were some errors in my PR calculations that I wanted to address.

Anyway, we used reduced atmospheric pressure by .46 based on the readings from Denver (5000 ft/ above sea level) which has a correction value of 2.3 from base atompsheric pressure (14.7). So it looks like this:

2.3/5000 x 1000 = ~ .46 correction for each 1000 ft. ASL.

Since we're 800 feet ASL, my correction factor is ~ .37 (.368 to be exact)

Using 1000 ft ASL as a baseline even though we're around 800, my 25 psi run at 46 lbs/min is actually very efficient (PR of 2.66), however my 28 psi (PR of 2.87) run at a conservative estimate of 50 lbs/min is out there. Just for kicks, I'm attaching a compressor map from a T04E 50 trim with the 1000 ASL calculations. Keep in mind that my turbo is actually a T04B and not as efficient. Keep in mind that these numbers are also on a large sidemount and not an FMIC.

Many profuse thanks to Paul for the education on proper PR calculations. If I'm off somewhere on my figures please feel free to let me know since I'm not quite sure how to account for density altitude and water grains (I'm assuming they also play a role).

 

[99gst_racer]

Andy - from a quick recalculation, I came up with slightly different figures than you have posted. Using 1000 ft ASL:

(14.24 + 25psi) / 14.24 = 2.76 PR

and

(14.24 + 28psi) / 14.24 = 2.96 PR


Another large determining factor is "depression". Any intake tract restriction such as an air filter, ducting, or sensors will affect the absolute pressure figure that we came up with. But the figures we came up with should be accurate enough to at least plot on a compressor map. You would only need more accurate numbers when applying your figures to a larger equation for figuring engine VE or anything else of that nature.

 

[andymoraitis]

Thanks for catching my screw ups Paul. I'll replot them tomorrow and see how it looks. In the meantime, I'll still re-log and see what she does at 27-28 psi so we can plot the changes from the 1G TB install.

I told you my math skills are awful!

Andy

 

[GVR4592]

Looks like you need a GT35R I finally got to drive my car with the new GT35 and it gets to 20 psi a hell of a lot quicker than I expected. I get 20 psi at 4000 RPM's in 3rd gear and at 3600 RPM's in 5th gear. If you're thinking about upgrading, this seems like a pretty streetable turbo, especially on a built stroker.

I dont quite understand why you are correcting for altitude with your PR calculations. What's the reason for that?

 

[drivemusicnow]

Looks like you need a GT35R I finally got to drive my car with the new GT35 and it gets to 20 psi a hell of a lot quicker than I expected. I get 20 psi at 4000 RPM's in 3rd gear and at 3600 RPM's in 5th gear. If you're thinking about upgrading, this seems like a pretty streetable turbo, especially on a built stroker.

I dont quite understand why you are correcting for altitude with your PR calculations. What's the reason for that?

pressure ratios are calculated as MAP/BP. To solve for barometric pressure, you would IDEALLY want to use a barometer, but as most people don't have those you can pretend that its 70* and at your elevation, solve for BP. MAP is your boost, plus BP. It matters because if you pretend that baro is 15, you'll have (28+15)/15 =2.87
versus (28+14.5)/14.5 = 2.93

only .06, but still worth noting.

 

[99gst_racer]

I dont quite understand why you are correcting for altitude with your PR calculations. What's the reason for that?

Elevation directly affects absolute pressure. So, unless you're sitting at sea level, you should correct for it.