FAQ
Search
chris wrote:It could be an interesting alternative to a Type 25.
Now that engine in a Legacy Spec B...
That's true, Chris. I'd be interested to see how the driving experience stacks up.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests
| |||||
ScoobyMania's WR1
Moderators: WR 1mposter, The Swede, Megaman, danr55, WR1 Bro, Moderators
98 posts
• Page 3 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
That's true, Chris. I'd be interested to see how the driving experience stacks up.
Alloys sh1tes to clean .... and when i found out about the performance packages it looked like it does now  looks far better now imho  2007 BMW M5
2004 Petter Solberg STi
Hi chaps,
Been a very busy over the last couple of days - but will be on later with some graphs and maybe a few more pics 
 I can't wait...  
sounds good.
are you up for bringing it to cheltenham on saturday for us all to drool over? we have a meet there 
That sounds like a plan.
Well I spent an hour earlier looking through the dyno graphs, I'll have to get another copy of Steve as I couldn't find the 554bhp graph. ho-hum. So a 553bhp one will have too do
 Power V Torque  It's not the finished article (boost and consequently torque are a little lower in the midrange on these graphs) - I think this was run 68 of 97. On the latter runs we hit 500bhp at 5000rpm and didn't drop below this until 7400rpm. That's one hell of a power band  Power V Boost  On the dyno (spot the old stickers)  Steve doing his thing   
Thanks for that Scoobymania. the power curve is impressive - and its a no-brainer that any car with 520 ft'lb is going to pull tree stumps up
 Given the strong boost curve though, if it was my car i would be a bit dissapointed in the torque curve as it hits a brick wall- a 120 ft'lb drop given the flat boost curve is normally a sign that the turbo is not working quite as effeciently as i would have hoped. I struggle to believe that a GT35 is running out of puff though so have you any thoughts why this is? Maybe at higher revs the relatively low advance you will be running on 95 is killing it a bit? Are you still on the standard 6 speed? Cant remember a car with this amount of torque that does not run either an uprated gear set or a Modena box. I assume as is Steve Simpsons norm its mapped on the rollers exclusively and not finished off on the road. Not that i would fancy mapping a 550 BHP car on the road  Headline figures it has to be said are superb and a credit to you
Love it. Please keep us posted with any developments. Some of us can't manage the technical commets like Marky Mark but we can still drool over the pics
agreed, this reall is impressive, and some nice pics
incase you hadnt already noticed we LOVE pics here how about coming along to cheltenham on Saturday ?
I'm surprised you say that Mark, we have hundreds and hundreds of dyno graphs here (from bikes to Nascars!). More importantly every Scoob dyno graph that is posted on any bbs is downloaded and filed with relative notes. Whether it be a 2ltr vf35 or 2.5ltr gt40, we have it. Of particular interest are (obviously) Dyno Dynamics graphs, especially when they have used rpm pickup coupled with the right ratios/temps/humidity etc. With a modification list (and a little background knowledge) they can be extremely informative. With this in mind I have yet to see a graph that exhibits a torque curve like our WR1. A few examples (All Dyno Dynamics in shootout mode): 2.2ltr peaking @ 500lbft @ 5400rpm, dropping to 300lbft @ 7500rpm = 200lbft loss over 2100rpm. 40% decrease 2.5ltr peaking @ 480lbft @ 4400rpm, dropping to 320lbft @ 6600rpm = 160lbft loss over 2200rpm. 33% decrease 2.5ltr peaking @ 435lbft @ 4800rpm, dropping to 315lbft @ 6400rpm = 120lbft loss over 1600rpm. 28% decrease 2.0ltr peaking @ 500lbft @ 5400rpm, dropping to 360lbft @ 7000rpm = 140lbft loss over 1600rpm. 28% decrease 2.5ltr peaking @ 550lbft @ 4400rpm, dropping to 410lbft @ 6200rpm = 150lbft loss over 1800rpm . 26% decrease Our 120lbft loss over 2100rpm (23% decrease) looks pretty good I think One other thing to note is that in on the latter runs we were making peak power @ 6800, not 6600 as this graph shows.The GT35 is actually giving it's all at this point, but you are quite right this is Octane limited. The extra timing say V-Power would have allowed (and also the consequential decrease in EGT) would have been in the order of ~ 4 degrees. Now during mapping a 2 degree increase in timing (around peak power) increased power from 525 to 550bhp. We may ask the owner if we can do a few runs on 'a better fuel'. I think 600hp would be on the cards. I'll also point out that this car uses the small port heads and stock sized valves. The increased breathing coming from our port work, focusing on the short radi and swirl characteristics (we've seen plenty of big port heads hogged out as much as possible - this just destroys velocity especially in the low - mid rpm area) and our cam choice. The 2.5 needs careful lobe and timing selection (different dwell time, piston acceleration from tdc & bdc etc). Apologies if I'm going on a bit but I think it's important to show that this car is not about peak power, but was built with the intention of producing the widest power curve possible.
Yes, still on the original 6 speed. We have a couple of customers running circa 480/500lbft through the 6 speeds, no problems as yet.
All our cars are mapped on the dyno and road, I would summise though that 90% of the map is completed on the dyno. Mapping 550bhp on the road doesn't take my fancy either This particular car was taken to Bruntingthorpe to test the high speed running (in relative safety). We try and load the car up to test scenarios based around the most ardueous of conditions. For instance holding the car at 160mph 4 up. While it is doubtful how many times the customer will actually achieve this, the last thing we want is a call from the owner saying "I was doing 160 4 up and it went bang" iyswim
Thanks Mark I think 500bhp+ over 2500rpm is the more impressive figure (and certainly harder to achieve!)
Cheers I'll try to sort some more pics
Unfortunately it looks like we are a little pushed for time this Saturday. Do you have any more details on the meet, or any other meets coming up?
YHPM
It's a pleasure doing stuff like this. The more of these we get, the further we advance each time. We need to do another 2.0 Litre again I think. We had 452BHP out of my STi7 (on stock internals), over 4 years ago and we KNOW we can easily extend that now by a substantial margin.
Admittedly whenever you see that "ScoobyMania" have posted, it's not always me, it could be one of my colleagues (as it has been in here mainly). While I get the pleasure of "standing at the front" when Magazine articles Etc. are done, this car being what it is is without doubt due to the "Team" effort by far more than just myself:- Notably, though not exclusively. Jase (Technical) Dan, (Technician) Mark (Trainee Technician) Tracy (Parts & Admin) Steve Simpson (Mapping) And not least of all I guess, our customer (Jason) , one very shrewd and excited customer!
Mike (or whoever is posting
) THANK YOU very much for sharing this info with us. This site is a little devoid of teccy stuff, but i can guarantee you will not get the sort of crap directed back you see on SN. We are all grateful for the info.
Maybe i can explain where i am coming from. I know i am being picky as you rightly say the power curve and spread is awesome, but we all know that what really gets the hackles rising is torque spread and 'area beneath the curve' I am just saying that it would be great if the torque could hold on a bit longer as IMHO (and please dont take this the wrong way) it falls off a cliff... I would gladly take a drop in peak for a better 'hold' as the car just feels like its pulling all the time. I do understand that this drop is worse with the EJ25's than it is with the 20's though for obvious reasons. Take my graph for example. I know the headline figures are nothing like the WR1 but the car is only a EJ20 classic, with a subaru bottom end (although a slightly stronger spec C item) and only 1.4 bar. This is on a dyno dynamics in shoot out mode. The Torque curve matches the boost curve almost exactly. showing 340 ft/lb at 4800 and 310 ft/lb at 6900 RPM . that equates to a 9% drop over 2100 RPM. I will also say that these torque figures and shape are probably a little unflattering even. on the graphs i am getting 1 bar at 4750 RPM but on the road i get it at 3700 RPM so torque will be effectively moved down the range. I'm sure you understand the reasons behind different spool on rollers as well as i do.   While i have your attention, i would welcome any comments about my own graphs.
Hi Mark
That's a very interesting graph  Are you using Spec C heads as well as the bottom end? I'm guessing here but it looks like you either have a large turbine, large ports or long duration cams? I'll discount the cams, as it's an unusual mod for 'stock' engines. I'll also discount the large turbine wheel too, as most hybrids tend to be lop sided towards a larger compressor wheel (I doubt that you are running a rotated Garrett due to the relatively low boost) LOL, so that leaves either Spec C heads (which would be a tricky install, unless you bought the complete engine, loom & ECU?) or some nice port work on the P1 heads? Either way the 9% drop is very good, but it is with only 1.4bar. I'm sure you will agree that the 310lbft @ 6900rpm is quite a bit more impressive then the 340 @ 4800. The 9% would certainly increase if you turned the boost up (and turn the boost up you should!). Mike's 2ltr graph exhibits similar traits (also ran at G-Force). I don't have his graph to hand but that featured the STi7 large port heads and cams, but with a unique turbocharger (one I can almost guarantee has not been fitted to any other scoob). It's a long time ago but IIRC it made 452bhp & 380lbft @ 1.55 bar. Personally I'm a big fan of the 2ltr, and pound for pound it will always have the advantage at high rpm for numourous reasons. I'd like to drop a 1.6Ltr crank into the 2ltr crankcase, run some long rods and have a 12k rev limit (we should have an oil system to allow us to do this in the not too distant future)
Dont like this as i dont know who i am speaking to now but i am presuming its Steve S?
STI5 cams and heads, heads ported/flowed and combustion chambers reworked by myself. Bit of work in the cases by myself, a lot of attention to heat managment and Ecutek mapped by sir Bob of Rawle. The turbo is actually almost identical to one your good selves (scoobymania) sell (in fact i suspect it maybe the same )It is actually mapped for 1.5 which it achieves (plus a bit more) on the road no problem but did not do on the RR. It is my daily driver and i do drive it hard and i dont wish for any more boost with still relatively weak pistons. Plus the missus takes it to work now and again and she cant be trusted I know where you are coming from with the seemingly lowish peak torque, but i dont have the advantages with the variable cam timing of the new cars and better control of a Gems/Motec etc. I am also a little suspicious of the reading as spool up is miles earlier than shows on the graph. Anyway, this thread is all about your car and i freely admit to being a bit picky in trying to find fault in an otherwise stonking motor! Stick some V power and a dash of NF in, quick bit of Steves tweakery, back on rollers, post the graphs and make me eat my words!
Nope, it's a combination of Myself and Jase. Steve doesn't post using our name anywhere.
Yes, I saw a couple of pictures of your port work Mark. Very tidy work.
I can easily sort you a nice shiny set of new pistons and rods and chuck em in an engine for you if you like?
REALLY, can't be trusted eh...... send her round here?  
 This one on a 2.5 from last year looked pretty impressive as well. That was on a smaller GT30R turbo and small port heads. Steve mapped this on as well.
Hi Dougie
Sorry for not getting back sooner - been away for the weekend That is AlanG's dyno plot as you probably know (it's also actually the 5th 'example' I gave in my earlier post). It's a great dyno plot and is a good comparison between the 30R and the 35R as used on the WR1. Obviously the torque drop off is greater (and quicker) on Alan's plot (calling Marky Mark ) due to running out of airflow on the smaller 30R. It spools around 4-500rpm earlier but the 35R holds on for another 1000rpm.
Yep i remember Alan saying a while back if he had put a bigger compressor housing on the GT30R, he'd gain that little bit more at the top end which would have complimented the good bottom it had.
I've read elsewhere that he's moved on a lot from this though.
Need some help understanding these graphs and "real world", on the road performance.
Been reading about people talking about "area under the curve" when they talk about how quick a car is. AlanG's has 500Ib ft over a 1500rpm span and 450Ibft over a 2100rpm span. The Scoobymania car has an area "under the curve" of 500Ib ft for only 600rpm and 450Ib ft for just over 2100rpm. Would the car with the greater "under the curve" graph not be quicker on the road even though it's got less peak power?
What a car, but the big question on my mind now is HOW much money has gone into it. I know it just dont matter, its because of the love of it obviusly as we can see by the end product. But if you was to sell it what price would you be asking for such a machine?
If it aint broke don't fix it!
Basically Bob thats correct. Torque is all about pulling - i.e the thump in your back most noticeable when you floor it from say 3500 RPM. If you floor (or exit a corner) anywhere in that in Alan Garrod's car in that wide span it will pull and accelerate a tad faster than the scoobymania car. At this level and with these high numbers the difference will be negligible mind you. Ultimately its BHP that defines how quick a car is, but if its all pushed up high in the rev range it requires more driver skill to keep it on the boil. For road use a good spread with minimal drop off is king. this is why its a bit 'false' to look at headline figures. Look at the graphs you get from one well known tuner and their kits based around APS stuff and you will see a good early peak but then its like falling off a cliff.
Name an shame Mark we know your talking about WRC APS is quality stuff.....  Also Group N cars are mapped exactly the same way ....early peak etc ! or his Mike Woods talking out his arse aswell....you know the Prodrive bloke 2007 BMW M5
2004 Petter Solberg STi
Mongy, before you get up your arse and tell me about different types of mapping for different scenrio .......
DON'T BOTHER  2007 BMW M5
2004 Petter Solberg STi
| ||
98 posts
• Page 3 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Who is online |
||