Single turbo discussion (Split from GB thread)

[bolarbag]

Yes, a T04Z, with apparently over 600bhp, once it got going it was phenomenal, but the response wasnt there, and no cams - although apparently it UK cams from last owner(hmmm) - it just felt as if it was all you ever wanted it to be but never lasted for very long, it didnt help the fact there was no traction

 

If you were driving it round a track and were lazy or careless with the gears it would very easily limit times

 

If it had bigger cams it would have been a beast!

 

Tell that to any rally team and they will laugh, most have to run a 33mm restrictor that limits the cars to 300bhp, but they still get 550nm of torque which makes them fast.

Ive tried a range of turbos ( T88, phr stage 3, various gt4088's) and out of them the smallest (gt4088, similar size to a T67) one with the broadest torque made for the fastest road car by a long way.

 

550nm=405lb-ft? So its not exactly as if they have went all out torque at the expense of bhp in the grand scale of things, they have made the best of what they are allowed to do, I bet all out torque wouldnt be their choice if they had one

 

one with the broadest torque made for the fastest road car by a long way.

 

Thats different from having no bhp at all, broad flat torque curves are good, you still need hp though and the more the merrier within your rpm limit

[David Reid]

[quote=bolarbag;2060271what happens when someone doesnt want the same setup as your own?

 

You really love AEM dont you.

Why do you think your AEM is going to be perfect after 1 mapping session. I can tell you from experiance I am sure you will find areas such as cold starting/uneven idle even/tip/tipout thump on an any ECU after a days mapping.

 

Why do you think it takes people like me 3 years+ (yes you read it right) to get a production tune to the point where its ready to be released to the public.

 

The latest sw I am working with has 16494 calibratable constants, MAPs and tables?

 

How does that compare with AEM? Does it make my ECU 150+* better?

 

The reality is AEM is about 10 years behind current technology.

 

You dont even need the majority of the features in the AEM all you need is a simple method of remapping fuel and spark. Which the greddy system can also do, so I see no reason why you couldn't get comparable results.

 

I would have thought because the greddy uses the manufactuers ECU as a base the cold/hot starting and general drivability may even be better than you achieve with your AEM.

[Ian C]

My injector choice at the time was influenced by a few factors. One, I wanted big enough ones, and 720cc sounded about right. two, they were 2nd hand, 5k miles old, and a really good brand (RC) so at 400 quid, a bargain (this was before the 650cc dropins became available).

 

My limitation on fuelling isn't the injectors as I'm running 38psi static fuel pressure as thats what the stock pressure is. I could wind it up to 43psi and run 1.6bar but I don't want to as I can't be arsed with the remap The limitation is the fact I'm running one Walbro - that's right at the top end of what it can deliver so I reckon pushing for more = more complex fuel system. I actually have the pump and fittings to run a dual pump rig but why bother? My power is fine for the road and one day I'll fit the WI system I have and wind on ignition timing instead - more welly, same fuel, nice and safe. Oh and my ign timing is very conservative as I said, Ryan reckons it'd easy crack 600bhp if he spent some dyno time on it, which is nice - maybe one day

 

I've driven T61s and they spin up faster. Fast enough for me to think "hmm, maybe I could go down to a T61 for the responsiveness". Until I reach 1.4bar of boost and the raw ooomph of the T67 just ain't there

 

I've got 256in 264ex cams so they aren't all that wild either. Deffo improves stuff above 6000rpm but not that much impact down low. For driveability, I come off roundabouts lazily going from 3500 to 4500rpm before shifting, as the torque surge is fantastic. If I keep my foot in it goes mental all the way to 7200rpm. What more do I need

 

-Ian

[Ian C]

You really love AEM dont you.

Why do you think your AEM is going to be perfect after 1 mapping session. I can tell you from experiance I am sure you will find areas such as cold starting/uneven idle even/tip/tipout thump on an any ECU after a days mapping.

 

Why do you think it takes people like me 3 years+ (yes you read it right) to get a production tune to the point where its ready to be released to the public.

 

The latest sw I am working with has 16494 calibratable constants, MAPs and tables?

 

How does that compare with AEM? Does it make my ECU 150+* better?

 

The reality is AEM is about 10 years behind current technology.

 

You dont even need the majority of the features in the AEM all you need is a simple method of remapping fuel and spark. Which the greddy system can also do, so I see no reason why you couldn't get comparable results.

 

I would have thought because the greddy uses the manufactuers ECU as a base the cold/hot starting and general drivability may even be better than you achieve with your AEM.

 

There is some good points there but it's worded a bit confrontationally Try and keep it friendly please

 

-Ian

[bolarbag]

If you had read right no I dont really love AEM - which is why I sold it,

 

It took you 3years to develop an ECU from scratch or 3years to map? What is a 'production tune'? I could develop an ecu in 20years spending an hour or so every weekend, that proves nothing

 

i.e said mapper may have techniques that he uses frequently that other mapper doesnt have or has not stumbled upon, they both get the same result but one gets it quicker than the other

 

What is current technology? Forgive me if I've missed something, but the concepts of EFI and their technologies have not changed much in terms of performance over the last 10years, hence why were having a discussion about enhancing a 15year old design(with you using that as a base)

 

I'd rather not have a signal fudger do my work for me - although said fudger has worked for some

 

would have thought because the greddy uses the manufactuers ECU as a base the cold/hot starting and general drivability may even be better than you achieve with your AEM.

 

True, thats just one instance where a piggyback comes in handy, there are few others but it has its limits

[Ian C]

there are few others but it has its limits

 

*pounce* c'mon you should know by now to provide at least one example

 

I know one that might be considered a limitation but I'm not telling what it is

[gaz1]

i have a t67dbb with the aem ecu and the nearest technical term i know to describe is "it goes like fook" i have 264/264 cams, i do agree though for me is not a one off mapping session, (hot and cold start niggles) but will be getting the mapp checked again on saturday and maybe a little more boost for fighting torque on sunday:eyebrows:

[Wez]

Subscribed

[JamieP]

I went out in the do-luck supra tonight for a rip (thanks Colin;)) it has a stock engine and cams makes over 600bhp on its T04Z kit and it went like stink, its the fastest spooling single ive ever been in, hand on heart it truly amazed me, such an amazing car and if mine goes that well ill be a very happy boy:)

 

Ive got a couple of videos on my phone but having trouble getting them to the pc at the min but i will keep trying.

Edited August 5, 2008 by JamieP (see edit history)

[JamieP]

Colin's dyno print on stock cams, this thing hits in fast and hard.

 

 

[Tricky-Ricky]

Interesting, apart from the rant;) i will disagree with the anything less than AEM bit, IMO EMU is quite up to running a modestly powered single, as long as you're not going daft on injectors,

also i am quite happy with my "budget" single, it seems to be running very well now, and the only thing i have felt the need to add is an oil cooler.