Steve Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 Am soon to be having 650cc injectors, 264 cams and emanage fitted. Will be keeping the stock tubbies for now ( until saved enough for single turbo). Would i be better switching them to paralell mode, or leave them in sequential mode? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyh Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 sorry to but in on your post. what are the advantages of running them paralell apose to sequential Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 I hate parallel (true twin), there's too much lag (don't let Paul K read this), nothing until 4k then BANG the rear wheels spin in pretty much any gear!! Advantages are more boost therefore more power at high revs, but disadvantages are NO power at low revs, and annoying lag. Bit like a big single then!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 If you look at the torque graphs side by side, you'll see the sequential has a hump of torque at low revs, then after 4K a bigger hump. The 'parallel' graph has just the second hump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 Stick with the sequential system or you'll have a really PITA to map. And you're less likely to be happy with the fueling if you're fighting the stock ECU like this. I know obviously a single goes against the sequential programming in the ECU but it's a completely different map anyway.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith C Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 I found true-twin awful, and I can't see how it can give you *more* boost than you could get in sequential?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 I found true-twin awful, and I can't see how it can give you *more* boost than you could get in sequential?! Maybe cause it's less controlled than the sequentials!! Maybe it's cause the first turbo doesn't run at the same pressure as the 2nd one in sequential mode Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supRo Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 I was on true twin (full de-cat) - Never going back to it purely because the car becomes way too loud! Motorway driving becomes unbearable. Even at Idle - It's much louder, a horrible sound. Don't know how to descibe the sound but I didn't like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 4, 2005 Author Share Posted July 4, 2005 Stick with the sequential system or you'll have a really PITA to map. And you're less likely to be happy with the fueling if you're fighting the stock ECU like this. I know obviously a single goes against the sequential programming in the ECU but it's a completely different map anyway.... I would have thought it would have been easier to map in paralell as you wouldnt have to worry about the transistion between the two turbos??? Or am i talking bollox!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopite Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 i hated TTC too, car sounded like there was a cat (feline type) stuck in the exhaust! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suprasteve Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 would you get a better 1/4 mile time in Paralell as the rpm will always be above 4,000 (apart from 1st gear unless you managed a good start) i.e. taking advantage of the higher boost compared to seq above 4,000 rpm. anyone tried both down the drag strip on the same day ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 I would have thought it would have been easier to map in paralell as you wouldnt have to worry about the transistion between the two turbos??? Or am i talking bollox!!!! Nah, cause it's the stock ECU you're trying to fool...the stock ECU is only mapped for the sequential system - it dumps in extra fuel when it's expecting the 1st turbo and extra timiing etc...you're fighting this when you go to map it for a single. With carrying on in sequestial mode you could conceivably(sp?) carry on with just the Global correction factor, but I don't think this would work completely, esp if you're using more than stock boost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 would you get a better 1/4 mile time in Paralell as the rpm will always be above 4,000 (apart from 1st gear unless you managed a good start) i.e. taking advantage of the higher boost compared to seq above 4,000 rpm. anyone tried both down the drag strip on the same day ? I think that statement is wrong. Above 4,000rpm both turbo's are working the same, together whether its in Seq mode or TT mode. The only adv you could gain is if you removed the plumbing for the sequential system and had independent feeds to the two turbos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 4, 2005 Author Share Posted July 4, 2005 Nah, cause it's the stock ECU you're trying to fool...the stock ECU is only mapped for the sequential system - it dumps in extra fuel when it's expecting the 1st turbo and extra timiing etc...you're fighting this when you go to map it for a single. With carrying on in sequestial mode you could conceivably(sp?) carry on with just the Global correction factor, but I don't think this would work completely, esp if you're using more than stock boost. Cheers for clearing that up Alex. It shall be mapped by Ian C, so hopefully he shoulnt have too many problems sorting it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suprasteve Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 I think that statement is wrong. Above 4,000rpm both turbo's are working the same, together whether its in Seq mode or TT mode. The only adv you could gain is if you removed the plumbing for the sequential system and had independent feeds to the two turbos. Thats what i thought but someone told me different. So yes, surely all your doing is removing the first hump on the graph, the second will remain the same as both tubs are doing the same thing as in the seq mode and overall bhp will not change.....if you get my drift Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 I've been running mine in parallel for over 5 years now and have similar mods to you Smarty. I was advised to go to parallel by my tuners here (HKS pro dealer) who said that it was easier to map the e-manage and extract more power with the turbos running in parallel. I much prefer the smoother power delivery of the parallel setup, see dyno graph in link below in my sig. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 4, 2005 Author Share Posted July 4, 2005 How long have you had your stock tubbies at 1.25bar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 How long have you had your stock tubbies at 1.25bar? Exactly the same amount of time, because I had one of the stock turbos blow on the dyno run when the e-manage was originally being mapped. I had 2 new stock turbos fitted and car mapped, that was over 5 years ago, maybe 6 years now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steady_eddie Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 heckler couldnt decide this either so he's got a lil button that he presses every now and then to switch between the two, dont ask me how it works tho, all i no is his car is like warp speed 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 4, 2005 Author Share Posted July 4, 2005 I presume that at about 3800 rpms the ECU alters the timing or something to allow for the second turbo coming online. Is that why people say its harder to map around this area??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian C Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 Hi all I saved out someone's dyno plot once of a parallel conversion. I've attached an annotated version which shows exactly what goes on compared to sequential mode. You can see the boost pressure curve of both modes of operation. Sequential absolutely kicks the arse of parallel up to about 3350rpm. Then, parallel gets up to 1 bar by 3500rpm, therefore being better for 150rpm. After that, and this is the traction-breaking moment that makes parallel mode *seem* more powerful, there is a really nasty boost spike to 1.3bar - scary when the boost pressure is supposed to be 1.0bar. This lasts for 400rpm before the wastegate opens - the wastegate isn't used until about 3900rpm because the stock ECU doesn't need it to control boost until then - as far as it's concerned, the EGBV controls boost until then. As you can see, by 4000rpm the wastegate has dragged things back under control and the boost pressure, and therefore power, is exactly the same as sequential mode No higher boost, no magic increase in performance, nothing. So, parallel gives you: 150rpm (count 'em) of safe higher boost than sequential mode 400 rpm of scary boost spike (the higher your target boost the higher this spike will get as it's basically no wastegate control ) A *lot* less power under 3350rpm No difference above 4000rpm Hmmm. You can use parallel if you want but I think it's rubbish -Ian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 4, 2005 Author Share Posted July 4, 2005 Thanks for that Ian. Was interesting seeing the difference between the two setups on a graph. I will stick with sequential operation me thinks, dont want no nasty spikes causing me grief. Cheers all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 The graphs I've got say a similar story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 4, 2005 Author Share Posted July 4, 2005 Cheers John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted July 4, 2005 Share Posted July 4, 2005 Also if it's a wired one like mine it makes your vsv rattle like a bastard when on overrun!!! Mine now rattles anyway after using ETTC a total of 3 times!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.