So near..

Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
12,351
Location
Vvardenfell
...and yet so far:

sti_rr_26mar07.jpg



MD321H turbo, 650 injectors, Hyperflow induction and a remap.

The LSV rolling road doesn't have a blower for a top-mount intercooler though, leaving heat-soak as a big problem - especially as that was after well over an hour of mapping. So hopefully the OcUK figure will break the magic 400bhp figure.


M
 
Meridian said:
About 60% of that - that's the downside of AWD...


M

Really 40% transmission losses ouch. :(

I thought that 4wd lost only 20-25% due to tranny losses.
 
Last edited:
Usually assumed figures are 15% for front-wheel drive, 25% for rear wheel and 40% for AWD.


Will Gill

1.55 peak and 1.45 constant - but that's the beauty of the bigger turbo. And remember that I already have a Walbro 255 pump and a 3" H&S sports-cat exhaust. I might get it tweaked up a bit later in the year, but I'll probably get lagged tubular headers at the same time. The idea would mainly be to get the torque up, rather than the power - provided the Powerstation run puts me over 400bhp.

M
 
Conanius said:
not nervous your scoobie power crown will be stolen from you... are you will? :p

nope :)

just think that whacking a big turbo on without doing much else is just asking for trouble, once I stop going to the alps every other week (nearly end of the ski season now) I plan to whack on a gt30/5 or similar, but I know I've already spent thousands preparing the car for the increase in power, if I list my mods I think you would notice the difference. Also remember mine isnt a daily driver so I could blow it up quite happily (arguable) and still not really worry.

mine:

Sti9 engine (triple layer gaskets, ARP bolts/head studs, arrow rods, forged pistons and ACL bearings)
RCM oil pump
3 port boost solenoid
HKS SSQV (hardly performance worthy but its in the engine bay)
walboro 255
sx fuel reg
740cc injectors
gt spec headers (unwrapped after trying both)
HKS uppipe
TSL parallel fuel rails
HKS downpipe
HKS hipe centre
Nur Spec R rear
HKS iridium plugs
Front Mount Intercooler
K&N cone
ekutek3 (second BR map now)
full samco hosing
exedy clutch
ACT streetlite flywheel

thats just engine related upgrades, I've also uprated the brakes (6pots 355, and 2 pots 297mm) to allow for any extra power. Got defi gauges to monitor whats hot and whats not in the engine, knocklink and lamdalink for utterly essential det management.

Arguably im being overly cynical and the car will run 400hp all day long, but I just feel that the power has been achieved with a bare minimum of modifications - by doing that you open yourself up to a myriad of potential pitfalls.

Just my two cents
 
Meridian said:
I already have a Walbro 255 pump
M

Are Walbro any good?

I think my fuel pump is on the way out, and the standard pump is a Bosch. Since it's lasted best part of 16 years I'm leaning towards an OEM pump, yet there is a 'motorsport upgrade' listed in some places and it's a Walbro. I've never heard of them and searches on the web haven't been particularly fruitful. Your thoughts and experience would be appreciated. :)
 
Lowe said:
Are Walbro any good?

They seem to be used a lot in japanese modded cars as uprated units and it would seem they are pretty good and are quite cheap (got mine for £55 from the US). I have one in my car (255l/hr) and it has worked fine but is a tad noisier than the standard pump. Havent heard of any major failures on the owners club, perhaps have a look on the other owners clubs to see if they suffered any failures.
 
Last edited:
Lowe said:
Are Walbro any good?

they are listed in just about every scooby tuning package i've looked at (Dieing to own a scooby, but at 24 with 6 points and an impending driving ban insurance will be laughable)

so they do come highly rated by the scooby tuners.
 
Yep, had a Walbro on mine, worked brilliantly.

Meridan: Nice result, but I agree with Will that it seems a hell of a lot of power for basicly just a turbo swap.

Have you considered an FMIC?
 
Meridian said:
Usually assumed figures are 15% for front-wheel drive, 25% for rear wheel and 40% for AWD.
That seems a bit extreme to me. I believe the major component of transmission losses for normal cars will be connections in the driveline rather than weight, and most RWD cars will have the same number of interconnections as most FWD cars, so it's only the extra weight of the longer driveshaft that constitutes an increase in transmission losses, which surely wouldn't be nearly 70% greater?
 
When my Pulsar was RR'd at 315bhp it was putting down 225bhp at the wheels, and thats on a relatively old AWD system which has slightly higher losses than more modern Evo and maybe Scooby transmissions

Someone can do the maths on that figure but I don't think it's as high as 40% :)
 
Stonedofmoo said:
When my Pulsar was RR'd at 315bhp it was putting down 225bhp at the wheels, and thats on a relatively old AWD system which has slightly higher losses than more modern Evo and maybe Scooby transmissions

Someone can do the maths on that figure but I don't think it's as high as 40% :)
About 28.5%
 
Back
Top Bottom