So apparently a Stage 5 tune for my 9³ Aero is good for 415/532

"Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls!" (spikejnz) 11/20/2013 at 15:27 • Filed to: None

1

31

I may just have to order one of these.

shinsen > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 15:31

0

wow, the speedometer moves just like a corvettes....surge to 40, 1 second pause, surge to 90, 1 second pause, and before you know it you're hitting 130....Yesss

davedave1111 > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 15:31

3

That's only 0.78. Is it really worth it?

Yowen - not necessarily not spaghetti and meatballs > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 15:38

0

What are the stock numbers?

GhostZ > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 15:43

0

415HP and 532 Torque? Or 415 on pump gas and 532 on E85?

Because 415HP and 532 ft/lbs is quite pathetic for an engine that should be good up to 6000rpm.

KillerRaccoon - Group J's Sébastien Loeb > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 15:57

0

Link?

GhostZ > GhostZ 11/20/2013 at 16:05

0

Oh, I get it. 532 newton meters. That makes perfect sense.

LandSpeed-DSM > GhostZ 11/20/2013 at 16:09

2

This just in! Peak torque figures being higher than peak power are common where (with respect to displacement) small turbos are employed!

More at 11.

GhostZ > LandSpeed-DSM 11/20/2013 at 16:22

1

First off, I'm fairly confident after making that comment that the peak torque is actually in newton meters, which would put it at 392 ft/lbs, which is perfectly reasonable for that engine.

Second, producing nearly 30% more torque (assuming it was actually ft/lbs) than HP on an engine that normally gets its peak power at 5000 or 5500 rpm means that you're losing 100 ft/lbs or more between peak torque and peak HP (indicating a bad tune, small turbo or not), or you pulled peak HP really low in the RPM range. In order for the engine to do that, it's not just a chip and turbo swap away, you'd have to change the cam profile, intake, and exhaust as well, or stroke the motor considerably. Either way, it would mean that you spent a lot of money to get only a fraction of the performance you should be getting.

Anyone who spends enough money to almost double the output of an engine is not going to make the engine run best at a significantly lower RPM, especially not if its been professionally tuned for performance.

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > GhostZ 11/20/2013 at 16:34

1

415 hp 532 lb-ft. That's for a tune, injectors, front-mount, a 19t turbo, intake and exhaust. All told it's about $4000 for all that.

http://www.jzwbmwtuning.com/product/v6-2-8…

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > davedave1111 11/20/2013 at 16:35

0

0.78 what?

davedave1111 > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 16:38

2

I don't know, you didn't give a unit. But 415/532=0.78...

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > Yowen - not necessarily not spaghetti and meatballs 11/20/2013 at 16:40

0

255 hp, 262 lb-ft.

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > KillerRaccoon - Group J's Sébastien Loeb 11/20/2013 at 16:40

0

http://www.jzwbmwtuning.com/product/v6-2-8…

Yowen - not necessarily not spaghetti and meatballs > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 16:41

1

This tune more than doubles torque? It comes close to doubling hp? That seems like quite a lofty claim. Is it more than just a tuner?

GhostZ > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 16:42

0

I'm actually really surprised that it isn't higher.

If you can pull 532 ft/lbs low on the powertrain, why not pull it higher? The engine was built to keep making good torque until 5500rpm. Is the turbo just not able to keep flowing air as the RPMs increase? With control over exhaust, variable valve timing, and intake, the only reason the peak torque should drop in the RPM band (which would cause this larger hp/tq split) is from the turbo itself I would think.

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > GhostZ 11/20/2013 at 16:46

2

Nope, lb-ft. Peak torque in stock trim comes in at 1900 RPM. This moves it up to 3500, but there's still a significant amount of torque available down low. A 19t turbo isn't significantly-larger than the stock 15t, so that choke is somewhat expected. There's another guy that is doing a build with a Holeset HX35 and custom manifolds, and so far it looks like the torque-curve is going to be straighter.

I'm still considering just going for a Stage 1 Aggressive tune, which bumps output up to 320 hp / 409 tq.

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > davedave1111 11/20/2013 at 16:47

0

415/532 hp/lb-ft

LandSpeed-DSM > GhostZ 11/20/2013 at 16:50

1

So how many cars have you tuned, exactly? Go watch the video. When you get to the parts list, pause and look at the bit that says "TD04-19T." Remember this is on a high VE 2.3L

Now google how big a TD04 family turbine wheel is and what size housings they are found in.. this is more than likely the dinky 47mm Ind. /40mm Exd. wheel. With a 19T (46/58) compressor on the other end of the shaft.

There's your answer. This is not at all uncommon, torque is simply falling off faster than its relationship with horsepower needs to rise with engine speed. The turbine is choking and engine demand is catching up with the compressor. Drive pressure is rising as boost is falling off.

I see this often on 1.5-2.0Ls with T25-16G sized turbos, thats with the larger TD05H turbine wheel and the 6cm/7cm nozzle area housings and divorced wastegates to boot.

LandSpeed-DSM > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 16:56

3

One thing that never ceases to amaze me is that this site is populated with a bunch of internet expert "gear heads" that have no practical experience with the things they comment on so confidently.

GhostZ > LandSpeed-DSM 11/20/2013 at 16:57

0

I actually did just that after posting (except that I just went to the JZW website instead) and compared it to similarly sized Garret turbos from the Garret website, and noticed they weren't rated much above 400HP either. At the same time, I still think that some extra money on the valvetrain could seriously untap the engine more than just pushing that small turbo further beyond its capabilities.

davedave1111 > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 17:00

1

Well then, 0.78 hp/lb-ft.

LandSpeed-DSM > GhostZ 11/20/2013 at 17:07

0

What would you do with the valvetrain? More cam with the same turbo would cause this to fall off faster if you shift VE to the right. Messing with cam timing would net marginal results in this case.

A Compressor/Turbine change is what is needed to make more power at that point.. even a TD05H-16G which, despite the "16" in the compressor designation, is actually larger on the compressor side and considerably bigger on the turbine, would pick up power across the board but especially in the upper rev range.

With 2.3L it's not until you start getting up into 50mm+ compressors and comparable hot-sides would there be much to gain from head work or cam swaps.

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > LandSpeed-DSM 11/20/2013 at 17:10

1

I'm not sure if you're talking about me...or someone else.

edit: nevermind, figured it out.

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > LandSpeed-DSM 11/20/2013 at 17:11

1

Aaccctually it's a 2.8L V6t with a TD04-15t from the factory, but the rest of your statement is correct. The 19t upgrade is literally just tossing a 19t wheel on the CRA and then machining the compressor housing for clearance.

LandSpeed-DSM > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 17:24

0

So, it's still a TD04-19T.. is the Factory turbine the TD04 HL?

The extra half liter would further exacerbate the problem.

Thanks for clarifying! I thought this was on a B235R 4-cyl.

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > LandSpeed-DSM 11/20/2013 at 17:28

0

It is! TD04HL-15t. It's a small turbo, but man does the torque come on fast. I usually shift at 5000-5500, though (despite the 7k limit), because it just completely runs out of steam.

The large-turbo builds really uncork this car. The unfortunate thing is that the car uses a unique twin-scroll flange, so aside from welding on a different flange or making a custom exhaust, a 19t is your only option.

LandSpeed-DSM > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 11/20/2013 at 17:36

0

Yea that's like running the factory T25 on second gen DSMs. Just too small.

Currently rocking a 67mm/99mm compressor on my 2.0L and a big old divided T4 turbine. Would never go back to T3, let alone stock footprint!

Saracen > Yowen - not necessarily not spaghetti and meatballs 11/20/2013 at 19:03

0

I don't think he meant "tune", I think he meant "package". It's a full 3" exhaust, big turbo, injectors, intercooler, and runs E85.

I'm more skeptical as to the automatic transmission's ability to not explode.

gmctavish needs more space > davedave1111 11/21/2013 at 00:48

2

I'm just perusing through oppo and came across this and I can't stop laughing

Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! > LandSpeed-DSM 11/21/2013 at 08:59

0

I'm looking at other options. One I've thought of is locating a spare connecting section (connects front and rear cylinder bank exhauts to the turbo), having a new flange welded on, and throwing on a larger twin-scroll turbo. I'd have to figure out a few other things as well, because the recirc valve is actually a solenoid rather than mechanical—removing it would trigger an CEL.

This is the guy running a custom build. It has swept log-style manifolds, dual external wastegates, and a Holeset HX35R. He's looking at over 550hp 600lb-ft at the wheels. Yeah, that could be fun.

http://www.saabcentral.com/forums/showthr…

TwoToneLoser > Spikejnz - Ezekiel 25:17, trolls! 09/30/2014 at 21:52

0

So, when does the trans explode?