what sort of EGTs are you getting on such high boost?
larger pipework will make the pressure drop larger, increased volume, means that the initial pressure has to be greater to sustain it.
Getting mine mapped in the next few weeks i hope, then off to the rollers for a power run. Had enough of driving a car that i have tried to map myself! LOL, best left to pros with experience.
larger pipework will make the pressure drop larger, increased volume, means that the initial pressure has to be greater to sustain it.
Getting mine mapped in the next few weeks i hope, then off to the rollers for a power run. Had enough of driving a car that i have tried to map myself! LOL, best left to pros with experience.
Last edited:
wont it just aid the flow of the turbo and get rid of any restrictions?surely jabba are experienced enough to be able to advise Sam correctly
wont it just aid the flow of the turbo and get rid of any restrictions?surely jabba are experienced enough to be able to advise Sam correctly
Just voicing my thoughts, need somebody else with a-level physics to comment please, been a while since i left sixth form!
The volume of the pipework will not make the turbo work harder. Once it's pressurised its pressurised. Reduced velocity and smoother bends will reduce pressure drop.
Your engine at 4000rpm is consuming 40litres of air per second, so a few extra litres of intake pipework will make minimal difference to lag.
Your engine at 4000rpm is consuming 40litres of air per second, so a few extra litres of intake pipework will make minimal difference to lag.
OK, cheers for clearing that up. I did admit it has been a while
Would changing the size of the pipework have that much effect on power? I have never experimented trying larger pipework as I have never seen it as a restriction in my setup.
Does anyone have any real proof of the gains to be had??
Isnt redcued velocity of air a bad thing? I would have thought that the idea is to get the air in and out of the engine as fast as possible? or does the increase in volume compensate for it?
Im not trying to knock anyones ideas here, just curious and like to have other peoples views, espiecally if they can prove it
Would changing the size of the pipework have that much effect on power? I have never experimented trying larger pipework as I have never seen it as a restriction in my setup.
Does anyone have any real proof of the gains to be had??
Isnt redcued velocity of air a bad thing? I would have thought that the idea is to get the air in and out of the engine as fast as possible? or does the increase in volume compensate for it?
Im not trying to knock anyones ideas here, just curious and like to have other peoples views, espiecally if they can prove it
@Sam, car sounds like it should be really drivable, with a great torque and power band. I think that the gt3071 is a great turbo and suits the 1.8t well. 420bhp should start to make it feel fast and give you that "sweaty hand" effect LOL
I went for the larger hotside which does give me about an extra 300 rpm lag, but hopefully a bit more grunt. Time will tell.
I went for the larger hotside which does give me about an extra 300 rpm lag, but hopefully a bit more grunt. Time will tell.
OK, cheers for clearing that up. I did admit it has been a while
Would changing the size of the pipework have that much effect on power? I have never experimented trying larger pipework as I have never seen it as a restriction in my setup.
Does anyone have any real proof of the gains to be had??
Isnt redcued velocity of air a bad thing? I would have thought that the idea is to get the air in and out of the engine as fast as possible? or does the increase in volume compensate for it?
Im not trying to knock anyones ideas here, just curious and like to have other peoples views, espiecally if they can prove it
Reduced velocity at the port is a bad thing not in the pipework pre-say
reduce pumping losses and the corrspoinding psi loss. tight bends, section changes, all things to avoid for a nice flowing low loss system.
fill time of the pipe is a lag related issue, but unless going silly big then unliikely to notice much difference.
in and out as fast and effeciently as possible.
I am running 63mm pipework still so am personally interested how my pipework and FMIc cope with the flowrates its going to see. (will stick a pressure tapping either side to see and review. My turbo outlet is 63mm (OD)
Well car is now back and 2L conversion is booked, 420 Hp and 400+ Torques
First is the pictures of new 70 mm pipe work all the way through, New intercooler (not pictured)
AND THE MONEY SHOT (see it is a bit jagged at top, due to pistons!) hence doing 2L stroker
Will do bigger write up when not on Iphone
First is the pictures of new 70 mm pipe work all the way through, New intercooler (not pictured)
AND THE MONEY SHOT
(see it is a bit jagged at top, due to pistons!) hence doing 2L stroker
Will do bigger write up when not on Iphone
Last edited:
mike told him the compression was too low.jagged at the top due to the pistons?
jagged at the top due to the pistons?
mike could only explain it as pistons are verylow comp, running silly amounts of timing ! Thinks it piston noise causing timing pull in odd manner
jamiebennett81
Guest
I dont have a scooby doo, but if someone who break it down in an ABC manner to why or how pistons would do that?
or is it a mis diagnosis from Mike?
or is it a mis diagnosis from Mike?
hmm
needs some more investigation first me thinks.
if CR is that low then I would expect to see it in a static compression test.
do you know what number the "silly" amount of timing was?
mines running 33 degrees of advance top end so far @ 500bhp (it will be less when its running its full boost) no such oscillation, but I am not running knock sensor controls, (if) they are pinging..
usually slappy pistons would give high CF's on just off idle rpms, not when loaded and under boost.
Similar threads
