intercooling

Author
Discussion

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
stevieturbo said:
You could possibly try Alan Jeffery in Bristol

http://www.enginetuner.co.uk/tuning.htm
Alan Jeffery has always been in Plymouth, has he opened another place in Bristol now?

Evoluzione

10,345 posts

242 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
stevieturbo said:
Several issues here.

Turbo...I'm sure you seen the thread on PF recently. Whilst I cant comprehend why, all the GT30 graphs they posted seemed horrific for such low powered cars.

The EFR's and indeed some GT35's seemed to spool earlier and make more power...which doesnt make a lot of sense.
Do you have a link Stevie? I also had good results from a GT30 and a 35 which spooled very well and early, but outside of max power outputs it's pointless trying to compare the two as I would spec a motor for one differently to the other.

jontysafe

Original Poster:

2,351 posts

177 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
stevieturbo said:
Several issues here.

Turbo...I'm sure you seen the thread on PF recently. Whilst I cant comprehend why, all the GT30 graphs they posted seemed horrific for such low powered cars.

The EFR's and indeed some GT35's seemed to spool earlier and make more power...which doesnt make a lot of sense.


Fuel, unless you're aiming for 500, 600+hp I really cant see the justification in this. A friends Subaru makes 750hp on 97 plus a little methanol.

It's cheap and easy. You could do it either via mixing with fuel, or via methanol injection. ( or yes you could add toluene instead of methanol. Meth seems cheaper to buy in bulk though, technically neither should be added to road fuel though, tax, hmrc and all that nonsense )
But running a 20% meth to petrol mix is very common these days.

Race fuel is all good and well if it is a race car only and you've deep pockets.

But for anything sub 500hp on a 2.0 turbo car...that expense just seems mental to me, even beyond it, it still seems mental. Maybe 700+ then yes it has real benefits...but then so does a meth/toluene mix at a fraction of the cost.

Knock and M400, you will need to buy Motec's SKM unit for this.


If you havent bought an ecu yet, just get a Syvecs S6, it will do everything you need in one box, and then some.
I`ve already bought the Motec M400, I like the complete range that Motec offer. Expensive but compatibility and completeness of the range won me over. That and a lot of people map it.
I`m only talking about fuel additives because I`m going to be knock limited running 9.5:1 and 1.8 BAR of boost. It`s no hassle for me as I`ll only be doing very limited mileage. I`m not keen on the idea of water/meth injection as it`s just another thing to go wrong. The car already has an injection system and fuel tank and if additives can be used that way, whether it`s methanol or anything else this appeals just for simplicity`s sake.
I`m trying to simplify the whole car. I`m going away from water/air chargecooling to a large front mount air/air intercooler and a rear mount engine rad so I can get a decent size. The rad will be in airflow in the roll cage not in the bodywork like has been done before.
I know the car will be over specced for the power (circa 550bhp) but that certainly makes a change from what I`ve seen!

anonymous-user

53 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
chuntington101 said:
Steve, re meth and combining (not adding) to normal fuel. Have you seen the GM flex fuel system? Seems like a great little bit of kit that can basically detect how much meth is in the fuel and alter the tune accordingly. Do you know if any of the aftermarket ECUs support this as it would make increasing octane in your fuel easier and safer (less chance of using he wrong tube as it dose if on the fly).
You can buy the "flexfuel" sensor off the shelf in the US, it outputs a 5v signal in proportion to the ethanol content of the fuel passing through it. Feed that into your ecu, and use compensation tables to adjust fuel mass, ignition angle and boost to suit ;-)

(search for "flexfuel sensor" etc)

anonymous-user

53 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
jontysafe said:
The rad will be in airflow in the roll cage not in the bodywork like has been done before.
er, Parachute anyone!! ;-)


(put the rad below the airflow line, and duct in air to the front of it, using a duct with a CSA of max about 60% of the radiators frontal area)

jontysafe

Original Poster:

2,351 posts

177 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
jontysafe said:
The rad will be in airflow in the roll cage not in the bodywork like has been done before.
er, Parachute anyone!! ;-)


(put the rad below the airflow line, and duct in air to the front of it, using a duct with a CSA of max about 60% of the radiators frontal area)
I agree that it would cause a lot of drag if it was bolt upright but it will be tilted back so as you say to reduce airflow to circa 60% and will also have some ducting.
The car will spend 99% of it`s life below speeds that would cause aerodynamic issues because Westfields are pants!

chuntington101

5,733 posts

235 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
chuntington101 said:
Steve, re meth and combining (not adding) to normal fuel. Have you seen the GM flex fuel system? Seems like a great little bit of kit that can basically detect how much meth is in the fuel and alter the tune accordingly. Do you know if any of the aftermarket ECUs support this as it would make increasing octane in your fuel easier and safer (less chance of using he wrong tube as it dose if on the fly).
You can buy the "flexfuel" sensor off the shelf in the US, it outputs a 5v signal in proportion to the ethanol content of the fuel passing through it. Feed that into your ecu, and use compensation tables to adjust fuel mass, ignition angle and boost to suit ;-)

(search for "flexfuel sensor" etc)
Cheers Max!

So if you had two tanks of fuel, one normal and one with 100% methanol and you mixed the fuel pre fuel rail (and flex fuel sensor) would you need to let anyone know about it or is this 'legal' option for added octane?

stevieturbo

17,229 posts

246 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
Alan Jeffery has always been in Plymouth, has he opened another place in Bristol now?
Mmmm are the two places not close ? lol, somewhere down the bottom left, Plymouth sounds about right though


Evoluzione said:
Do you have a link Stevie? I also had good results from a GT30 and a 35 which spooled very well and early, but outside of max power outputs it's pointless trying to compare the two as I would spec a motor for one differently to the other.
page 3 or 4 i think it starts

http://passionford.com/forum/general-car-related-d...

FFS I've used turbos bigger than GT35's and they've spooled much faster than those GT30's and made about 200hp more !

I've used basic GT30's on 2.0 and 2.5 Subarus and both spool far far faster than those Cossies. The horrendous lag on them just makes no sense.

stevieturbo

17,229 posts

246 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
jontysafe said:
I`ve already bought the Motec M400, I like the complete range that Motec offer. Expensive but compatibility and completeness of the range won me over. That and a lot of people map it.
I`m only talking about fuel additives because I`m going to be knock limited running 9.5:1 and 1.8 BAR of boost. It`s no hassle for me as I`ll only be doing very limited mileage. I`m not keen on the idea of water/meth injection as it`s just another thing to go wrong. The car already has an injection system and fuel tank and if additives can be used that way, whether it`s methanol or anything else this appeals just for simplicity`s sake.
I`m trying to simplify the whole car. I`m going away from water/air chargecooling to a large front mount air/air intercooler and a rear mount engine rad so I can get a decent size. The rad will be in airflow in the roll cage not in the bodywork like has been done before.
I know the car will be over specced for the power (circa 550bhp) but that certainly makes a change from what I`ve seen!
Motec are definitely very good there is no doubt. But you still need to buy extras to do basic tasks that should be already included.
eg lambda control, logging to name two.
For knock control you need to buy their SKM, more boxes and wiring.

As max is implying, if you ramp boost with rpm to limit mid range torque, then on pump fuel alone you may still be fine as keeping boost lower in the mid range should reduce any knock problems.

But simply adding 20% meth to your petrol is a very good and cheap fuel upgrade and should let you use your boost without any problems, and it wont fail.

Whilst I've never used it yet, apparently flex fuel sensors can detect a change in the fuel when there is methanol in there too vs straight pump, so if the ecu allows it this could automatically make changes for whatever mix of meth you add which would be handy.
Not sure if this applies to all sensors though but I know some Subaru guys mentioned they had it working ok.

So it doesnt only just work with ethanol.

That would allow you different boost ramps/rates with pump fuel only vs pump+meth without you needing to do anything, again if the ecu actually allows this to be configured.

If mixing meth/toluene/e85 with the petrol, the fuel system will need additional flow capacity over straight pump fuel only.

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
stevieturbo said:
Mr2Mike said:
Alan Jeffery has always been in Plymouth, has he opened another place in Bristol now?
Mmmm are the two places not close ? lol, somewhere down the bottom left, Plymouth sounds about right though
Only about 120 miles apart smile

stevieturbo

17,229 posts

246 months

Friday 8th May 2015
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
Only about 120 miles apart smile
You can tell I'm rarely near that part of the world biggrin

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 9th May 2015
quotequote all
I've never really understood why people get worried about the boost threshold in "tuned" cars? I'd much rather have an extra 500 useable rpm at high power rather than the same 500rpm at low power (ie low rpm)! And assuming your car has a gearbox, then you can just use that!

(And there's also the fact that the mapping of the car has a huge influence on the boost threshold too, and modern tricks with antilag strategies mean once moving you can have full boost pretty much down to idle speed if you want)

stevieturbo

17,229 posts

246 months

Saturday 9th May 2015
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
I've never really understood why people get worried about the boost threshold in "tuned" cars? I'd much rather have an extra 500 useable rpm at high power rather than the same 500rpm at low power (ie low rpm)! And assuming your car has a gearbox, then you can just use that!

(And there's also the fact that the mapping of the car has a huge influence on the boost threshold too, and modern tricks with antilag strategies mean once moving you can have full boost pretty much down to idle speed if you want)
Because hard anti-lag isnt practical for everyone, for road cars etc, and even some race events dont permit it for noise regs.

As for 500rpm....again that depends what is referred to as high or low.

We changed cams in a car that was making decent power from around 6-9k. Despite changing many things before this to no avail to try and improve things at the lower end, changing to much milder cams yielded over 1000rpm improvement in spool with maybe a loss of 7-800rpm at the top end.
And the car is far far faster and more usable with the lower rpm spool.

So in this case having more up top did nothing whatsoever for performance, and actually hurt it quite badly.

And trying to push higher rpm's creates it's own problems and expenses.

For most applications power in the 4-8500rpm is most practical for a typical 4cyl type engine.
For road use only, you could easily desire a much lower range.

And just because a car has a gearbox, doesnt mean those ratios are always perfectly matched to what you're using it for.
But yes, you could also spend a fortune on a box with access to different ratios too for different uses.

jontysafe

Original Poster:

2,351 posts

177 months

Thursday 28th January 2016
quotequote all
Things moving in the right direction again, albeit slowly.

Have bought a Titan dry sump system and off to see engine builder in Saturday.

Another Westie has gone in the same direction as mine on the twin scroll front : http://www.westfield-cosworth.com/build-diary/2015...

I have spoken to Nortech and will do the same with Efr7163 turbo pegged at 1.8bar.
Have to speak to engine builder about whether we are going solid lifters and plenum/throttle body options.
He's keen that we keep power under 500 as he likened the car to a coffin!

Going to keep the charge cooler route but some nice ah fabrications slanted tube radiators rear mounted and ducted.
Have had the block cleaned and checked and work starts on porting the head soon. I'm still waiting for confirmation on piston clearances as builder said they were a little wide and if that's the case will have to get some custom ones in order.
I must admit I've been pretty recalctritant at getting moving in this as we've been refurbishing our cottage and have a baby due in August.

jontysafe

Original Poster:

2,351 posts

177 months

Sunday 31st January 2016
quotequote all
Piston to wall clearance is a little all over the place, up to 5 thou in places. Going to re-hone and fit new rings.

If I wasn't going to be running the engine in vacuum then I'd be worried. But as I already have the Pistons and rings we're going to go with them.


stevieturbo

17,229 posts

246 months

Sunday 31st January 2016
quotequote all
jontysafe said:
Piston to wall clearance is a little all over the place, up to 5 thou in places. Going to re-hone and fit new rings.

If I wasn't going to be running the engine in vacuum then I'd be worried. But as I already have the Pistons and rings we're going to go with them.
In what respect ? Pistons not correct shape or bores not correct shape ?

And are you saying a 5 thou variance ? or just up to 5 thou clearance ?

jontysafe

Original Poster:

2,351 posts

177 months

Sunday 31st January 2016
quotequote all
No there's a 3-5thou variance across all bores.

stevieturbo

17,229 posts

246 months

Sunday 31st January 2016
quotequote all
jontysafe said:
No there's a 3-5thou variance across all bores.
So the bores are not round ?

Sometimes I wonder if there's even any point worrying about such measurements on a cold, unstressed engine.

They're bound to all change at 100degC and with everything torqued up.

jontysafe

Original Poster:

2,351 posts

177 months

Sunday 31st January 2016
quotequote all
It would seem there's a bit of a taper on one or two of the bores but we're only talking 2 thou.

As you say once up to operating temp and running under boost a lot of engine builders like a bit extra clearance anyway.

We're doing a dry build to take a load of measurements and see where we're at.

There's a load of weird things going on re oil system mods, bearing orientation and weights that only Julian Godfrey knows why. I guess that's why he charges so many tens of thousands an engine. I don't have that kind of money though.

Have to buy a dry sump system as the Titan one I was going to get has fallen through. Trying to decide Opi or Pace at the mo. That's a major part of the build budget gone.


stevieturbo

17,229 posts

246 months

Sunday 31st January 2016
quotequote all