Dyno results (FFWD BIG TURBO!)

[90_Shelby]

Well last year we made exactly 386fwhp @ 24psi. We had one run that was not a clean one and we couldn't back it up at 400fwhp. This year we made 460fwhp and 450 ft/lbs @ 28psi.................... Which exceeded the cylinder pressure limits of a stock Neon MLS head gasket. We weren't done, and the boost level will be raised beyond 28 psi. The engine and tranny work flawlessly with close to 50 dyno runs and the engine being shut off only a couple times. Overall we are very happy with the results.

We also had the oppurtunity to go for a little cruise last night w ith about 400fwhp. Holy SHIT!!! The car comes on hard and keeps pulling, spinning all the way through first and second (automatic with 3.02 final drive) finally catching up to itself in third with scary and fairly violent torque steer @ 160-170Km/hr. Last year when we ran the 11.84 Leon was seeing about 22psi which works out to about 360fwhp............

We'll be back.

P.S. Another very odd observation......... Our power and torque curves exactly mirrored Maus 706rwhp run..... Except our peaks weren't quite as high. ;)


Burnout Video. http://www.members.shaw.ca/scottrmitchell/Leon/101_0122.AVI

[90_Shelby]

Sleeper?:thumbsup:

[90_Shelby]

:eek: :D :thumbsup:

[90_Shelby]

:whipped: :whipped:

[///M3]

28psi:drool:

:eek: You crazy mang... you crazy

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by 90_Shelby
:whipped: :whipped:

AWESOME snake skin tubes!!!!

[90_Shelby]

Originally posted by 90_Shelby
and the boost level will be raised beyond 28 psi.





Originally posted by ///M3
28psi:drool:

:eek: You crazy mang... you crazy






:thumbsup: :D

[Superesc]

Nice setup!! :thumbsup:

[finboy]

turbo dodge powah!!!!

[rx7_turbo2]

I wouldnt mind seeing the dyno sheet for that. Just to see when the power actually comes on. That's a pretty big exhuast housing on that turbo. S300 correct?

[Ben]

thats awesome!!!

Nice work man!

[hyperwhite]

WOW! :eek: think you'll hit 500 whp anytime soon?

[kolumbo69]

nice numbers man, you should be able to break into the tens easy man 9 with a good hook up. Good job:thumbsup:

[Forcefed]

I luv it, every dam minute MUhahahahha:rofl:

[90_Shelby]

On the street at lower boost levels the turbo seemed to spool a lot sooner than the dyno sheet says for rpm........

The large dip just before 6000rpm was the resultant blown head gasket.

[EK 2.0]

Amazing numbers guys...great job on the Daytona...

Love those FWD Turbo Mopars...:thumbsup:

[Maxt]

Good Number but...

I think in this case that turbo is to large for this application...You would make more power with a smaller turbo, I think you are running down the left side of the map with that turbo, right along the surge line.
I know that turbo, I along with a guy at alamo dug it up out of obscurity, I was gonna use it on my seven but decided to go a different route, the price is right on it though, but the lack of choice of exhuast housing and trims makes it a hard turbo to tune to a specific application, when you have to start borrowing john deere parts catalogs to find housings for it..
A friend of mine runs that same turbo, 9 times out of 10 a piston motor will squeeze more power out of a given turbo than a rotary will, at 20 psi he was over 500 rwhp with it, given the rule of thumb, and your higher boost level you should have been well over 550, but I think its operating out of its sweetspot and probably not in the effiecient range you need it to bring down some really huge numbers....That s300 is airflow wise around a t-51, maybe a tad smaller.
Something like a t-66 would probably be a better match, even a mitsu t-88 would probably be better, incidently the s300 is crossreferenced match for the GT42 in oem applications..max

[90_Shelby]

When we mapped it out, it was to be at 30 psi at around 6000 rpm. The turbine housing should have been a .83 but this turbine housing/wheel combination is the smallest available with this compressor.

The point on the left was 5000 rpm, the point on the right is 6000 rpm. Both were for 30 psi.

Wait a minute. How does a piston engine get more hp from a turbo than a rotary? How often have you seen a 1.3L 4 banger with a TO4e on it making 400 hp?

Also, we mapped based on 540 hp at the flywheel at 30 psi. Our tuning was done on a Dynojet chassis dyno. 2 more psi of boost would put us up to around 485-90 hp at the wheels. What does that work out to at the flywheel?

[90_Shelby]

Keep in mind this car is built to drag race, and transfers power to the wheels through an automatic. It is not being autocrossed, or even driven on the street very often. Once it's spooled in first gear, it stays spooled til it's shut down at the end of the track.

[Maxt]

A rotary is less thermally efficient than a piston engine, thats how, we have to move more air and fuel to make more power, my t04e is a 60 trim, and has made larger numbers on 4 cylinders and sixes than on a 13b that were well tuned, yes I have seen some low t04e numbers on other engines, but that is an exception rather than the rule.
I have seen alot of dyno sheets from motors that are similar to yours in displacement and configuration, and they generally are making more hp with a smaller flow rate turbo, you have more displacment than an sr20, or a toyota 2.0, but for that size of turbo the numbers are a 100 hp low, a t-78/t-88 is a very good match for the high boost 4 cylinder, it spools faster, and they tend to come right down the centre of the maps. This is a case of to much of a good thing, I think there is an easy 100 more hp sitting your car.... Thats why I also never went chasing the s300, the comp side is pretty good for a 13b, but the ass end of that turbo is pretty hard to work with, and there are 2 smaller housings yet available for that turbo...Maxt

[Hollywood]

Originally posted by Maxt
A rotary is less thermally efficient than a piston engine, thats how, we have to move more air and fuel to make more power, my t04e is a 60 trim, and has made larger numbers on 4 cylinders and sixes than on a 13b that were well tuned, yes I have seen some low t04e numbers on other engines, but that is an exception rather than the rule.
I have seen alot of dyno sheets from motors that are similar to yours in displacement and configuration, and they generally are making more hp with a smaller flow rate turbo, you have more displacment than an sr20, or a toyota 2.0, but for that size of turbo the numbers are a 100 hp low, a t-78/t-88 is a very good match for the high boost 4 cylinder, it spools faster, and they tend to come right down the centre of the maps. This is a case of to much of a good thing, I think there is an easy 100 more hp sitting your car.... Thats why I also never went chasing the s300, the comp side is pretty good for a 13b, but the ass end of that turbo is pretty hard to work with, and there are 2 smaller housings yet available for that turbo...Maxt

I agree with Max. A more properly matched turbo would yield more peak WHP. As a reference and SC61 (contains GT parts)which is a much smaller turbo yielded 544whp/412wtq on a SR20DET, which is also .4L less.

http://www.teamenjuku.com/images/dyno.jpg

[Hollywood]

The snake skin ownS yo!

I like it!:thumbsup:

[90_Shelby]

Originally posted by Maxt

I have seen alot of dyno sheets from motors that are similar to yours in displacement and configuration, and they generally are making more hp with a smaller flow rate turbo,


As far as 2.2 and 2.5 Dodges, this engine has now made the most documented wheel horsepower. I think this is the best comparison as fas as our progress in the development of this engine. Although, I would love to compare our 2.5 to an SR20 or 4G63 as far as cylinder head flow numbers, valve diameter, bore size and stroke. We may have more displacement but our engine is a lot less efficient in moving air in and out of the cylinders.

The S300 is responding exactly the way we expected. This is the turbo our sponsor supplied us with, so we will use it and be happy with it for now. Our original choice was a GT42, Alamo insisted on the use of a Schwitzer so we found the closest match for the compressor and went with the smallest combination of wheel and turbine housing they could find.


What are the 2 smaller turbine housings available? How do you know which housing we have right now, in comparison?

[90_Shelby]

Another point to note if we are going to be posting dyno #'s. I'm assuming the SR20 has a manual?


I don't know how the percent loss changes with 4 banger transmissions from auto to manual. With V8's I've seen as little as 8-13% drivetrain loss from flywheel horsepower to rear wheel horsepower and as much as 20-30% loss with automatics. Don't necessarily use these numbers but keep in mind the difference in drivetrain loss with an auto.:thumbsup:


At these power levels that can be a difference of 85whp (using rwd drive figures that I've found.)

P.S. We went 11.84 on 22psi last year, at that boost level we were only making around 365 to the wheels................... Thats not a lot of power to be running 11's with a 2700lb car.

[Hollywood]

Ya I guess I never thought about that, the sr20 drive train loss was proven to be close to 15%.

Your head is stock? No porting, cams etc?

Actually post your mod list so we can see whatcha got!

[90_Shelby]

Originally posted by Hollywood
Ya I guess I never thought about that, the sr20 drive train loss was proven to be close to 15%.

Your head is stock? No porting, cams etc?

Actually post your mod list so we can see whatcha got!


This makes a lot more sense than assuming what we have.:thumbsup:

The bore and stroke of a 2.5 is 3.44x4.09. Small bore big stroke, small bore, more valve shrouding. The head is pretty much stock, slightly polished ports, stock cams, stock springs, stock valves, adjustable cam gears. Custom plenum on shortened runners of a stock intake, tubular header, 9-1 compression, with forged pistons and Eagle rods swinging on a stock cast crank. 71mm throttlebody, 3" IC plumbing, 3 1/2" exhaust. Intercooler, 3 stock turbo Dodge I/C's welded together. Built automatic with manual valvebody (Ricks racing Trannys) and the converter stalls around 3500-4000rpm depending on the boost level. Thats about it for hard parts.

P.S. The ports on a Neon head are about half the size of a Talon head, and quite a bit smaller than an SR20 head.

[HillBilly]

how the hell do you manage to hook up with it???

nice to see a fast Daytona....

prior to the Stealth, a 91 daytona was my daily driver. Just never thought it had this much potential.

nice work:thumbsup:

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by 90_Shelby



This makes a lot more sense than assuming what we have.:thumbsup:

The bore and stroke of a 2.5 is 3.44x4.09. Small bore big stroke, small bore, more valve shrouding. The head is pretty much stock, slightly polished ports, stock cams, stock springs, stock valves, adjustable cam gears. Custom plenum on shortened runners of a stock intake, tubular header, 9-1 compression, with forged pistons and Eagle rods swinging on a stock cast crank. 71mm throttlebody, 3" IC plumbing, 3 1/2" exhaust. Intercooler, 3 stock turbo Dodge I/C's welded together. Built automatic with manual valvebody (Ricks racing Trannys) and the converter stalls around 3500-4000rpm depending on the boost level. Thats about it for hard parts.

P.S. The ports on a Neon head are about half the size of a Talon head, and quite a bit smaller than an SR20 head.

See that's the nice thing here. Lots of people who posted a dyno number like this would have taken offence to the fact a few people started asking questions like this. Instead you've seemed to welcome it and answered all the questions.

I think the S300 is a little large for this particular application and I think more power can be made if a different turbo was used. HOWEVER you seem more than satisfied with the number it made and the current setup so in the end what does it matter? I say turn up the boost and let us know when it will be at the track.

Max and I both picked the brains of the guy's at Alamo regarding both the S300 and S200 models. Problem was that lots of the different sizes of housings for those turbos are not availble unless it's a warranty replacement situation. Finding the different applications takes considerable Sherlock Holmesing. The focus of Borg Warner at this point in time is not us car enthusiasts unfortunately. The guys at Alamo are hoping this changes and too that end they go out of there way to find Borg Warner applications for guys like us to use.

[JCX]

I <3 turdbo dodges.

Congrats!!! :burnout:

[RT16V]

Originally posted by Hollywood


I agree with Max. A more properly matched turbo would yield more peak WHP. As a reference and SC61 (contains GT parts)which is a much smaller turbo yielded 544whp/412wtq on a SR20DET, which is also .4L less.

http://www.teamenjuku.com/images/dyno.jpg

Something to be considered here is the 2.5L & it's inherant dislike for high RPM breathing. As you can see from the bore & stroke numbers posted when you start to spin it beyond 6500 or so, the piston speeds become very, very high. Which really is what limits high RPM power (or rather longevity) on that engine in my opinion.

The SR20 is a great platform for high RPM fun with it's "square" bore & stroke of 3.385" or so. You can aloso note on that dyno plot of the SC61 powered SR20, that the hp at the 6500 mark is in the neighborhood of 475 or so hp (if you smooth the slight 'dip' in the curve) - so it's very similar to the S300 on the 2.5L Dodge. Though the plot does look like the SC61 might spool a tad quicker on the SR20 - but it's hard to tell.

I think the S300 would have been a better suited turbo for this car with a slightly smaller A/R on the hot side - especially given the dimesnsions of the turbine wheel. But, as said earlier, this was apparently the only available housing that could be fitted.

The turbo is working as expected, which is very reassuring every once in a while.

[euro_racer]

:eek: that is one crazy shelby chrysler, congrats man :thumbsup:

[Maxt]

Yes the sr 20 does rev higher and breathe better, so its mass flow rate is also more.. Thats also why this turbo is a poor match for this motor, if you matched a smaller compressor wheel that would match the flow rate better , the point of inertia would be lower and you would spool quicker, thus givin you torque earlier, and in turn more horspower, which torque of a period of time. spool late, with a small power band, and the hp suffers as that dyno graph bears out... The turbo on the secret service is better matched to the engine take a look from 300 hp +, the Secret service powerband is about a 1000 rpm longer. A smaller a/r turbine housing would help this out, but the flow rate is still way to much for that motor you will spool better but have higher back pressure, which seems to affect hp more than compressor sizing at the top end... Try the larger of the s200's out and I'll bet you make more power... IF the compressor outflows your engine that badly, there is no point in trying to turn a compressor and turbine shaft that large and heavy is there...
The s300 originally came with a big dog legged 1.15, thats a 1.00 housing you are using, there is a .94 and a .83 availabe as well, considering Alamo is right next door, it shouldn'tbe that hard to get your hands on it...Maxt

[RT16V]

Originally posted by Maxt
Yes the sr 20 does rev higher and breathe better, so its mass flow rate is also more.. Thats also why this turbo is a poor match for this motor, if you matched a smaller compressor wheel that would match the flow rate better , the point of inertia would be lower and you would spool quicker, thus givin you torque earlier, and in turn more horspower, which torque of a period of time.
The s300 originally came with a big dog legged 1.15, thats a 1.00 housing you are using, there is a .94 and a .83 availabe as well, considering Alamo is right next door, it shouldn'tbe that hard to get your hands on it...Maxt

Yes, it's mass flow rate is more - at RPM's greater than that which the 2.5L will operate in. Below 6500 rpm, the mass flow rate is likely very comparable. What the 2.5L Dodge makes over displacement , is given back up to the SR20 in efficiency.
After all the research I did with this engine & various turbo's, I bellieve that plain & simple the limiting factor to this turbo being best is can be for this car, is the turbine A/R. Frankly, for the beefiest powerband, something like an .83 would have been ideal. In my opinion, the S200 wouldn't have supported the 500whp goal much better than the 50 trim TO4E.
I'd still like to measure the backpressure in the exhaust manifold with that big housing on there now.....I'd be curious to see how it compares to some of the 'hybrid' data on smaller set-ups.

Blaine

[Maxt]

I had maps for the all the s200's, there is probably around 8 or 10 different trims available, there are two trims available that are better in flow than the to4e 60 trim and a little less than the t-66, the only downside was in the internal wastegate, but I beleive Mr.wells said there was a different turbine that could be mated to it, and they were cheap, like 800-900 new.
A friend of mine that is running the s300, on his 13b also had the s300's shaft cut down to try and shed some of its wieght and improve the inertia point, with a half bridge the spool was decent, and the power curve decent but a half bridge 13b rivals a sb chev in airflow.
But even with smaller turbine, the airflows are still higher than what you need for that motor given the limited rpm, its simply far to big for that setup, and its not very often I say that, I love big turbo's but I really think its overkill and a total mismatch, given I have seen what it can do on other engines...Maxt

[RT16V]

Originally posted by Maxt
I had maps for the all the s200's, there is probably around 8 or 10 different trims available, there are two trims available that are better in flow than the to4e 60 trim and a little less than the t-66, the only downside was in the internal wastegate, but I beleive Mr.wells said there was a different turbine that could be mated to it, and they were cheap, like 800-900 new.
A friend of mine that is running the s300, on his 13b also had the s300's shaft cut down to try and shed some of its wieght and improve the inertia point, with a half bridge the spool was decent, and the power curve decent but a half bridge 13b rivals a sb chev in airflow.
But even with smaller turbine, the airflows are still higher than what you need for that motor given the limited rpm, its simply far to big for that setup, and its not very often I say that, I love big turbo's but I really think its overkill and a total mismatch, given I have seen what it can do on other engines...Maxt

How many trims do you suppose there are for the S300? I only compared a single S300 map with a single S200 map. If I remember correctly, there were lots of turbine wheel/housing options for the S200 - but not for the S300. This just from the data sheets I have. I will have to look when I get home.

The smaller turbine won't chnage the compressors flow charactaristics, it will change the operating RPM of that compressor wheel.

Blaine

[Dj_Stylz]

:eek: :drool:

[Maxt]

Originally posted by RT16V

The smaller turbine won't chnage the compressors flow charactaristics, it will change the operating RPM of that compressor wheel.

Blaine
Thats what I just said in my last post....:confused:
No, there is only one trim for the s300 compressor, but the s200's there are plenty, BW even makes a t04b model that is similar in flow to the 60-1, and its cheap like 500.00 new
The turbo you should look at is the s2E, it will do just about 53 lb/min at 2.8 pr at 72% and thats just about centre line in the map, while your torque may stay the same or drop a little, your overall powerband should get larger, and thats half the battle, especially with a low rpm cieling like that motor has..Get the boost threshold down to the high 2's and good things should happen, also, if your backpressure is within reason or low, add some more overlap to the cams, it really has a huge effect on spool...maxt

[RT16V]

Originally posted by Maxt

Thats what I just said in my last post....:confused:
No, there is only one trim for the s300 compressor, but the s200's there are plenty, BW even makes a t04b model that is similar in flow to the 60-1, and its cheap like 500.00 new
The turbo you should look at is the s2E, it will do just about 53 lb/min at 2.8 pr at 72% and thats just about centre line in the map, while your torque may stay the same or drop a little, your overall powerband should get larger, and thats half the battle, especially with a low rpm cieling like that motor has..Get the boost threshold down to the high 2's and good things should happen, also, if your backpressure is within reason or low, add some more overlap to the cams, it really has a huge effect on spool...maxt

Then there is no confusion - the S300 really would be slightly better suited to this application with smaller turbine charactaristics. Which isn't an option, unfortunately.

Last year's combo of a 50 trim TO4E had a boost threshold in the mid high 2's. That was too low to hook up effectively - with a very large amount of torque at roughly 3500 rpm. The limits of the compressor were also apparent with peak power being maintained from 4000 or so up to redline.

In no way would I argue this turbo as the best possible combo for the car. I would say it is much better than you have given it credit for. Those are just our differing opinions, at least a discussion like this can happen without a load of BS in the mix.

Later,

Blaine

[Maxt]

That 50 trim sounds like a better turbo, however a move to a 60 trim would give you more airflow, and then you could clip the wheel to play with the spool characteristics.
Ask Alamo, about the garrett from the 8.0 litre ford diesels, its a 57/60 trim, with 4" inlet and p trim wheel...
The schwitzer stuff is nice and cheap, thats why I looked at it, but the tuning with the oddball shit gets tiring after awhile, looking for parts...
A freind of mine has a .83 housing, I will see if he wants to do a trade for your 1.0...Maxt

[90_Shelby]

Maybe you know differently, but from what I researched, the smaller housings you can get off of John Deere turbos, have similar sized turbine wheels as ours or bigger........?

As far as our old turbo being a better match, try to keep in mind we are fighting for traction in a high powered front wheel drive. A more linear power curve is much easier to hook up than a fast spooling T3/T4. As cool as it is to light the tires at 90km/hr with 500 ft/lbs to the wheels.... a turbo with more lag will give us a better chance of hooking up.

[HillBilly]

Originally posted by 90_Shelby
a turbo with more lag will give us a better chance of hooking up.



horsepower is useless unless it can be transferred to the ground:thumbsup:

Time for some slicks on the front of the daytona!

[LancerShelby]

Originally posted by Stealth R/T




horsepower is useless unless it can be transferred to the ground:thumbsup:

Time for some slicks on the front of the daytona!

He was running slicks last year.


Oh, and for you who haven't seen Leon's car go here.... www.cardomain.com/id/dohcdaytona

[Maxt]

Originally posted by 90_Shelby
Maybe you know differently, but from what I researched, the smaller housings you can get off of John Deere turbos, have similar sized turbine wheels as ours or bigger........?

As far as our old turbo being a better match, try to keep in mind we are fighting for traction in a high powered front wheel drive. A more linear power curve is much easier to hook up than a fast spooling T3/T4. As cool as it is to light the tires at 90km/hr with 500 ft/lbs to the wheels.... a turbo with more lag will give us a better chance of hooking up.

More linear? Maybe your definition of linear is different than mine. That power curve is hardly that linear, there ain't much happening to 4500 then it pretty much spikes... Getting the power earlier, (again with a smaller turbo) will produce a more linear curve, and as you say , easier to hook up, making it a wet sponge to the 80'foot mark will make it easier to hook up, but wonl't make the car faster, that strategy just wastes some of the length of the track, controlling the boost per gear to your traction threshold would produce faster time slips, rather that just cutting the power band in half and using the bad half for the first 1/4 of the track to compensate for traction issues.
Yes the JD housing is smaller, but there is only one turbine wheel choice. Same with compressor.
But there is little sense in using a t76 sized turbo to supply 57 trim airflows , its like trying to fill a coffee cup with a snow shovel, most of the energy trying to that, is just wasted effort. Ask Alamo nicely for an s200e, you will probably make more power with it..maxt

[90_Shelby]

Originally posted by Maxt


More linear? Maybe your definition of linear is different than mine. That power curve is hardly that linear, there ain't much happening to 4500 then it pretty much spikes...



More linear torque curve.:thumbsup:


It's the torque that ignites the tires into wheel spin.




Originally posted by Maxt


But there is little sense in using a t76 sized turbo to supply 57 trim airflows , its like trying to fill a coffee cup with a snow shovel, most of the energy trying to that, is just wasted effort. Ask Alamo nicely for an s200e, you will probably make more power with it..maxt



I guess we'll just have to make the head flow better......

[WGR4Pussies]

who needs a steped boost controller when you got lag!

[Hollywood]

Originally posted by 90_Shelby
I guess we'll just have to make the head flow better......

I think that is your best bet as really you said it your self before, compairing your engine to an SR20.

[90_Shelby]

Originally posted by Hollywood


I think that is your best bet as really you said it your self before, compairing your engine to an SR20.



Thats been the plan all along, we'll make the best with what we have to work with. Changing the turbo every 6 months to accomodate the increasing modifications that we will be making could get pricey and we have a long list of future changes. When we are supplied a turbo free of cost, beggars can't be choosers.:thumbsup: