Latest RR graphs (172 turbo content)

[Russ_16v]

Ah cheers Danny, i must have missed that on the graph?

 

[Jimbo-Clio]

:hail:

 

[DMS]

Just a quick question matey, as I may be reading this wrong, but the graph above looks like to me that boost level spikes to just over 2.2 bar, then drops to 1.9 bar, or am I seeing that wrong?

Its just with 286bhp at 0.7 bar, to go to 317 at over 2 bar, it doesnt seem like much of a power increase for a near 3 times the boost level?

Torque is impressive though! I know its all about power delivery and how it feels though

As Danny said, atmospheric pressure is equal to 1 bar.
So that means that the air pressure going into an engine running 1.2 bar of boost is actually 1.2 bar over atmospheric pressure.

The torque is the most impressive thing about it IMO. Under hard acceleration you can feel your internal organs getting left behind

 

[Ant@BackyardRacing]

and what turbo??

also why so rich over 6k revs?

what sort of igntion timing does the car run at peak torque?
i take it you dont map the car yourself

 

[DannoTheGreat]

Legend! That must be an animal!

 

[DMS]

and what turbo??
GT28R

also why so rich over 6k revs?

what sort of igntion timing does the car run at peak torque?

i take it you dont map the car yourself
Nope.

.

 

[Ant@BackyardRacing]

small turbo for a 2.0l engine imo.

of course it depends what your using the car for/how much power you want.

i wouldnt of gone less than a 30r, would make a fair bit more hp per lb of boost.

i ran a gt28r on my renault 5 gt, 1397cc

 

[DMS]

The issue is that there's not really space to fit a much larger turbo. There's only about a centimetre of space between the compressor housing and the heat shield on the bulkhead.
The only way around this would be to cut away at the bulkhead or to get some clever tubular manifold made up allowing the turbo to be located elsewhere (it's using a log manifold at the moment due to space constraints).

 

[K-Tec Racing]

and what turbo??

also why so rich over 6k revs?

what sort of igntion timing does the car run at peak torque?
i take it you dont map the car yourself

11.5 AFR is not particularity rich at higher loads, it aids cylinder cooling when driving hard, also leaning it out only gains 2-4bhp.
you will notice with the lower boost that the fueling is not as rich
The turbo size is for response and driveability.

KTRsport

 

[T.Trophy]

Excellent results there lads, well done.

Had mine at Mallory on Sat and despite the track being soaking wet managed to get the power down no problems, definatley think they could handle more

Surprised you got that much power out of a GT28R as the one I had was dog poo and wouldn't flow anywhere that power?

 

[T.Trophy]

Next steps will be a better clutch, 680cc injectors and a bigger turbo, which should see it up to 350+ easily

If it was that easy everyone would be doing it LOL

 

[DMS]

Good point

 

[K-Tec Racing]

we have had more from a larger turbo, but the clutch wont take the torque

 

[T.Trophy]

Strange as mine was handling the power fine at Mallory on Sat?

Probably the brutal power delivery causing the problem, try pulling a little bit of boost in the lower rev range to give it a smoother delivery

 

[Andyrg@ ClioTurbo]

Steve what power does your car run now mate??

 

[K-Tec Racing]

i think in question... the car with the larger turbo had a worn clutch....... was getting on

 

[T.Trophy]

Well I still think it's hats off everyone as the turbo kits have really moved on massively in the last year, I'd say it's also came to the point where they've stole the spot light back from superchargers (which have gone quite quiet lately).

Now that I've proven the car reliable on track, theres a few tweaks I've been waiting to do :evil: and will update when it's done.

Anyway Darren welcome to the 300+bhp clio club

Sean/Andy/David I'm surprised you haven't put the graphs up of the bigger turbo to whet peoples appetites on whats in the pipework, could call it the HPT stage 3?

 

[Greeny.]

Very nice, I do however feel sorry for your gearbox.

 

[Magic Johnson]

I feel sorry for the other drivers who think 'Oh look, just a Clio'

LOL. Played, lads. KUTGW

 

[sideways danny]

small turbo for a 2.0l engine imo.

of course it depends what your using the car for/how much power you want.

not really small when you consider power isn't far off doubled lol

i wouldnt of gone less than a 30r, would make a fair bit more hp per lb of boost.

very odd thing to say, that's a laggy very high output turbo, capable of ~500bhp. Totally unsuitable tbh

i ran a gt28r on my renault 5 gt, 1397cc

probably just about got away with that as they have a tiny exhaust housing

 

[Weeman]

has this blown up yet?

 

[T.Trophy]

I was just comparing DMS' graphs against mine from june as his initial power/torque surge is monstrous and his torque figures whup my measley 317lb/ft.

Anyway as I see it there have been four clios turbocharged in the last year or so. Mine, RyanK's,DMS' and Butch's

All 4 ran the same Ktec turbo, I know for a fact (because I phoned Universal Turbos and they gave me the full spec) that it's based on a gt2560r, however the nicer flowing .60A/R comp housing was removed and a T3 .42 A/R was fitted.

Now this is the funny bit, mine and RyanK's cars were mapped at RStuning, DMS' and Butchs were done by Ktec. So we have two different mappers at work.
The highest BHP was hit by Ryan at 292bhp. DMS was just behind with mid 280's and mine and Butch's were around the 270bhp mark. (I'm pretty sure that Butch had the generic map that Henk originally developed for Ktec)

Moving on, after running a cable operated body and Omex and getting 280bhp DMS has now all of a sudden by simply fitting the Gen90 ECU jumped up 30-40BHP. Now I'll be honest I spent a lot of time researching/calculating/designing my own conversion, and to hear that a simple ECU swap made such a difference, I'll admit I was slightly dubious. Especially as me and Paul@RStuning tried absolutely everything to try and get it to work. Initial thoughts were they'd also swapped the turbo out for a better flowing model however the power delivery is almost identical to what I was getting last year, a boost and power surge which spikes then falls away rapidly.

One thing I did notice was the vast difference in intake and ambient temperatures, basically when mine was mapped in June AT was 27 and IT was 29. DMS were AT 23 and IT 46. This got me thinking as I'd read a thread on how to cheat the DynoDynamics rolling roads a while back.

Heres a link to the thread and people can make thir own minds up as to whats going on, Part II is probably the most applicable part but have a read through it so that at your next rolling road day you can ensure your not being cheated as well.

http://forums.m3cutters.co.uk/showthread.php?t=7378

Steve

 

[Andyrg@ ClioTurbo]

Intresting Read There steve,

 

[K-Tec Racing]

Steve, one thing we do not do is try and cheat the dyno. We have always worked on the cars with the air temp probe in the air box or next to the induction kit, as they do at companies such as Recardo who develop OE engines.

Today I have spoken with Mike Gurney from Dyno Dynamics and he has recommended that the sensor is placed next to the number plate as this will give a similar air inlet temp reading to the ambient air temp. In Darrens case we have a bigger difference in these figures due to the heat soak the car had on the rollers in between runs. On 99% of the graphs we have printed off and files the AT difference is between 3 and 6 degrees and anyone is welcome to view these. If we were also trying to cheat figures we would hardly leave them plain as day on the graphs that customers get given. There is also a conversion calculator that the dyno uses to calculate the adjustments it makes due to the differences in ambient and inelt temps which I will try and locate.

We operate a very tranparent way of working at K-Tec and anyone is able to watch as we work on their car whether it be in the workshop or on the dyno. Fiddling figures just to get bragging rights is not how we work, we are just interested in getting the job done correctly so that the customer is happy. If it helps I would be perfectly happy to dyno your and Darrens' cars back to back if you would like to get some comparisons.

David.

 

[DMS]

I'm not best positioned to comment on how it was mapped and why it was done the way it was. Frankly I know sweet FA about mapping, and as far as I'm concerned, if the car runs properly (which it does) and goes how it should (which again it does) then I'm happy. Therefore, Andy is much better placed to comment on this than I am.
What I will say though, is that it made 280.6bhp last time and while it felt quick, there's now a MASSIVE improvement in outright acceleration. Therefore, whether the above figures are correct or not, I'm in no doubt that it's definitely making more power than it was. The way it drives has also improved lots - part throttle doesn't automatically create a massive boost surge anymore. It's only when firmly planting the pedal into the carpet that the power delivery is at "peel your face away from your skull" levels, the rest of the time it's actually very nice and smooth to drive. I actually can't fault the way it drives now - a massive improvement over how it was previously. It's also a bit better on fuel than it was.

EDIT: Just seen David's post (thanks for commenting BTW). As I said above, there's definitely a HUGE difference in acceleration now compared to last time Andy mapped it. I'm in no doubt that it's gained a fair bit of power and torque irrespective of whether or not the figures are bang on accurate. It's a much nicer car to drive now, the only issue I have that the clutch does seem to stick a little as Sean and Andy discussed with me on Saturday. I plan on having the gearbox strengthened as a matter of cause and and an LSD fitted soon, so the clutch can be changed for a tougher one at the same time.

 

[K-Tec Racing]

We are very pleased you are happy with your car Darren, I must say it does go well!!

Mission accomplished.

David.

 

[DMS]

At the end of the day there's nothing stopping me from taking it elsewhere to get an RR figure. That would prove once and for all whether or not the figures have been distorted and whether or not it's simply down to who mapped the car. As you are no doubt aware, there are a lot of people on this forum with their tongues firmly lodged between the butt cheeks of various mappers and refuse to believe that anyone else can calibrate an engine better. I'm not having a go at anyone in particular here, but I've seen it a lot with the various posts concerning RS Tuning / TDF / Chipwizards etc. I have no experience of these guys' services, but they must know what they're doing due to their reputations. However, unless there's a "map-off" (never going to happen) then everyone will just have to settle for who they know / trust, and there will always be arguments and doubts either way.
As I said in my previous post, I'm in no doubt that the car IS making more power and torque than it was, and IMO Andy deserves a lot of credit for the work he's done (David - buy him a pint!). Anyone is more than welcome to have a passenger ride in the car to see just how it runs and performs, then they can make up their own minds about whether it's any good or not.

 

[Andrew Cooke]

The way it drives has also improved lots - part throttle doesn't automatically create a massive boost surge anymore.

That boost surge is what you get when boost is controlled on the engine side of the throttle, moving the actuator pipe, or boost controller pressure sensor in your case, to the other side of the throttle would have made a big difference. (I'm guessing on the controller bit as most folks connect them like this, but the actuator pipe looked to be tee'd into the FPR ref pipe in your previous thread, so it's a iair assumption that the boost controller was the same)

 

[T.Trophy]

Cheers for the quick response guys, and it's nice to see a clear and concise comment regarding the issue.

The real reason I posted this up is I felt Darren was being taken for a ride and that it's simply impossible for it to run that much power on the same set up as what I had last year. Trust me as I literally exhausted every option with it when I was trying to achieve the magical 300bhp.

So the question is can you honestly say that the gen90 ecu alone has given him such massive gains? as I'll be honest in all the conversations that I had with both Sean and Andy about it,the only special thing which was promoted to myself was the fact I could retain my DBW throttle at no point was any other special features mentioned.

Besides that, the fact that the intake temps are so high is obviously going to have an effect on the dyno graph and any cliosporter who can read obviously realises that as well. I'm sure (but can't find the link as a ref) that for every one degree rise in intake temptemps you lose one bhp, now if this is the case or even anywhere near the truth, your looking at a figure which is 20bhp adrift?

I'm quite happy to leave it at that, as mentioned in the second paragraph I originally posted it up as I thought Darren was being taken for a mug. However after reading his above comments about me having my tongue firmly wedged in Paul@RStunings rear end (I'd happliy let Icarus map my car as well ) I now have a fair assessment of his character, it wasn't that long ago where I had to answer PM after PM from him on how disappointed he was with his conversion. But hey some people have short memories or maybe it's Ktecs "butt cheeks" blurring his vision.

For the record the reason why your car feels considerably more responsive now is simply because the boost controller has been set so high, the fact that it drops off rapidly afterwards just highlights how far outside it's efficiency rating your trying to work it.

Thanks for the dyno shoot out offer David but it's to far really, besides I don't want you stealing my ideas LOL

 

[Andyrg@ ClioTurbo]

Thanks for the dyno shoot out offer David but it's to far really, besides I don't want you stealing my ideas LOL

PMSL

 

[DMS]

Let's not turn this into a big long argument guys. As has already been mentioned, everyone is entitled to form their own opinions and I'm happy for anyone with a bit of interest to have a passenger ride so they can make up their own minds.

Steve - the comment regarding the brown nosing was a bit of a play on what I deem to be the general attitude of people on this forum. Everyone who has their car mapped has a preferred place to get it done, usually by someone they've used before, but very few people have had their car mapped by more than one person. Those who have will always shout about which mapper was best etc, it's just the way it is. The point I'm trying to make is that different mappers may well have different views on how best to go about their job. Similarly, some may be more knowledgeable than others in specific areas.
I personally don't see any reason why my car couldn't have gained 37bhp and so much torque considering how much quicker it feels than it did previously. However, I also can't confirm whether measures were taken to "skew" the figures since I left the car down there and wasn't present when the mapping was done. Your argument is completely valid and I respect your opinion. However, I'm very happy with the improvements to performance, general running, fuel economy during sensible driving and overall responsiveness, and we all know that RR figures don't actually tell the full story anyway.

 

[K-Tec Racing]

Steve, well we only installed the GEN90 and mapped it while we had Darren's car here so I can only put this down as the cause of the gains, although I am sure someone will start a rumour we also fitted another turbo, bigger injectors, nitrous and a supercharger in order to get the figures before taking it all off before Darren collected the car

Like I said, we have not set out to achieve a certain figure and as this proves, too many people get hung up on dyno figures. I am sure you did a lot of research into your current set up and just because one company did not achieve the magic number does not mean another cannot with a similar set up (no dig at RS Tuning as I get on well with Paul and respect what he can do). This is just another case of comparing a different car, on a different dyno, mapped by a different person and at the end of the day there are going to be differences, and I think this should be taken into account rather that trying to discredit the results by hinting that the dyno figures have been purposely fixed and that we were trying to "take a customer for a ride".

I am sure you are very happy with your car and its special set up, but what matters to me as that our customer is happy with his car and as that seems to be the case I am happy.

David.

And from memory, 2 degree extra air temp equalled 1 lost bhp.

 

[sideways danny]

If the probe was put somewhere hot and the actual intake temp was low, then that would give a false high reading. However, if the probe is in the appropriate place, and intake temp is genuinely high then its a legitimate compensation factor, designed in by dd, and iirc originally calculated by ducatti

 

[K-Tec Racing]

Danny, the air temp sensor was placed inside the air filter pipe to give an accurate reading of the air inlet temperature. We have done some research into where other dyno users place the sensor and it does vary. We have since been advised by Mike at DD that it should be near the front number plate so this is how we will set it up in future.

 

[T.Trophy]

As I said in my last post I'm happy to just leave it at that, I'll be honest though, I feel the issues are being brushed over, the fact that the inlets are so high (in the eyes of the dynometer) is going to have a dramatic effect. I've also sent a few emails off myself just to see how honest your going to be when DD email you back with how much of a percentage the readings will be out by but I'm still confident in my 20 bhp.

At the end of the day people will believe what they want to believe and this thread won't change that.

Danny cheers for your input, but when was the last time you saw an Ambient Temp and Intake Temp vary by so much? It's impossible buddy. Unless as seems to be the case here, where the probe has accidently been left against a hot surface causing heat soak.

Darren no hard feelings I just thought you were being an ass

As for the bit about different cars, mappers, days, dynos etc... you obviously have no idea how much time and effort I put into fixing all the issues I had with my initial setup. I do, and thats why I'm confidently making these statements.

Well in my eyes we've established that it's not making the power on the graphs, and my personal opinion (from experience) is that it's not making 300 either.

Everyones happy though so lets just leave it at that,

Steve

 

[Andrew Cooke]

I'm not sure how relevant correcting for ambient air temp is with a turboed engine, by the time it's been heated by the turbo, and cooled by the intercooler it gets a bit lost in the noise. Certainly it's worth monitoring charge temps, but they're affected by fans and heat soak as much as ambient temp.

It's a similar thing when it comes to correcting for ambient pressure, sure, it does make a difference, but not like on a NA engine.

I'd like to see what the dyno does to correct for pressure and temp, and if it differentiates between turbo and NA engines.
Andy

 

[K-Tec Racing]

As I said in my last post I'm happy to just leave it at that, I'll be honest though, I feel the issues are being brushed over, the fact that the inlets are so high (in the eyes of the dynometer) is going to have a dramatic effect. I've also sent a few emails off myself just to see how honest your going to be when DD email you back with how much of a percentage the readings will be out by but I'm still confident in my 20 bhp.



Unbelievable, you really think we are going to lie about this? What good would it do us to be dishonest?

I am afraid with this statement alone you do not warrant any reply, and you said Darren's vision was blurred!

David.

 

[K-Tec Racing]

Andrew, you are quite right and the dyno also takes into account all other information collected by the weather station that the dyno is connected to (barometric pressure etc). It does not adjust the power figures just based on the differences between the IT and AT.

David.

 

[T.Trophy]

Feel free to prove me wrong with your findings.

Steve

 

[K-Tec Racing]

I am not out to prove you wrong like you are with us. I would be very happy with the definitive answer, what you do with it is entirely up to you.

David.