ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Boost v rpm v tps no ?
Yes, although as mentioned be careful using the term "load" as normally that means manifold pressure or map/tps combined in the context of a boosted engine, so using the term TPS (or user request) would be better.
Closed loop or open loop actually makes no difference you would notice when driving TBH if its well mapped in both cases.
Its nice to see this sort of control becoming more common now, when I started doing it what must be nearly a decade ago now a lot of people were treating it like it was witchcraft when to me it was the most logical thing in the world to have the user decide on the boost with the throttle even though at the time most people still seemed to be stuck in the mentality of a high/low map or a high/low switch which just swapped between mapped value and wastegate base pressure etc.
I know its a terribly over used statement these days but truely "power is nothing without control"
Yeah , that is a very nice way to do boost control tho there's nothing like lag lag lag bam full boost lol
For the boost control it should be using ONLY tps as the "user request" which is what that value really represents not load as you have labelled it.
On an ITB engine user request and load are identical, but in this context they are not.
If you want that then you still get it if you go WOT at low rpm.
A good boost control strategy should give you exactly what you want when you want it with the mechanical confines of compressor size and engine size etc (ie it cant give you boost where boost cant be made due to turbo too big for that rpm etc)
True , I've never had a go in a car with that type of boost control I'm sure it makes for a nice drive and much more usable on track
Yes mate it really does, as Tony mentioned in the thread about my car, I could come round the glue pot at llandow with the car held precisely on the balance point delivering exactly the right amount of torque to keep the car stable, just like you would on an N/A engine, its just a lot lighter doing it with boost instead (given that you would need about 4 litres to be comparable)
Obviously initial big changes in angle will result in a small period of lag, that is the downside, but in the correct rpm band it isnt something you notice on track as on track you are generally progressive with the throttle anyway not snapping it open and closed.
If I am sat on an A road at 60mph and I bang the throttle open from almost shut while im cruising along to perform an overtake, then there is a degree of lag then, but thats the only time I really notice it on my car TBH, as obviously on a track you dont ever sit at "cruise" in the first place.
If money had no affect on my decisions it would be cams (supercharger specific) and a supercharger with a shorter final drive. I simply prefer the power delivery.
However turbo can be done on more of a budget.
Both are quick, but its down to the driver and the mapping. If its mainly as a road car I'd say turbo. The extra midrange makes for a much quicker car.
But seeing as cost is a factor and once its together I don't want to be having gearbox rebuilds and expensive clutches I've gone with ITBs. However is a supercharger kit becomes available second hand....I may get tempted.
However turbo can be done on more of a budget.
Both are quick, but its down to the driver and the mapping. If its mainly as a road car I'd say turbo. The extra midrange makes for a much quicker car.
But seeing as cost is a factor and once its together I don't want to be having gearbox rebuilds and expensive clutches I've gone with ITBs. However is a supercharger kit becomes available second hand....I may get tempted.
Trophy Turbo :)
Engine swap to a VAG turbo unit is another option that makes a LOT of sense.[/QUOTE]
The vag unit is superb!! And the box is a little bir better thats a bonus
The vag unit is superb!! And the box is a little bir better thats a bonus
clio 182 sport
The vag unit is superb!! And the box is a little bir better thats a bonus[/QUOTE]
I saw a clio with this set up on ph for sale the other day, for a good price too. Because i wouldnt be able to do the work myself i would rather buy a clio T or a S/C clio second hand. the money they sell for is peanuts considering how much money is spent on building them!
Countryman JCW
Im using the GEN90 on my turbo, will be going in for mapping on the 22nd June so will reveal the results after that.
Hoping for 300bhp roughly
172
ITB's are Individual Throttle Bodies, Yeah 519 is spot on mate it's who i use as he's only up the road from me, he's recently just fitted cams and mapped my 172cup, can't fault him at all mate and i'd recommend him 2 anybody
Countryman JCW
Megane Pistons/Rods set up with a GT2860 turbo.
Have you ever experienced a PROPERLY mapped turbo car?
I have had loads of people tell me that they dont like the power delivery of turbo cars, then they go out in mine and change their mind!
To do it well, its 10K realistically.
for a low boost and hope for the best install though you can do it for only a few K.
Personally I wont recomend anyone do a turbo unless its got uprated valves for example, its just asking for trouble IMHO but others may want to cut corners to save money.
Things like a decent clutch (and the hassle to fit) are things people often forget.
When it comes to recomendations, be a little careful what conclusions you draw based on having other compeltely different work done as there is quiet a difference between lobbing in a set of cams and flashing a map to the standard ecu like you mention and knowing what you are doing with mapping a turbo car from scratch properly on aftermarket etc.
In an ideal world if you are about to spend a whole load of cash with any company, its nice to try and get a go in a car they have done already to make sure its what you want.
So for example anyone wanting an MWM conversion, is welcome to have a go in mine, as that is almost identical to the current spec Mike does, as although Ive done mine myself in terms of the latest rebuild, it was orginally an MWM low pressure conversion and Ive done the same things to it that Mike does on his higher boost conversions anyway.
Obviously just because a company hasnt done something before, doesnt mean that they cant as obviously everyone has to do things for the first time and learn as they go, but its always nicer if you let someone else be the guinea pig first or ideally they build their own guinea pig like MWM did for example.
Last edited:
Countryman JCW
Glad they've gone to a good home
Haha cheers Gray
Il do my best to look after them for you mate! Looking forward to getting it back now... this next 7 days is gonna be the longest 7 days ever!
Haha cheers Gray
Looking forward to getting it back now... this next 7 days is gonna be the longest 7 days ever!
Good man.
They came out of a low mileage engine, should be perfect for the job after a clean up.
Did you get your pistons machined for valve pockets?
Lets hope so based on those images that you put up showing the difference in pocket size, presumably cause the megane has no dephasor? (and poss slightly milder cams)
172
If i was ever to go Turbo or charged i'd have no problems leaving my car with 519 to do the work but as said i'd go for ITB's over either of them which i would also get 519 to do as i went in his old 172 with ITB's and it went well, but between charged or turbo i'd still go charged although i'm not overly keen on the power delivery of a charger on the Cooper S we have but that's a smaller engine and charger to the Rotrex.
Charger is just kinder on the box and shafts but also the big surge of power like you get with a turbo doesn't really interest me
You can soon tell from the cringe'worthy noise it makes when VVT engages, i mistook it foor the alternator vibrating loose, i quickly realised it wasnt that and cried a tear lol. I dont know if its actually distorted any of the inlet valves in the end, might compression test it at some point.
Clio 16v 'YOJ'
You've read nothing chip posted did you
Do u know if the gen90 is calibrated/uses for the stock knock sensor ?
I know its not utilised on mine.
That's a bit of a let down lol was thinking u could log the knock sensor
Countryman JCW
As far as I'm aware Andy is removing the VVT and replacing it with a solid advance pulley. Will they still need machining with this being changed??
PH1 loads of boost!
Link to pictures Chip, Laine?
172
i read what Chip said but how many turbo cars have you experienced where the power is smooth and constant and not just a big kick? any turbo car iv'e been in has been a big bang of power and then dies a death as the revs climb hence also why i'd rather a charger
You havent ever been in a decent turbo car yet thats all mate, but TBH neither have most people!
Nearly all turbo cars do exactly what you are saying so I dont blame you for thinking it has to be that way, but it doesnt.
Mine on low boost for example:
(and that was a very quick map where I just quickly popped by own car on the rollers between two other cars I was mapping that day, I literally only had about half an hour in total, it could be even smoother than that with a little more time)
Can you not run a super charged clio on standard ecu?
Rough cost of doing a home brew turbo conversion compared to a super charger? purely out of interest and all that.
Rough cost of doing a home brew turbo conversion compared to a super charger? purely out of interest and all that.
SQ5
Most of Andys mapping is done off the knock sensor from what I hear!
