 |
|
  |
 |
01-25-2005, 02:09 PM
|
#1
|
  |
subaru wrx VNT
|
|
Guest
|
a friend of mine has an 04 subaru wrx. although he got 14.8 out of it at the strip, it feels like theres plenty of room for improvement in the power delivery. when you go for a ride in the car you immediately notice poor throttle response, and feel hard acceleration only between 4,000 and 5,400 rpms where power drops off slightly. When i thought about the problem for a while and came to this conclusion... most 4cylinder cars are in straight/inline 4 layout, the subaru however is a boxer engine. The turbo on any inline 4cyl is usually no more than 15" away from the exhaust ports on the cyl head. on the boxer motor due to the two separate heads placed at opposite ends of the crank the turbo has to wait for the exhaust manifolds from both sides to come together, placing it much further away from the ports... based on my limited knowledge of turbos, i would think that this dramatically increases lag and causes the delay in response and power?? MY QUESTION: the garret VNT was designed to dramatically reduce lag and improve throttle response, and was supposed to be dependable to 14psi. although the vnt reduced top gear acceleration, it didnt effect 1/4 mile times of the 2.2's it was mounted on. the wrx runs 12psi max right now, can anybody tell me what they think would happen if we put a VNT on the wrx's boxer engine at 12psi
|
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-25-2005, 02:15 PM
|
#2
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: www.TurboDodge.com
My Ride: 1986 Plymouth Horizo
Engine: 2.2 Turbo
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 11.705
|
WRX's respond extremely well to exhaust upgrades. Especially when you remove the 3 cat converters they have.
He is lucky in that the WRX is a popular vehicle, and he can very easily just pic a tried and true buildup formula and go with it. No sense in re-engineering the wheel with '80's technology.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-25-2005, 02:16 PM
|
#4
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: www.TurboDodge.com
My Ride: 1986 Plymouth Horizo
Engine: 2.2 Turbo
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 11.705
|
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ominous
i guess this isn't the place to ask that question is it...
|
  |
I moved the thread to the appropriate forum.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-25-2005, 02:18 PM
|
#5
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Upland, CA
My Ride: 2000 GMC Sierra
Engine: 5.3L V8
Induct: N/A
1/4: 0.000
|
Sure it is!
If you remove any exhaust restrictions, you will notice increased throttle response, faster spool, and faster spool at lower RPMs.
3 catalytic converters is a huge exhaust restriction.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-25-2005, 02:20 PM
|
#6
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Macomb, MI
My Ride: 89 Spirit ES
Engine: 2.5L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
well how mechanically inclined is he?
im new to turbos but i would guess that the mounting pattern wont b the same, the cooling lines will have to be re routed how is boost controled on the WRX by the comp or some stand alone system?
you would probably need a custom computer, new lines new intake plumbing
do they make really small turbos? could he run twins?
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-25-2005, 10:00 PM
|
#11
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Macomb, MI
My Ride: 89 Spirit ES
Engine: 2.5L
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 0.000
|
lets not get too hasty here
do you have the specs on the stock turbo? wheel size and stuff
if we compare the specs of this turbo to stock TD's maybe we can find a better match
the problem with the VNT as you alreayd know if that it must spin several times more to make the same boost
are you serious about the cost for exhaust? holy crap even if you go to a shop and have them bend new pipes? how about side exit?
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-25-2005, 11:03 PM
|
#12
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: www.TurboDodge.com
My Ride: 1986 Plymouth Horizo
Engine: 2.2 Turbo
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 11.705
|
Yeah the exhaust is expensive.. but certainly less of a headache than re-engineering the turbocharger system would be. and a freeflowing exhaust should ALWAYS be the first step in upgrading a turbo car.
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
  |
 |
01-26-2005, 04:53 PM
|
#13
|
  |
|
|
|
Naturally Aspirated
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Prescott, AZ
My Ride: 1985 Shelby Charger
Engine: 2.2 Turbo
Induct: Turbo
1/4: 14.900
|
I gotta chime in here - a little longer exhaust manifold, or longer turbo plumbing will make almost NO difference in lag. The true lag comes from the ability of the engine to spool the turbo. When you step on the gas, you dont immediately get more flow from the engine - after a little bit, the engine flows a little more, which spools the turbo, which flows a little more, and voila; boost. Pressure is pressure - ever try to time how long it takes an exhaust pulse to get from the cylinder to your tail pipe? Not long. And as for long hoses to intercoolers and such, it doesn't take long to fill that amount of volume, so long as there is no large restriction, there's no problem.
Drop the exhaust as an experiment and see what happens, try a grainger and see if the car complains (I've read that some newer cars dont like to be grainger'd, but who knows).
After trying those (to rule out their involvement), THEN I'd move onto the turbos and such. Its much cheaper to buy a hacksaw blade and an exhaust coupler than modify an exhaust manifold and plumb in a new turbo
|
|
|
|
 |
  |
 |
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Quick Nav |
|
» Quick Tech |
|
» Market Place |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|