PDA

View Full Version : SR Powered E30 w/ 3071 Finally Tuned



dentsportgarage
07-11-2005, 05:30 PM
http://www.dentsport.com/bismo_dyno.jpg
Franz at KTR tuned the SR motor on the Bismo last night. The car was tuned for 19psi on 104+ with 272/264, 3071R and AEM/GEMS management. Weight of the car is 2300 lbs so 382 whp should be very good for hillclimb. Full boost isn't reached until 3rd gear due to the car's weight but going uphill will help that! Also, the evo 8 intercooler was completely maxed out so a XS GTR core with custom end tanks will be fitted in the next month or so. The tune was very conservative due to a stock bottom end but the 104+ should keep after that as well. A stock Evo 8 measures 220whp on this dyno as a comparison. Some pics here.
Bismo photos (http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10360319#post10360319)

Spec on the motor
The Car is a 1991 BMW E30 318i

We installed a Nissan SR20DET S13 red top
Cams- 264/272 step 2 (high lift)
255 walbro pump
AEM EMS running map sensor
Indeglo purple underbody lighting
850cc SARD injectors
SARD FPR
GT3071r turbo with T3 turbine housing
3" exhaust
Custom radiator
welded 4:10 rear end
racing dynamics rear sway bar 19mm
Adjustable end links
ARP head studs
Grex valvesprings
Grex headgasket
Grex RAS (rocker arm stoppers)
Greddy oil pan
Top Speed intake manifold with Q45 throttle body
CNC TB flange
EVo 8 IC (too small already)
-6 fuel lines throughout


etc etc


BMW TMS group N struts/springs
Ireland rear camber kit (weld on) major mods to rear subframe too
custom driveshaft

Brianb
07-11-2005, 07:08 PM
Am I missing something here...? There are two members (at least) on this board that have made more power with 2871's and stock motors.

sspikey
07-11-2005, 07:41 PM
those are those weird Aussie dynos
they read VERY low....
On a lighter note HILLCLIMB racing is SICK SICK SICK. So much fun its sick.

Brianb
07-11-2005, 08:09 PM
Oh... I thought it may be the, "Indeglo purple underbody lighting".

dentsportgarage
07-12-2005, 08:28 AM
"Am I missing something here...? "

Yes.

cwdmark
07-12-2005, 09:46 AM
"Am I missing something here...? "

Yes.


please do elaborate.

jprimera
07-12-2005, 11:37 AM
Hey nice numbers... 1 question at what boost and whp did the Evo fmic max out?
thanks

Vapor
07-12-2005, 11:56 AM
god why is it so laggy? Something is not right... and dynodynamic dynos dont read terribly lower than dynojet, i think something is wrong with your setup.

Wheelz_In_Motion
07-12-2005, 12:39 PM
Just curious... By any chance, do you happen to know the injector battery offset that Franz used in Bismo's AEM?

killjoy
07-12-2005, 04:05 PM
Perhaps an .82 T3 rear?

I was hoping to make about 60 more with smaller cams and 1 more pound of boost so i hope something is wrong.

cwdmark
07-12-2005, 04:15 PM
something's definitely wrong, unless he has no boost controller on it and its internally gated, and its just boost creeping like mad (like mine was). but even then, mine spooled very fast and had full boost at 4k.

Brianb
07-12-2005, 04:33 PM
"Am I missing something here...? "

Yes.



Your response is most defficient of any useful information.

You chose to post the results, I and others simply asked for additional information with regard to your present arrangement as it has been well documented on this site amongst others that not only is there more net power to be had but at a much greater operating range, and you even HAVE the optional neon under-body lights!

So, I dare say my good man, either come clean and provide a useful response to the query or bugger off! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/wink.gif

killjoy
07-12-2005, 04:55 PM
maybe its the manifold. Its not listed in the mod list. Maybe ist a dastardly modified log!

dentsportgarage
07-12-2005, 05:48 PM
Brian,
I'm sorry about the last response. Maximum power wasn't the goal with this. With the stock bottom end, flat-out up-hill for 3+ minutes is a lot of stress. I'm sure we could have made more power but drivability was a main concern and most of the tuning was done in partial throttle at different RPMs. I don't know how people are commenting on lag, boost creep etc as no boost map was posted. The turbo is externally gated with a 52mm gate and a 1.5bar spring running just vacuum. The power delivery is unbelievable and very drivable to say the least. There should be 20 odd bhp left in a new intercooler as the IATemps (measured before the TB) were 220+ at high load. The manifold is tubular. The dyno is known for reading very low and whp is estimated at 400 on a dynojet. I'll post the A/F and boost maps.

Brianb
07-12-2005, 06:14 PM
Check out this link...
http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=UBB9&Number=67956404&p age=&view=&sb=5&o=

The respective owner will correct me please if I go astray... this is a GT2871R .86 T2 with basically a stock head (save for the valve job) that makes more power over a wider area than your more mod'd GT3071R.

That's why you are getting questions and... we (if I may speak for a few others here)... are confused.

It just seems to me the tune or something is a bit off. The intent is to help, not ridicule. For gods-sake you must get enough of that for putting a Nissan motor in a BMW! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/smile.gif

too_much_boost
07-13-2005, 12:30 AM
those are those weird Aussie dynos
they read VERY low....



I'm be inclined to say that US dynos read VERY high

We use Dyno Dynamics in Oz as a standard nowdays. They probably account for 75% of dynos over here.

One great feature they have is 'Shootout Mode', which add correction factors to produce the same power figure regardless of ambient temp. This is great for comparing your results from one day to the next, or between dyno dynamics dynos at different workshops. The figures are usually within 1-2kw between dynos and on different days.

Most Dyno Dynamics dyno figures work out to have around 25-30% drivetrain loss (although i do realise that this percentage isn't linear), so this guy is getting over 500hp at the engine

Vapor
07-13-2005, 01:25 PM
I don't know how people are commenting on lag, boost creep etc as no boost map was posted. The turbo is externally gated with a 52mm gate and a 1.5bar spring running just vacuum. The power delivery is unbelievable and very drivable to say the least. There should be 20 odd bhp left in a new intercooler as the IATemps (measured before the TB) were 220+ at high load. The manifold is tubular. The dyno is known for reading very low and whp is estimated at 400 on a dynojet. I'll post the A/F and boost maps.



I don't need a boost curve, I can look at the torque curve and reference that against rpm, thats all Im concerned with. You have identical spool as my GT2540R .86 a/r but with comparable HP at the same boost. I thought this turbo was supposed to spool faster than that? If you think thats fast spool, you shoulda done a 2871R with .64 a/r

cwdmark
07-13-2005, 06:03 PM
Maximum power wasn't the goal with this.


if maximum power wasn't the goal, i don't know what the hell your goal actually is. i hate to enlighten you, but your turbo screams lag lag lag from the dyno chart. something isn't right.

is this the very big trim 3071? that would explain everything, but you say max power isn't the goal. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Alex_Grabau
07-13-2005, 06:31 PM
Mark, your responses seem, for some reason inflamatory. "What the hell is our goal?" I can tell you for sure it's not to make a big splash on an internet forum and answer questions from people who are purposely rude. We are building a solid race car. That's our goal. I'm not sure why it seems that way but as the owner of the car I can tell you that nothing's "wrong" with the car. If you're seeking personal satisfaction in having someone tell you that you're right about the turbo's "trim" then remain satisfied my friend.

The car is running an external gate only, no boost control. I/we have no plans of running the car anywhere below 4krpm so I'm not concerned with spool time. It's a race car.

To address the power output, we're on the boost for almost 3 minutes. This car gets driven harder than any street car will ever be driven. To risk engine failure for 40 more hp isn't worth it to me or us as our budget exceeds only our desire to brag about power output.

I hope that my response puts your worries to rest. I'm sure, as you're trying to suggest between grabbing low hanging fruit and turning it into fodder for sarcasm, that with an electronic boost controller that the boost would create a plateau in HP and it's linearity would be somewhat controlled. We're more worried at this point in shaking the car out, improving the braking and handling than trying to rationalize the need for so much power for our amateurish driving.

Thanks
Alex Grabau
www.dentsport.com (http://www.dentsport.com)
alex@dentsport.com

Brianb
07-14-2005, 06:57 AM
Alex, is meaning found in how it is said or how it is interpreted? (Think about it)

FWIW, I have found this site (and the members there in) to be very helpful. Vapor, S13Mark, DEF and some character that goes by Enthalpy (just to name a few and there are many others) have an enormous amount of experience and information and... AND beleive it or not... are offering you help!

Whether you choose to accept it or not is another thing entirely.

So, whether you are full throttle for several miles like at Bonneville or just squirting the thing around the street you have heard from several experienced individ'ls that the boost characteristics demonstrated on the dyno plot is not what it could be; EBC or not; sarcasm or not; amateurish driving skills or not.

Quoting SpongeBob..., "Good luck with that!"

PS If you're seeking personal satisfaction in having someone tell you that you have a great motor and race car then remain satisfied my friend.

Alex_Grabau
07-14-2005, 07:29 AM
I am willing to accept that Brian and I appreciate your straightforwardness. Of course the car isn't going to be sorted on it's first trip to the dyno and none of us ever tried to make it seem so by posting. I don't try to look for meaning in questions posed to me. Meaning is in the answers.

I have talked to Scot several times and he's very helpful. I'm not trying to discount information offered but it's tough to interpret a question asked in a deliberately harsh manner which was intended to hold an answer within it, over the internet etc. Anyway it is what it is. If we make more boost next time at lower RPM everyone will sleep well.

Enthalpy
07-14-2005, 08:28 AM
alex,

what exhaust housing are you running?

cwdmark
07-14-2005, 08:52 AM
Mark, your responses seem, for some reason inflamatory. "What the hell is our goal?" I can tell you for sure it's not to make a big splash on an internet forum and answer questions from people who are purposely rude. We are building a solid race car. That's our goal. I'm not sure why it seems that way but as the owner of the car I can tell you that nothing's "wrong" with the car. If you're seeking personal satisfaction in having someone tell you that you're right about the turbo's "trim" then remain satisfied my friend.



no, i meant what is your goal with the turbo, no lag or power? when you match up a turbo to a car you have to properly size the turbo and run the proper amount of boost, if you don't you will experience either lag or not meeting higher hp you were looking for. from your dyno chart it doesn't look like you are missing out on any power, you are missing out on spool time. that is completely due to you running a huge turbo.

i think he answered that in his last sentence scott, he's running the 1.06 ar. that may not be the correct turbo to run unless you have something else in mind. you say that topend power isn't that important to you, while you are running the biggest trim possible on that turbo. if having fast spool time is important to you, you could have acheived the same amount of power out of the .64 trim and with a huge increase in spool time.

are you planning on doing anything further with the engine? if not, you should really really consider swapping out to another turbo. running that turbo with that power curve is pointless when there are many other better options available.


the only thing that may be advantageous to this turbo and your racing style is the amount of tq you are putting out up high in the rpms. maybe thats why he picked it? im just looking for an answer http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/grin.gif

killjoy
07-14-2005, 09:17 AM
Mark, where did you see hes running the 1.06?

If thats true then the answer is obvious.

cwdmark
07-14-2005, 09:33 AM
Mark, where did you see hes running the 1.06?

If thats true then the answer is obvious.








Maximum power wasn't the goal with this.


is this the very big trim 3071? that would explain everything, but you say max power isn't the goal. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/confused.gif





If you're seeking personal satisfaction in having someone tell you that you're right about the turbo's "trim" then remain satisfied my friend.




that's what i said before, but i guess im not the only one seeking "personal satisfaction". http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Vapor
07-14-2005, 09:50 AM
plus he's running speed density... that should be good for a few more horses and improve spool, along with a tubular manifold... and 104 octane... trust me, i am trying to be helpful here, but i still contend something is wrong. I've seen a lot of dyno charts in my days, its either not tuned correctly, or a part was chosen that is hindering the ultimate performance of the setup.

SR20240Z
07-14-2005, 11:10 AM
COULD IT BE HE JUST WANTS LESS RESTRICTION?

ITS HILL CLIMB SO HES GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF LOAD TO HELP SPOOL THE TURBO... AND WITH A SMALLER MORE RESTRICTIVE TURBINE A/R HE IS GOING TO HAVE ALOT OF BACK PRESSURE AND HEAT BUILD UP. MAYBE HE IS LOOKING FOR MORE LONGEVITY RATHER THAN MAXIMUM TUNE?

YOU REALLY HAVE TO THINK OF ITS PURPOSE NOT JUST WHAT YOU EXPECT TO SEE ON THE DYNO ROLLERS.

asad
07-14-2005, 11:44 AM
IF I AM TYPING IN CAPS (LIKE NOW) I AM SORRY BECAUSE I AM AT WORK (DATA ENTRY). SORRY!



Jesus, and you're so lazy that you can't hit "caps lock" when you type a message on FA and hit it again when you go back to entering data?

There are almost 400 keystrokes in your post. 2 more won't kill you.

Asad

SR20240Z
07-14-2005, 11:48 AM
NO BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ONE.... I WOULD OF TYPED OUT THE WHOLE EXPLANATION LIKE I DO IN OTHER FORUMS, BUT THIS ONE WON'T LET ME (100 CHARACTER LIMIT).

I HAVE A SPECIAL 'PRODUCTIVITY' KEY BOARD THAT LIMITS THE AMOUNT OF EXTRA STROKES I NEED TO MAKE IN ORDER TO SPEED UP MY TYPING. IT IS ALWAYS LOCKED (UNLESS I CHANGE KEYBOARD SETTINGS, WHICH IS A LONG PROCESS) SO I'M STUCK WITH CAPS.

orion
07-14-2005, 11:49 AM
Jesus, and you're so lazy that you can't hit "caps lock" when you type a message on FA and hit it again when you go back to entering data?



IIRC, he's posted in the past that he does not have a caps lock key...so that's not an option.

FWIW...

[/offtopic]

asad
07-14-2005, 12:03 PM
I HAVE A SPECIAL 'PRODUCTIVITY' KEY BOARD THAT LIMITS THE AMOUNT OF EXTRA STROKES I NEED TO MAKE IN ORDER TO SPEED UP MY TYPING. IT IS ALWAYS LOCKED (UNLESS I CHANGE KEYBOARD SETTINGS, WHICH IS A LONG PROCESS) SO I'M STUCK WITH CAPS.



Lame. It's funny you have a 'productivity' keyboard yet you're spending your workday on FA http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/smile.gif

And Brian...he only had 2 posts when I originally replied, neither of which explained that he doesn't have a caps lock key.

Asad

SR20240Z
07-14-2005, 12:06 PM
I USED TO POST UNDER PROJECTRB240SX.... BUT I SOLD THAT PROJECT AND GOT MY SR20DET 240Z. SO I CHANGED THE NAMES.... YEAH I FIND IT FUNNY THAT I'M MORE PRODUCTIVE ON THE INTERNET THAN ANYTHING ELSE, BUT HEY THEY DON'T GOT ANYTHING FOR ME TO DO.... SO I GET PAID TO SURF THE NET.

cwdmark
07-14-2005, 02:14 PM
Lame. It's funny you have a 'productivity' keyboard yet you're spending your workday on FA http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/smile.gif



only in america!!! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/laugh.gif