TMIC Install, Boost Leak

[EQ Tuning]

It deffinately sounds like you're out of range of the base map with the TMIC. FYI, we're looking at mid august for my trip up to reno

[WRXRallyBlue]

Sounds great, Ed. Thanks!

[cody]

We flashed Rob's car to the CA 91 stg 2 map and made a couple logs.

[WRXRallyBlue]

Commentary on my datalogs:
"Ed said your first pull was 184/183 and your 2nd was 178/183 (HP/TQ). He said not to reset your ECU anymore if you can help it since it knocks, especially out of boost...which is weird...but of course the ECU learns around it and it's no biggie."

So everything is running well enough to be relatively smooth and drivable. Anyone care to bet on what my final numbers after my tune will be?

Engine Mods:
perrin crank pulley
cobb intake
perrin turbo inlet
perrin i/c hoses
ssac i/c
helix up
hks dp
bosal twin-tip cbe

[cody]

You're catless and you've got a couple goodies I didn't have when I made ~210 up here, so as long as your turbo with 100K miles on it isn't on its way out, I'd guess somewhere around 225 up here (Re: a lot better than your currently getting). Hopefully that HKS DP isn't a problem.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by cody

You're catless and you've got a couple goodies I didn't have when I made ~210 up here, so as long as your turbo with 100K miles on it isn't on its way out, I'd guess somewhere around 225 up here (Re: a lot better than your currently getting). Hopefully that HKS DP isn't a problem.

Whoa... you're saying you put 210hp to the wheels at 4200 ft altitude on a stock turbo'd WRX? You sure that number isn't corrected for altitude? 210 is a good number at sea level. If you're making 210 here, that would put you at like 240-250 (guess) at sea level, which would be some sort of record on a stock WRX turbo/91 octane.

Then again, I don't trust numbers off a real dyno, let alone a road dyno.

[cody]

*shrugs*

[Kevin M]

Damn, if cody made 210, I guess I no longer have the record for the most powerful road dyno'd Subaru in Reno...

[sperry]

Originally Posted by cody

*shrugs*

What's Ed's record for a stock turbo WRX? Around 220 awhp? There's no way you're only down 10 hp up here. So, either those numbers are altitude adjusted, or your car is making exceptional power for that turbo/fuel... in which case, put that thing on a real dyno at sea level and see what you're making!

/me thought you had the car tuned in Davis.

[cody]

The numbers aren't exact so take them with a grain of salt. I don't think Ed's changed the air density variable in his software for up here yet...

I don't know his record for the stock turbo.

[EQ Tuning]

Cody,

If I remember correctly, your car was making right around 200whp at altitude and close to 210whp here in Davis. I have had only one stock turbo WRX break 220whp here in Davis. Most of them make around 215-218whp.

Thanks
-- Ed

[cody]

I thought one pull was 208 or somthing...maybe I'm wrong.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by EQ Tuning

Cody,

If I remember correctly, your car was making right around 200whp at altitude and close to 210whp here in Davis. I have had only one stock turbo WRX break 220whp here in Davis. Most of them make around 215-218whp.

Thanks
-- Ed

Wow, I'm surprised the hp loss was only about 10 hp. Any chance you've got the data still from both runs? I'd like to see how/if the power curve shape shifts due to altitude.

Also, what were the temperature/humidity differences betweent he Davis and Reno pulls, if either of you can remember? Was it hot in Davis and cool in Reno? That might explain the two numbers being so close.

All I know is that I can noticably feel the difference in power/torque when I'm driving in Reno at altitude, vs. at sea level... and I don't think my butt-dyno is sensitive enough to pick up +/-10 hp.

[EQ Tuning]

Originally Posted by cody

I thought one pull was 208 or somthing...maybe I'm wrong.

I think 208 was your original Davis number

You were in the 190's at elevation and then with a little remote tuning I believe we got you right around 200whp in fairly cool temps.

Thanks
-- Ed

[EQ Tuning]

Originally Posted by sperry

Wow, I'm surprised the hp loss was only about 10 hp. Any chance you've got the data still from both runs? I'd like to see how/if the power curve shape shifts due to altitude.

Also, what were the temperature/humidity differences betweent he Davis and Reno pulls, if either of you can remember? Was it hot in Davis and cool in Reno? That might explain the two numbers being so close.

All I know is that I can noticably feel the difference in power/torque when I'm driving in Reno at altitude, vs. at sea level... and I don't think my butt-dyno is sensitive enough to pick up +/-10 hp.

Sperry,

I do believe that the Davis number was in significantly hotter weather than the Reno number, so that certainly accounts for some of it.

On the original tune, Cody's car deffinately lost more than 10whp going to elevation, but after some remote tuning I was able to close the gap a bit. Of course it still looses some power at elevation, but its not more optimized for the each condition bringing the power variance down significantly.

The other thing to remember is that a 10whp difference on a low reading dyno is equivalent to a significantly larger variance on a higher reading dyno. So in fact, you could most likely feel a 10whp difference on a ~200whp car.

Thanks
-- Ed

[sperry]

Originally Posted by EQ Tuning

Sperry,

I do believe that the Davis number was in significantly hotter weather than the Reno number, so that certainly accounts for some of it.

On the original tune, Cody's car deffinately lost more than 10whp going to elevation, but after some remote tuning I was able to close the gap a bit. Of course it still looses some power at elevation, but its not more optimized for the each condition bringing the power variance down significantly.

The other thing to remember is that a 10whp difference on a low reading dyno is equivalent to a significantly larger variance on a higher reading dyno. So in fact, you could most likely feel a 10whp difference on a ~200whp car.

Thanks
-- Ed

The temperature difference makes sense. If Cody's at 215-220 awhp on a cool sea level day, that makes the 200 awhp at altitude on an optimized map very believeable... and pretty impressive. I was making 198 awhp on my car w/ the 2.0L and stock turbo... 'course my map was designed to run on the stock boost curve for STX, then we bumped the boost a bit and got to 198.

Will Cody have issues if he drives at sea level on a map optimized for altitude? What sort of tweaks did you used to counter the altitude? A touch more boost and timing? Fueling changes?

[WRXRallyBlue]

FWIW, average stage 2 setups generally reach about 225whp at sea level on an average-reading dyno. From what I understand, Ed's dyno reads very low.

FYI, the most power a stock turbo wrx ever put down (using pump gas + meth) was 264 whp and 290 ft/lbs and ran a 12.68 @ 107.63 mph, which is the current record.

[EQ Tuning]

Originally Posted by sperry

The temperature difference makes sense. If Cody's at 215-220 awhp on a cool sea level day, that makes the 200 awhp at altitude on an optimized map very believeable... and pretty impressive. I was making 198 awhp on my car w/ the 2.0L and stock turbo... 'course my map was designed to run on the stock boost curve for STX, then we bumped the boost a bit and got to 198.

Will Cody have issues if he drives at sea level on a map optimized for altitude? What sort of tweaks did you used to counter the altitude? A touch more boost and timing? Fueling changes?

I would guess that Cod'y car is around 215whp on a cool sea level day and about 200-205whp on a cool day at altitude

Cody has driven the same map at sea level without issues. The main changes were boost related with a couple small timing and fuel tweaks to keep things consistant. Cody's MBC also really helped close the gap in response from sea level to elevation.

Thanks
-- Ed

[EQ Tuning]

Originally Posted by WRXRallyBlue

FWIW, average stage 2 setups generally reach about 225whp at sea level on an average-reading dyno. From what I understand, Ed's dyno reads very low.

FYI, the most power a stock turbo wrx ever put down (using pump gas + meth) was 264 whp and 290 ft/lbs and ran a 12.68 @ 107.63 mph, which is the current record.

The numbers you're talking about sound more like Dynojet numbers. My road dyno reads pretty much dead on with Gruppe-S's Mustang.

Thanks
-- Ed

[cody]

Originally Posted by EQ Tuning

The numbers you're talking about sound more like Dynojet numbers. My road dyno reads pretty much dead on with Gruppe-S's Mustang.

Thanks
-- Ed

Regardless, 12.68 @ 107.63 mph is pretty impressive. Probably not a tune that preserves reliability though...

[WRXRallyBlue]

Originally Posted by EQ Tuning

The numbers you're talking about sound more like Dynojet numbers. My road dyno reads pretty much dead on with Gruppe-S's Mustang.

Thanks
-- Ed

No offense to your tuning. I had mentioned that your dyno reads low.


Pic of my tmic:

[WRXRallyBlue]

Originally Posted by cody

Regardless, 12.68 @ 107.63 mph is pretty impressive. Probably not a tune that preserves reliability though...

He was running 21 psi and loved it. I recommend everyone read this http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=988825.

[EQ Tuning]

Yea... that 1/4 time is quite impressive. I've run 21psi on a 100 octane map but I never drag race so I'm not sure what it would run.

BTW, no offense taken

[WRXRallyBlue]

Cool. What is your take on the compressor map, Ed?

[EQ Tuning]

Its not much of a surprise to me. I've worked out a similar conclusion about boost efficiency of the stocker mostly through experimentation. Most of my TBE TD04 pump gas tunes run about 17-17.5psi through the mid range and taper off to just over 13psi by redline. On race gas I've run the stocker to 21psi in the mid range and as high as 15psi by redline. A bigger TMIC really helps for race gas tunes, however, as those higher boost levels tend to start heating up the stock TMIC.

Thanks
-- Ed