Stage 2 Cosworth Kit Preview!!!!

[qqfob]

Originally Posted by 350matt

its not shy of torque low down though is it?
it makes 200Nm from 1500 rpm ( as much as a stock car makes at peak) and builds from there and this SC and intercooler setup supposed to be good 380Bhp and 450nm but obviously needs a built engine to go with this

plus I'd be surprised if it suffered from the heat soak issues of the innovate kit as the inter cooler cores are about 4x the size

Good point, just to remind people who are STILL complaining about HP per dollar that what they get is a 380hp setup minus the pulley and retune.

And heat soak can happen on either street or track with constant high boost. It mainly comes down to the size of the IC core in the manifold, and/or water flow or capacity.

[Sleepless]

Originally Posted by qqfob

Good point, just to remind people who are STILL complaining about HP per dollar that what they get is a 380hp setup minus the pulley and retune.

And the built engine to support that amount of power...

[stonenewt]

Originally Posted by glamcem

so if I don't have the linear/early torque advantage of a Innovate/Sprintex kit and track-ability advantage of the Rotrex units, what do I gain with this kit? brand name?

Huh, sorry, what?

Innovate SC w/IC seems to be laying down 220-265Nm @ 2500 rpm depending on pulley & other mods. The Cosworth kit is making 265Nm at this point, from there the Cosworth kit, with an IC, looks very similar to the Innovate torque curve with a 70mm pulley & without an IC.

I'm just not sure the price premium is justified. I'd have to see numbers from the same rollers.

[Deep Six]

Originally Posted by qqfob

Good point, just to remind people who are STILL complaining about HP per dollar that what they get is a 380hp setup minus the pulley and retune.

And heat soak can happen on either street or track with constant high boost. It mainly comes down to the size of the IC core in the manifold, and/or water flow or capacity.

What your saying is that adding the blower, tune and exhaust yields 80bhp (according to Cosworth) and somehow the smaller pulley and retune will add 20 more bhp than the initial supercharger install did over stock ????


80bhp entire $10,000 FI package
100 more bhp just a pulley ???

[OICU812]

Originally Posted by Deep Six

What your saying is that adding the blower, tune and exhaust yields 80bhp (according to Cosworth) and somehow the smaller pulley and retune will add 20 more bhp than the initial supercharger install did over stock ????


80bhp entire $10,000 FI package
100 more bhp just a pulley ???

What he's saying is like Innovate you can and should be able to mount a smaller pulley, this turning the blower faster creating more HP. A tune would be required to address the increased air flow. Being CW has stated a much higher rpm capability over Innovate there is obviously extra HP over what they've stated left on the table.

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by stonenewt

Huh, sorry, what?

Innovate SC w/IC seems to be laying down 220-265Nm @ 2500 rpm depending on pulley & other mods. The Cosworth kit is making 265Nm at this point, from there the Cosworth kit, with an IC, looks very similar to the Innovate torque curve with a 70mm pulley & without an IC.

I'm just not sure the price premium is justified. I'd have to see numbers from the same rollers.

Ok, but why do we compare apples to kiwis? when I look at both graphs I see that Cosworth TQ curve looks like a roller coaster ride whereas the Innovate TQ looks almost flat... of course without comparing both kits on same type of dyno (smoothing factor, other variables ..etc) it's really hard to tell who makes what kind of power







Also, intercooled Innovate kit (since Cosworth kit is also intercooled I figured I should compare ICd versions) makes a lot more than 220-260 nm at flywheel, it makes roughly 170-175 lbft of torque at the wheels at 2500 rpm as you can see in the above graph, so it should be something like (170/.82)x1.36 (since the drivetrain loss is about 18%) it should be something like 280-285 ntm torque at flywheel and more importantly it looks a lot smoother than that bumpy Cosworth Torque, of course it's too early to anticipate but this is what I see so far

showing the flywheels numbers don't really tell us anything about the real world conditions, it just looks cool since the numbers are overly inflated

[350matt]

Originally Posted by OICU812

What he's saying is like Innovate you can and should be able to mount a smaller pulley, this turning the blower faster creating more HP. A tune would be required to address the increased air flow. Being CW has stated a much higher rpm capability over Innovate there is obviously extra HP over what they've stated left on the table.

Agreed
I suspect they've not spun it any faster than they have to keep the standard bottom end alive

I know there are plenty of folks putting more power into the standard bottom end but I suspect Cosworth are playing it safe on this one

the point is (as you say) is there's plenty of headroom with this unit and as ever we're not going to believe power figures until some customer puts one on the rollers

[350matt]

Originally Posted by glamcem

Ok, but why do we compare apples to kiwis? when I look at both graphs I see that Cosworth TQ curve looks like a roller coaster ride whereas the Innovate TQ looks almost flat... of course without comparing both kits on same type of dyno (smoothing factor, other variables ..etc) it's really hard to tell who makes what kind of power







Also, intercooled Innovate kit (since Cosworth kit is also intercooled I figured I should compare ICd versions) makes a lot more than 220-260 nm at flywheel, it makes roughly 170-175 lbft of torque at the wheels at 2500 rpm as you can see in the above graph, so it should be something like (170/.82)x1.36 (since the drivetrain loss is about 18%) it should be something like 280-285 ntm torque at flywheel and more importantly it looks a lot smoother than that bumpy Cosworth Torque, of course it's too early to anticipate but this is what I see so far

showing the flywheels numbers don't really tell us anything about the real world conditions, it just looks cool since the numbers are overly inflated

hang on the 'bumpy' CW curve has a variation of 15Nm = 11ft/lb which about the same variation as the Innovate curve that you show and 15nm out 300 isn't exactly a huge variation now is it? 5% or so...

I think yes you're right in saying its putting out a very similar amount of power to the innovate SC with its intercooler however the CW setup has a lot more to give and will very likely not have heat soak issues

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by Koa

There are two aspects that work against this logic:

• Time Value of Money
• Depreciation of high-performance assets

The first notes that any initial money spent, compounded with the less-than-face-value resell price at a future point down the road, crushes the aspect of planning to significantly re-coup money from the kit if one wanted to sell it down the road (given that the kit doesn't malfunction or otherwise become impossible to sell)

The second notes that high-performance assets depreciate at a faster rate than other assets, such as wheels and aero kits (given how they were maintained/treated/exposed to elements of course).
--

That being said, yes the Cossy kit will have better re-sale value. That's a given. The argument here is that the initial outlay of their higher price works against other less expensive homebrew solutions that, while may re-sell for less, cost less to begin with and thus the time value of money and depreciation elements impact the investment less, resulting in a greater chance the cosworth kit indeed was not a smarter net disposal cash inflow. This is not speaking to the performance aspects of the kit versus other solutions.

I am not exactly sure if/how the microeconomics jargon such as time value of money or the face value applies here but I think I understand your point

It shouldn't take a genius to guess an already expensive product will hold more value at the end but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a smarter buy (from a financial standpoint).. simple stupid example, say you ended up spending $10k on a so called "premium" brand car part and at the end of the certain period you lost about %40 of its initial value, that's $4k of total loss which could be even more than the total cost of of another kit ..same can be said for German vs Japanese cars, in some cases some German cars can be cheaper than Japanese alternatives after 3-4 years of depreciation even if the initial value can be more than twice the Japanese car to begin with


if I were to make an investment, aftermarket parts would would be the last place to look at for sure, especially for late adapters of an already "saturated market"

[stonenewt]

Originally Posted by glamcem

Ok, but why do we compare apples to kiwis? when I look at both graphs I see that Cosworth TQ curve looks like a roller coaster ride whereas the Innovate TQ looks almost flat...

You sure about that because this is what happens when you align the scale & overlay the torque curves..

Hum... no massively different.

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by 350matt

hang on the 'bumpy' CW curve has a variation of 15Nm = 11ft/lb which about the same variation as the Innovate curve that you show and 15nm out 300 isn't exactly a huge variation now is it? 5% or so...

I think yes you're right in saying its putting out a very similar amount of power to the innovate SC with its intercooler however the CW setup has a lot more to give and will very likely not have heat soak issues

I am not worried about that small dip between 4-4.5k RPM but if you look at the whole picture, it's pretty obvious that the CW torque curve is a lot steeper than the Innovate.. my point is if I were to get a twin screw SC, I would be looking for a smoother curve, or if I can live with that peaky curve I would either get a Centrifugal type SC or Turbo, each his own of course

[stonenewt]

Originally Posted by glamcem

Also, intercooled Innovate kit (since Cosworth kit is also intercooled I figured I should compare ICd versions) makes a lot more than 220-260 nm at flywheel, it makes roughly 170-175 lbft of torque at the wheels at 2500 rpm as you can see in the above graph, so it should be something like (170/.82)x1.36 (since the drivetrain loss is about 18%) it should be something like 280-285 ntm torque at flywheel and more importantly it looks a lot smoother than that bumpy Cosworth Torque, of course it's too early to anticipate but this is what I see so far

Anything I find up there includes ethanol be it injection or E85. Does Cosworth kit use ethanol at all?

[350matt]

Originally Posted by stonenewt

Anything I find up there includes ethanol be it injection or E85. Does Cosworth kit use ethanol at all?

no


its difficult to get in the uk

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by stonenewt

You sure about that because this is what happens when you align the scale & overlay the torque curves..

Hum... no massively different.

so if you now agree with me on that there is no torque advantage of the CW, I can explain why they look similar


they simply started the dyno pull from or after 2200 rpm on the Innovate dyno graph but way before than that on the CW dyno, take a look at this dyno graph and you'll see the difference in low end, I wouldn't really worry about the numbers since different dynos, different smoothing factors (and size differences of the graphs) but if you look at the whole picture it's pretty easy to see how flat is this one compared to the other