Is the AVO kit worth it?

[DAMotorsports]

Many people think this kit has not room and they are wrong. The kit was designed around the lowest quality gas a customer would use for daily driving without a need to change a ton of parts just to drive the car. The base kit is great for DD. We have tested the kit on and off the track. The 2014 season is going to be interesting for AVO. If you want to track your car you will need to upgrade the cooling system and exhaust (at least 2.5” with as little restriction as possible). The kit and placement does have room for a bigger turbo but this kit is still not been pushed to the limits. Your there have been owners you pushed the boost and made great number, but to track the kit at the same level is a different story.

As for installing this kit for a first timer you will be looking at about 10 hours. There are a few spots that the instructions are not clear but they have been addressed via thread.

[King Tut]

Originally Posted by jkonquer

just wondering, is it a external or internal wastegate?
if its internal, anyone experience any boost spike during cold weather?
and if external, does it bump back into the exhaust?

It is internally wastegated. I haven't heard of anyone having boost spike issues. The only issues I have seen with this kit have been boost taper in the upper RPM range.

[jamesm]

I would argue that there are many better options out there for the money, particularly if you're interested in headroom. I think the most I've seen it make was around 360whp or so on e85. So, it's up to you whether or not that is sufficient.

It certainly has the least straightforward upgrade path, and the price is pretty up there compared to some of the newer kits with better Garrett turbos that are easier to upgrade in the future if necessary.

[TRD_07]

I agree with @jamesm but if you really like AVO kit I would wait to view stage 3 and see what that brings to the table.

[AVOturboworld]

The only reason we haven't concentrated on multiple upgrade paths is simple - the motor isn't going to last long past 320-330whp on standard (92~94) octane gas. So instead of concentrating our efforts on the few people that plan to run e85 all the time, we are concentrating our efforts on all those people that intend to daily drive their car on 91~94 octane gas.

But since we started as a race engine company building turbocharged motors for the Australian version of NASCAR some 40 odd years ago, we still engineered to minimize issues with heat and reliability at the track.

Fitting a larger turbocharger isn't that hard. Having a small turbo system work well in a n/a car and tuning for it properly is harder.

[jamesm]

I don't think there is any data available that would suggest that these engines become unreliable at the 320-330whp level. I think that is at best an assumption.

Have there been any documented failures at that level that weren't related to tuning or mechanical failure (i.e. overboosting)?

I understand your position, but I think that your assumption is contradicted by all of the available evidence. If you could provide evidence to the contrary I'm sure the community would appreciate it.

[buditjoenawan]

Originally Posted by jamesm

I don't think there is any data available that would suggest that these engines become unreliable at the 320-330whp level. I think that is at best an assumption.

Have there been any documented failures at that level that weren't related to tuning or mechanical failure (i.e. overboosting)?

I understand your position, but I think that your assumption is contradicted by all of the available evidence. If you could provide evidence to the contrary I'm sure the community would appreciate it.

Paul has said very clearly that this motor in stock form does not support powers beyond 320-330whp on 92-94 octane. Show me a motor that hold up beyond that on readily available pump gas and I would agree with you. All the data that shows big power is done on E85, which isn't widely available. Case in point, I have a friend with a Turbo MR2 that has an E85 tune. He drives 45 minutes to get his corn juice from his place in Dallas. Now, I don't know about other large cities, but in Dallas, E85 isn't readily available. For that reason alone, I would classify E85 as specialty fuel.

Also, to Paul's point of difficulty of a tune; think of it this way: if you're tuning a big turbo that is on boost for a narrow part of the RPM band, then you only have to tune for that band. If you have a properly sized turbocharger for the motor and it produces torque over a large RPM band, then you'll have to tune for that entire band. Am I wrong? In my mind, tuning for a big turbo, you can leave the lower half of the RPM band alone and not even touch it.

Back to power levels, this motor has shown to be octane limited to around 300whp +/- 10%. By octane limit, I'm specifically referring to 92-93 octane, 91 octane users see an even larger deficit. Am I incorrect in this? I have never seen a 400whp 93 octane chart. At least not from a dyno that I trust.

-budi

[Victor Draken]

Funny thing is.. everyone kinda bashing AVO but I don't see any turbo kit around that have been tracked without heat issue. I have seen S/C that can do it but not a single turbo.

Some turbo out there have problem of heat even not on the track, so it's kinda funny how most of you guys is talking about headroom for bigger turbo and big numbers when the only thing you are thinking of is: smoke ppl at stop light and e-peen my dyno charts around, making my friends wet their pants when I do few highway pulls.

I mean... It's ok if you like it but stop bashing a product because of numbers. It's same story as S/C vs Turbo.

Bring a turbo car on the track, beat the shit out of it, post proof and I will put a shoe on my head and post pic.

[spitfire481]

I make 300whp/260tq at 10psi with my base avo kit plus manual boost controller and 700cc injectors. 93 octane. Powerband is perfect, glad it's the route I took

[jamesm]

Originally Posted by buditjoenawan

Paul has said very clearly that this motor in stock form does not support powers beyond 320-330whp on 92-94 octane. Show me a motor that hold up beyond that on readily available pump gas and I would agree with you. All the data that shows big power is done on E85, which isn't widely available. Case in point, I have a friend with a Turbo MR2 that has an E85 tune. He drives 45 minutes to get his corn juice from his place in Dallas. Now, I don't know about other large cities, but in Dallas, E85 isn't readily available. For that reason alone, I would classify E85 as specialty fuel.

Also, to Paul's point of difficulty of a tune; think of it this way: if you're tuning a big turbo that is on boost for a narrow part of the RPM band, then you only have to tune for that band. If you have a properly sized turbocharger for the motor and it produces torque over a large RPM band, then you'll have to tune for that entire band. Am I wrong? In my mind, tuning for a big turbo, you can leave the lower half of the RPM band alone and not even touch it.

Back to power levels, this motor has shown to be octane limited to around 300whp +/- 10%. By octane limit, I'm specifically referring to 92-93 octane, 91 octane users see an even larger deficit. Am I incorrect in this? I have never seen a 400whp 93 octane chart. At least not from a dyno that I trust.

-budi

i've tuned everything from gtx28r's to a gtx35r. the 'easiest' kit to tune so far has been the full blown 35r kit. it has a lot more to do with maf placement and the quality of the fueling components than anything else.

in theory your assumption about tuning difficulty as far as where the car is making power would make some (though very little) sense in the context of a speed density system, where you have to tune at every given manifold pressure and rpm, so obviously a car with a wider useable manifold pressure range would take longer to nail down. in practice, you don't just tune half of a map in any case. you tune the whole maf, tune the whole ve table, and then set the threshold wherever you deem necessary in a hybrid system. at least that's how i do it. i suppose you could disregard the parts of the ve map that aren't seen in real life, but that would just be a shortcut and probably not the best idea. of course the avo kit wouldn't need a hybrid setup to begin with on pump gas, and would just be a simple maf tune that wouldn't really care how big your turbo is.

cars are knock limited on pump gas, not power limited. fuel limits knock resistance, knock limits power. 550whp is 550whp, regardless of the fuel you're using to make it.

@lexusb3 has been beating his car north of 400whp for something like 20k miles. he's making ~550whp now.

i'll just ask again, has anyone documented a failure of an fa20 at ~300-350whp that wasn't caused by bad tuning or something like overboosting? what data are people using to arrive at this conclusion?

[Sportsguy83]

Originally Posted by buditjoenawan

In my mind, tuning for a big turbo, you can leave the lower half of the RPM band alone and not even touch it.

If it were that easy....

Originally Posted by Victor Draken

Funny thing is.. everyone kinda bashing AVO but I don't see any turbo kit around that have been tracked without heat issue. I have seen S/C that can do it but not a single turbo.

Some turbo out there have problem of heat even not on the track, so it's kinda funny how most of you guys is talking about headroom for bigger turbo and big numbers when the only thing you are thinking of is: smoke ppl at stop light and e-peen my dyno charts around, making my friends wet their pants when I do few highway pulls.

I mean... It's ok if you like it but stop bashing a product because of numbers. It's same story as S/C vs Turbo.

Bring a turbo car on the track, beat the shit out of it, post proof and I will put a shoe on my head and post pic.

ANY 86 with no cooling upgrades will see heating issues at the track, no matter if FI or not.

Furthermore, the amount of 86 owners that will actually track their cars actively will be what 5% at MOST? On top of those, how much will push the car 10/10 at the track N/A, 2%, lastly who will be FI and track it 10/10ths... less than 1%?

This is not about bashing the AVO kit or not. Everyone has a use for the car, goals etc... But saying the golden standard is tracking the shit out of the car and if it doesn't overheat is good is flawed because that will not be real life use for most buyers.

Fact is the AVO stage 1 turbo is limited in power output (MOST people will see WHP gains per $$$ to see what value they get out of power modifications). Fact is the upgrade path seems easier on other turbo kits (turbo location).

I mean, Stage 2 is about $6K and that does not include fuel upgrades or a full 3" exhaust. What will stage 3 run you?

I payed less than 6K for a GTX30 turbo, Garret IC and full 3 inch SS V-band exhaust (everything custom made which should make it more expensive)...


I DO NOT mean by my post that this is what everyone should look for. there are some people who have a very specific goal and build setup in mind (example, NEEDS to be lower mounted, NEEDS to be UEL, NEEDS to spool extremely quick down low and be OEM+ type of modification).

My only point is, dollar for dollar, there are a few options out there to look at before setting sights at AVO.

My last point is that IMHO the quality of the manifold is suspect after seeing (and living through) exhaust leaks, turbo downpipe not mating to Overpipe and have read about others having the same issues on top of other minor annoyances. I never got more compensation for my troubles than... I'll look into it. Research and read and make the best decision you can with all of the info at hand.

[jamesm]

^ this

[buditjoenawan]

Originally Posted by jamesm

i've tuned everything from gtx28r's to a gtx35r. the 'easiest' kit to tune so far has been the full blown 35r kit. it has a lot more to do with maf placement and the quality of the fueling components than anything else.

in theory your assumption about tuning difficulty as far as where the car is making power would make some sense in the context of a speed density system, where you have to tune at every given manifold pressure and rpm, so obviously a car with a wider useable manifold pressure range would take longer to nail down. in practice, you don't just tune half of a map in any case. you tune the whole maf, tune the whole ve table, and then set the threshold wherever you deem necessary in a hybrid system. at least that's how i do it. i suppose you could disregard the parts of the ve map that aren't seen in real life, but that would just be a shortcut and probably not the best idea. of course the avo kit wouldn't need a hybrid setup to begin with on pump gas, and would just be a simple maf tune that wouldn't really care how big your turbo is.

cars are knock limited on pump gas, not power limited. fuel limits knock resistance, knock limits power. 550whp is 550whp, regardless of the fuel you're using to make it.

@lexusb3 has been beating his car north of 400whp for something like 20k miles. he's making ~550whp now.

i'll just ask again, has anyone documented a failure of an fa20 at ~300-350whp that wasn't caused by bad tuning or something like overboosting? what data are people using to arrive at this conclusion?

@lexusb3 didn't make >400whp on 93 octane did he? Knock limit isn't the same as power limit? I mean, if the motor is knocking, then you can't make more power right? Isn't that the same thing? I don't understand the distiction.

Tuning for FI when stock is NA is tuning for boost right? Assuming that your large turbocharger doesn't put undue backpressure to the system at low RPMs. If your system doesn't generate positive pressure, then you don't have to alter the tune, right?

It's fine to want more power, just know that with a limited displacement motor, you're just shifting the powerband upwards. And there hasn't been a Subaru motor that has survived long term high RPM usage. High here meaning >8500rpm. The narrow powerband is fine if you have a specific use case in mind: like drag racing. But for the street, positive boost at more than half the redline is not something I find to be pleasant. But again, please don't get me wrong: I would never put down anyone who advocates for a bigger number.

Back to AVO, their turbocharger is rated at 38/39lb/min. So 360/370 is reasonable expectation if the fuel support it. This comes back to knock/power limitation right? If you're tuning a car and it's knocking once you get to 320whp, you won't push it any further right? But then you drain the fuel cell and add race gas. The tune on that would look much different right? Even with the change only being the fuel with it's associated. So yes, octane limitations means knock-limits and power-limits since knock dictates how much power you get.

James, don't bring up Brandon's car. I'm pretty sure he is not running 93 octane. If I'm incorrect on that and he's the only one running >400whp on 93 octane, I am comfortable to apologize and say that I'm wrong.

-budi

[Victor Draken]

Originally Posted by Sportsguy83

If it were that easy....




ANY 86 with no cooling upgrades will see heating issues at the track, no matter if FI or not.

Furthermore, the amount of 86 owners that will actually track their cars actively will be what 5% at MOST? On top of those, how much will push the car 10/10 at the track N/A, 2%, lastly who will be FI and track it 10/10ths... less than 1%?

This is not about bashing the AVO kit or not. Everyone has a use for the car, goals etc... But saying the golden standard is tracking the shit out of the car and if it doesn't overheat is good is flawed because that will not be real life use for most buyers.

Fact is the AVO stage 1 turbo is limited in power output (MOST people will see WHP gains per $$$ to see what value they get out of power modifications). Fact is the upgrade path seems easier on other turbo kits (turbo location).

I mean, Stage 2 is about $6K and that does not include fuel upgrades. What will stage 3 run you?

I payed less than 6K for a GTX30 turbo, Garret IC and full 3 inch V-band exhaust...

Fair enough about the track, what about canyon driving? would a turbo be able to be beaten up on some mountains road for more than 20-30mins no stop?

I'm surprised about the trend, I'm just learning that the idea I had about sports car enthusiasts is a bit different from reality