In the process of Boosting my BRZ, did I miss anything?

[Leviticus Ezra]

Originally Posted by Jaden

Nor will it likely need a clutch at those power levels.

People love to say how weak these engines are, yet there have been as many or more rod failures on stock power levels as on boost which SHOULD lead a logical mind to the probability that it was a quality control issue rather than a generally weak rod issue. Especially considering that many have gotten over 400 on stock blocks without issues.

The problem with a quality control issue though is that it's a crap shoot when adding power. Although if you were unlucky enough to get the shitty rods, it's just as likely that running it stock will have the same end result, so whatever.

I would love to see how much power can be gotten with just a rod upgrade and some ring gap. I would bet over 500 reliably.

I have my first engine that, (on stock power levels), spun a rod bearing, which I eventually plan on doing the above to to find out what it will handle.

Jaden

I've heard quite a bit about how these cars actually love to make power stock. It's just how you go about that power. I didn't know much about the rods being more a quality issue than a material/strength issue. That's knowledge that eases the mind quite a bit. I'm sure there'd be a significant increase in the power threshold if the rods and piston gap were nicely mated. I'm sorry to hear you spun a bearing, but at least now that means you can dive right in and start doing some serious power adding!

[Leviticus Ezra]

Originally Posted by B T

You could probably save some money on the radiator with a CSF unit. I've got one on my car and it keeps great temperatures in traffic and on the track. Never even come close to overheating whereas my car overheated here in the south from the factory. They actually produce the Jackson Racing oil cooling radiator as well.

https://csfrace.com/product/subaru-racing-radiators/

It sounds like it may just be worth throwing into my car!

[Leviticus Ezra]

Originally Posted by anticubus

You'll still see the reduced throttle response. There's an argument to be made that the water cooling intake length counteracts that, but there's no replacing your exhaust's time to expand as it travels towards lower pressure when you make that first request for more torque. The cat issue is mitigated if you're catless, and the header will probably flow better.

OTOH why not sell the header to recoup some additional costs from bumping up to a higher quality kit?

What might have been a more quality kit worth selling the headers for? After biting the bullet I'm seeing other kits that actually raise a brow, but of course you don't start to notice much until you're expecting or have a kit already. I'm still content with my purchase of the Works kit, but I'd like to hear what else is out there.

[anticubus]

Originally Posted by Leviticus Ezra

What might have been a more quality kit worth selling the headers for? After biting the bullet I'm seeing other kits that actually raise a brow, but of course you don't start to notice much until you're expecting or have a kit already. I'm still content with my purchase of the Works kit, but I'd like to hear what else is out there.

I looked hard at the works kit in order to maintain emissions compliance by not removing/relocating emissions equipment. In that situation it turns out supercharging is the most cost effective choice.

Of course I wasn't happy with that. Turbo noises! Thermal efficiency! My favorite kits ended up being the JSRC no-cut specifically for the no-cut option, followed by AVO for the most OEM-like setup, then the SBD kit since it's very cost effective even with some extras.

That doesn't mean you made a bad choice, I hope you love the works kit while you run it! It's the only mass produced air-to-water kit for our cars that I know of too. Air to air is often labelled the best choice but as long as the carrier liquid doesn't heat soak it's going to remove more thermal energy from the charge per square inch of core and it's got a much shorter path from the turbo to the cylinder than a front mounted option.

[Leviticus Ezra]

Originally Posted by anticubus

I looked hard at the works kit in order to maintain emissions compliance by not removing/relocating emissions equipment. In that situation it turns out supercharging is the most cost effective choice.

Of course I wasn't happy with that. Turbo noises! Thermal efficiency! My favorite kits ended up being the JSRC no-cut specifically for the no-cut option, followed by AVO for the most OEM-like setup, then the SBD kit since it's very cost effective even with some extras.

That doesn't mean you made a bad choice, I hope you love the works kit while you run it! It's the only mass produced air-to-water kit for our cars that I know of too. Air to air is often labelled the best choice but as long as the carrier liquid doesn't heat soak it's going to remove more thermal energy from the charge per square inch of core and it's got a much shorter path from the turbo to the cylinder than a front mounted option.

I couldn't tell you how much back and fourth I had been doing whilst owning my BRZ(s). I've told myself the cars to balanced to have a turbo so it NEEDS a supercharger. initially I wanted a turbo. But the more I saw and read, the more a supercharger became the more effective and efficient way of making that power. However, I've been a die hard boost creep ever since I was a child. I just couldn't see myself straying from a turbo. What got me most about the Works kit was that it was different but kind of reminded me of the old top mount style intercooler of the older Subarus. I quite liked what it had going for it and the quality they are known for. Granted it may not be the flashiest or make the purest of sounds, it just seemed like a really well thought out kit. I stumbled across the AVO kit after making the purchase and was rather surprised at how they were able to manufacture a kit rather similar to the FA20DIT layout. As for the Jackson Racing Supercharger, that would have been the go to if I had stayed on the path of instant boost.

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by Leviticus Ezra

I've heard quite a bit about how these cars actually love to make power stock. It's just how you go about that power. I didn't know much about the rods being more a quality issue than a material/strength issue. That's knowledge that eases the mind quite a bit. I'm sure there'd be a significant increase in the power threshold if the rods and piston gap were nicely mated. I'm sorry to hear you spun a bearing, but at least now that means you can dive right in and start doing some serious power adding!

Yeah I spun a bearing 4 years ago. I bought the replacement engine and trans for 2500 at the time, so I have a spare trans too. I've gone through many iterations of what power adder to add. Right now I'm finishing up a custom supercharger using an eaton m90 out of a buick.

Actually, technically I'm finishing up my Jetta VRT project first, then I'll finish up the supercharger. Well, not finishing, but I want to get first start done with the stand alone on the Jetta before I finish the supercharger.

Jaden

[MR2Dave]

I got my car back today, and;

The Competition Stage 2 clutch needs another 400 miles to bed-in but, so far the pedal is a little stiffer and engagement is smooth enough. I think I'll get used to it quickly and it'll be fine for a daily.

I also spoke with Jeff about spark plugs while I was there. He said that because of the high compression ratio Subaru uses a "9" stock, which is the coldest plug aside from racecar plugs that cost $100 a pop. So, stock plugs are apparently good enough.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by anticubus

I looked hard at the works kit in order to maintain emissions compliance by not removing/relocating emissions equipment. In that situation it turns out supercharging is the most cost effective choice.

Of course I wasn't happy with that. Turbo noises! Thermal efficiency! My favorite kits ended up being the JSRC no-cut specifically for the no-cut option, followed by AVO for the most OEM-like setup, then the SBD kit since it's very cost effective even with some extras.

That doesn't mean you made a bad choice, I hope you love the works kit while you run it! It's the only mass produced air-to-water kit for our cars that I know of too. Air to air is often labelled the best choice but as long as the carrier liquid doesn't heat soak it's going to remove more thermal energy from the charge per square inch of core and it's got a much shorter path from the turbo to the cylinder than a front mounted option.

Water very much heat soaks, and will take longer to shed that heat!

[jrhudson]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Water very much heat soaks, and will take longer to shed that heat!

Yes this is true, but water will also take longer to heat soak. Those issues can be fixed with increasing water capacity and/or increasing heat exchanger. That means more points of failure for more money, but it will work if setup correctly.

[ninjan00dles]

Originally Posted by Leviticus Ezra

I couldn't tell you how much back and fourth I had been doing whilst owning my BRZ(s). I've told myself the cars to balanced to have a turbo so it NEEDS a supercharger. initially I wanted a turbo. But the more I saw and read, the more a supercharger became the more effective and efficient way of making that power. However, I've been a die hard boost creep ever since I was a child. I just couldn't see myself straying from a turbo. What got me most about the Works kit was that it was different but kind of reminded me of the old top mount style intercooler of the older Subarus. I quite liked what it had going for it and the quality they are known for. Granted it may not be the flashiest or make the purest of sounds, it just seemed like a really well thought out kit. I stumbled across the AVO kit after making the purchase and was rather surprised at how they were able to manufacture a kit rather similar to the FA20DIT layout. As for the Jackson Racing Supercharger, that would have been the go to if I had stayed on the path of instant boost.

No one really discusses this, but the superchargers aren't instant full boost either. They take awhile to hit full boost pressure as well, particularly the centrifugal types (JRSC). The roots types (Edelbrock, Harrop) hit full boost a little bit sooner but have pretty poor gas mileage for your end power output.

IMO if you aren't tracking and don't have to worry about CARB turbos are more fun on this car.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by jrhudson

Yes this is true, but water will also take longer to heat soak. Those issues can be fixed with increasing water capacity and/or increasing heat exchanger. That means more points of failure for more money, but it will work if setup correctly.

You underestimate how quickly even water will heat soak, when cooling the charge from a turbo, as well as traveling through a hot engine bay to get to the heat exchanger.

This applies to the Harrop/Edelbrock kits as well.

[jrhudson]

Originally Posted by jrhudson

Yes this is true, but water will also take longer to heat soak. Those issues can be fixed with increasing water capacity and/or increasing heat exchanger. That means more points of failure for more money, but it will work if setup correctly.

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

You underestimate how quickly even water will heat soak, when cooling the charge from a turbo, as well as traveling through a hot engine bay to get to the heat exchanger.

This applies to the Harrop/Edelbrock kits as well.

Well, if you got a small water capacity and small heat exchanger yes, this will happen quite quickly. But what I have in bold is why the water won't heat soak.

I'll be more specific. You can increase your water capacity by getting a 5 gallon water tank and/or increasing your heat exchanger for more volume of water and more surface area for cooling. If you're sitting in traffic for a while, it will heat soak but once you get going water temps will drop to near ambient. This could also be said about any setup though. BUT this is, for sure, wayyy more work than an A2A setup though. Like I said in a previous post, it'll work if you set it up correctly. It's just more complex and work.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by jrhudson

Well, if you got a small water capacity and small heat exchanger yes, this will happen quite quickly. But what I have in bold is why the water won't heat soak.

I'll be more specific. You can increase your water capacity by getting a 5 gallon water tank and/or increasing your heat exchanger for more volume of water and more surface area for cooling. If you're sitting in traffic for a while, it will heat soak but once you get going water temps will drop to near ambient. This could also be said about any setup though. BUT this is, for sure, wayyy more work than an A2A setup though. Like I said in a previous post, it'll work if you set it up correctly. It's just more complex and work.

Increasing water mass/volume will increase capacity, but only means it will take even longer to shed. Even with a large volume of water, the cool and less-cool water will still mix, leading to intercooler efficiency loss, and heat exchanger loss. This is actually why unless you are only dealing with huge bursts of intermittent heat output (e.g. a drag car, or a drift car), water tanks/reservoirs are not used for air-water intercooling outside of a swirlpot for self-bleeding.

You can increase the surface area of the heat exchanger, but very quickly hit diminishing returns on depth, because the water's temperature delta to ambient is very small, unlike an air-air intercooler, or engine radiator. Using a very typical exxample, at 70mph, going from a 1" thick heat exchanger to a 3" thick heat exchanger will have.... zero increase in actual heat exchange from the water to the atmosphere, and given identical fin densities, actually hurt cooling, as now restriction has significantly increased.

I've done a looooooooooooooooooooot of water cooling for both vehicular and industrial applications.

[86TOYO2k17]

Killerchiller or interchiller