Boost vs N/A - questions

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by solidsnake11

I killed more rings and pistons with a hot motor.

Your failure points should indicate to you what's going on.

[ls1ac]

To reiterate, if adding two inches to intake runners would make a significant change in drivability or horse power the factory would have done it to start with.
Remember the butt dyno response directly to the amount of money spent. A real dyno is needed for real numbers.
Finally, small power adders are not cumulative. Each device is measured against bone stock. Some midnight auto suppliers measure against a poorly tuned engine.

We get people coming to the shop regularly claiming the dyno is wrong as they have added thousands of dollars worth of parts and added up the power that they should have.

[SUSPECT_BRZ]

Originally Posted by DarkPira7e

If you do not want to add stress to your car, stick to very basic modifications - exhaust, intake, pro tune. Even something like the intake manifold spacers can introduce headaches- the less you need to remove from the car, the better.

Forced induction's unreliability is mainly based on the modality of what you're adding power-

I find that turbocharges are more reliable than a supercharger.
Why?
Because they are actually very basic. They have a CHRA that can be replaced, seals that can be replaced, and at minimum just require an oil line to and from the turbo. A few vacuum lines with the tune and you're set. Any kit should come with a manifold and requisite exhaust pieces, which if machined correctly, will just replace/supplement the existing hardware.
Here is your first weak link- exhaust leaks, especially at the header, will cause issues everywhere. Tune, how it runs, loss of power, bad noise, etc.

Second weak link - oil fittings, these need to be installed near perfectly, or else oil will leak. I shouldn't have to explain the benefits of not having your car's blood leaking everywhere, especially onto a burning hot manifold.

3rd weak link - intercooler piping is essentially adding a ton of places where vacuum/boost leaks can happen.

4th weak link - you're adding quite a bit more stress to the engine with forced induction. It's in the name - FORCED induction.

If you want RELIABLE, don't mess with anything except the catback. The car does make good power and tune adjustments using the OpenFlash tablet wake the car up quite well.
You cannot install a supercharger or turbo setup and expect to not have to touch anything. You will need to check for oil leaks, you will need to check for coolant leaks ( if your setup requires coolant), you will need to make sure bolts aren't backing off, you need to upgrade OTHER pieces of the car to accommodate them in some cases ( engine and transmission mounts) so you will incur further expense over time.

TL;DR- Stay stock except your catback of choice and you'll have a 150,000 mile car. Start messing with making power and you can expect things to go wrong.

Very good input, thanks for your answer, I'm in the same boat as the OP.

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by ls1ac

To reiterate, if adding two inches to intake runners would make a significant change in drivability or horse power the factory would have done it to start with.
Remember the butt dyno response directly to the amount of money spent. A real dyno is needed for real numbers.
Finally, small power adders are not cumulative. Each device is measured against bone stock. Some midnight auto suppliers measure against a poorly tuned engine.

We get people coming to the shop regularly claiming the dyno is wrong as they have added thousands of dollars worth of parts and added up the power that they should have.

Even under the best conditions a dyno is a tuning tool and they are poor at comparing changes.

Timeslips on the other hand work a treat no need for big launches, no need for drag radials, just line it up and take off, your printout tells the story.

[DarkPira7e]

Originally Posted by 86MLR

Even under the best conditions a dyno is a tuning tool and they are poor at comparing changes.

Timeslips on the other hand work a treat no need for big launches, no need for drag radials, just line it up and take off, your printout tells the story.

At least a dyno can be compared under deliberately ideal conditions. Drag can be tire slip, surface conditions, intake air temp from idling, outdoor temperature, wind direction, inconsistency in your shifting, etc.

I think a dyno is far better for comparing changes on the same dyno- a time slip from a drag race is ideal for seeing if those changes mean anything outside of that controlled space.

If your car makes 350whp and plants it well, and you're consistent, it's a lot better than your friend driving the car at 500whp with lots of tire spin and hitting rev limiter.

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by DarkPira7e

At least a dyno can be compared under deliberately ideal conditions. Drag can be tire slip, surface conditions, intake air temp from idling, outdoor temperature, wind direction, inconsistency in your shifting, etc.

I think a dyno is far better for comparing changes on the same dyno- a time slip from a drag race is ideal for seeing if those changes mean anything outside of that controlled space.

If your car makes 350whp and plants it well, and you're consistent, it's a lot better than your friend driving the car at 500whp with lots of tire spin and hitting rev limiter.

I choose to disagree

My reasons: as with the inherent variables at the strip, there are variables with a dyno, the dyno itself needs to be calibrated and temps, humidity, tyres and how it is strapped down all comes into it, for example: what torque do you have your straps at? Oil temps? Coolant temps? Oil? Fuel?AIT? CAI ram?

Plus there is always that +/- hp difference from run to run which could be due to a plethora of reasons.

At the strip, if you have at least some driving prowess, it is much easier to get a closer estimate of true power, and, how that power is put down.

Typically you may get from 4 to 6 runs on a Wednesday night at WSID here in Sydney, all for the Princely sum of $60. if you cannot get at least 1 clean run in over those passes you should not be allowed a licence,

As long as you are smooth and shift at the correct RPM point you will get a fairly accurate MPH, BUT, there is no shifting under full load on the dyno, well none if you wanted some form of accuracy in your reading.

Will the strip be 100% accurate, hell no, but it will be a better judge of actual, real world power, and how your engine performsunder that curve through all the RPM's and all the gears..

I have seen alot of people going on about dyno numbers that never match up to MPH.

Disclaimer: Dyno's are the only place that I would ever tune a engine, what number the algorithm makes up is no real concern, as long as my fuel and timing is optimal it is up to the engine and the sum of its parts to be as efficient as possible, from there it is to the track to see how she really runs.

In the end you have 2 options:

Option 1. Watch a car rev on a dyno to get number that people can circle jerk over

Option 2. Run a 1/4 for a number

Me, I'm an option 2 kinda guy


Meh, I'm also a grumpy old opinionated arsehole, so there is that.

[DarkPira7e]

Originally Posted by 86MLR

I choose to disagree

Meh, I'm also a grumpy old opinionated arsehole, so there is that.

We agree, just voicing it differently. I'm saying that for a direct comparison of change only, a dyno will give you a higher level of insight. Like if you're looking to measure something for the sake of using a measurement

Eg. "We lowered boost a little here but we're able to add timing and made 13wtq more at 3300rpm, and overall added about 20wtq up top"

What does that mean though? It means next to nothing. It only has any value when compared with a before/after on the same car,same day, same dyno calibration. Dyno numbers are arbitrary and near meaningless. You are right that the real proof is in the pudding.

Nobody cares if your car made 340whp. Let's see it roll a 12.5 like a car that read 270 on a different dyno.

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by DarkPira7e

We agree, just voicing it differently. I'm saying that for a direct comparison of change only, a dyno will give you a higher level of insight. Like if you're looking to measure something for the sake of using a measurement

Eg. "We lowered boost a little here but we're able to add timing and made 13wtq more at 3300rpm, and overall added about 20wtq up top"

What does that mean though? It means next to nothing. It only has any value when compared with a before/after on the same car,same day, same dyno calibration. Dyno numbers are arbitrary and near meaningless. You are right that the real proof is in the pudding.

Nobody cares if your car made 340whp. Let's see it roll a 12.5 like a car that read 270 on a different dyno.

Mate, I've had a few brewskis tonight, my compression kung fu is weak.

In other news: yeah, what DarkPira7e said....

[Cephas]

Originally Posted by ls1ac

To reiterate, if adding two inches to intake runners would make a significant change in drivability or horse power the factory would have done it to start with.

Agree 100% with the rest of what you said, but I don't think this part is necessarily true. Maximum output and optimal power delivery are far from the only consideration from the factory, as they have to comply with fuel economy regs (across the whole fleet of vehicles, not just individual models), CG, cost, reliability/warranty implications, and so on. The twins and the FA-20 are much, much closer to the "limit" than most cars, for sure, but it doesn't mean that there's nothing to do for little gains here and there.

I guess we'd quibble over the definition of "significant," in the case of a mod like the power blocks, which seem to require some degree of fiddling with the tune to extrapolate a few ponies across the rev range.

[Hades]

Originally Posted by TommyW

A proper motor and FI and all the things that go with the extra power can run up a 15k bill. Stock internals are less

I think that figure is a little low, unless we're talking supercharger (but then really you don't *need* to build the engine with something like JRSC). I know CSG Mike recently quoted nearly that figure just for the turbo and all the cooling. If we're talking built internals it can get pretty expensive.


OP: I've resolved to stay N/A until I'm sure what I want to do with this car. When you look into competition classes, F/I can really restrict that and if I do eventually end up going racing F/I will be much more expensive (and likely break a lot more). There is always NASA TT4 which seems a good fit for a supercharger or relatively lower boost levels, but again I worry about the extra costs at that point.

[TommyW]

Originally Posted by Hades

I think that figure is a little low, unless we're talking supercharger (but then really you don't *need* to build the engine with something like JRSC). I know CSG Mike recently quoted nearly that figure just for the turbo and all the cooling. If we're talking built internals it can get pretty expensive.


OP: I've resolved to stay N/A until I'm sure what I want to do with this car. When you look into competition classes, F/I can really restrict that and if I do eventually end up going racing F/I will be much more expensive (and likely break a lot more). There is always NASA TT4 which seems a good fit for a supercharger or relatively lower boost levels, but again I worry about the extra costs at that point.

you can spend 30. It depends on how far down the rabbit hole you're willing to go. I laugh at guys that want to spend 5K to boost an 86

[Hades]

Originally Posted by TommyW

you can spend 30. It depends on how far down the rabbit hole you're willing to go. I laugh at guys that want to spend 5K to boost an 86

Yea, especially when we are talking track reliability. If OP wants a more budget option, I think the superchargers are a better bet (particularly JRSC or other centrifugal). Either way, you're still looking at more stresses and issues than just pure N/A.

[Ernest72]

Originally Posted by Cephas

Agree 100% with the rest of what you said, but I don't think this part is necessarily true. Maximum output and optimal power delivery are far from the only consideration from the factory, as they have to comply with fuel economy regs (across the whole fleet of vehicles, not just individual models), CG, cost, reliability/warranty implications, and so on. The twins and the FA-20 are much, much closer to the "limit" than most cars, for sure, but it doesn't mean that there's nothing to do for little gains here and there.

I guess we'd quibble over the definition of "significant," in the case of a mod like the power blocks, which seem to require some degree of fiddling with the tune to extrapolate a few ponies across the rev range.

The power blocks just move the torque down a bit so it’s more useful. You can feel it. Is it work 300 and the pain to install. Well that’s another story and subjective. If staying NA I think they are worth it, but I like to mod and do it all myself. If you are paying labor to put them in well that’s a lot of money for a modest gain. I am done with power mods. Save money for tires and suspension mods.

[Cephas]

Originally Posted by Ernest72

The power blocks just move the torque down a bit so it’s more useful. You can feel it. Is it work 300 and the pain to install. Well that’s another story and subjective. If staying NA I think they are worth it, but I like to mod and do it all myself. If you are paying labor to put them in well that’s a lot of money for a modest gain. I am done with power mods. Save money for tires and suspension mods.

Yeah I would do the work myself for sure, but then paying for dyno time to get out of them what you should... That's outside my wheelhouse.

Meh... good problem to have, I guess, having a motor that's quite good from the factory!