285 whp!

[SVXRide]

Bob the Fabricator delivers...


http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?p=21068941#post21068941



-Bill

[sicksubie]

wow..... Just wow...

[TomsSVX]

Thats wheel HP?? might wanna check on that because I highly doubt that

Tom

[YourConfused]

Holly Hell Batman!

[Crazy_pilot]

285 WHP NA with cams, milled heads, and flow work? Holy ****:eek:

[LetItSnow]

I have to agree... that sounds like a lot! :confused:

[sicksubie]

I asked if it was whp.... Let's wait and see
















Okay... This waiting thing stinks. What is it already...

[Tim]

I'm going to say its crank HP. He said it was up 60 hp so I imagine he meant the baseline was 230hp.

[sicksubie]

I'm going to say its crank HP. He said it was up 60 hp so I imagine he meant the baseline was 230hp.

Nope, because this car put down 210whp last year and then 215 on another pull later on.

[Tim]

Nope, because this car put down 210whp last year and then 215 on another pull later on.

Holy crap... that's insane. What I wouldn't do for 200 :o

[TomsSVX]

what I wouldn't do for some dyno tuning:rolleyes:

Tom

[LetItSnow]

/me wants to see a stock vs. modified dyno graph!

[Tim]

what I wouldn't do for some dyno tuning:rolleyes:

Tom

Sell the new lift and get a dyno :p

[shotgunslade]

I rode in Jack's RS last year at Watkins Glen, before he did the engine work. He already had the Autronic, and it was pretty much keeping up with a modestly upgraded Sti. It is a great car. I believe that he could easily be pulling 285 whp now. He said at that point he was pulling over 210. I think the secret is the stand-alone ECU, so he can tune it for max hp without any concern for emissions, or idle smoothness. Also, no frigging engine braking. The EG33 block and heads are a great design. Once it is freed of the mundane concerns of a street legal machine, there is no reason why it can't make prodigious HP, even NA.

[Tim]

I rode in Jack's RS last year at Watkins Glen, before he did the engine work. He already had the Autronic, and it was pretty much keeping up with a modestly upgraded Sti. It is a great car. I believe that he could easily be pulling 285 whp now. He said at that point he was pulling over 210. I think the secret is the stand-alone ECU, so he can tune it for max hp without any concern for emissions, or idle smoothness. Also, no frigging engine braking. The EG33 block and heads are a great design. Once it is freed of the mundane concerns of a street legal machine, there is no reason why it can't make prodigious HP, even NA.

I think it's time for me to register my car as a collector so I won't have to go for emission inspection :D

[SVXRide]

Note to self - get "worked over" heads on the flow bench...:D
-Bill

[TomsSVX]

I thought they were comming here soon??

Tom

[SVXRide]

what I wouldn't do for some dyno tuning:rolleyes:

Tom

+infinity on this!!:cool::cool:
-Bill
p.s. you unleashed the wideband yet?

[TomsSVX]

no bill, time has not been on my side with all the new operations going on here. I doubt I will be able to either anytime soon so if u want me to give it back when your car is done thats fine

Tom

[TomsSVX]

what I wouldn't do for some dyno tuning:rolleyes:

Tom

Just for clarity, I was saying that it should have been dyno tuned:rolleyes:

Tom

[SVXRide]

I thought they were comming here soon??

Tom

YT,
Just the "special sauce" cams for now. It will allow for a with and without comparison (i.e., with stock heads and with "worked over" heads).
-Bill
p.s. don't worry about the wideband, it's yours for as long as you need it. Would be nice if you could put it to use while my car is in the shop;):cool:

[TomsSVX]

YT,
Just the "special sauce" cams for now. It will allow for a with and without comparison (i.e., with stock heads and with "worked over" heads).
-Bill
p.s. don't worry about the wideband, it's yours for as long as you need it. Would be nice if you could put it to use while my car is in the shop;):cool:

Eh?? Do you want bungs for the wideband??

Tom

[cdigerlando]

So what does that equate to in flywheel HP? 420 HP? NA? That seems a bit high. That is better than the S2000's HP/displacement ratio which makes that much HP by running craploads of RPMs.

[Tim]

So what does that equate to in flywheel HP? 420 HP? NA? That seems a bit high. That is better than the S2000's HP/displacement ratio which makes that much HP by running craploads of RPMs.

I think its roughly 350 hp...

[NikFu S.]

Incredible, and it didn't even cost a fortune.

[cdigerlando]

I think its roughly 350 hp...


How much loss are we getting through the drive train. I thought it was pretty high on the 4EAT.

[Tim]

How much loss are we getting through the drive train. I thought it was pretty high on the 4EAT.

I did a rough calculation of 25% loss, but figure his setup is a 5mt.

[Tim]

Wait I did my calculations wrong sorry... It's about 385 crank hp if there's a 25% parastic loss and 360 HP wtih a 20% loss.

[Tim]

With 350+ crank HP you can't go wrong :)

[sicksubie]

Just got off the phone with BobtheFabricator from the Nasioc forum. He recommended to go increase the exhaust cam profile over what was already being done. More lift and more duration

[SVXMAN2001]

something i've found interesting is that fuel wasn't addressed, in regards to upgraded fuel injectors. For a long time we have been told that the stock fuel injectors are only capable of providing a sufficient amount to sustain about 250 hp. I suppose this newly tuned eg33, disproves that theory....any thoughts?

[NikFu S.]

Only the maf is limited to 250hp. The injectors according to LAN have "a little more headroom". The problem with using stock injectors with this kind of power is they are probably being stressed and working at capacity for great durations of time.

[SVXMAN2001]

Now that begs the question what MAF are they using?

[sicksubie]

they aren't using a MAF. They are using a MAP based stand alone system

[cdigerlando]

Too bad subaru didn't make and 8 cylinder. I wonder what Mike's heads and cams would do on a stock bottom end? This is where the 370 stock nissan 300 zx turbo injectors might be useful. Might even get away with the 5 speed trans with this setup. We really haven't seen where the power starts dropping.

[sicksubie]

a N/A build is the next thing on the list. I want to push the stage 3 as far as I can and keep it a daily driver (it wont be daily driven, but COULD be is what I mean) Then I want a N/A 5spd monster in another SVX...

[SVXRide]

... Then I want a N/A 5spd monster in another SVX...

Bobby,
Think I might beat you to this;):cool:(okay, so I have to get the car to YT's shop first:rolleyes:)
-Bill

[Tim]

Bobby,
Think I might beat you to this;):cool:(okay, so I have to get the car to YT's shop first:rolleyes:)
-Bill


I'm next!!! :D

[SVXRide]

I'm next!!! :D

Tim,
There's SVX 5 spds, and then there are SVX monster 5spds:lol::lol:
-Bill

[zavikan]

Coming from the enginering illiterate side of the forum here.....WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT!?!?!?!

Is this for real? what kind of whp at what kind of $$ value are we talking, and has this person been proven yet? Is it even logicly feasible? Can it be used WITH stage 3? I never know how this performance stuff goes....its scary getting into it b/c you dont want to start down one path, to find out that the upgrades you made were not the most optimal bang for buck and reliability...or sometimes a complete loss b/c it wont work with the set up you want.

[TomsSVX]

I am sure the car has a VERY rough idle with those cams and valves:rolleyes: BUt it would work with anything you wanted to throw at it. I have been in contact with the builder and he is not bull****ting, With better tuning I see no issue with him pulling 300whp.... Thats more than my stage 3 can do.... So much for professional tuning huh??

Tom

[sicksubie]

1200rpm idle.... Any lower and it lopes BIG time

[Hocrest]

mmmmm... 300whp in a 2800 car..... :D:D:D

[SVXRide]

mmmmm... 300whp in a 2800 car..... :D:D:D

Run!:eek::eek::lol::lol::lol:
-Bill

[huck369]

mmmmm... 300whp in a 2800 car..... :D:D:D

FrankenWedge would like a motor like that too....

But would NOT put that motor in my SVX, as it would be a horriable street motor.....but would be a totl beast at the track!!!

[Johnybeas]

I love how all you guys are tryin this **** before I throw down my money in it, lol I'm waitin till it's all set up and people know what they're doin and after bobby and tom try the turbo set up and get that worked out then I'll throw down the cash, build my motor, turbo it, and have uber power :) I love reading advancements like this, it makes me really excited! hehehe right now I'll just enjoy my 5spd :)

[sicksubie]

Your welcome for being the guinea pigs..:tongue:

[Trevor]

Quite a long time ago, within threads on cams, I made the point that as the SVX is already a highly developed road car, the modified mild cams being discussed, were unlikely to be cost effective, when stacked up against the increased performance which could be anticipated. Here we have evidence that all or nothing is the name of the money game.

[SVXRide]

Quite a long time ago, within threads on cams, I made the point that as the SVX is already a highly developed road car, the modified mild cams being discussed, were unlikely to be cost effective, when stacked up against the increased performance which could be anticipated. Here we have evidence that all or nothing is the name of the money game.

Trevor,
While the EG33/SVX combination is definitely an example of very thoughtful late 1980s engineering (much in the same way that the Space Shuttle was an example of early 1970s engineering when it was first launched in 1981), it does, as all cars under ~$100k/copy do, reflect multiple compromises. The good thing is that the compromises did result in a very stout engine that, left alone, is good for 300k miles with a graceful degradation in hp over those miles. The bad thing is that the compromises resulted in an engine/chassis combination that really had no true performance path that owners could follow (which Subaru eventually recognized with SPT parts for the WRX and STi models).
So, what we now have is a small band of die hard SVX owners that are willing (and able) to use their own time and skills to push the EG33's envelope beyond what the Subaru engineers felt comfortable doing (given the management-imposed "compromises"). What have we confirmed to date? Well, as good as the stock air intake and exhaust systems are, there are some gains (5-10 hp) to be made with with well-engineered alternate systems that are well within the budgets of most SVX owners (I'll point to the true ram air system I developed and implemented - with documented pressure readings post installation and OT's "evolution" of exhaust systems). We've also found that the EG33 does respond to ECU tuning (10 - ? hp) via LAN's breakthrough work cracking the ECU's code and creating chips we could all take advantage of (again, relatively reasonable prices) and actually get many of us to start thinking seriously about standalone systems (Hydra, Megasquirt, etc.). We've also found that the EG33 does respond to forced induction (okay, we're talking serious money here), which has also pointed to weaknesses not previously experienced in normally aspirated operations (ring lands!). And now we're seeing that the EG33 does respond positively to well engineered camshaft and cylinder head porting alterations (not really all that surprising, just took a while to get here;)). Moving the EG33 from 230hp at the crank to somewhere in the neighborhood of 350 hp at the crank is by no means insignificant or inexpensive given the limited market (hard to get any established cam company interested in investing the R&D $ in something with a total market less than a week's production of Honda Civics:rolleyes:).
Personally, I believe we're rapidly approaching the day when we'll have a well designed, comprehensive package of ram intake, cams, head, and exhaust (true tuned exhaust manifolds + matched exhaust system) mods coupled with purpose-burned ECU chips that will provide a very dependable and "streetable" normally aspirated 300 crank hp. Cost? Probably around $2k. I do believe that the next year is going to be eye-opening on the performance front across both normally aspirated and forced induction fronts:cool::cool:
-Bill

[sicksubie]

Here, here...

[Trevor]

Trevor,
Cost? Probably around $2k. I do believe that the next year is going to be eye-opening on the performance front across both normally aspirated and forced induction fronts:cool::cool:
-Bill

Thanks Bill, but be sure I have been following all that has been going on and am aware of the technicalities involved, as well as the status quo. I am simply recording an opinion for what it is worth. I fully understand and appreciate the entheusiasm and ambitions of those experimenting.

Yes the SVX is a compromise, but not to a degree allowing for improvement to the extent which easily makes modifications cost affective in the real world. Those securing personal satisfaction from hobby work, are not aligned with commercially oriented costs as will be assessed by others .

If a set up can be developed which will provide an adequate power gain as compared to price, this will be a wonderful achievement worthy of applause. I would say into a shop and out finished for $3k, and resulting in a standing quarter of 13.5 sec. quarter, could render things viable, but only to the real enthusiast. Expert opinion here from the market would comprise a valuable yard stick. ;)

[RallyBob]

I'd like to take this time to introduce myself briefly. My name is Bob Legere, you perhaps know me better as 'Bob the fabricator' (long story, but it's an inside joke) on Nasioc.

My interest in the EG33 is simply one of curiosity. I like making relatively obscure stuff fast. I originally suggested the installation of the EG33 into Jack's 2.5RS base on the fact he had access to an SVX with a blown tranny for $500. It's a fantastic engine, particularly from an acoustic point of view...in other words, it sounds great. And I suspect there's a lot of hidden potential still in there, power-wise.

I have plans for use of an EG33 in a race-only car some time down the road myself, but that's years away. The goal is a 2:1 power-to weight ratio in a closed-body tubular chassis race car. I think it's entirely feasible.


mmmmm... 300whp in a 2800 car..... :D:D:D

At the end of this month (Feb 27th-29th), you can see Jack's '3.3RS' at Virginia International Raceway at a NASA event. It'll be a shake-down for the new engine mods, so we'll see how things do from a reliability point of view. Once nice thing about racing....three days of competition provide about a year's worth of normal road abuse. So we'll see how 285 whp and 2748 lbs of Impreza do on the track. He also has new springs and dampers, so I expect the lap times to drop drastically from previous visits to VIR.

Bob

[sicksubie]

Input on possible variations of the cams in that motor that could be used for a more streetable purpose?

[redlinedeath]

*drool* id better sell my guitar!

[RallyBob]

Input on possible variations of the cams in that motor that could be used for a more streetable purpose?


I have access to a spare EG33 engine, so I could measure for the maximum safe lift with the hydraulic buckets, and the max valve lift and base circle that would not entail grinding the bucket sleeves for clearance.

Bob

[Johnybeas]

:D this is exciting!

[TomsSVX]

Bob, thanks for coming over, its good to have a tech head around, but be warned, you will be blasted with questions about that engine with all the power you are putting down. That being said... i wish you luck and more importantly... Welcome!!

Tom

[sicksubie]

I have a spare motor here too if you want it for anything let me know...

[Trevor]

I have a spare motor here too if you want it for anything let me know...

IMHO someone must set up a static engine and brake, so as to carry out proper before and after testing as changes are made. Wheel dynos are to remote from the project and conditions vary from one day to the next.

The problem is to jerry up some form of brake, i.e. a machine which can absorb power. A fire pump motor is an option, pumping against a jet. A lot of heat will have to be dissipated but a large tank could suffice. It is the sort of set up which requires a rural sort of site, with a shed and plenty of outside space. Shade tree stuff. :D

The principle is that the pump/brake is mounted so as to be able to rotate freely against a weighted lever. Lever length and weight, provide a means of balancing the load and exactly measuring torque in lbs ft. Obviously HP can be computed with a figure for RPM.

Best of all and the real oil, is a dynamo or alternator capable of handling the power on hand, together with a resistance bank. Anybody on the net in the junk machinery business? Has anyone come across a home built set up which could be copied? :confused:

[shotgunslade]

Rallybob:

Does Jack intend to be at any upcoming NASA-NE Lime Rock, Pocono, Watkins Glen or NASA-MA Summit Point events? AS I said in a preious post, I rode in his car at Watkins Glen before hte engine work and would love to take another ride in it.

[Chiketkd]

At the end of this month (Feb 27th-29th), you can see Jack's '3.3RS' at Virginia International Raceway at a NASA event. It'll be a shake-down for the new engine mods, so we'll see how things do from a reliability point of view. Once nice thing about racing....three days of competition provide about a year's worth of normal road abuse. So we'll see how 285 whp and 2748 lbs of Impreza do on the track. He also has new springs and dampers, so I expect the lap times to drop drastically from previous visits to VIR.

Bob
Welcome. Take pics! Lots of pics. :cool:

[Tim]

Welcome Bob!

[RallyBob]

IMHO someone must set up a static engine and brake, so as to carry out proper before and after testing as changes are made. Wheel dynos are to remote from the project and conditions vary from one day to the next.

I have free access to an engine dyno, but sadly it is located in Hyannis, MA. That's about 3.5 hours away from me, so it's not convenient by any means.

The biggest issues with engine dynos is that, unlike a chassis dyno, the mountings are engine-manufacturer specific. So in order to make a Subaru engine fit, there will be the need for a custom bellhousing adapter and engine mounts. I had mounts made about 15 years ago for an oddball engine I was developing for SCCA GT-4 racing, and the adapter alone cost me close to $800.

Bob

[RallyBob]

Rallybob:

Does Jack intend to be at any upcoming NASA-NE Lime Rock, Pocono, Watkins Glen or NASA-MA Summit Point events? AS I said in a preious post, I rode in his car at Watkins Glen before hte engine work and would love to take another ride in it.

I believe Jack intends to run the majority of the racing season in an attempt to win the championship. I believe he placed 3rd in class last year in the Northeast, he needed the extra power we just made to be competitive with the fastest STI's and EVO's out there right now. He was quicker than them already in the turns and could outbrake them...gotta love light cars!

So if you follow the NASA Northeast (http://www.nasanortheast.org/schedule.htm)calendar, he'll probably run all the Sprint races and some of the track days/instructor days.

Bob

[SVXRide]

IMHO someone must set up a static engine and brake, so as to carry out proper before and after testing as changes are made. Wheel dynos are to remote from the project and conditions vary from one day to the next.

The problem is to jerry up some form of brake, i.e. a machine which can absorb power. A fire pump motor is an option, pumping against a jet. A lot of heat will have to be dissipated but a large tank could suffice. It is the sort of set up which requires a rural sort of site, with a shed and plenty of outside space. Shade tree stuff. :D

The principle is that the pump/brake is mounted so as to be able to rotate freely against a weighted lever. Lever length and weight, provide a means of balancing the load and exactly measuring torque in lbs ft. Obviously HP can be computed with a figure for RPM.

Best of all and the real oil, is a dynamo or alternator capable of handling the power on hand, together with a resistance bank. Anybody on the net in the junk machinery business? Has anyone come across a home built set up which could be copied? :confused:

Trevor,
I couldn't agree with you more. I believe Boxer6 is working on setting up such an engine dyno at his shop. This is yet another reason why I said that that next year should be eye opening.:cool:
-Bill

[Myxalplyx]

So we'll see how 285 whp and 2748 lbs of Impreza do on the track. He also has new springs and dampers, so I expect the lap times to drop drastically from previous visits to VIR.

Bob

Very important that people don't forget this. That same engine on an SVX will not yield the same results on the dyno with the heavier SVX + the stock SVX tranny/gearing. Even still, you should see gains. Just don't expect 285 whp...that's all. :) I don't think so anyways.

I would not however mind that engine in my Outback Sport. ;)

[RallyBob]

Very important that people don't forget this. That same engine on an SVX will not yield the same results on the dyno with the heavier SVX + the stock SVX tranny/gearing. Even still, you should see gains. Just don't expect 285 whp...that's all. :) I don't think so anyways.

I would not however mind that engine in my Outback Sport. ;)

I agree the automatic tranny would skew the results, you'd see a lower number. I don't see how the weight would affect things on a Dynapack dyno however? I'm not saying it can't, I'm just hoping you'll elaborate as to why.

But the percentage of gain is real. 221 whp to 285 whp.

I have to corner-balance/scale this car on Sunday, I'm *hoping* to get to actually drive it too.

Bob

[Myxalplyx]

I agree the automatic tranny would skew the results, you'd see a lower number. I don't see how the weight would affect things on a Dynapack dyno however? I'm not saying it can't, I'm just hoping you'll elaborate as to why.
Bob


Hey Bob,

I can not elaborate as to how weight would affect things on a Dynapack dyno. Most of the SVXs here at the site have dyno'd using a Dynojet dyno. So what I am saying is that people should not expect to see these same type of gains with the same modifications to the engine as yours, on a Dynojet dyno. Weight is one of the variables that will throw the differences off. Autotranny, different type of dyno, etc are others. At any rate....the numbers are good.

[SVXRide]

I think the point is that weight shouldn't make a difference with the Dynapacks as they bolt right to the hubs (?). The only variable should be the parasitic loss through the drivetrain to the hubs (AT vs MT).
-Bill

[huck369]

I think Kevin is saying that even if you got the same HP in a SVX, it would not get you the same results at the Track, nor on th estreet, as the SVX is just a lot heavier....

But it WOULD make it a lot faster than it was without the mods...

[shotgunslade]

The same event that I rode with Jack I also rode in a slightly tweaked Sti. Interesting diferences in the handling. Jack could get easily get a little bit of rotation to help his cornering. The Sti was noticeably pushing in all corners. The Sti clearly had more grunt out of the corners, but I bet with the new engine mods, the RS will really be a contender. Will report back any sightings or, hopefully, rides, during the next few months.

[Trevor]

Weight should not effect results using any form of wheel dyno. Weight being factor which affects acceleration, rather than developed power. Hence the disparage in respect of quarter times verses maximum speed, recorded for the SVX.

That said, tyre inflation is a very important component in respect of error, made more, so the heavier the car.

[RallyBob]

A small update:

I had to corner-weight Jack's EG33-powered Impreza today. I had hoped to get a drive in this car today, but it was not to be. Instead, Jack did take the car out on the road for the first time today. I told Jack he needed to test-drive it to make sure the tune was good. Yea, right, I just used that excuse because I wanted to hear it go through the gears....

All I can say is: I wish I had a video camera today, so that all of you could hear and see what I heard and saw. The road was damp, the tires were just normal street tires for the road-test. Jack violently side-stepped the clutch, and the car literally smokes the rear tires for 20-30 feet. The front of the car unloads with the front tires scrambling for grip as well. He is shifting at 8200 rpms, and he says it is still pulling at those rpms....

Keeping in mind this is on a Sunday in an industrial park area, the otherwise absolute silence is only broken by the sound of a very pissed-off EG33 echoing off the walls of the vacant buildings along the test road.

I cannot *quite* explain the sound. Previously with bolt-ons, the car sounded like a very healthy Porsche flat-6. Now...I don't know, it sounds far more mechanical. There is no transition from 'street' to 'performance' like you'd hear with a modern 'VTEC' style engine. Nor can the cross-over flap be heard anymore as an increase in induction noise at a given rpm. It sounds viscious from off-idle, but the intensity grows as the rpms climb. It sounds purely like a racing engine now, there's no other way to describe it. A cross between a Porsche Carrera GT and an Enzo Ferrari is the best analogy I can make. It almost seems to have gained a few cylinders.

I'd like to apologize about my previous inaccuracy about the NASA racing weekend at VIR. It is coming up this weekend (22-24th), not at the end of the month.

Bob

[sicksubie]

what valve springs do you have on the motor again?

[sicksubie]

BTW.... Major props for this car.. I am very interested on hearing quotes for a stand alone installation in my new ebony SVX

[RallyBob]

what valve springs do you have on the motor again?

They are the Supertech WRX spring/valves/retainers. These are taller than the SVX parts, but fit perfectly with the mechanical bucket conversion.

[TomsSVX]

I was always under the impression that the wrx valves were of equal diameter??

Tom

[RallyBob]

I was always under the impression that the wrx valves were of equal diameter??

Tom

Yes, but Supertech offers a .5 mm oversize head diameter as a no-cost option.

I originally wanted +1 mm intake and +2 mm exhaust, but that would have added quite a bit more to the overall costs.

Bob

[TomsSVX]

I am sure... Not to mention stuffing those valves in would have been a trip. What did you use for vlave seats in this project or did you simple cut the stock ones??

Tom

[RallyBob]

I am sure... Not to mention stuffing those valves in would have been a trip. What did you use for valve seats in this project or did you simple cut the stock ones??

Tom

We just had the stock ones cut. Going with the bigger valves I originally wanted would have meant bigger seats...again more cost!:(

As it is, I unshrouded the chambers for better exhaust flow. I suspect with the + 2mm valves I'd have been looking for a bigger bore area too to facilitate better breathing.

Bob

[TomsSVX]

great info Bob, it will come in handy for future head build ups

Tom

[RallyBob]

great info Bob, it will come in handy for future head build ups

Tom

No problem, glad to help out.

On another note, I have dug out my old video camera, and purchased a new battery for it. I intend to do a mini-documentary of Jack's car...a thorough once-over showing the overall build. Let's keep in mind this is Jack's personal car and not a 'shop' car, it was built within serious budget contraints. I'd also like to get some live-action footage at VIR this weekend.

Since my camera is an 8 mm and not digital-recording quality, and I have severely limited computer knowledge (hey, I'm in my '40's and back in high school I didn't even know what a computer was), I was going to ask you if you are capable of converting it to a digital format so that it can be seen and heard live-action. If so, I'll send you the tape when I'm done so you can make it available for those who want to see it in action.

Bob

[SVXRide]

No problem, glad to help out.

On another note, I have dug out my old video camera, and purchased a new battery for it. I intend to do a mini-documentary of Jack's car...a thorough once-over showing the overall build. Let's keep in mind this is Jack's personal car and not a 'shop' car, it was built within serious budget contraints. I'd also like to get some live-action footage at VIR this weekend.

Since my camera is an 8 mm and not digital-recording quality, and I have severely limited computer knowledge (hey, I'm in my '40's and back in high school I didn't even know what a computer was), I was going to ask you if you are capable of converting it to a digital format so that it can be seen and heard live-action. If so, I'll send you the tape when I'm done so you can make it available for those who want to see it in action.

Bob

and there's a problem with someone being in their 40s?:rolleyes::lol::lol:
I can do the conversion to digital if YT doesn't have the necessary hardware, as our family camera is a Sony Hi8 that also doesn't have digital output (thus requiring me to buy a box that Sony conveniently offers to convert the output to digital:rolleyes:)
-Bill

[Tim]

The VRD MC3 by sony is a pretty cool little device. The studio I do work for has the equipment for converting hi8 to digital. I also found out about the o scope. its roughly about 10 to 15 years old so im not sure if its going to be any use to you.

[longassname]

Many old oscilloscopes are very good. I didn't catch what exactly you need an oscilloscope for but I would expect most any 10-15 year old oscilloscope to have the bandwidth necessary whatever you might be doing on an SVX. The quality of the probe used and it's calibration are far more important than the age of the oscilloscope. My TEK unit isn't that old but it's no brand new multi-gigahertz unit either. The problem you will find is nobody will want to ship or haul around their oscilloscope because that's when they break.


The VRD MC3 by sony is a pretty cool little device. The studio I do work for has the equipment for converting hi8 to digital. I also found out about the o scope. its roughly about 10 to 15 years old so im not sure if its going to be any use to you.

[RallyBob]

VIR has come and gone. The bad news is that I never ended up making it down, so I have no photos or video to share. The Impreza also suffered some overheating issues. Basically the engine was not designed to be run continuously at high rpms.

The problem has shown itself previously, even running at 6500 rpms. About 15 minutes into any racing session the oil temp gets very hot, then the coolant temps quickly follow. When the temps get high enough, the radiator cap blows off some pressure, discharging coolant into the overflow and then an air pocket is created, and the temps start to climb like crazy. The only option is to slow down and let everything cool, then after the race top up the coolant and purge the system of any air. The car then runs fine through the next race session, again 15-20 minutes in.

The car runs an aftermarket oil cooler, as well as an electric coolant pump. This has extended the useable range in general, but the addition of another 1500-1700 rpms has brought the problem back. The next step seems to be a custom oil pan with trap doors, baffles, and perhaps a crank scraper. Oil vapor is being drawn into the intake plenum under deceleration, pointing towards a windage problem at the higher rpms being seen.

The good news however, was two-fold. A new power steering pump and reservoir was tested. The old SVX pump would get so hot, it would singe your flesh to touch the metal reservoir after any track events. It would often also expunge the contents onto the top of the engine, and the power steering would start to lose effectiveness. This was with a remote cooler added! The aftermarket KRC pump and alloy reservoir worked excellently, the power steering worked fine (even with a 2:1 steering quickener), it didn't puke any fluid, and the reservoir remained cool.

The other good news is that the car was faster than ever. Almost 10 seconds per lap faster than the last time the car was run at VIR. It's running in the 2:14's on the long course. This was with the addition of the added HP, but also partial credit goes to some revised spring rates just installed. Prior to overheating, the car had enough outright speed (and light weight) to pull on a stock-weight 360 whp EVO IX in top gear. And it was nearly an equal match for a C5 ZO6 Corvette. The Impreza pulled the 'vette out of the turns and only at the top end of 5th gear would the ZO6 start to close in 3-5 car lengths.

Ultimately though, 5th gear on the 5MT shedded itself, so the car had to drop out as running 4th only is not an option at VIR. Speeds approaching 152 mph were seen prior to the 5th gear departing.

More news as it develops.

Bob

[TomsSVX]

Sounds impressive... Only question/concern... Are you sure it is the fact that the engine runs so hot or that the new found HP is stretching the head bolts too far causing compression to leak at high HP levels?? The fact that the oil gets that hot leads me to believe what you have said it true but still something to think about. What are you using for head bolt/studs and also what gaskets are you using??

Tom

[longassname]

You may want to shoot boxersix a pm. I think he said he is already working on a dry sump system. I understand he has a VMC big enough to do the pan. I have a large VMC and may pop one out myself but it won't be in time to help you.

I'm guessing you didn't use any thermal coatings?

[RallyBob]

Sounds impressive... Only question/concern... Are you sure it is the fact that the engine runs so hot or that the new found HP is stretching the head bolts too far causing compression to leak at high HP levels?? The fact that the oil gets that hot leads me to believe what you have said it true but still something to think about. What are you using for head bolt/studs and also what gaskets are you using??

Tom

Stock head bolts. Not sure on the head gaskets to be honest. But I think they are OEM Subaru. It always ran hot, even when it was bone-stock. Not initially, only after 15-20 minutes on the track, once things got 'cooking'. Getting in racing traffic doesn't help, the cars in front block airflow to the radiator and oil cooler. We've never found coolant in the oil either.

When the old heads came off, there were no signs of leakage, FWIW. And the plugs got pulled at the track, they were very clean. It's not uncommon on a lot of engines (SR20 Nissans are very prone to the same issue for example) to exhibit high temps only under sustained duress. An autocross or drag strip run will never show it in other words, not enough time spent at elevated rpms and loads.

I want to do something with the oil pan, the entire 'soup bowl' design always bothered me, because at those G-force levels I know the oil is climbing up the walls of the oil pan and becoming aerated by the crank....8200 rpms and 1.2+ G's was probably not within the original design constraints!

Bob

[RallyBob]

You may want to shoot boxersix a pm. I think he said he is already working on a dry sump system. I understand he has a VMC big enough to do the pan. I have a large VMC and may pop one out myself but it won't be in time to help you.

I'm guessing you didn't use any thermal coatings?

Stock shortblock, it's never even been taken apart!

So, no coatings to anything...not the head, valves or pistons.

I'd love to see a dry sump on this car, but knowing Jack's budget, it won't happen. Engine development can be fun, but only when someone else is paying for it:rolleyes:.

Bob

[shotgunslade]

This overheating behavior is completely consistent with my own experience at the track. 15 or 20 minutes into the session, water temperature starts climbing. When you slow down to pit, temperature spikes toward the red zone. If you park it then, it will go up into red, so I typically drive it around the infield slowly in 3rd gear, until it calms down. During this period I will see occasional spikes in temperature that slowly return to normal, which I assume may be air pockets passing the temperature sensor. After it settles down and I shut it down, I will see that the coolant in the overflow tank is very high and that it may have pushed some out into the engine bay. After it has cooled down and I pop the radiator cap, I will see that the coolant level has dropped in the radiator.

It boiled over the first time I saw this, right after my tranny transplant, when I shut it down immediately after pitting.

Normally on the track, I observe a 7200 rpm red line. When it starts to warm up I will drop that to 6400.

Originally YT thought I had a leaking head gasket, but I had no other symptoms.

Also have consistently had PS problems, leaking O-rings, and a totally hemorrhaging PS pump. On second track day had the PS return line split and spill all PS fluid onto pit pavement. Kitty litter time.

How do you purge air from the system?

I'm afraid the problem is only going to get worse with my Tomyx snorkus and new CAI.

[sicksubie]

What are the details on the PS pump you are using now and how did you quicken the steering ratio?

[sicksubie]

And I am getting the same oil blown into the intake as you mentioned as well. I have a catch can but it is not hooked up right now. See what improvements are made with that functioning properly.

[RallyBob]

How do you purge air from the system?

Once in the pits, the car is jacked up very high in front. After cooling down a bit, the radiator cap gets removed and the vehicle is restarted. A tall funnel is fitted to the filler neck, and coolant is poured in. Once back up to temp, the thermostat opens, the coolant level drops, and more is added until it is full again, A column of coolant/water is kept in the tall funnel, the column of pressure here is high enough to overcome the system pressure w/o the cap fitted. About 5 minutes of running are all that's needed, then the radiator cap is refitted.

A 24 psi cap will be tested next track day, to see if that helps. Maybe a bigger oil cooler too.

Bob

[RallyBob]

What are the details on the PS pump you are using now and how did you quicken the steering ratio?

It's a KRC aftermarket pump (http://www.howeracing.com/Steering/Index-Pumps-AlumSteel.htm). Commonly used in circle track cars. Funny thing is, it looks like the typical OEM Japanese PS pumps out there. Almost a direct fit. His is the steel version, an aluminum one weighs half as much but costs more. The Subaru pulley was apparently a direct fit. The new reservoir has greater capacity, and the return lines are now -10AN. Foamed-up, overheated fluid does not return easily, so a larger return line is needed to avoid stalling the pump due to cavitated fluid not returning. The cooler helps a lot as well.

The quickener is a Howe 'Stealth' (http://www.howeracing.com/Steering/Index-Quickener-Stealth.htm) 2:1 quickener. It's fitted within the stock steering column (welding required). Most of the rally guys have been doing this for years.

Bob

[RallyBob]

No one has posted any racing pics yet, but one guy that was in Jack's race group has a video from Saturday's race (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5553619250920900118).

As it's a standing start, Jack got quite a jump on a lot of the cars. At approximately 37 seconds in, the Impreza comes into view passing the Corvette driver on the right side of the screen. He holds him off fairly well until the car starts to overheat.

Bob

[SVXRide]

It's a KRC aftermarket pump (http://www.howeracing.com/Steering/Index-Pumps-AlumSteel.htm). Commonly used in circle track cars. Funny thing is, it looks like the typical OEM Japanese PS pumps out there. Almost a direct fit. His is the steel version, an aluminum one weighs half as much but costs more. The Subaru pulley was apparently a direct fit. The new reservoir has greater capacity, and the return lines are now -10AN. Foamed-up, overheated fluid does not return easily, so a larger return line is needed to avoid stalling the pump due to cavitated fluid not returning. The cooler helps a lot as well.

The quickener is a Howe 'Stealth' (http://www.howeracing.com/Steering/Index-Quickener-Stealth.htm) 2:1 quickener. It's fitted within the stock steering column (welding required). Most of the rally guys have been doing this for years.

Bob

Bob,
Very cool! Can you provide pics of both installed in the car. I'm very interested in both additions.
-Bill

[RallyBob]

Bob,
Very cool! Can you provide pics of both installed in the car. I'm very interested in both additions.
-Bill

Since I already spent the money on a new video camera battery/charger/tapes last week, I'll try to do one better and get some video of the car. Under the hood, under the chassis (on a lift), and maybe some of the car running.

Bob

[AndrewR]

Bunch of STi boys up here who do track are having similar overheating issues, and have all found head gasket issues.

I know it is a different engine, but very similar symptoms. They would run cool on the street, but when pushing on the track, overheat.

HTH

[longassname]

I'm a little suprised you haven't replaced the thermostat with a restrictor plate. I'd use a restrictor plate and kick the fans on full blast at 180 degress F.

[TomsSVX]

I was going to mention Dan's hot experiences at the track as well but he already chimed in. Have you guys thought of the cooling capacity that the wrx radiator you are using has?? Maybe its about time to go to a bigger all aluminum rad?? Good luck with it anyways:)

Tom

[Trevor]

Stock shortblock, it's never even been taken apart!

So, no coatings to anything...not the head, valves or pistons.

Bob

Good going Bob.

The above does not surprise me on several counts. ;)

P.S. Congratulations you are on the right track in all respects and are blazing a trail.:D

[shotgunslade]

I don't think radiator size has anything to do with it. I think there is some section of the block that has insufficient adjacent water flow to prevent local overheating. When you are really running the engine hard, even though the radiator may have sufficient capacity to reject the total heat output of the engine, that section overheats, and causes localized boiling of the coolant. That is why the temperature needle stays OK, until suddenly it starts rising toward the red. As long as the temperature sensor is surrounded by liquid coolant, it registers the correct temperature. When the steam bubble passes it, it goes over the top. The steam bubble also forces coolant out into the overflow tank. Even so, the average temperature of the coolant as a whole is not excessive. Hence the weird behavior. Temperature starts rising, goes from normal to red in maybe 20 seconds. a short time later, drops back to normal. As I'm slowly driving around the infield roads, cooling down after a track session, I might experience this behavior 2 or 3 times. In between, coolant temperature registers normal.

Same behavior might be exhibited by a head gasket leak out on the track, but probably not as I'm cruising the infield roads at 1100 rpm in third.

[Nomake Wan]

Funny... this behavior sounds just like the behavior my car exhibits when I'm climbing a steep grade in 2nd with the throttle fully open. Or when I'm otherwise pushing the car hard, staying above 4k RPMs for long periods.

Well crap. :o

[RallyBob]

Bunch of STi boys up here who do track are having similar overheating issues, and have all found head gasket issues.

I know it is a different engine, but very similar symptoms. They would run cool on the street, but when pushing on the track, overheat.

HTH

I'm very familiar with the STI head gasket issues, as I've seen it on a lot of other race cars. Those tend to be more 'violent', for lack of a better word. In other words they push the coolant out suddenly, and the temp spikes suddenly, thanks to combustion pressures/boost being transferred to the cooling system.

With the EG33, we're seeing a gradual buildup of temperature (and presumably coolant pressure), and then the eventual letting go of the pressure cap, so the coolant overflows into the catch can.

I used to crew on a mini-stock circle track car, and we had tons of cooling issues. We tried slowing the water pump speed by 35%, deleting the thermostat and adding a restrictor, installing a huge aluminum radiator, etc. All helped a bit, but none solved the issue. The eventual fix was a change from the OEM 13 psi cap to a 24 psi Stant racing cap. Never overheated after that!

I'm hoping this problem may be as simple as a good radiator cap.

Bob

[RallyBob]

After the oil pan gets built, and (hopefully) the oil temp/coolant temp issues are handled, then we're going to strive for some more power as well as mid-range torque.

Jack had previously chopped up a spare stock EG33 intake manifold, and I got to looking at it the other day. In terms of basic design, it looks very good, there are very generous transitions from the plenum to the runners...factory 'trumpets' if you will. The crossover valve is a moot point for our application. The engine's running vacuum is already lower than standard, and the engine rarely sees low rpms on the track. So the crossover is always open as it is. As well, the intended original application was for a relatively heavy Grand Touring vehicle with an automatic transmission, so down-low torque was a priority to the engineers.

None of those factors apply now, so my thoughts are to eliminate the crossover, and utilize one common plenum at all times. A trial bit of math also shows that the plenum volume is very small relative to the engine's displacement. I'd like to investigate the effects of changing the plenum volumes to work with the improved breathing and extended powerband of the modified engine. If possible, I'd like to make it modular (bolt-on plenum addition) for testing, so I can determine which is best for our needs. Then , once the proper plenum volume is determined, I'll make a permanent version with reworked (slight porting and polishing) internal runners.

I'm thinking of trying 80%, 90% and 100% plenum volumes...2.64 litre, 2.97 litre, and 3.3 litre. Plus or minus a few CC's....

The first step will be to CC the stock plenum, and go from there.

It won't be tomorrow, but over the next 4-6 weeks I'll see if I can free up some time to tackle this project, and will post the progress here.

Bob

[Trevor]

Funny... this behavior sounds just like the behavior my car exhibits when I'm climbing a steep grade in 2nd with the throttle fully open. Or when I'm otherwise pushing the car hard, staying above 4k RPMs for long periods.

Well crap. :o

Jumping to the conclusion that a larger radiator as been mentioned earlier in the thread, is not a cure all and is a common misconception.

A factor which is often overlooked is the fact that production engines are designed for limited RPM. When constant RPM are raised as in competition, the average water pump speed is increased resulting in a much increased water flow at greater pressure. As a result the coolant spends less time within the radiator, when cooling should be taking place.

Longassname has referred a restrictor plate which is a means of reducing the flow rate. In the past I have overcome the problem by cutting off some of the impeller vanes from a standard water pump.

This aspect is worth full consideration. ;)

[Trevor]

After the oil pan gets built, and (hopefully) the oil temp/coolant temp issues are handled, then we're going to strive for some more power as well as mid-range torque.

Jack had previously chopped up a spare stock EG33 intake manifold, and I got to looking at it the other day. In terms of basic design, it looks very good, there are very generous transitions from the plenum to the runners...factory 'trumpets' if you will. The crossover valve is a moot point for our application. The engine's running vacuum is already lower than standard, and the engine rarely sees low rpms on the track. So the crossover is always open as it is. As well, the intended original application was for a relatively heavy Grand Touring vehicle with an automatic transmission, so down-low torque was a priority to the engineers.

None of those factors apply now, so my thoughts are to eliminate the crossover, and utilize one common plenum at all times. A trial bit of math also shows that the plenum volume is very small relative to the engine's displacement. I'd like to investigate the effects of changing the plenum volumes to work with the improved breathing and extended powerband of the modified engine. If possible, I'd like to make it modular (bolt-on plenum addition) for testing, so I can determine which is best for our needs. Then , once the proper plenum volume is determined, I'll make a permanent version with reworked (slight porting and polishing) internal runners.

I'm thinking of trying 80%, 90% and 100% plenum volumes...2.64 litre, 2.97 litre, and 3.3 litre. Plus or minus a few CC's....

The first step will be to CC the stock plenum, and go from there.

It won't be tomorrow, but over the next 4-6 weeks I'll see if I can free up some time to tackle this project, and will post the progress here.

Bob

Bob, once again you are applying sound logic. It is good thinking to assume that the designers knew what they were doing, and looking at improvement through adjustment to fit different parameters. Moving out of the square into new territory, requires facilities, expertise, and most of all money. These factors tend to move the issue outside of the scope of an amateur, or any experimenter with a limited budget.

Do not bite off more than you can chew, is the proverb which exactly applies. :D

[Myxalplyx]

Bob, once again you are applying sound logic. It is good thinking to assume that the designers knew what they were doing, and looking at improvement through adjustment to fit different parameters. Moving out of the square into new territory, requires facilities, expertise, and most of all money. These factors tend to move the issue outside of the scope of an amateur, or any experimenter with a limited budget.

Do not bite off more than you can chew, is the proverb which exactly applies. :D

Just remember Trevor that designers/engineers have their limitations as well. They are not always right and can only work and go as far as their company will let them. They have to make compromises for various reasons. Some inventions come from not what you know but from new ideas brought to the table. Perhaps Bob can come upon a new discovery by accident or even on purpose that can benefit the SVX community as a whole.

Even Einstein once said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge." ;)

[Trevor]

Just remember Trevor that designers/engineers have their limitations as well. They are not always right and can only work and go as far as their company will let them. They have to make compromises for various reasons. Some inventions come from not what you know but from new ideas brought to the table. Perhaps Bob can come upon a new discovery by accident or even on purpose that can benefit the SVX community as a whole.

Even Einstein once said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge." ;)

Constraints do not imply limitations in knowledge. For sure the designers have been limited in their choices, but so is the guy trying to make improvements. On this score, Bob is displaying sound logic.:D

"Perhaps Bob can come upon a new discovery by accident or even on purpose that can benefit the SVX community as a whole."


I note the missing "?", but sarcasm is one thing I hate. I trust that it was not intended. ;)

Bob is not trying to reinvent the wheel, because he knows that is futile. He is correctly bent on adjusting to suite a different application.

Please take heed of who is heading the field in the race for performance to date. :lol:

[YourConfused]

Trevor,
You hate sarcasm? You must hate me then. :lol:
How's that for sarcasm?

Good thread, good read, great info, must subscribe.

[Trevor]

Trevor,
You hate sarcasm? You must hate me then. :lol:
How's that for sarcasm?

Good thread, good read, great info, must subscribe.

I love you. :):eek::D:lol:

[SVXRide]

It's a KRC aftermarket pump (http://www.howeracing.com/Steering/Index-Pumps-AlumSteel.htm). Commonly used in circle track cars. Funny thing is, it looks like the typical OEM Japanese PS pumps out there. Almost a direct fit. His is the steel version, an aluminum one weighs half as much but costs more. The Subaru pulley was apparently a direct fit. The new reservoir has greater capacity, and the return lines are now -10AN. Foamed-up, overheated fluid does not return easily, so a larger return line is needed to avoid stalling the pump due to cavitated fluid not returning. The cooler helps a lot as well.

The quickener is a Howe 'Stealth' (http://www.howeracing.com/Steering/Index-Quickener-Stealth.htm) 2:1 quickener. It's fitted within the stock steering column (welding required). Most of the rally guys have been doing this for years.

Bob

Bob,
the PS100 pump and pulley?
thanks
-Bill

[cdigerlando]

Holy crap what a story. Definitely some problems that we can expect with
our built motors and heavier cars. Are you running any sort of aftermarket
aluminum radiator? I would be curious to see how you set up your electric water pump and aftermarket power seering pump. I wonder if a larger more efficient oil cooler and a better radiator would fix your problem. Right now I'm running an aluminum radiator and a small tube and fin oil cooler. It sounds like this will not be enough. I'm not sure if the STi water pump would pump more, but it should. It might be worth a try. I'm sure this would be easy to modify to fit. The impeller is much different than that on my EG33 and EJ207 motors. You would just need to plug the outlet to the air water oil cooler.

With this kind of duty you probably need to go through the entire cooling system and improve everything that you can. Aluminum radiator, stronger hoses, high pressure cap, pump, coolant, bigger plate and frame oil cooler. All this has been mentioned. You are not pushing that much HP and weight so that should really be good enough. Anything you can do to improve air flow to the radiator too would probably help. A manual fan operator would probably help too. A buddy of mine is running a 600 HP Impreza. As soon as he slows down the temp goes up so fast the fans don't kick on in time. If they came on much lower, like at about 195 instead of 205, it would really help. Also a lot of guys are running straight water with water wetter. I didn't have much luck with this though.

Too bad about 5th gear. I really thought that the route you were going making more power with better RPMs would relieve the stress on the 5 speed. You might consider replacing the gears with hardened ones. This may be better on your budget than the 6 speed. I'm not too sure how well these work though. I'm sure there would be some good advice on Nasioc regarding improvment to the transmission.

Keep up the good work!

[RallyBob]

Are you running any sort of aftermarket
aluminum radiator?
Yes, the car already has an aftermarket Koyo STI radiator fitted.

I would be curious to see how you set up your electric water pump and aftermarket power steering pump.

The power steering pump was apparently a direct fit (just conveying what Jack told me). The larger capacity reservoir and associated plumbing are routed to just behind the right side headlight. The electric water pump is almost completely hidden from view, at the lower left front corner of the engine. In fact you can only see if if the car is on a lift. The space confines are definitely tight there.

I wonder if a larger more efficient oil cooler and a better radiator would fix your problem.

The aforementioned radiator has been installed for some time. The oil cooler is a Setrab unit, 7.5" tall x 13" wide plumbed with -10 lines.

I did inquire about the thermostat, and there is none fitted. The restriction is done entirely via the electric water pump. I was also not aware that the water pump can be controlled via the Autronic ECU. It can turn the pump on and off as the temperature tells it to do, and can also be set to control the fans. So even when the engine is shut off in the pits, the water pump is circulating coolant and the fans run until the true engine temp is down to acceptable levels.

Too bad about 5th gear. I really thought that the route you were going making more power with better RPMs would relieve the stress on the 5 speed. You might consider replacing the gears with hardened ones. This may be better on your budget than the 6 speed. I'm not too sure how well these work though. I'm sure there would be some good advice on Nasioc regarding improvment to the transmission.

Keep up the good work!

The real bummer is he had a tighter ratio 5th gear too. He had scavenged it from a blown-up customer gearbox. The aftermarket replacement gear is $260, but the factory gear ratio is only $95. So the budget wins out, and the car will get a slightly taller 5th now.

He is going to send 5th gear out to be 'MicroBlue (http://www.microblueracing.com/bearing_central/bearing_central.php)' treated however. I had recommended them for his wheel bearings last year, based on my talking to MicroBlue at the PRI show in 2006. The Impreza was only averaging 2 events per front wheel bearing before they got totally cooked, while the MicroBlue treated stock bearings have 6 events on them and they are still perfect. The loads that modern racing tires put on the stock bearings and hubs is huge!

Bob

[RallyBob]

Just remember Trevor that designers/engineers have their limitations as well. They are not always right and can only work and go as far as their company will let them. They have to make compromises for various reasons. Some inventions come from not what you know but from new ideas brought to the table. Perhaps Bob can come upon a new discovery by accident or even on purpose that can benefit the SVX community as a whole.

I agree the designers and engineers have limitations, and it is unfortunately usually a monetary restriction that the upper management deems necessary for them to follow. So most things end up being a compromise, unless you are building a no-holds barred supercar.

I never would have believed it mattered that much, but a close friend of my family's went to work for one of the 'big three' automakers a few years ago in charge of quality control in his respective field, and he ended up quitting after only two years because of the futility of it all. If they could make a substandard part last 90% of the required time, they would use it to save money. He would rant and rave over the safety issues (his field was electronics), but it fell on deaf ears. To them, $1 per car spread over 500,000 cars was more important than the potential for electrical fires!:eek:

Myself, I have no shortage of ideas, but certainly I have a shortage of free-flowing cash, as does the car owner. So anything I do has to be both: A) cheap, and B) cost effective. In reality it should also preferably be free and not involve outsourcing unless absolutely necessary!

Keep in mind I haven't been paid for any of this EG33 development work, it's really been just for fun. I guess I have a penchant for underdogs...

Bob

[Tim]

I'm not so keen in automotive department as I am with other things, but what about removing the thermostat altogether to increase flow?

[RallyBob]

I'm not so keen in automotive department as I am with other things, but what about removing the thermostat altogether to increase flow?

It's already been done.:)

Bob

[cdigerlando]

I'm not so keen in automotive department as I am with other things, but what about removing the thermostat altogether to increase flow?

He did.

Sounds like a well set up system. Good oil cooler too. Maybe a bigger one would help. The taller gear might help as well (lower RPMs). You are definitely set up to use a higher pressure cap. That should help. Might need to upgrade some hoses too though.

I was talking to a buddy of mine who has a 600 HP Impreza. He also has some heat issues. He was talking about how a lot of the nascars are running 250 degrees regularly in their motors:eek: Yikes. How do your competitors do with their cars and heat?

[shotgunslade]

I have a stock SVX radiator and stock-type, but new hoses. Would I have any issues with using the 24 psi radiator cap?

[TomsSVX]

problem with using the plastic tanks are they will be more vulnerable to stress cracks, hence the reason I asked if they were running an all-aluminum radiator... Dan, it might be worth experimenting with... but might want to bring some back-up supplies just in case

Tom

[shotgunslade]

Radiator caps are cheap. I might try the 19-21 psi first. I forget. Is our radiator cap a standard size? Bought one once before, but don't remember what I bought.

[SVXRide]

anyone willing to point toward the cast cross over pipe that connects the two halves of the engine coolant system together as a potential contributor to the cooling "issues"? Given its shape, I can almost get myself to believe it is contributing to gas bubbles....just something to throw out there for discussion.
-Bill

[TomsSVX]

Radiator caps are cheap. I might try the 19-21 psi first. I forget. Is our radiator cap a standard size? Bought one once before, but don't remember what I bought.

not saying the cap will be damaged... hopefully the plastic radiator will hold the new pressure.

Bill, you are right with your thinking as it has crossed my mind as well... But trying to find a way to prove this theory is going to be troublesome

Tom

[sicksubie]

I have a 18psi STi radiator cap on my car with a stock radiator

[Nomake Wan]

Has anyone bought OEM lately? I was told by a lady in the service department at the Subaru dealer that SOA superceded the original SVX radiator with a metal design. I haven't been able to confirm it, except that the SOA parts system does show that the part number has been superceded. With what it doesn't specify.

So, anyone out there lately who bought P/N 45199PA001? Is it metal, or still plastic?

Sorry for the hijack, RallyBob. :o

[cdigerlando]

I don't know about the SVX, but when I installed a crucial cap in my WRX, not to long after I started getting seam leaks between the tank and the core. Aluminum is the way to go, and from his post, this is the way he went. He is running a Koyo aluminum, which is what I run in my WRX as well.

I have had seen these planstic tanks crack a couple of times, so I think you may have gotten some bad information. Either that or they deteriorate fast. Don't forget, aluminum can be repaired too.

[cdigerlando]

Bob:

If you come up with a good aluminum pan design and would like to spread the cost among some folks, I would be very interested in participating in a group buy.

Anyone else interested

Chuck D.

[RallyBob]

Bob:

If you come up with a good aluminum pan design and would like to spread the cost among some folks, I would be very interested in participating in a group buy.

Anyone else interested

Chuck D.

It won't be an aluminum pan, largely because it's easier to start with the OEM as a foundation. Jack purchased a new stock steel pan last year, and I'll just build it off that.

I personally can't manufacture the pans, but I could possibly provide templates for someone else to do it if you guys are interested in a group buy.

The trap doors will be something similar to these. pic1 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/10498579@N07/1778170127/sizes/o/in/set-72157601174340430/), pic2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/10498579@N07/1778170467/sizes/o/in/set-72157601174340430/), pic3 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/10498579@N07/1779019816/sizes/o/in/set-72157601174340430/), pic4 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/10498579@N07/1778170797/sizes/o/in/set-72157601174340430/), pic5 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/10498579@N07/1779020142/sizes/o/in/set-72157601174340430/).

It's a style I've used a lot in the past on circle track, race and rally engines. Pretty simple and cheap material-wise, but just time consuming for someone like me to build (in other words expensive for one-offs). You need to find someone with mass production capabilities to make it cost-effective.

The only other addition would be a crank scraper most likely. The windage must be extreme at 8000+ rpms.

Bob

[SVXRide]

not saying the cap will be damaged... hopefully the plastic radiator will hold the new pressure.

Bill, you are right with your thinking as it has crossed my mind as well... But trying to find a way to prove this theory is going to be troublesome

Tom

Tom,
I'm seriously considering fabricating a replacement out of Al tubing, making sure that it has a greater volume than the stock piece. I've got a spare stock piece in the garage to use as a guide. Now, if I can just figure out when I'll have time to do it:rolleyes:
-Bill (jet lagged from CA work trip...)

[TomsSVX]

point is Bill, why bother fabricating this piece when it may not be the culprit?? A long day at the track and a laser thermometer may be a little conclusive??

Tom

[SVXRide]

point is Bill, why bother fabricating this piece when it may not be the culprit?? A long day at the track and a laser thermometer may be a little conclusive??

Tom

Ah, because fabricating is a diversion I enjoy?:rolleyes::lol::lol:
-Bill
p.s. but seriously, the forming of the gas bubble is a transient event and we'd have to instrument the h*ll out of the block (quick response thermocouples, etc.) to determine conclusively where the bubble is actually forming. It's probably easier to just replace the stock piece and run the h*ll out of the car to see if the problem has gone away.

[RallyBob]

Teeny update.

Jack got in his high pressure radiator cap. He did a test to the car's cooling system, it held at 24 psi, no problem. He then tested the new cap, it held at 23 psi for 1 hour, no loss of pressure. He tested the old cap that was on the car, it started to bleed pressure at 12-13 psi, and went downhill from there. All pressure gone within 5 minutes.

So it appears the overheating culprit may have been nothing more than a bad radiator cap. Here's hoping....

Bob

[TomsSVX]

cool!! Thanks for the update!

Tom

[RallyBob]

cool!! Thanks for the update!

Tom

Another small teaser then.

I *might* be contracted to fully develop an EG33 for a top level driver in a yet unnamed US motorsport. We're thinking totally outside the box, but it might raise a few eyebrows and most likely will cause the rulesmakers to have to rewrite those rules, as I personally think it will be a dominant car/driver combination.

But we'll just have to see how it pans out during the planning stages.

[tubbstcg]

sounds interesting....:D

[TomsSVX]

Another small teaser then.

I *might* be contracted to fully develop an EG33 for a top level driver in a yet unnamed US motorsport. We're thinking totally outside the box, but it might raise a few eyebrows and most likely will cause the rulesmakers to have to rewrite those rules, as I personally think it will be a dominant car/driver combination.

But we'll just have to see how it pans out during the planning stages.

Sounds like you will be in for some serious fun:D

Tom

[sicksubie]

Can you say whether it will be NA or not?

[cdigerlando]

Teeny update.

Jack got in his high pressure radiator cap. He did a test to the car's cooling system, it held at 24 psi, no problem. He then tested the new cap, it held at 23 psi for 1 hour, no loss of pressure. He tested the old cap that was on the car, it started to bleed pressure at 12-13 psi, and went downhill from there. All pressure gone within 5 minutes.

So it appears the overheating culprit may have been nothing more than a bad radiator cap. Here's hoping....

Bob

Yet another chase for something as simple as loosing pressure through a cap. It's always something like this. I was having similar trouble with my WRX. Simple matter of tightening all of my hoses:( Glad this worked for you. Let us know how you make out during your next event. This is an awesome project.

[RallyBob]

Can you say whether it will be NA or not?

NA all the way. My target numbers are about 140 hp higher @ the wheels, but with a superior torque spread.

Knowing that Frank Aragona makes 475 +/- crank hp from his carbureted drag-race EG33, I think this is feasible with ITB's and EFI.

Bob

[RallyBob]

Yet another chase for something as simple as loosing pressure through a cap. It's always something like this. I was having similar trouble with my WRX. Simple matter of tightening all of my hoses:( Glad this worked for you. Let us know how you make out during your next event. This is an awesome project.

Sometimes it is the simple things. You can literally try to reinvent the wheel to circumvent a problem, but in truth simple maintenance is often overlooked!

Bob

[SVXRide]

It's a KRC aftermarket pump (http://www.howeracing.com/Steering/Index-Pumps-AlumSteel.htm). Commonly used in circle track cars. Funny thing is, it looks like the typical OEM Japanese PS pumps out there. Almost a direct fit. His is the steel version, an aluminum one weighs half as much but costs more. The Subaru pulley was apparently a direct fit. The new reservoir has greater capacity, and the return lines are now -10AN. Foamed-up, overheated fluid does not return easily, so a larger return line is needed to avoid stalling the pump due to cavitated fluid not returning. The cooler helps a lot as well.

The quickener is a Howe 'Stealth' (http://www.howeracing.com/Steering/Index-Quickener-Stealth.htm) 2:1 quickener. It's fitted within the stock steering column (welding required). Most of the rally guys have been doing this for years.

Bob

Bob,
Which part number KRC pump? There appears to be three different part number.
Thanks.
-Bill

[Dessertrunner]

Bob have you looked at the SVX manual on the cooling system. The reason I ask is I purchased a second hand SVX that had a Craig Electric water pump and the thermstate had been removed as well as the fins on the standard pump. I noticed the car ran hot even though the car temp said it was okay. The second clue there was a problem was that the heater did not work.
Looking at the SVX book you can see the cooling is close looped with water going around in a circle independent of the radiator till it heats up. Witht he electric water pump the water went in reverse on one part of the plumbing at ment the engine didn't get any cooling.
In an attempt not to make this a long thread you need to block off the return pipes going from the engine to the water pump and don't run a thermostate. If you want I can explain this further if you are interested.
Tony

[Dessertrunner]

The page from the manal on cooling

[Phast SVX]

no offense.....But unless you have a power adder, these efficencies are not scientifically possible

[RallyBob]

Bob,
Which part number KRC pump? There appears to be three different part number.
Thanks.
-Bill

I will have to ask Jack which one it is.

Bob

[SVXRide]

no offense.....But unless you have a power adder, these efficencies are not scientifically possible

Phil,
Which ones are you talking about?
-Bill

[RallyBob]

no offense.....But unless you have a power adder, these efficencies are not scientifically possible

No offense taken. But why do you deem them 'not scientifically possible'? We're not building street engines here, we're talking about developing an engine for racing. In fact we're still only at about 110 hp per litre, which is nothing particularly outrageous for a fairly modern twin-cam 4-valve design engine without emissions concerns. Heck, I've made a 40-year old non-crossflow single cam 2-valve per cylinder engine put out 107 hp per litre for racing use...now that was a challenge!

[dynomatt]

Thanks to Desertrunner for letting me know about this thread.

I've checked the NASIOC thread too.

Bob...I've got exactly the same specs as you...STi valves (not oversized though), compression, porting, stand alone ECU.

Interestingly I only got 165hp. To this day I've been confused by that, as mathematically, we should have been up where you were.

Mine also overheated, but I initially have put that down to airflow through the engine bay due to the sump guard potentially blocking off the air. Perhaps that's not true...might need to spend some mroe time looking at that.

I'm interested to know about your static timing. Did you set it up using the factory positions? Given the grinding of your heads, you'd realise, like we did, that the timing on the right hand head becomes more critical due to it changing as the belt goes longer.

Can you share any of the static timing events? ie, Inlet 0.050" open and closed at what crank degrees? Ditto the exhaust?

Thanks,
Matt

[cdigerlando]

Interestingly I only got 165hp.

What are you using for fuel injectors? Intake? Exhaust? Transmission

Bob, are you tuned using race fuel?

Also Bob is using a 5 speed, which has a lot less drive train loss.

The stock injectors get maxed out right away.

[dynomatt]

Hey Chuck,

Consistent with the power figures we got, the standard injectors were only running about 75%...we'd banked on getting more, and hence needing more fuel, but didn't happen.

Intake is stock, save that the MAF is gone, exhaust is standard headers with a 2" system joined at a y-pipe under the floor somewhere, then 2 1/2" out with one resonator and one muffler.

Transmission is a stock 6 speed.

[dynomatt]

Here's my chart.


Was actually 190hp ATW.

Matt

[RallyBob]

Bob...I've got exactly the same specs as you...STi valves (not oversized though), compression, porting, stand alone ECU.

Interestingly I only got 165hp. To this day I've been confused by that, as mathematically, we should have been up where you were.


Your cam specs though?

The cam we had ground are the big power maker IMO. The stock cams have miniscule valve lift, and the duration IIRC was something like 196° @ .050" . The new cams we have are 244° @ .050", so we're looking at nearly 50 degrees more duration than stock, plus a massive valve lift increase (.444"/11.27 mm intake, .460"/11.68 mm exhaust lift).

Even with the larger valves and porting, I don't feel the headwork I performed was worth that much (yet). The stock, unported heads flow enough air for almost 425 bhp. My porting work increased the potential only to about 450-455 hp, athough it probably made getting to our existing power levels a bit easier. The trick is extracting that potential by matching the rest of the components. The stock cams for example, reduce the hp potential down to 325 bhp simply by virtue of the low valve lift (the duration not being taken into consideration).

I do agree that something seems 'wrong', 165 hp seems to be about the same as a stock engine makes. My stock 5-speed WRX (with 2.5" cat-back Stromung and K & N panel filter) made 184.6 whp back in June of 2001 on the exact same Dynapack dyno that Jack's 3.3 RS was dynoed on, for comparison's sake.

[RallyBob]

What are you using for fuel injectors? Intake? Exhaust? Transmission

Bob, are you tuned using race fuel?

Also Bob is using a 5 speed, which has a lot less drive train loss.

The stock injectors get maxed out right away.

I *believe* the injectors are either Nissan or stock STI...I just know they're yellow!

Jack's car is tuned only on 93 octane pump gas. Max timing is 41 degrees BTDC (same as previous tunes), the timing at crank-over is 12 degrees, timing at 1100-1200 rpm idle is 15 degrees.

[longassname]

Can you post your dyno plots? I'd be interested to see the dyno settings. You have a correction factor or something set different than the dyno plots others here have been comparing your results to.


Your cam specs though?

The cam we had ground are the big power maker IMO. The stock cams have miniscule valve lift, and the duration IIRC was something like 196° @ .050" . The new cams we have are 244° @ .050", so we're looking at nearly 50 degrees more duration than stock, plus a massive valve lift increase.

Even with the larger valves and porting, I don't feel the headwork I performed was worth that much (yet). The stock, unported heads flow enough air for almost 425 bhp. My porting work increased the potential only to about 450-455 hp, athough it probably made getting to our existing power levels a bit easier. The trick is extracting that potential by matching the rest of the components. The stock cams for example, reduce the hp potential down to 325 bhp simply by virtue of the low valve lift (the duration not being taken into consideration).

I do agree that something seems 'wrong', 165 hp seems to be about the same as a stock engine makes. My stock 5-speed WRX (with 2.5" cat-back Stromung and K & N panel filter) made 184.6 whp back in June of 2001 on the exact same Dynapack dyno that Jack's 3.3 RS was dynoed on, for comparison's sake.

[longassname]

That difference in correction factor or gearing input is what is tempting some to call bs. The crank hp they are infering from it is out of the realm of possiblity but when you correct your wheel hp readings for the eg33 by the same factor as the difference between your stock wrx wheel hp readings and the readings found on the dyno's used for plots being compared to yours you get the same results.

165/184.6*212= 189.5 hp

essentially the same hp as a chiped svx with a 5 spd

[RallyBob]

Can you post your dyno plots? I'd be interested to see the dyno settings. You have a correction factor or something set different than the dyno plots others here have been comparing your results to.

I haven't seen my WRX dyno plots in years...that was 7 year ago after all. As far as the 3.3RS dyno plots, Jack is reluctant to release them. So that is beyond my control. IIRC a bone-stock WRX made 175-177 whp on their dyno, so my minimal mods added a few hp. I suspect that the swap to full synthetic didn't hurt either (engine and driveline).

[RallyBob]

That difference in correction factor or gearing input is what is tempting some to call bs. The crank hp they are infering from it is out of the realm of possiblity but when you correct your wheel hp readings for the eg33 by the same factor as the difference between your stock wrx wheel hp readings and the readings found on the dyno's used for plots being compared to yours you get the same results.

165/184.6*212= 189.5 hp

essentially the same hp as a chiped svx with a 5 spd

I'm afraid I'm not understanding what you're saying. Are you speaking of the driveline losses being different?

[longassname]

That's a shame; they would be interesting to see but they are his and he certainly has no responsibility to share them. Just be warned that someone is running around using your wheel hp readings to try to make a case that the factory engine management is seriously flawed and that there is 60-70 crank hp to be found by installing stand alone engine management on a stock svx.



I haven't seen my WRX dyno plots in years...that was 7 year ago after all. As far as the 3.3RS dyno plots, Jack is reluctant to release them. So that is beyond my control. IIRC a bone-stock WRX made 175-177 whp on their dyno, so my minimal mods added a few hp. I suspect that the swap to full synthetic didn't hurt either (engine and driveline).

[longassname]

No I'm not speeking of driveline loss. I'm speaking of some difference in dyno calibration or correction factors entered. Without seeing the actual plots so I can see what the settings are I can't say what is causing the difference in the measurements.

The plots that are being compared to yours have all been from machines that read a stock 5 spd wrx as having 165 wheel hp. Your said your machine reads a stock wrx as having 184.6 hp. Taking the factor of that difference and applying it to the measurements for a stock eg33 engine with a 5 spd we suddenly find that your measurements match those taken by everyone else.



I'm afraid I'm not understanding what you're saying. Are you speaking of the driveline losses being different?

[SVXRide]

Bob,
Can you release just the correction factor used on the EG33RS dyno runs? (SAE smoothing?)
-Bill

[RallyBob]

No I'm not speeking of driveline loss. I'm speaking of some difference in dyno calibration or correction factors entered. Without seeing the actual plots so I can see what the settings are I can't say what is causing the difference in the measurements.

The plots that are being compared to yours have all been from machines that read a stock 5 spd wrx as having 165 wheel hp. Your said your machine reads a stock wrx as having 184.6 hp. Taking the factor of that difference and applying it to the measurements for a stock eg33 engine with a 5 spd we suddenly find that your measurements match those taken by everyone else.

Understood. Like I said, my car had a few bolt-ons, albeit nothing major. Expect an average stock 2002 WRX to make 172-177 whp on that same dyno. Given that it is a Dynapack 'hub' dyno, the wheels and tires are taken out of the equation altogether. So I expect it to read a few hp higher than a Dynojet or Dyno Dynamics or Mustang, etc as the wheel/tire inertia is out of the equation.

We must also keep in mind that the EG33 that was 'stock' was in fact bolted to a 5-speed transmission. And it did have equal length headers and a 3" exhaust. And it did have the cold air box, which genuinely reduces intake air temps. It also probably has 40-50 hours of dyno time on it, thanks to the use of the car for the EFI-101 classes as a test vehicle. Hence the increase from the baseline 212 whp to 221 whp with no other changes to the engine. If that number is 10% lower on other dynos...so be it, I won't argue that case, as the car has not been on other dynos therefore I cannot compare results.

We all know dynos are only tools, and arguing the hp one brand makes in Colorado Springs vs. another brand in NYC is a moot point. Dynos vary, as do conditions, fuel, and engines.

However the increases we have seen from modifications performed cannot be denied (from 221 to 285 whp and ultimately 292 whp after more tuning). Even if the 'real' hp increase is not 71 whp, but rather a reduced percentage of that number, it still represents a 32% increase in power over what the same engine had on the same dyno prior to the modifications. And ultimately that is what matters to me the most. Making accountable gains. It shows up in the lap times the car turned at VIR (nearly 10 seconds per lap faster, albeit with new tires and spring rates accompanying the engine mods), and in the speeds at the end of the straights. Last year 140-142 was observed, this year 152-154 mph was observed. Partially I'm sure from the increase in corner exit speeds, but partially from the greater hp too.

[RallyBob]

That's a shame; they would be interesting to see but they are his and he certainly has no responsibility to share them. Just be warned that someone is running around using your wheel hp readings to try to make a case that the factory engine management is seriously flawed and that there is 60-70 crank hp to be found by installing stand alone engine management on a stock svx.

Please dont think that I believe there is nearly that much hp from management alone. I believe it was from the cumulative effect of everything. For example, I am not surprised that the engine 'likes' exhaust flow, as my flow results showed the head flow to be very weak in that regard. I believe that was the largest contributing factor in conjunction with the management upgrade. Either modification on their own would probably not have given even 50% of the results, I think it was a matter of achieving complimentary balance, nothing more.

That said, perhaps I should never have said the car made 'X amount' of power, but instead should have interpreted it as a 'sizeable percentage increase' in hp and given that percentage. Because regardless of the numbers, high or low, there will always be doubters who think the numbers are inflated, and then there will always be those who think that 'there's something wrong' and it should make more power.

Regards,

[longassname]

No worries,

The person missusing your numbers has a history of missrepresenting and slanting things to support what he wants. I'm sure you are a victim rather than a perpetrator. With the source of the discrepancies identified I'm sure no one will question the gains from your mechanical modifications.


Please dont think that I believe there is nearly that much hp from management alone. I believe it was from the cumulative effect of everything. For example, I am not surprised that the engine 'likes' exhaust flow, as my flow results showed the head flow to be very weak in that regard. I believe that was the largest contributing factor in conjunction with the management upgrade. Either modification on their own would probably not have given even 50% of the results, I think it was a matter of achieving complimentary balance, nothing more.

That said, perhaps I should never have said the car made 'X amount' of power, but instead should have interpreted it as a 'sizeable percentage increase' in hp and given that percentage. Because regardless of the numbers, high or low, there will always be doubters who think the numbers are inflated, and then there will always be those who think that 'there's something wrong' and it should make more power.

Regards,

[dynomatt]

Hey Bob,

Taken from this post back in March last year !!!

http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/showpost.php?p=460393&postcount=257

My engine specs have been decided.

I'm using 98 WRX valves, springs, retainers and gutted SVX buckets, custom shims for in between.

The intake cams have 10.0mm lift, with 230 degrees duration at .050.

The exhaust cams have 10.5mm lift with 236 degrees duration at .050.

Engine analyser pro shows a number of 375hp at 7500rpm. Real world will be probably closer to 330hp.


So I'm only using 10mm of lift and 230 of duration at 50 thou. Similar, but certainly less than you.

I should also clarify. On reviewing my dyno chart (copy attached) it seems we managed 190 atwhp. Still, far short of what we were anticipating.

Regardless, mine is coming out this weekend to measure the timing. If it's way out, then I'll be motivated to fix it again...if it's dead on, then it's time for the garbage tip.

Matt

[dynomatt]

Actually, looking at the Flickr thread in Bob's signature, I notice the new exhaust headers.

Bob, did you flow test the factory headers? Did you form a view on their efficiency or did you just replace them becasue you could?

You would have noticed, as I did, that the rear most exhaust port has a lot further to travel than the other two in each head and I was unsure of the implications of that.

Matt

[SVXRide]

Matt,
As good as the stock exhaust manifolds are, they're still a compromise based on packaging and the need for long, trouble-free existence. There are gains to be made in this area!
-Bill

[Nomake Wan]

That's a shame; they would be interesting to see but they are his and he certainly has no responsibility to share them. Just be warned that someone is running around using your wheel hp readings to try to make a case that the factory engine management is seriously flawed and that there is 60-70 crank hp to be found by installing stand alone engine management on a stock svx.

I love it when people don't name names. Awesome. :lol: Love ya, Mike!

[dynomatt]

Sorry, but here is the scan.

Anybody who can help resolve the torque dip would also be appreciated. It all could point to the timing.

APologies to all those that have seen this before.

[Trevor]

I love it when people don't name names. Awesome. :lol: Love ya, Mike!

Originally Posted by RallyBob ---

I haven't seen my WRX dyno plots in years...that was 7 year ago after all. As far as the 3.3RS dyno plots, Jack is reluctant to release them. So that is beyond my control. IIRC a bone-stock WRX made 175-177 whp on their dyno, so my minimal mods added a few hp. I suspect that the swap to full synthetic didn't hurt either (engine and driveline).

Reply by longasname ---

That's a shame; they would be interesting to see but they are his and he certainly has no responsibility to share them. Just be warned that someone is running around using your wheel hp readings to try to make a case that the factory engine management is seriously flawed and that there is 60-70 crank hp to be found by installing stand alone engine management on a stock svx.


N.B. One must assume that Jack is the name, in case confusion occurs and someone here becomes blamed.

[Nomake Wan]

N.B. One must assume that Jack is the name, in case confusion occurs and someone here becomes blamed.

I'm not sure if he's talking about me or TomsSVX. His first response (the one I quoted) seems to be at me, since I've been saying pretty much that a standalone has been successful in bringing out quite a bit of power in an otherwise stock motor. I didn't notice that he had custom headers, but the other mods (injectors which I'm guessing are Nissan, MSI ignition, cold air box) struck me as rather minor in comparison. I'd still be rather interested to see how much one could get out of just messing around with a standalone.

The second one I'm getting the feeling was directed at TomsSVX. Could be wrong, though. Hard to prove intent when someone is trying very hard to be inconspicuous. ;)

[svxistentialist]

Well I think that Bob is answering well and clear when asked direct questions. It also appears to me that he is new to this forum and aware of this newness, and does not want or need to be caught in crossfire between members who are sniping at each other because of what I will call "issues"

Nomake I did say in a reply to you elsewhere that we need to be cautious in evaluating where an untapped 70 horsepower might be coming from, and the cost of extracting it.

Even so, it is still well worth following this line of thinking and seeing where gains can be made. This is the way we will make progress.

It would be good if we could continue beneficial progress for all of us without descending into the sticky realm of unnecessary personal slights and I'd like to thank YT for recognising this and stating his case.

Joe:)

[TomsSVX]

I do have to agree with Mike. Leaving the engine stock, and using most of the stock components, you will not see 70whp switching to a stanalone. This engine was prepared properly and outfitted properly for Jack's application and I think Bob did a great job doing. Thus they reaped the benefits of having a system tuned extremely well to their application specifically. At no time did I reference that there would be such a substantial gain in power from a SA alone. My point restated again, an ECU that is tuned very well to match the outfit, will provide more benefits.

Tom

[cdigerlando]

Hey Chuck,

Consistent with the power figures we got, the standard injectors were only running about 75%...we'd banked on getting more, and hence needing more fuel, but didn't happen.

Intake is stock, save that the MAF is gone, exhaust is standard headers with a 2" system joined at a y-pipe under the floor somewhere, then 2 1/2" out with one resonator and one muffler.

Transmission is a stock 6 speed.

Wow 75% duty cycle running 190 AWHP, on stock injectors. Something is wrong. Were you running more fuel rail pressure?

[RallyBob]

Actually, looking at the Flickr thread in Bob's signature, I notice the new exhaust headers.

Bob, did you flow test the factory headers? Did you form a view on their efficiency or did you just replace them becasue you could?

You would have noticed, as I did, that the rear most exhaust port has a lot further to travel than the other two in each head and I was unsure of the implications of that.

Matt

I did not flow test the OEM cast iron manifolds. But I did not like the fact that the runners merged together very early, I prefer a longer primary runner and a true merge collector, as there is usually a lot to be gained from that design in my experience.

Not to mention we started with an engine that was +/- 82 lbs. heavier than the EJ25 that came out of the car, so part of our goal was to get the front end weight to the same as/ or lighter than stock. The headers are 304 stainless and are quite light compared to OEM. We are currently about 5 lbs lighter than when the car had the EJ25 installed, thanks to creative gutting, lightening, and relocation of components from up front. If we ever come across a GC8 WRX hood (aluminum), there's another 20 or so lbs off the front end.

We're just trying to alter the front/rear distribution and overall weight for improved handling, which is one of the car's strong points when compared to the average caged STI (3300-3500 lb usually with a heavy front bias).

[RallyBob]

Sorry, but here is the scan.

Anybody who can help resolve the torque dip would also be appreciated. It all could point to the timing.

APologies to all those that have seen this before.

If you are still running the IRIS crossover, then this is probably the cause. I noticed that Jack's car always had a bit of a dip in the both the power and torque curve when the crossover opened up, and when the cams were installed the dip changed to a lower rpm (less vacuum therefore earlier opening). Some of the dip was eradicated with fuel and timing, but it never went away completely.

If he ends up trying the modified intake manifold route rather than the ITB's first, we'lll delete the IRIS altogether, and I suspect that 'dip' can be tuned completely smooth.

[SVXRide]

Bob,
Any chance you might be willing to offer the merge collectors for those of us fabricating their own SS headers?:cool:
-Bill

[RallyBob]

Intake is stock, save that the MAF is gone, exhaust is standard headers with a 2" system joined at a y-pipe under the floor somewhere, then 2 1/2" out with one resonator and one muffler.

The intake cams have 10.0mm lift, with 230 degrees duration at .050.

The exhaust cams have 10.5mm lift with 236 degrees duration at .050.

I think these two combined factors *may* figure in.

We found a significant power increase on a standard engine with the 1.75" primary tube headers, into two 2.5" secondary tubes, merging into a single 3" main exhaust system. One can imagine that this exhaust further complimented....and was complimented by, the larger cams we now have.

FWIW, I think that 1.625" header might be a better choice for rallying, and a 2" merge collector tapering out to 2.5" secondary pipes will fatten up the torque compared to the road-racing setup that Jack's car runs. My own 'vintage' rallycar runs a relatively small header with longer primary tubes so I have a wider power band rather than a peaky one.

On your engine, you have larger cams, yet you are running an exhaust that is barely more efficient than standard. Perhaps this is the 'cork' that is not letting you extract full power from the camshaft upgrade. Overlap tuning from the increased duration while running with non-equal length factory headers will be virtually non existant.

Just my observations, maybe there's a bit more untapped potential still there.

[RallyBob]

Bob,
Any chance you might be willing to offer the merge collectors for those of us fabricating their own SS headers?:cool:
-Bill

I wasn't planning on getting into business making them, if that's what you mean. Burns Stainless and SPD both make beautiful merge collectors, if somewhat pricey. I only make my own because I can't afford their's....:rolleyes:

My own design is somewhat of a shortcut, but is infinitely easier for me to construct. The central 'cone' or 'pyramid' section is not an integral part of the collector, but rather is welded directly to the ends of the primary tubes. Then the collector is welded onto the primary tubes after the 'cone' is metal-finished. As seen here:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2296/2262440644_77b5c5dd44_o.jpg

Note that the one outer collector section shown is merely tacked in place here for test-fitting. Normally I weld and finish the collector itself on a bench, then weld it to the completed header after-the-fact.

[SVXRide]

I wasn't planning on getting into business making them, if that's what you mean. Burns Stainless and SPD both make beautiful merge collectors, if somewhat pricey. I only make my own because I can't afford their's....:rolleyes:



Thus the reason for my question;)
-Bill

[RallyBob]

Jack had previously chopped up a spare stock EG33 intake manifold, and I got to looking at it the other day. In terms of basic design, it looks very good, there are very generous transitions from the plenum to the runners...factory 'trumpets' if you will. The crossover valve is a moot point for our application. The engine's running vacuum is already lower than standard, and the engine rarely sees low rpms on the track. So the crossover is always open as it is. As well, the intended original application was for a relatively heavy Grand Touring vehicle with an automatic transmission, so down-low torque was a priority to the engineers.

None of those factors apply now, so my thoughts are to eliminate the crossover, and utilize one common plenum at all times. A trial bit of math also shows that the plenum volume is very small relative to the engine's displacement. I'd like to investigate the effects of changing the plenum volumes to work with the improved breathing and extended powerband of the modified engine. If possible, I'd like to make it modular (bolt-on plenum addition) for testing, so I can determine which is best for our needs. Then , once the proper plenum volume is determined, I'll make a permanent version with reworked (slight porting and polishing) internal runners.

I'm thinking of trying 80%, 90% and 100% plenum volumes...2.64 litre, 2.97 litre, and 3.3 litre. Plus or minus a few CC's....

The first step will be to CC the stock plenum, and go from there.

It won't be tomorrow, but over the next 4-6 weeks I'll see if I can free up some time to tackle this project, and will post the progress here.


While I have had no time to work on this project personally, I spoke with Jack about it, and he had XXTuning's current fabricator (Sean) modify the stock intake per our discussions. What this means is the entire center plenum area is basically open, the IRIS is gone altogether, and the manifold lost 7 lbs of weight too! The forward-facing 'wall' area is curved to direct air to each runner side, but other than that the entire plenum is a huge box now. Plenum area has been basically tripled compared to stock.

I sort of like the 'consultant' aspect of this for me...I didn't need to get my hands dirty at all!:D

He didn't make the plenum area 'adjustable' like I had originally hoped (I sometimes tend to complicate things by making them overly adjustable), but I think we're likely to see a significant change, good or bad.

[SVXRide]

Bob,
Cool! Any pics of the final version? Did Sean end up shortening the "legs" of the intake in the process of making the "body" bigger?
-Bill
p.s. the EG33R pics you've posted are great! Any chance you can add pics of how the steering quickener was added in?

[RallyBob]

Bob,
Cool! Any pics of the final version? Did Sean end up shortening the "legs" of the intake in the process of making the "body" bigger?
-Bill

The legs/lower runners are the same length as stock. Only the center plenum area is modified. I have no pics of it, and only just saw it yesterday for the first time.

p.s. the EG33R pics you've posted are great! Any chance you can add pics of how the steering quickener was added in?

All those pics are rather old...two-plus years most of them. My old camera died a slow death thanks to repeated droppings....

I have a new camera, but with no software to be able to upload new pics...sort of useless actually.

I tried to take video of the quickener install a few weeks back. It is virtually unseeable once installed, I couldn't even get my camera into the space unde the dash. It literally is completely hidden from view in the car.

It simply entailed shortening the steering column itself, and installed the quickener in the column prior to the firewall via splined and welded couplers. A bracket welded to the outer column's steel shell secures the quickener body in place so the body itself can't rotate.

[RallyBob]

A tiny update.

The customized large-plenum intake manifold has been test-fitted and the engine run. No tuning or dyno time was performed, as an interesting dilemna showed itself.

When the throttle is blipped, the plenum top and bottom plate (.125" 5052 aluminum) gets sucked inwards by almost 1/2". I don't really see how a piece of (roughly) 10" x 10" aluminum plate that's .125" thick bends so much, but it un-nerved Jack enough that he removed the intake and never bothered to dyno the car for fear of cracking the intake @ the welds and sucking broken-off material into the engine. So the intake plenum will have to be revised somewhat, probably with some centrally located supports welded in place. Then it will get dynoed. I think it will be promising.

I'm almost thinking this is showing that the twin TB's are restricting the flow to the intake, although that is admittedly a bit tough to fathom as they're pretty darn big. But then again I have nothing else to compare it to...I have never run another EG33 with cams and headwork so I can't really comment on the VE potential of this engine when all the mods are in place.

Another interesting side effect is the induction noise at idle is now significant. You can truly hear the camshaft overlap pulses inside the plenum. I guess the stock plenum divider wall significantly dampened the pulses previously.

I'm open to comments and input from other forum members.

[GreenMarine]

I'm open to comments and input from other forum members.


I don't have any comments other than I hope you are keeping track of everything you are doing. Because as soon as I have the $$$ I'm coming to you for a mild build on my engine!! :D

~ Chris

[TomsSVX]

A tiny update.

The customized large-plenum intake manifold has been test-fitted and the engine run. No tuning or dyno time was performed, as an interesting dilemna showed itself.

When the throttle is blipped, the plenum top and bottom plate (.125" 5052 aluminum) gets sucked inwards by almost 1/2". I don't really see how a piece of (roughly) 10" x 10" aluminum plate that's .125" thick bends so much, but it un-nerved Jack enough that he removed the intake and never bothered to dyno the car for fear of cracking the intake @ the welds and sucking broken-off material into the engine. So the intake plenum will have to be revised somewhat, probably with some centrally located supports welded in place. Then it will get dynoed. I think it will be promising.

I'm almost thinking this is showing that the twin TB's are restricting the flow to the intake, although that is admittedly a bit tough to fathom as they're pretty darn big. But then again I have nothing else to compare it to...I have never run another EG33 with cams and headwork so I can't really comment on the VE potential of this engine when all the mods are in place.

Another interesting side effect is the induction noise at idle is now significant. You can truly hear the camshaft overlap pulses inside the plenum. I guess the stock plenum divider wall significantly dampened the pulses previously.

I'm open to comments and input from other forum members.

Why no Dyno??? If the aluminum is flexing, best to take all the vacuum out of it by opening those throttle plates all the way:D

Keep us updated

Tom

[oab_au]

A tiny update.


When the throttle is blipped, the plenum top and bottom plate (.125" 5052 aluminum) gets sucked inwards by almost 1/2". I don't really see how a piece of (roughly) 10" x 10" aluminum plate that's .125" thick bends so much,
I'm almost thinking this is showing that the twin TB's are restricting the flow to the intake, although that is admittedly a bit tough to fathom as they're pretty darn big. But then again I have nothing else to compare it to...I have never run another EG33 with cams and headwork so I can't really comment on the VE potential of this engine when all the mods are in place.

I'm open to comments and input from other forum members.

10"x10"=100 sq" X 10lbs/sq" =1000lbs. Yes I guess it would flex a bit.:)

The engine will achieve a VE of 106%, in its standard state, at higher rpms it will achieve 110%.

Harvey.:)

[Trevor]

10"x10"=100 sq" X 10lbs/sq" =1000lbs. Yes I guess it would flex a bit.:)

Harvey.:)

When the throttle is blipped, the plenum top and bottom plate (.125" 5052 aluminum) gets sucked inwards by almost 1/2"

A positive 10 lbs/sq” is in no way applicable. :D

[shotgunslade]

Saw Jack and his car at at Pocono today. Said he had dynoed the car at 300whp recently. Also said he is still having some overheating problems, despite having a 25 psi radiator cap. He confirmed that he is going for individual throttle bodies for each cylinder.

I also found out that a 20 psi radiator cap is incompatible with the stock radiator. More about that unfortunate discovery when I report on my track day at Pocono later this week.

[SVXRide]

I also found out that a 20 psi radiator cap is incompatible with the stock radiator. More about that unfortunate discovery when I report on my track day at Pocono later this week.

:(:(:(:(
-Bill

[RallyBob]

Saw Jack and his car at at Pocono today. Said he had dynoed the car at 300whp recently. Also said he is still having some overheating problems, despite having a 25 psi radiator cap. He confirmed that he is going for individual throttle bodies for each cylinder.

Bummer. How'd the car sound out on the track?

I also found out that a 20 psi radiator cap is incompatible with the stock radiator. More about that unfortunate discovery when I report on my track day at Pocono later this week.

That doesn't sound good either. I suspect the plastic yielded judging by your comment?

[TomsSVX]

yea he split the tank at their usual weak spot on the top. No worries an all aluminum PWR is on the way for his ol' girl:D

Tom

[Tim]

yea he split the tank at their usual weak spot on the top. No worries an all aluminum PWR is on the way for his ol' girl:D

Tom

Dan's car definitely deserves it :). I'm surprised the stock radiator lasted that long with all those high speed runs at the track.

[shotgunslade]

Rally Bob:

Jack's car sounded great. I don't think I was on the track with him because I was in the Open Track sessions and I think he was in the Comp School. I couldn't get a ride because it's now a "proper race car" with only one seat.



Yes radiator split along the front side top between the hose connection and the cap nipple. Tried to KDWeld it, which lasted about 5 miles. Towed to Ertle Subaru in Stroudsberg. YT is UPS'ing up to their shop the radiator from his silver, which is down, and I'm buying a new one that will ulimately go back in the silver. They said they could install, but no warranty. I told them, "It's a track car, I'm just as likely to ask you for a waranty as I am to ask my insurance company for damage protection on the track."

Hopefully, I can pick it up on Saturday morning and drop by Reading on the way home. Obviously Lime Rock is out for that morning.

[RallyBob]

Rally Bob:

Jack's car sounded great. I don't think I was on the track with him because I was in the Open Track sessions and I think he was in the Comp School. I couldn't get a ride because it's now a "proper race car" with only one seat.

FWIW, I spoke to Jack yesterday, and while the car did fill the overflow initially, he said after that it never got above 180° on the track, and never lost power like it did in the past when overheating. Oil temps stayed constant as well for once, usually when the coolant temps rise the car's oil temps skyrocket as well.

Hopefully, I can pick it up on Saturday morning and drop by Reading on the way home. Obviously Lime Rock is out for that morning.

Well, if you ever get out to Lime Rock again, let me know. I live about 28 miles from there and wouldn't have to come up with any excuses to make a trip out there.

[SVXRide]

10"x10"=100 sq" X 10lbs/sq" =1000lbs. Yes I guess it would flex a bit.:)

The engine will achieve a VE of 106%, in its standard state, at higher rpms it will achieve 110%.

Harvey.:)

Harvey,
Welcome back! Glad to have you as part of this thread!!:cool::cool:
-Bill

[SVXRide]

"Special Sauce" cams are now operational in Racer X (the rest of the short block is totally stock). I'll have the car on the dyno within the next 30 days (so no need for "but they're GTech curves" comments) :cool:
-Bill


Before and after GTech plots (first two=before;))

http://www.subaru-svx.net/photopost/data/500/medium/Racer-X-GTech-curves.jpg

[RallyBob]

Teeny update. I took some pics of the EG33 intake manifold that was modified by the fabricator at XX Tuning. It's a little crude yes, and my pictures suck (bad exposure due to flash), but you get the idea. The view inside the plenum shows the supports that were added to prevent the 'cave in' that occurred previously.

[TomsSVX]

Looks pretty good. too bad the volume cannot be adjusted for measuring purposes. I am guessing it was jigged up on a spare long block??

Tom

[RallyBob]

Looks pretty good. too bad the volume cannot be adjusted for measuring purposes. I am guessing it was jigged up on a spare long block??

Tom

I agree, I'd have loved to have made it adjustable for volume if I had the time to build it myself. But I think it will help nonetheless.

That is Jack's spare engine he bought, the one we 'stole' the heads and cams from for his existing engine combo. He didn't want to be without his car while the cams were getting welded and ground (5 weeks) and while I did the head porting (one day) and waited for the machine shop to complete them (4 months for the machinist!).

[Sir. Nate]

I love the custom airbox

[GreenMarine]

I love the custom airbox

I bet it'll pick up alot of bugs, maybe a bird or two? ;) :p

~ Chris

[Dessertrunner]

Not sure but is this the Dyno's on Mad Jack's car you talk about Rally Bob. I got it from here.

http://www.xxtuning.com/dynocharts/dyno2.php

Select Subaru,
then Impreza RS
then XXJack

Tony

[RallyBob]

Not sure but is this the Dyno's on Mad Jack's car you talk about Rally Bob. I got it from here.

http://www.xxtuning.com/dynocharts/dyno2.php

Select Subaru,
then Impreza RS
then XXJack

Tony

Yes it is! I didn't even know those charts existed. Looks like that was with the standard engine with headers/airbox/aftermarket ECU.

[Dessertrunner]

Looks like those few changes made a difference, I take it this is WHP?

[RallyBob]

Looks like those few changes made a difference, I take it this is WHP?

Correct. Technically, it's 'hub hp', as the dyno used is a Dynapack, and the wheels are removed for dynoing purposes.

Regards,

[RallyBob]

Well, I promised an update regardless of the outcome. The revised 'big plenum' stock intake significantly lost hp and torque. In fact it also narrowed the powerband appreciably. Jack finally got the car on the dyno and the results were: -30 whp/-25 ft lbs of torque @ the wheels. Air/fuel ratio did NOT change with the new intake. Timing was messed with, but it changed nothing. So that experiment was a major let-down. To confirm it was in fact the intake and not some other variable, the stock intake was bolted back in place and the car re-dynoed. The numbers came right back to within a few hp of before (it was rather humid on dyno night).

Looks like Subaru did a pretty good job with the stock intake design!

[TomsSVX]

Well, I promised an update regardless of the outcome. The revised 'big plenum' stock intake significantly lost hp and torque. In fact it also narrowed the powerband appreciably. Jack finally got the car on the dyno and the results were: -30 whp/-25 ft lbs of torque @ the wheels. Air/fuel ratio did NOT change with the new intake. Timing was messed with, but it changed nothing. So that experiment was a major let-down. To confirm it was in fact the intake and not some other variable, the stock intake was bolted back in place and the car re-dynoed. The numbers came right back to within a few hp of before (it was rather humid on dyno night).

Looks like Subaru did a pretty good job with the stock intake design!

Interesting... Do you guys have the IRIS system functional in that car??

Tom

[RallyBob]

Interesting... Do you guys have the IRIS system functional in that car??

Tom

It's removed completely from the intake.

[TomsSVX]

So essentially, the stock intake you are running is constantly in a balance state?? Rather than occasionally separated by the valve??

Tom

[RallyBob]

Yes, that is correct.

[TomsSVX]

thanks for the clarification... I am a little surprised at the results though...

Tom

[RallyBob]

thanks for the clarification... I am a little surprised at the results though...
Tom

As was I. And a little bummed out too. I guess I should have expected it, up 'til now everything has increased fairly dramatically in leaps and bounds (relatively speaking), so we were due for a step backwards...:rolleyes: But I guess that's why they call it 'research and development'.

Tom, did you still have that spare engine available BTW?

[SVXRide]

Bob,
Have you been able to establish how much volume the stock intake "holds"? I'm interested how it stacks against the thought of "holding" as much as the engine displaces.
Thanks.
-Bill
p.s. how did the volume of the fabricated intake compare with the volume of the stock intake?

[RallyBob]

Bob,
Have you been able to establish how much volume the stock intake "holds"? I'm interested how it stacks against the thought of "holding" as much as the engine displaces.
Thanks.
-Bill
p.s. how did the volume of the fabricated intake compare with the volume of the stock intake?

I never got to physically cc any of the intakes. However, dimensionally (as in measured via a tape-measure), the new plenum is 'about' 3 times the volume of stock.

[TomsSVX]

As was I. And a little bummed out too. I guess I should have expected it, up 'til now everything has increased fairly dramatically in leaps and bounds (relatively speaking), so we were due for a step backwards...:rolleyes: But I guess that's why they call it 'research and development'.

Tom, did you still have that spare engine available BTW?

Yeah but is a bare bones long block if thats enough

Tom

[RallyBob]

Yeah but is a bare bones long block if thats enough

Tom

Should be plenty. I am forwarding your contact info to Andrew, he's the guy who is building the next recipient car for an EG33 transplant. He said he's heading to VA so he might want to pick it up.

[oab_au]

Bob I have looked at the inlet, as to modifing it to allow the torque to be produced at a higher rpm where more power can be produced. The govening factor is the length of the inlet track runners. This is what sets the rpm that the maximum torque is produced. At the moment it resonates at about 4500/5000, to bring this figure up to where the camshafts want to work at, 5500/6000, the length of the tracts have to be shortened.

To do this, you may want to build a new manifold, knowing your metal work skills :) but there is a way you could test the theory first, by cutting the underside of the manifold where the dividing walls are either side of the center runner, cutting the division back to have the runners open into the plenum 1" earlier. This will effectively shorten the tuned length of the tract, to allow it resonate at a higher rpm.
What do yeh reckon, worth a try?:)

Harvey.

[TomsSVX]

Should be plenty. I am forwarding your contact info to Andrew, he's the guy who is building the next recipient car for an EG33 transplant. He said he's heading to VA so he might want to pick it up.

He is gonna drop by tomorrow and pick it up... If there is anything else you guys need let me know... I am also gonna give him a set of cams as there are none in the engine right now

Tom

[dynomatt]

Bob, we've seen the standard dyno run graphs...are the 285whp ones available for comparison?

Tom, in my case, we specifically built the ECU to control the IRIS valve, and given the cams had changed, assume the switch point was going to move too. However, when we dynoed it side by side with the valve open and the valve shut (two power runs) the valve made no difference. We were hoping to be able to plot a point to open and close the valve, but with no difference in output, I think we ended up leaving it open.

Matt

[zukiru]

OMFG BOB! awesome build! almost makes me want to rethink my EJ25 swap. (86 XT)

I will PM you when I get ready to get a nice all motor tune for that. ;)

[RallyBob]

Bob, we've seen the standard dyno run graphs...are the 285whp ones available for comparison?

While I've seen them, Jack prefers not to post the most recent dyno plots. So it's out of my hands.

[RallyBob]

Bob I have looked at the inlet, as to modifing it to allow the torque to be produced at a higher rpm where more power can be produced. The govening factor is the length of the inlet track runners. This is what sets the rpm that the maximum torque is produced. At the moment it resonates at about 4500/5000, to bring this figure up to where the camshafts want to work at, 5500/6000, the length of the tracts have to be shortened.

To do this, you may want to build a new manifold, knowing your metal work skills :) but there is a way you could test the theory first, by cutting the underside of the manifold where the dividing walls are either side of the center runner, cutting the division back to have the runners open into the plenum 1" earlier. This will effectively shorten the tuned length of the tract, to allow it resonate at a higher rpm.
What do yeh reckon, worth a try?:)

Harvey.


I would have loved to have built an intake with a variable plenum chamber volume (via spacers) as well as variable-length runners (again via spacers). But alas, Jack is not that patient a person! He just wants to bolt on parts and go racing. He hates testing.

[RallyBob]

A little update. The last track event (Pocono) proved terminal for the EG33 powered Impreza. A combination of a stock shortblock being run for 3+ years at racing speeds, the extra loads of near-300 whp, the 8200 rpm shift points, and the stock soup-bowl oil pan (which has horrible oil control for road racing) finally took it's toll.

The net result is #5 rod bearing virtually fused to the crankshaft and #6 damn close to doing the same. Luckily, the heads were intact and the cams are unscathed, but it did bend a few exhaust valves thanks to the extra vertical rod movement at the spun bearing(s).

Another interesting wear item: The forward moveable cam gear (don't know the technical term) which is apparently there to reduce noise and gear slop...it's nearly totally burned up. Wasn't made for those rpms apparently, nor the added loading from the aggressive cams and springs. So we'll probably need to make some billet cam gears, preferably straight cut to reduce fore/aft loading.

I've been consulting with Jack on an oil pan, but the fabricator seems to want to build a drag-race pan only. So I may end up having to build this one myself.

A new shortblock with billet rods and high compression pistons has already been started on.

[SVXRide]

Bob,
Sorry to hear about the race EG33's demise :(

Is your issue with the oil pan the pan design itself or the way the oil pickup sets in the pan (or both?) I'd been told by others that the stock pan's baffling wasn't bad (in response to my inquires about running a dry sump)

Please keep us all informed as to the new engine build!

Thanks.

-Bill

[RallyBob]

Is your issue with the oil pan the pan design itself or the way the oil pickup sets in the pan (or both?) I'd been told by others that the stock pan's baffling wasn't bad (in response to my inquires about running a dry sump)


The baffling is okay, but it needs better anti-slosh control for braking, and trap doors for the cornering. Keep in mind this is a lighter car with 9.5" slicks with some aero effect going on....I would not be surprised if 1.5+ lateral G's are happening on the banking at Pocono.

My real pet peeve is simply the shape of the pan. It's a soup bowl. Not conducive to oil control! A half-round shape like that has no way to keep the oil from climbing the sides while braking and cornering, and to a lesser effect even during acceleration. Even if the baffling keeps it away from the crank, the oil might not be anywhere near the pickup. And even if the engine is not under load, it may very well be spinning 8000 rpms at that given moment, and even 1/2 second of starvation at that rpms will not be kind to the bottom end parts.

[SVXRide]

The baffling is okay, but it needs better anti-slosh control for braking, and trap doors for the cornering. Keep in mind this is a lighter car with 9.5" slicks with some aero effect going on....I would not be surprised if 1.5+ lateral G's are happening on the banking at Pocono.

My real pet peeve is simply the shape of the pan. It's a soup bowl. Not conducive to oil control! A half-round shape like that has no way to keep the oil from climbing the sides while braking and cornering, and to a lesser effect even during acceleration. Even if the baffling keeps it away from the crank, the oil might not be anywhere near the pickup. And even if the engine is not under load, it may very well be spinning 8000 rpms at that given moment, and even 1/2 second of starvation at that rpms will not be kind to the bottom end parts.

So, maybe something more like a typical Moroso pan (straight sides, squared off kickouts)?
-Bill

[Dessertrunner]

Bob what compression will you guys go with?
Tony

[RallyBob]

So, maybe something more like a typical Moroso pan (straight sides, squared off kickouts)?
-Bill

It'll be squared off with some kickouts. None too radical, still need to be able to access the pan bolts as well as the header bolts. And 4 trap doors most likely.

[RallyBob]

Bob what compression will you guys go with?
Tony

Jack was talking about 12:1. I think he wants to refrain from having to buy 'straight' racing fuel. A mix might be okay however (93 octane + 100 octane). Budget is always looming!

[TomsSVX]

It'll be squared off with some kickouts. None too radical, still need to be able to access the pan bolts as well as the header bolts. And 4 trap doors most likely.

I was thinking the same thing... Just try and square out the bottom of the pan... Increases volume, decreases any likelyhood of starving the pick-up and will be relatively simple to fabricate...

Tom

[RallyBob]

Small update here.

I completed the oil pan with trap doors for Jack's EG33. Some teasers.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3286/3013737447_5e283b20aa_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3010/3013738129_82dabcec76_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3230/3013738989_00c559aefb_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3152/3013739185_0119d2f7ae_o.jpg

The rest of the pics are here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/10498579@N07/sets/72157603229734931/).

The shortblock parts for the new engine are done, Jack is waiting for the custom head gaskets to arrive and then assembly of his new engine will commence. Compression ratio is 11.95:1, the new displacement is a bit over 3.5 litres. More updates when it's finished and dynoed.

[dynomatt]

Bob...talk to me about cooling and inlet.

What are your plans for each?

I notice the oil cooler plumbing...are the sandwich plates effective? Does it provide the right level of cooling? Can the oil pump deal with it?

I'm actually considering going for individual throttle bodies as a mate can make them pretty cheaply...have you looked at that?

Matt

[RallyBob]

Bob...talk to me about cooling and inlet.

What are your plans for each?

I took some time to review the spare block and heads this time around, while the machine shop was working on the shortblock. I mentioned to Jack some of the shortcomings I *thought* I saw in the stock cooling system. So between him and the machinist, some of those areas were addressed (lots of sharp edges and turns) via grinding and machining. I had also suggested a revised externally plumbed cooling system, but that won't happen this time around.

I notice the oil cooler plumbing...are the sandwich plates effective? Does it provide the right level of cooling? Can the oil pump deal with it?

Oil temps haven't been an issue. They do climb somewhat when the water temp climbs, but all in all it works well. Lines are -10AN (5/8" - 15.87 mm ID), the billet sandwich plate I think is by Canton Racing, and the cooler is Setrab. The oil pump is interesting, apparently it specs out the same as an STI pump, but with fewer shims under the spring. Not my findings, but rather
Jack and his machinist again.

I'm actually considering going for individual throttle bodies as a mate can make them pretty cheaply...have you looked at that?

He thought about the Extrudabody setup from a Porsche 911 (http://www.extrudabody.biz/servlet/the-164/6-dsh-ITB-dsh-KIT-dsh-45mm-Porsche-911/Detail)(simple adaptation based on my discussions with the owner). But it's not currently in the budget. The other EG33 project I'm *sort of* working on will definitely have the ITB's.

HTH,

[TomsSVX]

Bob, Looks great bud! I was thinking of a dry sump the other day... still lingering... Need to weigh my options

Tom

[SVXRide]

Bob,
Nice! What's the total oil capacity now?
-Bill

[XT6Wagon]

The JDM Dual AVCS engines apparently use the same oil pump as the SVX uses a wider pump rotor than the normal STi's. The 08+ STi is a dual AVCS engine so should have the wider pump rotor too.

[SVXRide]

The JDM Dual AVCS engines apparently use the same oil pump as the SVX uses a wider pump rotor than the normal STi's. The 08+ STi is a dual AVCS engine so should have the wider pump rotor too.

Are you saying that you think we should be able to use the oil pump off of an '08 STi??
-Bill

[TomsSVX]

Are you saying that you think we should be able to use the oil pump off of an '08 STi??
-Bill

Unless there is a way to mount the two crank sensors, we cannot use their case

Tom

[RallyBob]

Bob,
Nice! What's the total oil capacity now?
-Bill

We'll find out when he adds oil.....:rolleyes:

I suspect he gained at least two quarts.

[shotgunslade]

Rally Bob:

Would really be interested in the insights Jack and team have about the overheating problem with the EG33. I have a sense that the problem is located in the engine, or at the inlet to the water pump. If it is in the engine, there might be a portion of the engine that is inadequately served by cooling channels, and overheats locally, causing local boiling of the coolant and steam pockets in the coolant stream under hard running. A second possiblity is that there are coolant passages that, because of their poor hydrodynamic design, cause local cavitation at high flow. Another possibility would be that at high rpms, the water pump is cavitating. The first problem probably isn't solvable, the second might be solvable by machining some of the coolant passages in the block. The third could be solvable by an electric water pump.

As I have continued to track my SVX, the overheating problem has gotten worse. Maybe I'm driving the car harder, or maybe something is deteriorating. Even the PWR radiator didn't seem to help. At this point, I have given up tracking it. Overcoming this issue is key to my keeping the car. Even though I do have a new track car, it's open and isn't really suitable for heavy rain. I loved being among the fastest cars on the track when it got wet. Loved passing Corvettes. But, soon as it dried out, my radiator boiled over.

Anyway, next year, I'm going to upgrade my closed trackable car alternative. I'll either go into a major refurb of the SVX, if the overheating can be overcome, or buy something different. So, the overheating issue is very important to me. Would love your insights.

[oab_au]

I realise your post was addressed to Bob, but I really do think it is related to the pump speed. Over the years that I have seen engines improved, and the average engine speed raised, it has always been a problem of the pump cavitating to allow the engine to overheat. The fix was to fit a larger pulley to the pump, or fitting an under drive crank pulley, to reduce the pumps speed.

When the engine was designed the pump speed was set to operate at the most effective speed. For the normal SVX this would be about 3000 rpm. As you are road racing with a 5 speed box, you are running at a much higher average speed that is over the effective pump speed, for a longer period.

Gearing the pump down is not an option, reducing the pump impeller would impair its effectiveness. So the best option would to fit an electric pump. Its operation is controlled by the water temp, without the thermostat.
You would have to remove the impeller fins, and reroute the bypass and heater return pipes to return to the inlet side of the pump, but that is not a big job.

It is an easier option to try, than redesigning the cooling system.:)

Harvey.

[shotgunslade]

Harvey:

Thank you. I really want to keep the SVX, but I want a car that can take a few turns around the track without blowing its top. :cool::cool:

[oab_au]

Harvey:

Thank you. I really want to keep the SVX, but I want a car that can take a few turns around the track without blowing its top. :cool::cool:

Yes I can understand that.:D

I would like to hear what Bob has found out also.

Harvey.

[oab_au]

Just to explain, as you may not know the full implications of how the effects of cavitation affect the cooling. It is not just that the pump stops pumping.

When the impeller reaches the speed where the molecules of the water are torn apart, forming bubbles of nothing. This is a void where the pressure has dropped dramatically.

With the drop in the boiling point, with the drop in pressure the water around the void instantly explodes into superheated steam. The pockets of steam push the water out of the system overflow.

This can happen in a normally driven pump, when it is revved out. You can see on the inside of the housing, around the impeller track, small indentions where the water has exploded into steam, blowing holes in the casting. Looks like detonation marks on a piston.:)

As it only happens at high rpms, so it does not last long. Yours would do it most of the time, because you are up in those rpms most of the time.

Harvey.

[RallyBob]

Rally Bob:

Would really be interested in the insights Jack and team have about the overheating problem with the EG33. I have a sense that the problem is located in the engine, or at the inlet to the water pump. <snip>

As previously mentioned in this thread, Jack has done quite a few of these mods already. Aftermarket radiator, higher pressure cap, deleted thermostat (restrictor in place), remote electric water pump. All have reduced the overheating to some extent, and certainly delayed it until later in a racing session. But none have cured it 100%.

I had mentioned when I had a chance to look at his spare shortblock while building the oil pan, that I didn't 'like' the appearance of the cooling passages and in particular the inlet at the water pump. Jack's machinist also agreed with this, and spent some time machining the block to straighten the passages and try to reduce some turbulence. So when the new engine is fired up and run, we'll see if these changes have helped any.

Jack had mentioned that he might have it up and running this weekend, maybe dynoed this week.

Unfortunately we won't have a direct HP comparison to before, as Jack had left XXTuning when that company got sold, and now works for EFI Logics (http://www.efilogics.com/about.html)with another brand of dyno (Mustang AWD). And apparently the Mustang reads *quite* differently from the old Dynapack they had used before.

[RallyBob]

Bob,
Nice! What's the total oil capacity now?
-Bill

Almost forgot, the engine now takes exactly 8 quarts, inclusive of the oil cooler and the accusump.

[longassname]

Ya the numbers off the previous dyno didn't seem right. I expect the results off the new one will fall more inline with other dynos.

Did you take any pictures of the new pistons and the engine as it went together?

As previously mentioned in this thread, Jack has done quite a few of these mods already. Aftermarket radiator, higher pressure cap, deleted thermostat (restrictor in place), remote electric water pump. All have reduced the overheating to some extent, and certainly delayed it until later in a racing session. But none have cured it 100%.

I had mentioned when I had a chance to look at his spare shortblock while building the oil pan, that I didn't 'like' the appearance of the cooling passages and in particular the inlet at the water pump. Jack's machinist also agreed with this, and spent some time machining the block to straighten the passages and try to reduce some turbulence. So when the new engine is fired up and run, we'll see if these changes have helped any.

Jack had mentioned that he might have it up and running this weekend, maybe dynoed this week.

Unfortunately we won't have a direct HP comparison to before, as Jack had left XXTuning when that company got sold, and now works for EFI Logics (http://www.efilogics.com/about.html)with another brand of dyno (Mustang AWD). And apparently the Mustang reads *quite* differently from the old Dynapack they had used before.

[shotgunslade]

Harvey:

Rally Bob's proposed cures of the water pump inlet and the restrictor are all consistent with the problems caused by increased water flow due to higher engine rpms. In a closed fluid loop, a pump is merely a mechanism for creating a net positive pressure on the discharge side and a net negative pressure on the inlet side. The sum of these net pressures can be considered the average net pressure for the system. It may not be limited to the pressure rating of the radiator cap, because the radiator cap may not be located at the neutral pressure point in the system, the point where the downstream pressure drop equals the upstream pressure drop.

The faster the pump moves the greater is the lift acrosss the pump, and the greater the positive and negative net pressures on the discharge and inlet sides of the pump respectively. The problem arises when the net absolute pressure on the intake side of the pump falls below the vapor pressure of the fluid at the operating temperature. The fluid then boils. Since pumps don't pump steam very well, there can be a drastic loss of flow, greatly reducing the ability fo the cooling system to shed heat and resulting in rapid overheating. Local poor flow configurations resulting in high turbulence can also result in very local low pressure areas causing localized boiling. The probelem is that the steam bubbles may not collapse completely when they rejoin the main stream and they disrupt heat transfer between the coolant and the block. These local flow conditions are more disruptive, the closer they are the pump inlet, because the net absolute pressure in the line is lower the closer you get to the pump inlet, and the less has to be the negative pressure differential caused by local turbulence before local boiling occurs.

So, an electric pump to avoid excessive lift thru the pump at high rpms, and cleaning up the pump inlet condition and accessible fluid passages at the downstream end of the block coolant channels should avoid the local boiling problem. Can't wait to see how this works. Don't know if the restrictor is needed with the electric fuel pump, unless it moves the pressure balance point of the system farther upstream in relation to the radiator cap, thus effectively increasing the average net system pressure required to blow the cap.

If I decide to redo the SVX, including having an engine built, it will be later this year, hopefully, after we can find out if Jack's efforts are successful.

[dynomatt]

What electronic pumps are you guys using?

I know there's the Davies Craig, but when I looked at relative flow comparisons, the standard pump flowed a lot more.

The manual says

600rpm 20l/min
3000rpm 100l/min
6000rpm 200l/min

The Davies Craig ones I have seen max at 110l/min.

If we have engines running at 5000-8000rpm...and we assume they are cavitating up there, what is the max flow we need to effect proper cooling?


Matt