245 BHP for £1000 and perfect delivery!

[steve matthews]

I will say that after track days 2-19-20-11, yes 2 days engine
behavior has my Fed car 4th gear red lined at 130 mph.
5th gear taken to 140. Only 140 because straight ended.
Response in the short straights is that of a V-6 or V-8.
Full throttle now tracks the car outward extremely fast especially when
in 3rd gear. Something not able to do prior.
Will post additional results on the Fed. down pipe as I organize my thoughts.
Will also be going back out on track March.
Steve -lovin the upgrade-

[surfboardfiller]

Turbo arrived today and it looks like they threw mine away and sent me a new one.

The Impellar is completely different to the old one.





Now I need some copper nuts and a custom pipe.

[steve matthews]

Phil, Without hijacking pull the exhaust manifold and port all the channels.
It's just nasty looking for flow.

[Karl Martin]

Thanks for the info (Tony and RSteve)

Phil, it will be interesting to hear your verdict when you have finished. I would recommend a professional testing before you push it, to check on the fuelling etc. What set up do you intend to run?

Elan lover...sorry I missed answering your question....I installed the mountain chip at the same time as the turbo work, so I don't know how much extra BHP it has made, except CR Turbos gave an educated guess of 20-40% over stock, depending what you did with it, but more can be gained if you ignore their safety recommendations (Max 1Bar.... will invalidate their warrantees)

Just to throw a spanner in the works, consider the following before you all get too carried away!

When I first decided to upgrade the performance of this car, I asked numerous professionals lots of the same questions and got lots of different answers .....but some answers were the same throughout.

The idea is to gain as much power as possible, within reasonable costs, without compromising safety or excessively shortening the life span of components and not to sacrifice drivability for power.

Improving the down pipe/turbo elbow/ 'stiffy', as some of you call it (why?!) and improving the induction manifold was one of the things I also looked at. The overall response from all those that have done this to other cars, was that it brings on the power a lot sooner ( no surprise there then!) but the trade off was that it puts a lot of stress on the Turbo bearings (another reason for a ball bearing Turbo, because these can tolerate far more stress, not so good for the bearings/seals in our IHI)

Also, coating the system (and in particular the Turbo) with heat retaining materials was also open to question - C R Turbos are particularly against this, as they constantly stressed that the biggest cause of failure was excessive heat and retaining it would make things a lot worse . Also, the heat has got to come out somewhere, so where the insulation ends at the exhaust and under the car, it is going to become very hot .....( plastic body ). It would be interesting to hear Knoxmotorsports (Billy?) and SteveM’s opinions on this.

When I was talking to a local gearbox specialist about fitting a LSD, they said you might also like to consider that you could get gains in torque and drivability by changing the final drive gear ratio, for a reasonable price and with less risk, the trade off being that top speed is sacrificed and motorway driving would be several hundred revs higher, which would wear the engine more in the long term and give worse fuel economy....or you could cruise at a lower speed to compensate!

However, the work Knoxmotorsports has undertaken with SteveM is truly a work of art. I was so tempted to follow, that I showed a couple of fabricators some photos and was quoted around £500 minimum for the down pipe and around £1500 for a custom manifold!

But if you were to go to that extent, you are just £500 away from all the benefits of the Garrett 2554, but added together, you are spending three to four times more money for maybe 10 to 15% more power....the law of diminishing returns!

This was before Knoxm. Was offering a group buy (I don’t want to tread on anybody's toes here) but would the Federal pipe fit the UK cars? I know the USA cars have longer front ends to incorporate the air bag systems.

This is the reason why everyone recommends spending the resources on the ECU and not the induction or pipe, but you never really know till you try.....the extra drivability that Steve describes (more important than the figures to me) has seriously got my attention.

Rip, I thought the ESM chip did more? ( like changing the fuelling and timing). Going back to the stock chip was next on the agenda.....but I have put it in a safe place.......and can't find it......

I was even thinking about getting the switcher board from ESM (I know he includes the stock map) and run further tests with Kilimanjaro and Elysium......trouble is rolling tests add up (£s)!

[knoxmotorsports]

Karl, I will try to answer your questions to the best of my ability.

Improving the down pipe/turbo elbow/ 'stiffy', as some of you call it (why?!) and improving the induction manifold was one of the things I also looked at. The overall response from all those that have done this to other cars, was that it brings on the power a lot sooner ( no surprise there then!) but the trade off was that it puts a lot of stress on the Turbo bearings (another reason for a ball bearing Turbo, because these can tolerate far more stress, not so good for the bearings/seals in our IHI)


-I think stiffy came from the fact that it was just pipe rather than a large ugly cast piece. Ours is technically only a half-stiffy since the wastegate dumptube has a flex bellows on it.
-it certainly has brought power in sooner. I would not continue to listen to whoever has told you that a high flowing downpipe or turbo manifold will exacerbate stress-wearing of the turbo bearings. This is silly (no offense to you). Quite simply, the less backpressure after the turbo, the less hard the turbo has to work to make the same boost pressure, since the basic operation of a turbine is via pressure ratio before/after the turbine wheel.
-in many cases, ball bearing turbos are actually more finicky when it comes to durability, as any impurities in your oil will quickly kill the sensitive bearings. This is usually a non issue if you change your oil frequently, use good filters, and have an oil inlet restrictor so that the center section does not choke on oil.

Also, coating the system (and in particular the Turbo) with heat retaining materials was also open to question - C R Turbos are particularly against this, as they constantly stressed that the biggest cause of failure was excessive heat and retaining it would make things a lot worse . Also, the heat has got to come out somewhere, so where the insulation ends at the exhaust and under the car, it is going to become very hot .....( plastic body ). It would be interesting to hear Knoxmotorsports (Billy?) and SteveM’s opinions on this.

-I think the biggest cause of turbo failure is FOD (foreign object damage). If we run into the problem of melting a turbine housing down the road, then we can quantifiably say we need to go to a larger turbine housing But until that day....

-The exhaust joint under the car where our insulation coating ends is directly below the engine (give or take). Not worried about melting a FG body from excessive exhaust heat. It just isn't an issue. The rest of the exhaust is within 40-50 degrees of its pre-downpipe readings after dyno runs, and we're making 11% more power at peak than before, so that is to be expected. If you want to make more power, you will have to deal with more heat as a byproduct. Unless you find a way to make an endothermic engine, but I'm not holding my breath.

When I was talking to a local gearbox specialist about fitting a LSD, they said you might also like to consider that you could get gains in torque and drivability by changing the final drive gear ratio, for a reasonable price and with less risk, the trade off being that top speed is sacrificed and motorway driving would be several hundred revs higher, which would wear the engine more in the long term and give worse fuel economy....or you could cruise at a lower speed to compensate!

-the final drive is fine. Turbo cars like wide gear spreads, to take advantage of the midrange torque and giving more time in boost. Stock elans already come with 3.83:1 ratio final drive, which gives for roughly 30mph in each gear at maximum revs. I am not sure you'd see many gains going shorter. 2nd gear, as-is is already perfect for autocross, and 3rd and 4th suit most race tracks around here.

However, the work Knoxmotorsports has undertaken with SteveM is truly a work of art. I was so tempted to follow, that I showed a couple of fabricators some photos and was quoted around £500 minimum for the down pipe and around £1500 for a custom manifold!
thanks!
-custom fabrication, especially in something as tightly packaged as an M100, is not cheap. There is the old adage "you have to pay to play." It is pretty true. Thankfully, inexpensive performance parts are available such as the intake pipes, piper exhaust, etc. Here in the states, something like our downpipe made at a professional exhaust company in small scale would cost $700-900. If mass-production were to happen, the prices would likely drop a few hundred $. Since we are a small company and don't have the overhead of the bigger guys, we can offer it more affordably. But the bang for the buck will still be very high.
Most header/manifold manufacturers won't touch a project like the turbo manifold for less than $1500.

But if you were to go to that extent, you are just £500 away from all the benefits of the Garrett 2554, but added together, you are spending three to four times more money for maybe 10 to 15% more power....the law of diminishing returns!

-All the benefits? I agree the 2554 is a good sized turbo for the elan, but of what I have seen so far, it is not making much more power than the standard turbo, and in the case of ABmunro's, it seems terribly laggy, not making peak tq until 4500+. Maybe his just needs a better tune or more boost or something, but we are putting 201.6 honest FWHP to the pavement. I have not seen numbers much bigger on the GT. I just wish the dyno shops in UK didn't futz with their numbers so much, and that we could compare them. It is lying and silly to convert back to BHP unless you do a negative pull in each gear to find the parasitic losses. Most shops do not do this. Even still, at a very conservative 14% loss, we are making 234"bhp" in Steve's elan with the standard turbo....

-If you upgrade the turbo, you should at very least upgrade the downpipe to suit. I think LGM's downpipes are just fine in terms of performance. The modern GT turbos are nice because they have newer wheel designs and more aftermarket support, but those all come at a cost.

This was before Knoxm. Was offering a group buy (I don’t want to tread on anybody's toes here) but would the Federal pipe fit the UK cars? I know the USA cars have longer front ends to incorporate the air bag systems.

-the added length, I am told, is in the front bumper support area, not in the engine compartment. I also do not think many UK elans had AC, which is something all elans here got.

This is the reason why everyone recommends spending the resources on the ECU and not the induction or pipe, but you never really know till you try.....the extra drivability that Steve describes (more important than the figures to me) has seriously got my attention.

-I am not sure if you are referring to ECU as in the chips, or as Haltech/etc.. If the former, as with any turbo car, the exhaust and the programming should be the first items changed, since bean counters and lawyers always have a way of getting the manufacturers to downspec their turbo offerings so as not to be a liability. If the latter, I think throwing in a standalone EMS is only a good idea if you plan to greatly exceed 200whp. The cost is simply too high to recognize the gains unless you are going big with your project.

Rip, I thought the ESM chip did more? ( like changing the fuelling and timing). Going back to the stock chip was next on the agenda.....but I have put it in a safe place.......and can't find it......

I was even thinking about getting the switcher board from ESM (I know he includes the stock map) and run further tests with Kilimanjaro and Elysium......trouble is rolling tests add up (£s)!

-I have not figured out the big differences either between the different chips. We are thinking about getting a switcher on Steve's, but if the difference is just going from .90bar to .95 or whatever, that isn't worth it IMO. The car will make more power and torque at the highest boost setting (Elysium?), why bother dyno testing the other programs? If it actually leans out the mixture and the car runs in the high 11:1-low 12:1 in boost, then maybe it will make some more power. It is so rich approaching redline with the Everest that I wish we had more boost to lean it out. Alas, 2bar map sensor FTL. Wish it weren't such a PITA to switch to a 3bar. The Thunderbird compressor ought to be able to flow decently at ~18+ psi when we get there.

Hope that helps!

[surfboardfiller]

I cant wait but my mechanic is very busy and I am struggling with the amount of work on the car, as I am not a technician I have no experience to aide me.
I have a short induction which takes air in from the front of the car at the top of the bumper. I will probably get a programmable ECU but would love to chat to ECM first.

Did you get a quote from piper regarding the custom waste gate exhaust section? It would be good if they could add it to their existing set of upgrade packages to spread the cost and they already have the rest of the exhaust system, so may be enthusiastic?
I think it was called a stiffy in a Beavis and Butt Head type way, but it confuses things as there is a ball joint there as you know (which requires small maintenance) instead of the more commonly used flexi section (which tend to fall apart)

The idea of coating the system is to reduce radient heat in the engine bay and heat soak through the pipe which causes the engine to work hard to cool it's self and shortens the life of components. But I think this should only be done lining the inside of the pipe until the exhaust is past the engine bay. Beyond the engine bay (under the car) the exhaust hangs under the chassis well clear of it and well clear of the platic body so don't worry about the heat there.
In the engine bay it passes closely to the sump so I will at least shield the sump, some people lag the exhaust but I don't think that's a good idea, like you said you don't want a hot exhaust pipe cooking the turbo, the coating should keep the pipe cool.

In my old car the Everest chip sits on top of the original chip, so I never took one out, not sure if yours is the same.

I can't help but think it's better to do a timed run like RIP did on my old car when setting the CAS, anyone can do it so you can compare with loads of other Elans on here, your time 30-60 in 3rd etc it's better than a print out as you know what your car is actually doing, I think the dyno tests are theoretical for those who like to brag about BHP (Race cars test on track). Save you a fortune too!

[surfboardfiller]

Knox beat me to it..
That will teach me to take so long to write a reply!

[steve matthews]

Karl, Billy, I look at it this way.

Old set up of turbo with heat shields.
Temp at 02 sensor 849 deg. f
Temp at turbo center this would be oil lines and water lines 220 deg. f
Compressor housing entry 125 deg. f

New set up with coated turbin (hot side) and coated Knox down pipe.
Temp at 02 sensor 390 deg f
temp at turbo center this would be oil lines and water lines 190 deg. f
Compressor housing entry 90 deg. f

I will run these temperatures again to verify.

Prior to Knox down pipe 194 whp with everest chip. Turbo boosted to 14.97 lbs.
to get the 194 whp and produced 220 deg. f heat at the center section (where the oil
seals are located).

After install of the Knox down pipe and coatings everest chip produced 200 whp
with only 13.60 lbs. boost and produced only 190 deg. f at center section.
This 190 deg. f is less than my thermostat at 210 deg. f.

More power with less boost and cooler housing. I am actually saving my Turbo.

Elan chips were designed for the standard down pipe with all it's fault's and restrictions.
They produced the best case scenario. If Allen had the Knox down pipe with it's flow
characteristics to taylor a chip too I imagine we would see whp in excess of 210 whp
and still maintain a safety margin.

As for the heat increase under the car when the ceramic coating ends I can not say.
I would like the experts to way in. I would think that under Idle no additional heat
is produced under the car because of the coatings. Upon boost air flow should take
over and be as a stock set up.

Please keep the questions coming as I feel these are important to the development.
Allen if you are reading HOW ABOUT A NEW CHIP

Billy if you want this mod back to reproduce additional
YOU WILL HAVE TO PRY IT FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS.

Steve -w- incredible performance from our little Elan.

[surfboardfiller]

I have ordered the Piper 2.5" system, should be arriving on thursday!

I'm not going to put the original down pipe back on having spent so much on all the rest of the system. It seems silly to put a bottle neck back into the system.

I'm looking at a group buy for a UK/Euro down pipe and guaging interest on [url=I'm looking at a group buy for a UK/Euro down pipe and guaging interest.]this[/url] thread:
viewtopic.php?f=85&t=18813

[Karl Martin]

Sorry for being away for so long.

Thanks to Billy for your in depth answers to my questions and to Steve and Phill.

No progress to report yet.....work gets in the way of life

[HJ2]

I have come across this tread multiple times, and every time I have a little more knowledge (also from LEC + a well developed common sense!) so I tend to read this topic different than the way before.
After finding out just now that my turbo is scrap, viewtopic.php?f=31&t=25030 This tread pops up again and I am pointed towards here as well.

If I read well, the bigger compressor (be it T-bird or another) gives higher boost at the same turbo shaft rpm, or the same boost at lower rpm for that matter, compared to our stock IHI.
But where's the trade off? I would say that a bigger compressor has more mass and more air resistance, so slower spooling times. As the energy/rpm is higher (on the compressor side, more loss at the turbine side), I would suspect that the air forced in the cylinders is hotter as well. Besides: boosting over 1 bar is a nono, and the stock IHI can easily boost a lot higher than that and has no problems of getting there fast...

If I was to select another turbine wheel i would think now that the way forward is to optimize it for a little for cooler air in stead of higher boost for the obvious reason (higher fill-rate of the cylinders).

Any educating thoughts for me that help me understand everything better would be appreciated!

[Elanlover]

Its my recollection (and I could, of course, be wrong) that a larger turbo such as the ones installed in the LGM turbo upgrade project deliver much less boost at lower RPMs (less than stock) and therefore less power. They do seem to deliver higher boost at higher RPM's though. If this is the case then I have to question the value of a rather expensive turbo upgrade. The biggest "hole" in the power curve of this engine comes at lower RPM's not higher ones.

Now part of this may be due to the need for proper mapping which hasn't been done yet and which could increase the boost at lower RPM's (and some have "begged" ESM to look into a chip for this). Some is obviously due to the larger turbo needing more time and pressure to produce boost. I haven't reviewed the threads on the various upgrades performed in a while. I seem to recall that the Thunderbird housing upgrade produced some benefits but would have to re-read it to be certain. In any case, I'd be much more interested in upgrades that increase power in the lower RPM band (sub 3,500) which would make the car "quicker" overall. I'm not sure what the average RPM is for you (or anyone else) but I seem to be around 3 - 4 k when cruising so when I step on it I'm not too disappointed. Its easy to be swayed by promises of higher HP but, as we all know, its not just the max HP that makes a car quick but where on the RPM curve it can be accessed.

I could be completely wrong about all this of course.

[HJ2]

I'm sorry, but when I wrote rpm, i meant turbo shaft rpm, not engine rpm Let me correct that in my post.
Yes, the sooner the power is delivered, the more you benefit from it. this would be a smaller turbo. Top end will be less with a smaller turbo.
I think that the match in turbo size is perfect, and am happy with the power delivery from all my mod's but wonder if i can get cooler air from the turbo @ the same setup with another compressor wheel geometry. Perhaps aerodynamic design and production techniques of compressor wheels improved over the years, allowing for cooler air or better low-end performance for that matter...
Top end power is more than enough (hence the wastgate needed to be ported and we can't over 1 bar anyway) but anything that pushes the curve up towards that 1 bar at lower shaft speeds is welcome.

Point is: there are so many variables that I can't oversee the full game here.

[Elanlover]

Some time ago ESM was going to try to get the engine performance data from Steve M. to see if it was possible to create a chip with another boost in performance based on his results. I don't know if that's happened yet but there's always the hope we'll see an "Olympus Mons" (or similar) chip some day. Again, if there was some way to get power faster (at lower RPM's) this would make the car quicker and would be ideal in my mind (especially if it also comes with a little more HP at the top end too).

[HJ2]

That would be welcome, but first we I need to select a compressor wheel.
I tend to stock for now...

[tigerdog]

Sorry to be slow entering the discussion. As many know, Smaug wears a larger, Garrett GT2560R ball-bearing turbo, along with larger injectors and a 3-bar MAP sensor. He is quite driveable and when the boost is dialled up, frighteningly fast. Boost doesn't come on in any meaningful way until about 2600RPM, then climbs steadily until the wastegate cuts in. In theory, this turbo should allow over 300HP but not with the stock computer.

ESM and I have corresponded several times: the challenge for a different chip is twofold. Not only does he need data with which to work (proper fuel curve, etc.) but he has to reverse-engineer the machine code in the computer that controls the injectors. Existing Mountain Chips only manipulate the wastegate opening; while not a trivial task, it only means finding one variable in the code and tweaking appropriately. Fueling curves would be much more complex. My hope was for a chip that dealt only with boost but even that has not been possible due to his work schedule.

So today, using a 3 BAR MAP, 550cc injectors and a larger turbo works pretty well. In closed loop mode with a nice, hot catalyst, it still passes California emissions tests but runs slightly rich when the computer is in open loop (e.g., during acceleration). The other downside is the use of an MBC to reach peak boost; disadvantages are discussed elsewhere.

In addition to the GT2560R, there's also a slightly smaller GT2554 that aims for peak power outputs between 160 and 270. It would spool faster and probably be similar in feel and performance to the stock IHI. It is not a simple bolt-on replacement, though.

Garrett Turbo clicky

[steve matthews]

Hello all. That custom map does exist. It is in my C location in the Switcher from ESM. I call it the CAT program.
Alan at ECM and Billy delivered exactly what I wanted. The most HP from the stock 2 bar map and the IHI Turbo.
This will again start a argument but here goes. Delivers 210 Wheel HP. Want BHP add 15%.

This is a track program and car is very very quick. Response is immediate due to the waste gate and down pipe configuration.

Plugs do not last long when using this program. Rubber also seems to disappear. But could just be the driver.

Steve - Ever closer to the edge

[HJ2]

Now how do I get that in my switcher? :

[Elanlover]

..... Response is immediate due to the waste gate and down pipe configuration.......

Steve, exactly what is this config if I may ask (not sure if its buried in this thread somewhere)? I ask because I wonder if I (and others) may have the same or similar setup. I am using the "pre cat eliminator" which was a stiffy-like component produced in a run a while ago. Also, the wastegate has been ported. Does this sound like a similar setup? If it is then perhaps the chip you have now would be appropriate for anyone with a similar config. Alan might want to tweak it some more I suppose if you're burning through plugs.

[lotusflasherman]

Alan might want to tweak it some more I suppose if you're burning through plugs.

Meanwhile, just fit 'colder plugs'. Cold plugs have short insulator 'nose' so heat passes through metal body into head but are prone to oiling or carbon fouling when cold. Hot plugs have a long nose that stays hot so it burns off carbon and oil deposits but on a highly turned engine can burn out. I raced a 100 bhp 1000cc Mini on Champion N60Y but we had to start it and run it up to temperature on standard N9Y plugs and then fit the N60Y's. Bit tedious for a road car but there's always a sensible compromise.

Elan uses NGK and useful info about plug choices here -ngkntk.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/5884-Spark-Plug-Pocket-Guide-.pdf
Recommended plug for Elan turbo is BKR6E but alternative BKR7E-11 listed is a colder plug - both shown on Page 3 of the guide.

Word of warning - Before fitting any non-standard plug compare it for length to a standard plug to check it won't protrude to where the piston wants to be from time to time...