Pavlo

Hey no need to pick on the guy, he's only trying to make a living.

Although I am sure Mr APS now sees the benefits of giving 100% accurate product infomation while in the company of technically savy scoob enthusiasts.

Paul

Adam M

there is nothing wrong with making an honest living so long as you dont mislead people.

Especially when quoting power figures, as you are feeding people what they want to hear.

450 from standard internals is an incredible claim, I would really love to see it substantiated, and I dont consider that picking on someone!

MorayMackenzie

APS,

Re: "Sorry again. You are correct. My original statement was the correct one, simply not expansive enough. The VF22 was used on the version 3, RA variants, homologated for motor sport."

My STI Version 3 Type RA VLimited came with a VF23, as did all the other Version 3's derivatives I know off. I believe there were a few version 4 WRX cars supplied with the VF22, but I believe those are the only ones that came equiped with that turbocharger.

BTW: It's nothing personal, honest, just trying to keep technical information posted here as accurate as possible, based on facts!

Moray
bbs.22b.com

Pavlo

Hmm, how about Inspired by facts....


Paul

MorayMackenzie

Paul,

How about "Based on facts"?

Moray

Andy.F

I just love it when the Scoobynet tech police get their teeth into something

Trout...

Andy,

yeah - and then Airwolf comes along and says things like we shouldn't try and be clever and just let outrageous marketing speil sway the day

Dave@APS,

when you talk about an STi 7 making this number - that means 225nbhp a litre at 21PSI - as I understand it - and again I am no expert - but I would like to understand your interpretation - this would not only be limited by the internals potentially melting down - but also that 450bhp at 21PSI would need to achieve 100% VE. This of course can only be done in a theoretically perfect world - a world without backpressure and gasflow limits to get in the way.

Do you have estimates of VE for an STi 7 - if so - the theoretical maximum power could be calculated.

Indeed there has been a Phase I Scoob running over 600bhp - the theoretical boost is 2.3bar - however it reality it needed to run 4bar to achieve the power and had a life expectancy of around 100 rallycross laps between rebuilds (slightly off topic I know - but you get my point )

I look forward - as I am sure the others do - to your response.

Trout

Pavlo

VE can exceed 100% on a NA engine. Keywords, air, mass, velocity and momentum.

Also rememeber that pressure doesn't equate to flow exactly, so a high VE engine will draw more air our the turbo, so lower pressure higher velocity.

Everything is only impossible until you've done it.

Paul

APS

Moray,

As you are probably aware, the VF22 preceded the VF23. It certainly was used on genuine Version 4 RA models (race variants, not V limited, the latter being the “street” version), as it was originally on equivalent Version 3’s.

Andy,

“100% VE” is a meaningless term, applied to forced induction. As for the relationship between power and “boost” figures (the latter being one of the most misleading terms in automotive engineering), your example is a pretty poor one.

Our 2.5 litre based “race” engine (which is actually perfectly streetable, except for the petrol octane requirement), makes over 600H.P. flywheel at 1.5 bar positive (2.5 ABS). Incidentally, although admittedly not relevant, it does a lot more than “100 rally cross laps”, also!!

Dave
APS

PS “Volumetric Efficiency” is effected by components external to the long engine. I made it perfectly clear originally that some such components required change.

Andy.F

APS Dave - It was Trout who mentioned 100% VE, 4bar boost pressures and 600 bhp cars

cheers

Andy

(positioning himself out of firing range for this one )

Trout...

Andy

Dave@APS,

OK - so I was talking bollocks - and created a distraction - although I do think that 620bhp out of 2 litres is still quite a lot! And yes I know it was a distraction - but it was the European Champions X-Cross car - so I guess he would know something about building winning cars.

I am not in anyway challenging a 2.5l plus car doing this - but anyway - back to the main game - you said you have an STi 7 with standard internals that produces 450bhp @ 21PSI.

You still have produced nothing other than that statement - CAN YOU PLEASE QUALIFY THIS WITH WHAT ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS ENABLE A STANDARD INTERNALS STi 7 CAR PRODUCE THIS KIND OF POWER (450BHP)?

Look forward to your response.

Trout

[Edited by Trout - 7/23/2002 6:47:11 PM]

Adam M

Andy,

I love the way you sit on the fence but have attacked us "techno police" when we believe there is misinformation being sprouted!

aps,

I believe moray said that the VF22 was found on certain variants of version 4 wrxs (including ras), but they were not found on the version 4 stis (VF 23 and VF24), nor the version 3 stis (VF23).

Does the long engine really have no impact on the volumetric efficiency? I didnt know that. I would have thought flow efficiency of the heads would have an effect on VE, surely it must, otherwise people would not bother flowing them on our engines.

Volumetric efficiency strictly speaking is meaningless when applied to forced induction engines, but then the square root of minus one is a meaningless figure. It doesnt mean it doesnt enable us to calculate things which we couldnt otherwise.

One of these is the theoretical maximum output of engines.

I am fascinated by your 600bhp 2.5 @ 1.5 bar, and have been considering building something similar for a long time, could you post any sueful information (no **** taking here) on such things as your compression ratio, stroke, methods of block strengthening, and most specifically, the turbo you ran. Is there anyway you could also post the engine dyno print out of this engine, as I would be interested to see the power delivery curve of what I presume must be a huge turbo.

On a less serious note, I actualy am still keen like the rest of us to see a proven 450bhp on standard sti 7 internals.

Pavlo

I think APS meant that the long engine wasn't the only thing to affect VE, and of course he's right, anyone for 19" inlet trumpets?

C'mon, don't be so hard on the guy, I haven't seen any (more) wild claims, just observations of what he's done and seen. The fact that he may not understand exactly what or how it was done, or the exact details engines not directly related to his works, or some weird physics behind it (generally, not referring to anything in paticular), doesn't mean the observations or experiences aren't valid.

I think APS have tried hard to explain what they have done, and do remember one thing, they have done it, and they have the car to prove it, regarless of what is or isn't know.

BUT

And I am afraid it's a big but. I hope that vendors take note of this thread, and do not make wild, unsubstantiated claims about their products based on pet theories and manufacturer prepared literature. If you sell based on information you give, you had should make sure that info is accurate to the best of your knowledge.

I may be a despicable person, but when Truth speaks through me I am invincible. Mahatma Gandhi

Rant over.

paul

Adam M

nice quote.

I dont see any truth here.

when I see dyno plots from engine dynos then I will believe.

My questions aboutt he 2.5 were out of genuine interest though.

Trout...

Pavlo,

I am not sure I entirely agree with your rant - "they have done it, and they have the car to prove it" - that is the nub of this.

They have made a statement that the Sti " will, in fact" produce around 450bhp with an APS SR40 turbo on standard internals.

OK I take full responsibility for farting about and creating a distraction with theoretical output and X-cross cars and I slap my own wrists.

However - the TRUTH remains that APS have been asked to provide more information about the car - as I for one would love to have a 450bhp Sti 7 in my drive now!

If it could be substantiated I am genuinely interested to see how they did it. This is the theoretical limit for a 2l car at 21PSI - but as you rightly say - anything is impossible until it is done.

I just want to know how it was done - is that a fair question?

Trout

PS When you say - don't be hard on the guy - do you mean APS - I would hope they know how they achieved this with these cars - they are the designer of the product!



[Edited by Trout - 7/23/2002 6:55:52 PM]

Pavlo

It is a fair question to know how it was done, but don't forget they are in the business of getting paid for getting it done, trader secrets and all that.

I think the main reason you haven't seen the requested info is the guy can't be ar5ed to join in the squabble at the moment, too busy trying to make a living maybe.

Perhaps we have nothing better to do!

Don't remember anything specific being said about standard internals, one way or another.

Paul

loscooby

Hmm, It's a lot of opinions here from self claimed subaru experts(the other claiming another ones greatness).
But, I still has more confidence in a company that has proven themselves by selling their product to many satisfied customers like in this case APS.

One of the easiest things is to tell something is bad rather than the opposite.
Even myself not knowing much about the details in car performance can knock something down with arguments taken from this BBS. Although the arguments is based on someone that I have not any knowledge of whatsoever says his name is xxx.
All I'm saying is that don't trust anything on the web without making sure that the person/company is really what the say they are.

FACTS:
APS is a company that have knowledge in subaru performance although biased like any company out there.
None of the persons claiming greatness(although they are trying to be modest) have any proven skills until they have proven themselves making products that works on more that a few cars.
All I have read is theese persons coming up with a lot of theories, theory is good but alas not always the whole truth.

nom

The problem is more the lack of information from APS. Although numbers can't tell everything, they can tell a lot.
However, as most companies don't seem to be that keen on actually giving out real information (as opposed to 'ours is the best at...' and 'on our xxx car we produced...' which isn't much good to anyone as our car is not their car), APS are probably very similar to others.
The problem - I think - is one of marketing. There are two groups who are being sold to - those who know they want 'the best', and those that understand what they want and therefore someone else's best is not necessarily the best for them. Most companies go for the 'don't-really-knows' rather than the 'do-knows' - your product doesn't need to be good to sell to them, just your marketing team. The 'do-knows' realise this to some level, and are therefore put-off by companies that don't release all their information/specification when requested. It may be/probably is just good marketing. Not a good product.
I myself - from what I have seen of it - think that APS products seem to be excellent. I am however slightly put off them because of their marketing - I have a thorough dislike of most marketing & would prefer to be given real information rather than hashed-about bo11ocks. I think many share the same sentiments. Sadly, unless managing to break-through the sales people at the front line (who don't want to let you through 'cos it would eventually put them out of a job), it's very hard to talk to anyone who actually knows what they are talking about. Again, this is not APS in particular - they are all as bad as each other.

OK, rant over . I think that's the first one I've had on ScoobyNet - wow, some accomplishment

Andy.F

Loscooby

The Scoobynet 'tech police' (didn't that hit a nerve ) don't need me to speak for them but I think you'll find that they have been 'bitten' in the past by some of the 'expert companys' out there.
I know I have !

It is possible to do a better job yourself in many cases.

Quantity doesn't guarantee quality !!

paulwadams_my99

plus marketing is a wonderful thing especially with money. I dont think there is anything wrong with asking for proof of claims even in such a forumn.

Edited to say Nom i didnt read that before you posted it, but i agree.

[Edited by paulwadams_my99 - 7/23/2002 10:03:42 PM]

APS

Guys,

I’ve just read this complete thread and thought I would attempt to clarify our position on this issue. We have definitely produced over 450HP flywheel on the new V7 STI on stock internal engine components on 3 different cars, two APS engineering cars and a third car which is privately owned. Many of the external parts used in this conversion are yet to be released. Hence, I won’t give specific details on the APS components until we release the information to the public. One of the APS V7 STI’s will be tested by Australian Motor Magazine in the near future, so we will publish the road test report on our web site when available. When the project is completed, all of the hardware used in the 450HP upgrade will be commercially available worldwide to WRX/STI enthusiasts. I can say there are a number of new APS prototype products utilised in this engineering project that should see production and benefit all owners of WRX and STI vehicles. (Not that we are saying a WRX will make 450HP on stock internal components).

These new APS products and dyno power graphs will be on our web site for all to view over the next 3 to 4 months. Until then, please be patient.

Peter Luxon
Director APS

Trout...

Dave,

thank you for answering the question

I now undestand why you were reluctant to reveal more - I look forward to reading the road test - certainly a very impressive figure indeed!

Trout

Pavlo

Also nice for all those people that still thing subaru engines are crap.

Now where did I leave that spare £30k ???

Paul

Adam M

can't argue with that.

(although strictly speaking I can but it wouldnt be nice in public)