TEK 2 & ECUTEK / Power Engineering
12 April 2002, 04:50 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the Dawes on I'm getting 14psi at 2700 and 15.5 at 3000 which stays like that all the way to 5000, then tails off to 12 at 6500.
The Dawes is more agressive than the Tek, this is because the boost comes in quicker and the ECU backs the boost back slightly before boost comes on strong again, so you get a kind of surge feeling between 2600 and 3200 rpm. The tek doesn't do this, that why it feels smoother, but this is at the expense of a bit of torque.
I'm happy to put up with this because the Dawes makes the car feel a lot more spritely.
The Dawes is more agressive than the Tek, this is because the boost comes in quicker and the ECU backs the boost back slightly before boost comes on strong again, so you get a kind of surge feeling between 2600 and 3200 rpm. The tek doesn't do this, that why it feels smoother, but this is at the expense of a bit of torque.
I'm happy to put up with this because the Dawes makes the car feel a lot more spritely.
12 April 2002, 05:32 PM
#33
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lambo - I'm not sure about the ECU backing the boost with the Dawes, as the ECU has no control over the boost... I'm also not convinced that the Dawes allows faster spool-up, as it actually comes in at higher rpm. I remember with the Dawes, if in, say, 2nd at 1,000rpm & foot goes down, there's trundle trundle surge woosh. With the Tek2 from 1,000 there is no apparent boost point in the same situation - it just pulls as if a larger engine.
I haven't really kept an eye on the boost throughout the rev range since having the Tek2 (I find I'm having to pay rather more attention to the road these days
), so I can't comment on where the boost is.
However, as the Tek stuff in general has now shown, increased boost isn't necessarily the only way of increasing torque. Mervyn & Steve have got - well, as of last night - 305bhp & 312lbft (at least that's what I remember the figures to be) out of Steve's car without excessive boost - marginally more than the Tek2's 1.1bar, I think - through timing & whatnot. So a high boost doesn't necessarily mean high torque!
I haven't really kept an eye on the boost throughout the rev range since having the Tek2 (I find I'm having to pay rather more attention to the road these days
), so I can't comment on where the boost is.However, as the Tek stuff in general has now shown, increased boost isn't necessarily the only way of increasing torque. Mervyn & Steve have got - well, as of last night - 305bhp & 312lbft (at least that's what I remember the figures to be) out of Steve's car without excessive boost - marginally more than the Tek2's 1.1bar, I think - through timing & whatnot. So a high boost doesn't necessarily mean high torque!
12 April 2002, 05:54 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nom, you can see the evidence of the "dawes" effect on my on my torque curve from the PE dyno, the torque rises sharply from 2500 rpm and actually exceeds the Tek 2 torque at 3200 rpm the torque then drops back at 3500 rpm slightly below that achieved by the Tek 2.
The Tek 2 torque is higher than the Dawes ( about 10lbs ) between 2000 and 3000 rpm then its about the same up to 4500rpm then it tails off less than with the Dawes.
Its a very similar tale on the power curve with the Tek 2 and the Dawes giving the same power between 3200 and 4000.
The Tek 2 is definately better than the Dawes and it does give more power/torque below 3000 rpm and above 5000 rpm, but for me its not £625 + vat better.
The Tek 2 torque is higher than the Dawes ( about 10lbs ) between 2000 and 3000 rpm then its about the same up to 4500rpm then it tails off less than with the Dawes.
Its a very similar tale on the power curve with the Tek 2 and the Dawes giving the same power between 3200 and 4000.
The Tek 2 is definately better than the Dawes and it does give more power/torque below 3000 rpm and above 5000 rpm, but for me its not £625 + vat better.
12 April 2002, 06:13 PM
#35
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lambo - can see your point about the cost 
Dawes is definately an incredibly cheap option for what it does. I was very happy with mine until I tried the Tek2 option - the increase in performance I think is most noticeable in the way that my brakes smelled after the Tek2 went on
I've no idea what the fuel-cut is on the Tek2. I think it may work a little differently anyway than the Dawes - I don't believe that fuel-cut is as simple as 'ooh, got to 16.5psi I'll cut the fuel then' from other discussions - it's also related to how long at what level, etc. As the ECU is actually being reporgrammed as to it's boost levels, I would imagine that the effective cut is raised in the same way - i.e. if boost is raised by 10%, the point of fuel-cut is also raised by 10%. That is, though, IMHO with the info at hand. It seems, also, from talking to Merv last night, that it all depends on exactly where the boost is being measured from, as there seem to be queues of the stuff depending on where your restrictions are... I got lost shortly after this point
Dawes is definately an incredibly cheap option for what it does. I was very happy with mine until I tried the Tek2 option - the increase in performance I think is most noticeable in the way that my brakes smelled after the Tek2 went on I've no idea what the fuel-cut is on the Tek2. I think it may work a little differently anyway than the Dawes - I don't believe that fuel-cut is as simple as 'ooh, got to 16.5psi I'll cut the fuel then' from other discussions - it's also related to how long at what level, etc. As the ECU is actually being reporgrammed as to it's boost levels, I would imagine that the effective cut is raised in the same way - i.e. if boost is raised by 10%, the point of fuel-cut is also raised by 10%. That is, though, IMHO with the info at hand. It seems, also, from talking to Merv last night, that it all depends on exactly where the boost is being measured from, as there seem to be queues of the stuff depending on where your restrictions are... I got lost shortly after this point
13 April 2002, 10:10 AM
#36
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Stirling
Posts: 2,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When John Banks put his Dawes onto my car it felt very smooth - not sure if he's done anything 'special' to it - or I just don't have a Tek2 to compare it to (probably the latter).
Richard.
Richard.
13 April 2002, 11:48 AM
#37
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 3,105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be careful fitting the Dawes to a tek2 - I imagine EcuTek have optimised the fuelling and ignition with this map, so your car isn't running as rich as it was before.
This will give less margin for error if upping the boost further with an MBC. Best to buy the DeltaDash software too - then you can monitor what the ecu is seeing from it's knock sensor and the effect it has on timing (it's likely that if you up the boost too far, the ignition will retard to protect from det - so more boost would equal less power
).
Richard
This will give less margin for error if upping the boost further with an MBC. Best to buy the DeltaDash software too - then you can monitor what the ecu is seeing from it's knock sensor and the effect it has on timing (it's likely that if you up the boost too far, the ignition will retard to protect from det - so more boost would equal less power
).Richard
13 April 2002, 05:15 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Richard (Dowser),
Thank you ... good advice I feel. I'm leaving things as they are ... a little more time in the car with the TEK2 has made me appreciate just how smooth, torquey and, as you say, safe this upgrade is and more fuel efficient, not that any of us can really be worried about that I guess!
I don't have the Delta Dash ... I would buy it, but my laptop is a Macintosh
- I would like to be able to review what's happening with my car in my own time.
I was very impressed by the ''surge'' and higher boost from the Dawes but I felt unsure about the fuelling.
ECUTEK have clearly done a super job with the TEK2 upgrade.
If I wish to improve performance further, my next step should be to look at the exhaust, not boost IMHO. I'm not making the most of the ECU's capabilities now with a standard exhaust system. Besides, as I posted earlier, it must make sense to keep boost under certain limits ... Just look at Stephen Dones results - 300plus BHP and Torque with a TEK 2 running no higher than 1.2 Bar and breathing mods from what I understand!
Scotsman,
The Dawes is smooth alright, but the TEK2 is ... different, less impact or kick in the back - more progressive. The fuelling map Merv. showed me was very, very different to the original 800 series ECU's, far smoother and, as I say, progressive.
I thoroughly enjoyed the TEK1 and Dawes ... but TEK2 is a big improvement overall IMHO.
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/13/2002 5:17:55 PM]
Thank you ... good advice I feel. I'm leaving things as they are ... a little more time in the car with the TEK2 has made me appreciate just how smooth, torquey and, as you say, safe this upgrade is and more fuel efficient, not that any of us can really be worried about that I guess!
I don't have the Delta Dash ... I would buy it, but my laptop is a Macintosh
- I would like to be able to review what's happening with my car in my own time. I was very impressed by the ''surge'' and higher boost from the Dawes but I felt unsure about the fuelling.
ECUTEK have clearly done a super job with the TEK2 upgrade.
If I wish to improve performance further, my next step should be to look at the exhaust, not boost IMHO. I'm not making the most of the ECU's capabilities now with a standard exhaust system. Besides, as I posted earlier, it must make sense to keep boost under certain limits ... Just look at Stephen Dones results - 300plus BHP and Torque with a TEK 2 running no higher than 1.2 Bar and breathing mods from what I understand!
Scotsman,
The Dawes is smooth alright, but the TEK2 is ... different, less impact or kick in the back - more progressive. The fuelling map Merv. showed me was very, very different to the original 800 series ECU's, far smoother and, as I say, progressive.
I thoroughly enjoyed the TEK1 and Dawes ... but TEK2 is a big improvement overall IMHO.
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/13/2002 5:17:55 PM]
13 April 2002, 06:32 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Stirling
Posts: 2,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve,
Tek2 sounds excellent - £600 odd better though I'm not too sure. I do love that kick that the dawes gives and for £35 I'll stick with that for a few months
Getting over 300 bhp with Tek2 and a full decat does sound sweet though.
Richard.
[Edited by Scotsman - 4/13/2002 6:33:42 PM]
Tek2 sounds excellent - £600 odd better though I'm not too sure. I do love that kick that the dawes gives and for £35 I'll stick with that for a few months
Getting over 300 bhp with Tek2 and a full decat does sound sweet though.
Richard.
[Edited by Scotsman - 4/13/2002 6:33:42 PM]
15 April 2002, 10:13 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scotsman,
£600.00 does seem a lot I agree and the progressive nature of the TEK2 may not initially be as exciting as the Dawes ... I think in the long run the TEK2 will be more predictable and possibly safer and perhaps ultimately more satisfying
(PS, still got the Dawes in the glove box though just in case I feel like a little more fun!)
Steve
£600.00 does seem a lot I agree and the progressive nature of the TEK2 may not initially be as exciting as the Dawes ... I think in the long run the TEK2 will be more predictable and possibly safer and perhaps ultimately more satisfying
(PS, still got the Dawes in the glove box though just in case I feel like a little more fun!)
Steve
16 April 2002, 01:27 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
has anyone fitted a Dawes to a 93 WRX ? I have a TSL BB and decat SS mid section and was wondering what kind of power or max boost I'd be able to get 'safely'. !
Has anyone fitted a dawes without confirming safe leanness with an AFR gauge?
Has anyone fitted a dawes without confirming safe leanness with an AFR gauge?
16 April 2002, 03:05 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok cheers nom.
Lambo was saying the safest way is to fit the AFR before the dawes, monitor afr under all conditions, fit the dawes and tweak boost so as to not sway too far from orginal settings. Apparently they're set up to be pretty rich anyway (I have lots of blackness in my zorst so it should still be running rich like)
May try that pending my read of Banks's monologue !
Lambo was saying the safest way is to fit the AFR before the dawes, monitor afr under all conditions, fit the dawes and tweak boost so as to not sway too far from orginal settings. Apparently they're set up to be pretty rich anyway (I have lots of blackness in my zorst so it should still be running rich like)
May try that pending my read of Banks's monologue !
16 April 2002, 03:23 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just checked the Dawes instructions, there's nothing on there saying there's any extra risks with the 93WRX ? Did I read the wrong bit ! The Dawes site just says that you should always have extra fuel to support the extra air...but I guess the idea is that a scoob runs rich anyway so there's unburnt fuel to play with ? (a small amount I guess?)
16 April 2002, 04:14 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi guys,
Big thread !
Just thought I'd clarify something...
I am not running a Tek2 - that's one of our standard maps. I have a custom map on my car, but on the standard ECU, as with Tek 2. I've had about 4 hours rolling road time to get where I am. I am also running a manifold and custom wing induction (bigger than APS cool air). Still have the PE sports CAT though. I am running 4 degrees more advance at the bottom end, and 2 degrees more advance over the rest of the map. I see at most 1-2 degrees of knock correction, and that's normal. I had to make drastic changes to the boost control from the stock map in order to keep overshoot under control. I am/was holding 16.5 PSI. I have reduced my overshoot from 18.4 PSI to a smoother 17 PSI, though I'm still doing lots of tests with different boost control parameters.
260-270 BHP is normal for the Tek2 - please don't expect 300 and be disappointed. My car got 285BHP with the Tek2, but the manifold gives 20-25 of that. The manifold's my favourite mod (ahem... I mean second to the ecu of course ;-) )
Re Boost limit: Subarus run an absolute boost pressure map, not atmospheric relative. They then run a boost pressure compensation map based on atmospheric pressure. The boost limit is also atmospheric pressure dependant. Though they don't use it, the STIs have the ability to adjust desired boost based on atmospheric temperature - i.e. prevent heat soak det from a sharp start in traffic, but it's switched off. Anyway, I'm rambling...To cut a long story short, under most conditions, our boost limit is approx 19.4 PSI. By the same calcs, the standard ECU's limit is at 17.3 PSI.
Re Tek1: It is meant to be a replacement for ae802. The difference when compared to an 800 or 801 is much less dramatic, though still better.
Cheers
Steve
[Edited by StephenDone - 4/16/2002 4:21:34 PM]
Big thread !
Just thought I'd clarify something...
I am not running a Tek2 - that's one of our standard maps. I have a custom map on my car, but on the standard ECU, as with Tek 2. I've had about 4 hours rolling road time to get where I am. I am also running a manifold and custom wing induction (bigger than APS cool air). Still have the PE sports CAT though. I am running 4 degrees more advance at the bottom end, and 2 degrees more advance over the rest of the map. I see at most 1-2 degrees of knock correction, and that's normal. I had to make drastic changes to the boost control from the stock map in order to keep overshoot under control. I am/was holding 16.5 PSI. I have reduced my overshoot from 18.4 PSI to a smoother 17 PSI, though I'm still doing lots of tests with different boost control parameters.
260-270 BHP is normal for the Tek2 - please don't expect 300 and be disappointed. My car got 285BHP with the Tek2, but the manifold gives 20-25 of that. The manifold's my favourite mod (ahem... I mean second to the ecu of course ;-) )
Re Boost limit: Subarus run an absolute boost pressure map, not atmospheric relative. They then run a boost pressure compensation map based on atmospheric pressure. The boost limit is also atmospheric pressure dependant. Though they don't use it, the STIs have the ability to adjust desired boost based on atmospheric temperature - i.e. prevent heat soak det from a sharp start in traffic, but it's switched off. Anyway, I'm rambling...To cut a long story short, under most conditions, our boost limit is approx 19.4 PSI. By the same calcs, the standard ECU's limit is at 17.3 PSI.
Re Tek1: It is meant to be a replacement for ae802. The difference when compared to an 800 or 801 is much less dramatic, though still better.
Cheers
Steve
[Edited by StephenDone - 4/16/2002 4:21:34 PM]
04 December 2002, 11:17 AM
#49
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Matt,
I had a 1.5mm bleed hole on the Dawes ... I have to say I haven't had chance to have some fun in the car yet, but my initial impression is that of a far smoother, if less dramatic spool up ... If the ECU is ''learning'' then this could change I s'pose.
Scotsman,
I was seriously suprised at the TEK1 and Dawes figures - I expected about 235 BHP and 220 torque, bearing in mind the standard exhaust ... I know that the TEK 1 has more power than a standard 800 / 801 and the fuelling is smoother/more progressive.
One thing that came to light on the first Dyno (TEK1 and Dawes) was that at the top end the car was running a tad too lean. The TEK 1 is leaned out at high revs so the addition of the Dawes - assuming your running at approx. 15-16 PSI - could be a problem I guess.
Here are my graphs for you to see ...
The spikes in the two lower curves were a flouresent light being switched on in the workshop! These machines are so sensitive
What can I say ...
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 11:22:17 AM]
I had a 1.5mm bleed hole on the Dawes ... I have to say I haven't had chance to have some fun in the car yet, but my initial impression is that of a far smoother, if less dramatic spool up ... If the ECU is ''learning'' then this could change I s'pose.
Scotsman,
I was seriously suprised at the TEK1 and Dawes figures - I expected about 235 BHP and 220 torque, bearing in mind the standard exhaust ... I know that the TEK 1 has more power than a standard 800 / 801 and the fuelling is smoother/more progressive.
One thing that came to light on the first Dyno (TEK1 and Dawes) was that at the top end the car was running a tad too lean. The TEK 1 is leaned out at high revs so the addition of the Dawes - assuming your running at approx. 15-16 PSI - could be a problem I guess.
Here are my graphs for you to see ...
The spikes in the two lower curves were a flouresent light being switched on in the workshop! These machines are so sensitive
What can I say ...
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 11:22:17 AM]
04 December 2002, 12:43 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nom,
Yes I agree, very smooth low down.
Can't remember, what other bits and pieces do you have on your motor?
Did you have the TEK1 first?
T,
I am not sure how much is down to PE / ECUTEK playing safe, but the ECU being in control seems far safer ...
Mega,
Fitting a replacement ECU is very, very simple. If your close to PE, then they will happily remap your own ECU ... That's what they did for mine ... apparently, mine was the first one Merv had done without removing it from the car, didn't even move my carpet!
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 12:49:19 PM]
Yes I agree, very smooth low down.
Can't remember, what other bits and pieces do you have on your motor?
Did you have the TEK1 first?
T,
I am not sure how much is down to PE / ECUTEK playing safe, but the ECU being in control seems far safer ...
Mega,
Fitting a replacement ECU is very, very simple. If your close to PE, then they will happily remap your own ECU ... That's what they did for mine ... apparently, mine was the first one Merv had done without removing it from the car, didn't even move my carpet!
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 12:49:19 PM]
04 December 2002, 01:05 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mega,
Good point, what is the guarentee / what are they going to guarentee against?
Lambo,
Why did you stick to Dawes and Std ECU then if TEK2 gives smoother and better torque / fuelling and arguably safety?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 1:09:11 PM]
Good point, what is the guarentee / what are they going to guarentee against?
Lambo,
Why did you stick to Dawes and Std ECU then if TEK2 gives smoother and better torque / fuelling and arguably safety?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 1:09:11 PM]
04 December 2002, 01:17 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scotsman,
I was suprised at these figures ...
I know people say that RR's are not always that representative of ''Real'' on the road figures ... which makes sense - the car not being under load, etc.- so the figure of 250 BHP, 230 torque, may be high (or indeed, low I guess!), but the key thing for me was the RR showed quite clearly the change in figures from TEK 1plus Dawes to TEK2 ... So th real figures I would guess probably are nearer the 230 BHP, etc ... perhaps - who knows!
T,
I can see your point abiout manual control of boost ... strong argument for adding an MBC into the equation.
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 1:20:18 PM]
I was suprised at these figures ...
I know people say that RR's are not always that representative of ''Real'' on the road figures ... which makes sense - the car not being under load, etc.- so the figure of 250 BHP, 230 torque, may be high (or indeed, low I guess!), but the key thing for me was the RR showed quite clearly the change in figures from TEK 1plus Dawes to TEK2 ... So th real figures I would guess probably are nearer the 230 BHP, etc ... perhaps - who knows!
T,
I can see your point abiout manual control of boost ... strong argument for adding an MBC into the equation.
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 1:20:18 PM]
04 December 2002, 01:24 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lambo,
Absolutely right about the slippery slope ... I know my car would improve greatly with exhaust change, etc. it is difficult to draw the line, though the missus may help with the line drawing bit i guess!
I see you have changed your DP ... better torque? much louder? Better than doing just the BB?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 1:25:34 PM]
Absolutely right about the slippery slope ... I know my car would improve greatly with exhaust change, etc. it is difficult to draw the line, though the missus may help with the line drawing bit i guess!
I see you have changed your DP ... better torque? much louder? Better than doing just the BB?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 1:25:34 PM]
04 December 2002, 02:02 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ping, my local MOT place have offered to try it for me on their machine, he said I need to get the CAT really hot and that is should pass. Haven't got round to going in yet.
If you have a std dp you are always going to lose early spool up because of the cat, did you see the one on the wall at PE, it amazing the exhaust gases get through it !
I did post a thread on wagons/exhausts about a year ago after thinking about fitting a magnex system but the response was not to do it as it made your ears bleed ! Scooby sport will do a quieter BB but at 250+ quid I decided not to bother.
My car is quick enough for me now with the Dawes, managed to get 155 quite easily out of it the other day, on a private road of course.
[Edited by Lambo - 4/12/2002 2:06:00 PM]
If you have a std dp you are always going to lose early spool up because of the cat, did you see the one on the wall at PE, it amazing the exhaust gases get through it !
I did post a thread on wagons/exhausts about a year ago after thinking about fitting a magnex system but the response was not to do it as it made your ears bleed ! Scooby sport will do a quieter BB but at 250+ quid I decided not to bother.
My car is quick enough for me now with the Dawes, managed to get 155 quite easily out of it the other day, on a private road of course.
[Edited by Lambo - 4/12/2002 2:06:00 PM]
04 December 2002, 02:31 PM
#55
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ping -
It' a full decat that I have (you asked about 20 posts ago!) & just a non-standard panel filter.
And... I can help out a bit on the BB noise stuff. I run a PPP BB these days (the decat is a SS one), but I also have a Remus one for those long journeys... much quieter. Of all weird things, the girlie prefers the PPP one, so that's the one that connected usually The Remus entirely removes the droning noise - I have quite a bit of sound deadening in the car, & it's like a magic carpet with the Remus on. Great for long motorway journeys!
Edited to add that I went straight for the Tek2 (skipped the Tek1), but did use a dawes pre-Tek2. The figures between the AE80/801 + Dawes might look similar to the Tek2, but the control (quality of power? that's a new one) has no comparison. Dawes feels clumsy/on&off by comparison. Dawes was 'thump, thump', the Tek2 is just a constant stream of 'woosh'
Having one of my 'can't describe things very well' days today
[Edited by nom - 4/12/2002 2:38:50 PM]
It' a full decat that I have (you asked about 20 posts ago!) & just a non-standard panel filter.
And... I can help out a bit on the BB noise stuff. I run a PPP BB these days (the decat is a SS one), but I also have a Remus one for those long journeys... much quieter. Of all weird things, the girlie prefers the PPP one, so that's the one that connected usually
The Remus entirely removes the droning noise - I have quite a bit of sound deadening in the car, & it's like a magic carpet with the Remus on. Great for long motorway journeys!Edited to add that I went straight for the Tek2 (skipped the Tek1), but did use a dawes pre-Tek2. The figures between the AE80/801 + Dawes might look similar to the Tek2, but the control (quality of power? that's a new one
) has no comparison. Dawes feels clumsy/on&off by comparison. Dawes was 'thump, thump', the Tek2 is just a constant stream of 'woosh' Having one of my 'can't describe things very well' days today
[Edited by nom - 4/12/2002 2:38:50 PM]
04 December 2002, 03:48 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nom,
I think your elloquanse (!) is quite superb ... Dawes is on / off, TEK 2 is smooth.
Lambo,
Finished my tea break! and Dawes does spool the turbo up quicker for sure ... but ... as I say above, is on / off ...
Depends what one wants I guess ...
1, smooth ''safer (boost solenoid engaged)'' running
or
2, a more raucous approach with a possibility (??)of more risk?
Seems to me that perhaps a DP is next on the list for me motor
Edited to say
You mention the DP encourages the Turbo to to spool earlier ... any figures as a guide? I hit peak boost at about 2,800/2,900 ish without the Dawes ... yours?
Any thoughts?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 4:02:01 PM]
I think your elloquanse (!) is quite superb ... Dawes is on / off, TEK 2 is smooth.
Lambo,
Finished my tea break! and Dawes does spool the turbo up quicker for sure ... but ... as I say above, is on / off ...
Depends what one wants I guess ...
1, smooth ''safer (boost solenoid engaged)'' running
or
2, a more raucous approach with a possibility (??)of more risk?
Seems to me that perhaps a DP is next on the list for me motor
Edited to say
You mention the DP encourages the Turbo to to spool earlier ... any figures as a guide? I hit peak boost at about 2,800/2,900 ish without the Dawes ... yours?
Any thoughts?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 4:02:01 PM]
04 December 2002, 05:00 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lambo,
My car holds about 1.15 kg/cm3 (1.13ish BAR - 16.3 PSI) from 3,000ish ... I'll note where it is at 2,700 on the way home having removed the Dawes.
I can understand the ''Spritely'' comment ... I think I'll stay ''Dawesless'' for a while and see how things go, though the perceived surge that the Dawes creates is very nice.
Matt,
2mm eh? I had the impression this would begin to negate the spool up time advantages as it would allow wastegate creep to increase ...?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 5:07:34 PM]
My car holds about 1.15 kg/cm3 (1.13ish BAR - 16.3 PSI) from 3,000ish ... I'll note where it is at 2,700 on the way home having removed the Dawes.
I can understand the ''Spritely'' comment ... I think I'll stay ''Dawesless'' for a while and see how things go, though the perceived surge that the Dawes creates is very nice.
Matt,
2mm eh? I had the impression this would begin to negate the spool up time advantages as it would allow wastegate creep to increase ...?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 5:07:34 PM]
04 December 2002, 05:49 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nom,
Steve and Merv were no higher than 1.2 Bar apparently.
So what you're saying is boost = torque, but torque is acheived by boost and other bits and pieces - timing, breathing, etc.
It seems a good idea to control the level of boost your turbo produces to elongate its life. Stephens Car surely will need major changes now to get much more out of it ...
PS, do you know what the fuel cut on TEK2 was increased by ... 2PSI?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 5:50:12 PM]
Steve and Merv were no higher than 1.2 Bar apparently.
So what you're saying is boost = torque, but torque is acheived by boost and other bits and pieces - timing, breathing, etc.
It seems a good idea to control the level of boost your turbo produces to elongate its life. Stephens Car surely will need major changes now to get much more out of it ...
PS, do you know what the fuel cut on TEK2 was increased by ... 2PSI?
Steve
[Edited by PING - 4/12/2002 5:50:12 PM]