Notices
Scion tC 1G Forced Induction Turbo and supercharger applications...

UPDATE: going to dyno tomorrow; results posted

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 01:59 AM
  #21  
Basstrack17's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 517
From: Chapin, SC
Default

that's true on the exhaust. I would run just header mufflers for the fun of it ( small town, back road running, etc ). Sounded pretty cool at higher rpm's, but i could notice the low end punch would be better when I'd put back on the full exhaust. Free-er flowing is a good thing but there should be some backpressure in the system. We would make sure the header tubes & exhaust sizing all worked together.
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 02:03 AM
  #22  
killerxromances's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,808
Default

2.25'' piping is perfect for n/a builds, 2.5'' piping is perfect for f/i builds, 3.0'' is larger than you want to go for a 2.4l on any build. Its do able, but you will lose mostly wtq. Which, 191wtq is not bad at all for the tC. 3.0''+ you will loose a good amount of wtq and whp.

Thats as a general rule, you wouldn't want to run 3'' piping unless your 2az is completely built up from side to side, bottom to top and even then its questionable.
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 02:05 AM
  #23  
05-RS1's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,379
From: Houston, TX
Default

Originally Posted by Basstrack17
that's true on the exhaust. I would run just header mufflers for the fun of it ( small town, back road running, etc ). Sounded pretty cool at higher rpm's, but i could notice the low end punch would be better when I'd put back on the full exhaust. Free-er flowing is a good thing but there should be some backpressure in the system. We would make sure the header tubes & exhaust sizing all worked together.
my point exactly
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 02:18 AM
  #24  
Basstrack17's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 517
From: Chapin, SC
Default

i just want to hand out some props to you younger guys out there. Too many times people my age end up pre-judging your age group; and don't ever return any respect. There is a good amount of car knowledge being used on this site, it shows in your posts & in your cars. At your age, I had a 70 1/2 Camaro that I worked on constently to make as fast as I could afford to. But vehicles were easier back then; less tech details to worry about. Now you are getting 2-300 hp out of engines that at one time were designed for reliability/economy. And in some cases ( like the older Honda hatches ) there is engine swapping, etc being done just like the old days. I just wish we had the web like you do--man this is great to be able to exchange ideas across the country in a moment's time.
Well, for what it's worth you guys have my respect.. keep up the solid work.
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 02:27 AM
  #25  
magicmanjk808's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,109
Default

fyi, you sig says you have 2241hp. not disappointing at all if you ask me
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 02:47 AM
  #26  
JT_Scion's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 202
From: Orlando, FL
Default

I have to agree.. the numbers are lower than i would of wanted too. There is just no torque with this SC... i hate that.. Turbo is looking better and better.. now how to get rid of this supercharger is the real question haha.
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 03:01 AM
  #27  
phoenixtc's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 573
Default

Originally Posted by Basstrack17
i just want to hand out some props to you younger guys out there. Too many times people my age end up pre-judging your age group; and don't ever return any respect. There is a good amount of car knowledge being used on this site, it shows in your posts & in your cars. At your age, I had a 70 1/2 Camaro that I worked on constently to make as fast as I could afford to. But vehicles were easier back then; less tech details to worry about. Now you are getting 2-300 hp out of engines that at one time were designed for reliability/economy. And in some cases ( like the older Honda hatches ) there is engine swapping, etc being done just like the old days. I just wish we had the web like you do--man this is great to be able to exchange ideas across the country in a moment's time.
Well, for what it's worth you guys have my respect.. keep up the solid work.
I totally agree. Back in the day it was a set of headers, a manual distributor, carburators, having the heads reworked and tossing a cam in, all on a big block and still only making 250hp. Now 4cyl engines pound out over 300hp with a few mods. I still can't stand popping my hood and looking at all the electronics. Chips, pulleys, NOS, and re-tuning. Good job guys!
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 03:02 AM
  #28  
Whocares05050's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Scikotics
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,689
From: Florida
Default

I Think the #'s are pretty decent for what mods you have. Now get that thing to the track and see what time you can squeez out of it ;)
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 04:09 AM
  #29  
Garage1217's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member


SL Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,980
From: Phoenix, Az
Default

Looks like your belt started to slip at 4800 rpm on that run and again up high on that run for a split second. Might be why you only saw the hp you did and 8 psi.
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 05:11 AM
  #30  
OutCrnrU's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
Team N.V.S.
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 366
From: Roseville, CA
Default

i would have to disagree with some of you about 3" being too big. the supercharger is designed for top end power, im willing to sacrafice 2-3 lbs of torque to gain some top end power with better air flow, but hey everyone is titled to their opinions.

desertheat- how would i be able to tell by driving the car that the belt was slipping, im very interested in this matter and how i might fix it if there is a problem

I agree that with some tuning the numbers would be a lot better, also with some form of cooling agent as well, ie intercooler. im not dissapointed in the numbers themselves, im dissapointed in not seeing the numbers ZPI claimed it would put out, maybe someone from there end might have some input.

Thanks for the comments
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 05:55 AM
  #31  
HighlanderMac's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 948
From: Keller, TX
Default

Those numbers arent bad at all, but I dont know if you are having any slipping or what, cause your dyno is very steady to redline besides that last little hump.... Do you have the stock air box in? If so I wouldnt be surprised if that is why you are thinking your numbers are a lil low... Think about it, you cant force any more air in that cant get through the airbox...
I am hitting 227hp-197ft-lbs before I did the header.... You have all of the mods that I have, besides the intake and 3" exhaust...
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 06:37 AM
  #32  
OutCrnrU's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
Team N.V.S.
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 366
From: Roseville, CA
Default

i have the umnitza intake but i think that does about as much as the stock airbox would, looks pretty though haha. after doing the s-pipe i wouldnt be surprised if my missing power isnt from the 3 inch exhaust.

But its like i said and what i still cant figure out is why i only got 13hp from the pulley when ZPI claims 21 on the stock exhaust, seems kinda funny to me but oh well life moves on
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 08:50 AM
  #33  
rhythmnsmoke's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Music City Scions
Scikotics
SL Member
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,747
From: TN
Default

Originally Posted by 05-RS1
the zpi pulley is suppose to be 9.5 psi isnt it? to be honest i actually think its your s-pipe that may be the reason your numbers are so low (thats if you got a fully funtional pulley). to me it seems too big for what you actually need so it may be causing you to lose some power instead of gaining. bigger isnt always better esp. when it comes to your exhaust system.. mayb try getting a 2.5 inch one. jus my opinion though

ZPI = 9psi

NST = 9.5psi


Originally Posted by OutCmru
But its like i said and what i still cant figure out is why i only got 13hp from the pulley when ZPI claims 21 on the stock exhaust, seems kinda funny to me but oh well life moves on
Wasn't that claimed 21hp verified by someone other than ZPI? I believed someone else dynoed that increase. Honestly, I think it's your 3" piping. It's to large IMO.
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 01:45 PM
  #34  
Simplyscion's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Team No Limitz
SL Member
Team ScioNRG
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,789
From: Smithtown Scion (NY)
Default

The stock belt sucks...when you put a pulley on, its absolute garbage...look on your engine block right behind your pulley...you see any black dust?? Replace the belt with the part number that I supplied on my NST pulley thread and that will answer your problems...You can thank Munch for that one
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 03:15 PM
  #35  
HighlanderMac's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 948
From: Keller, TX
Default

Originally Posted by rhythmnsmoke
Wasn't that claimed 21hp verified by someone other than ZPI? I believed someone else dynoed that increase. Honestly, I think it's your 3" piping. It's to large IMO.
I gained about 19hp from the ZPI Pulley.. I went from 208hp with Intake and 3" exhaust to 227 hp with Intake, Exhaust, Bosch BPV and ZPI Pulley....
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 03:26 PM
  #36  
Garage1217's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member


SL Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,980
From: Phoenix, Az
Default

Originally Posted by OutCrnrU
i have the umnitza intake but i think that does about as much as the stock airbox would, looks pretty though haha. after doing the s-pipe i wouldnt be surprised if my missing power isnt from the 3 inch exhaust.

But its like i said and what i still cant figure out is why i only got 13hp from the pulley when ZPI claims 21 on the stock exhaust, seems kinda funny to me but oh well life moves on

It is not a claim, it is a fact of physics. Somthing happened were you only hit 8 psi. that 1 psi is worth about 10whp which is why you only saw a 13hp gain! RIght at 4800 looks to me like your belt started to slip like I said, then on in the rpm range before redline she really slipped for a second. Just my 2 cents.
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 03:59 PM
  #37  
smokeydog001's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 617
Default

Originally Posted by Basstrack17
i just want to hand out some props to you younger guys out there. Too many times people my age end up pre-judging your age group; and don't ever return any respect. There is a good amount of car knowledge being used on this site, it shows in your posts & in your cars. At your age, I had a 70 1/2 Camaro that I worked on constently to make as fast as I could afford to. But vehicles were easier back then; less tech details to worry about. Now you are getting 2-300 hp out of engines that at one time were designed for reliability/economy. And in some cases ( like the older Honda hatches ) there is engine swapping, etc being done just like the old days. I just wish we had the web like you do--man this is great to be able to exchange ideas across the country in a moment's time.
Well, for what it's worth you guys have my respect.. keep up the solid work.
I concur! Mine was a '56 Chevy 2 DHT. When we wanted a lowered front end - we just heated the springs!
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 04:28 PM
  #38  
JT_Scion's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 202
From: Orlando, FL
Default

Wasn't that claimed 21hp verified by someone other than ZPI? I believed someone else dynoed that increase. Honestly, I think it's your 3" piping. It's to large IMO.
That would be me. Dyno'd 195 before the pulley. 217 after. Swapped it out while it was strapped to the dyno. No other mods, stock airbox, spipe, header, exhaust. That why i thought with a header, intake, spipe and muffler he should of saw more than what he got. I'd suspect some belt slippage too maybe?
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 05:05 PM
  #39  
TheQuietThings's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member

5 Year Member

SL Member
Team ScioNRG
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,920
From: Staten Island, NY
Default

wow

i personally like the linear increase in power, just because i know its safe on the engine.

the flat line of torque looks awesome too.

Good job!
Old Feb 4, 2006 | 05:06 PM
  #40  
Nu_ERA's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
ScionERA
SL Member
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 679
From: T-Town
Default

Wow I thought you would pull in a bit better for the mods. Nothing stratospheric but I mean at least 235 hp and over 200 tq. My car has the TRD supercharger, ZPI pulley, Crank Pulley, DC Header and Custom Intake and I netted 225 hp and 195 tq. I recently added the Forge 007 BPV a ZPI s-pipe. Wondering what that will put me at when I go to the dyno.

I'm not trying to rain on your parade regardless, the wheel horsepower is still awesome considering the TC dynos at 139 whp and 136 tq stock. So its good to know you have one of the faster tC's on the road.



All times are GMT. The time now is 12:41 AM.