Quack

[g40chris]

i do have a graph somewhere of the map on my polo if thats what you mean

[juan]

Here's the spec's of lreg's old eaton setup


induction> Large induction K&N cone air filter, port matched GT inlet manifold, 51mm throttle body.
Type of forced induction> Eaton
Intercooler> AW tracksport
Pulley> Toothed pulley kit
Cylindor head> Standard
Camshaft> Standard
Exhaust Manifold> Standard
Exhaust system> Stock decat downpipe and 63mm bastuck system, single silencer
Fuelling> Stock ECU, green injectors and a PSD remap with an sns stage V base code
Headgasket> Standard
Pistons> Standard cast 1272cc
Rods> standard
Crank> Standard
Flywheel> Lightened

[The Duck]

Lreg is really restricted by flow there. Is he still around?

Yoof, I like to dream. Seems to freak you out? So you are assuming that I have the pretty much the same engine as the most powerful G60 1341 you have seen? And it seems you are putting me in the same boat as a 190BHP car you used to own?
How would you feel about asking some of the boys who have actually seen/been out in my car on the safe map? Quite presumptious to judge my car on my charger and CC don't you think? I have carefully planned, spent some duck bread and had some shockers getting my car where it is. (My missus was not happy either) 
Lets keep it constructive and thanks for the welcome mate! BTW really good effort on the work you are putting in with the subframes etc. Keep it real.

So when do you guys generally have a rolling road day? Do we have any threads with history RR plots? Did we lose some info with the state of the PSD forum?
I would love nothing more than to compare my safe map to that of now. Surely someone has Ben's plot? (It may be considered optimistic but the shape of the torque curve is a pointer) Is Ben still around?

It seems as if the contraversy surrounding differing results from various setups of 1341's is highlighting some understanding issues with certain members of the forum. If you don't get it, either ask or keep quiet, better not to put your foot in it.
I joined this forum as it seemed quite mature compared with the others out there. I have better things to do than bicker about who has the biggest balls. Surely we are here to learn from each other and enjoy the company of like minded idiots?
I know where club polo is if I want it......

"In simple terms boost is a measure of backup of air the engine is not getting into the cylinders and therefore not being used"

At no point can boost pressure be considered entirely representative of the volume of mixture you have placed in the cylinder.

Something often misunderstood

Lets not compare apples to cooking apples.

Quack....

[Andy]

We all like to dream. A dose of realism never hurts either, so get to the next RR day to silence any doubters! Been a while since there was a spec'd up Eaton or G60 motor at them.

Agree that Gregg's setup was limited by the head and stock cam (though I thought he'd got an Eaton cam in it before he broke the car?). Even so, a ported BV head will only gain you so much - others have gone to 16v to get decent flow, which is the route I'd take if I was going for 260bhp. To stick with the 8v head and reach that kind of power I think serious levels of boost would be required, or lots of nitrous! The R5 boys do it - modified 8v heads and 30psi+ of boost.

Gearboxes really are a worry though, turbos can be kinder to the gearbox for transient events as the transition to maximum boost is smoother/slower than a G-lader (e.g. I've tweaked the boost control in Emerald on mine to give progressive spool-up even if you mash the throttle) - but there's not much you can do to help the 'box once you're at maximum load. If you're making massive torque, it's going to kill it. Having said that, it's the transient events that hurt the 'boxes the most, so going steady when applying the power could extend gearbox life - I know Yoof's turbo setup makes over 200lb/ft of torque on nitrous (and around 185lb/ft without) and his gearbox has been fine. Not sure what'd happen if a G60 lader was used instead though!

Incidentally - when you got it remapped, do you know whether the calibration engineer altered the map rpm setpoints? If you're peaking at 7800rpm or so it can't be helping power/torque if you're using the same fuel and ignition as at 6500rpm.

[Andy]

RE: silencing the whine - many OEMs use resonant chambers and carefully positioned baffles to silence re-circulating dump valves, especially in applications that run lots of boost. Similar chambers within the inlet tract are also becoming common place, but require plenty of instrumentation and work in the NVH cells (as well as the obvious desktop calcs) to get right.

Would be very interested to see how much quieter you can make the Eaton, the noise is the sole reason I kept away from them! Worth noting that JLR, Aston and BMW Mini stick the Eaton 'charger downstream of the throttle body to keep the noise down. Not seen anyone do that on a Polo (yet!).

[Yoof]

Lreg is really restricted by flow there. Is he still around?

Yoof, I like to dream. Seems to freak you out? So you are assuming that I have the pretty much the same engine as the most powerful G60 1341 you have seen? And it seems you are putting me in the same boat as a 190BHP car you used to own?
How would you feel about asking some of the boys who have actually seen/been out in my car on the safe map? Quite presumptious to judge my car on my charger and CC don't you think? I have carefully planned, spent some duck bread and had some shockers getting my car where it is. (My missus was not happy either) 

I'd be in a whole lot of trouble if a 1.3 8v freaked me out...

Anyway- my comparison lies with your torque curve, the flow/heat characteristics of a G60 vs Eaton set-up and the simalarities between my engine (which kingofming owned) with an eaton set-up (which made almost identical power to yours) and different rolling roads.

I'm not going to argue over bhp/lbft figures- there's nothing mroe pointless, a quick change of nitrous jets and I could break 300hp- whoop de doo.

To be honest- I'm all for pushing these Polos as hard and fast as possible, but whilst being realistic at the same time... did you manage to sort the pulley rubbing on your chassis leg by the way?

[The Duck]

Andy, some great points there mate. Regarding the mapping I have thought about the changing of fueling points but I would like it to remain as is for now. The car is a road car and everyday reliability is paramount. I only use 7-8K rarely and tend to shift at 7-7200 as this will reduce the wear rate of the pistons. Should we be able to source the same 1341 pistons then I may consider tweaking the values and maybe optimising the final fueling point up to 7K. I will have more of an idea when I see the torque curve now it is mapped.
Now Steve is off the scene can anyone else map the G40 ECU properly?
I may at some stage go with a custom ECU. What do you think of your emerald? Would you choose one again with hindsight?

Yoof,
I have never had a pulley interference problem with the chassis leg, in fact I am looking at possibly running a 30mm wide pulley setup but I prefer the micro V belt setup. I want to allow some slippage of the belt under wheelspin/grip transition as I feel this is overstressing the charger and belt setup. I am not keen on the toothed belts.
The issue I had was warpage of the charger bracket due to weld heat (out from true a factor of 4 over what should have been allowed!). I have sorted this with a different machining process and should know the results soon. (The car is still in the air having its bum cleaned and waxed) and I havn't driven it in 18 months.

We had a baby duckling and I needed to save as the missus was off work. 


All the best

Duck

[Yoof]

Explains alot- I remeber Seve going on about a car that had elongated engine mount holes to fit the crank pulley in, was a black one fitted with an eaton- ironic that the problem turned out to be his own kit!

Hopefully with that torque (circa 170lbft) you shouldn't have too many gearbox woes, and the car should be fairly tractable, similar to a turbo in its power delivery characteristics, should avoid the problems the G60 boys have with broken boxes/shafts 

[Andy]

1341cc pistons are easily available, many people are going for Wossners now though to retain the original 8:1 compression ratio. JE offer an alternative at 8.5:1 too - available from Jabbasport.

I've never altered the map rpm setpoints on a car, but I do know where the values to do that are - so may get around to trying it one day if I map a car that needs it. If your peak power is definitely at 7800rpm I think you may see some gains, but it'd mean loss of map resolution somewhere else.

Jabbasport have mapped some G40s on their rollers recently, not sure whether they'd do an Eaton or turbo though - they weren't interested in mapping my turbo a few years ago. Not as cheap as Steve was.

Mapping will be available through myself and Yoof at Polo-PP shortly. I'm waiting for the emulator to arrive at the moment, and will be mapping Hayesey's turbo and Robin's G40. I've already done some map tweaking for Robin, but without an emulator it was very time consuming!

As for Emerald, I'd probably still buy one again - I wanted electronic boost control and switchable maps. Only pain in the arse was I waited over 18 months from buying the system for them to finish writing new firmware for the ECU to allow me to run the closed-loop boost control I wanted, and their software still doesn't have the full functionality.

In some respects, I'd have been better off sticking with the original ECU, buying a seperate boost control module, and sorting out a switchable map module for Digifant (which Polo-PP will shortly be offering!). Long-term it might not've been the best option though, as Emerald's a more open system.

[The Duck]

Everyone have a good easter? 

So the 1341 pistons are still available from accralite with a 9:1 compression ratio? Last time a mate asked he was told to order through PSD........

Not much use these days.

[Nick_S]

The Accralite pistons give a 9:1 CR with a thinner metal head gasket. iirc using the OE compound fibre board gasket, it's at 8.5:1

[Andy]

No, they're 9:1 with a stock gasket. Up to circa 9.3:1 with a metal gasket...