# Chronicles of a track TT



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Time to start another build thread, I wanted to have all my pictures and future projects in one place and share them with the community. Some of this stuff is copied and pasted from my old motorsport build thread that I can't even update, but I also have plenty of new stuff.

The Car:
- 01 TT quattro AMU engine code

Suspension:
- 17X10 5zigen fn01rc
- 295 Hoosier A6 front/back
- Revalved H&R RSS (listed for R32) with custom spring rates (700lbs/1300lbs)
- Custom made front ball joint camber extenders with caster offset 
- No front swaybar 
- Madmax rear adjustable control arms
- Modified stock rear swaybar
- Tyrolsport caliper stiffening kit


Engine:
- 42 Draft Design intake (with velocity stack but heatshield deleted)
- Larger S4 maf housing with stock sensor and 4 bar of fuel pressure
- Generic ECU chip with Gonzo Tuning updates
- Gonzo GTT-x hybrid turbo with custom external wastegate 
- Modified JBS knockoff exhaust manifold (ported and drilled for external wastegate outlet)
- Converted to E85 ethanol 
- Custom 42 DD 4" expansion chamber DP and 3" turbo back exhaust 
- Custom FMIC and IC piping
- 630cc injectors, inline external fuel pump
- Timing advanced +13.5* on top of the base flash
- SEM intake manifold with 65mm TB
- Twin Madmax metal recirculating diverter valves
- FFE solid aluminum engine and transmission mount with dogbone delete
- Custom power steering fluid cooler
- Custom 9 row engine oil cooler
Other:
- Massaged front fenders for tire clearance
- 4 point harness
- Home made front air dam
- 15 lbs DEKA battery
- Sparco 310 mm suede steering wheel 
- OMP FIA-homologated racing seat
- Custom 4 point roll bar (based on factory hoops)

Future mods:
-Put the car on super diet ( 2700 lbs current weight) with lighter wheels/brakes and short aluminum exhaust post downpipe
-LSDs and a modified haldex controller 
-Lengthen gear set
-Brakes with more overall friction coefficient 
-Aero mods front and rear

The mission:
Build a competitive F-Prepared TT for SCCA Solo competition


*How it started*


*

Now
*











*Random static and action shots*


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

*Wheels/tires and suspension details*

Wheels are 5Zigen FN01RC 17x10 with a +35 offset
Spacers are 25mm converting 5X100 to 5X114.3
Tires are 295x17 Hoosier A6
H&R RSS coilovers revalved to Madmax specs
700/1300 lbs linear springs
Modified front bar (elongated mounting arms to cut the rate)
Stock rear bar


Custom ball joint relocating plates (BJ extenders) with caster offset allowing over -5 degrees of camber









Custom adapters spacing the wheel/tire combo and also allowing a more available 5x114.3 bolt pattern (finding wheels wide enough and with the right offset in 5X100 is impossible) 






Madmax rear adjustable control arms




Front swaybar modification (reducing the bar's rate)








Rear swaybar modification (increasing the stock rear bar rate and making it adjustable)












Race wheel/tire fitment and weight (43.4 lbs)


























OEM fat 5 with small 245 tires weight comparison (47.0 lbs)











MCPI Delrin forward control arm bushing




















Front wheels at full droop with view of fender rolling 




























Outer front control arm view of the ball joint relocating plates





















Front coilover and inner wheel/tire clearance 











Rear view at full droop


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

*Latest egine bay configuration with externally-gated hybrid turbo, GM coil conversion and short route IC piping*










Air-to-water intercooler




























































Dual Madmax DV setup













SEM intake manifold (thanks [email protected]) 














GM LS2 coil upgrade 













Custom full face disc, modified OEM DMF, custom PP with 30% clamping load increase 










































42 Draft Designs intake with velocity stack and 80 mm ID













Manifold heat shield













Forge unos MBC with stiff spring












Valeo 3-row radiator




















42 Draft Designs vacuum manifold adapted as a direct port distribution block













FFE solid engine mount 













Trunk relocated 15 lbs Deka battery












42 Draft Designs downpipe and custom 3" catback with single driver side outlet





















Auber EGT sensor (mounted pre-turbine at the collector)
Gauge mounted on outer left vent



































310 mm Sparco wheel




























OMP FIA homologated seat





















45 psi vacuum/boost gauge 













Backdated to a manually operating convertible top (hydraulic motor and strut and line removal)


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

*Videos* 

Waterfest autocross 
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zB0ou8jQVOU 

Front tire and suspension behavior 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBt0oO2J6q4 


Dyno run on a mustang dyno at 30 psi (405 AWTQ/300 AWHP). 
http://youtu.be/j_RITf5S4dE


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

2010 at 30 psi
































2011 dynojet numbers (I know...dynojets are pretty meaningless)

318 whp backed up by a 316 whp run. Here is an overlay of the two runs










2013 at 30 psi (365 AWTQ/285 AWHP with no intercooling due a dead AWIC pump)




















2013 revisited a week after the previous dyno at 30 psi with AWIC and water injection switched on. (405 AWTQ/300 AWHP).






















2014 low boost conservative road racing mode











12/6/2014 road racing mode


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Some useful links and charts I use all the time, they should be helpful to most (sometimes, even if your Kung Fu is strong, you need nunchuks).

Links:

*Injector Duty Cycle calculator* (IDC) by Jeff Lucius
http://www.stealth316.com/2-calc-idc.htm

*Injector flow calculator by RC Engineering*
http://www.rceng.com/technical.aspx

*Water injection calculator by RB racing* (the page, although a bit dated, is still full of awesome info about water injection in general).
http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/waterinjection.html#calc

*Another good water injection calculator by Custom Performance Solutions *
http://www.customperformancesolutions.com/waterinjectioncalc/


*Turbo Outlet Temperature Calculator & Intercooler temp/pressure calculator *by Jeff Lucius
http://stealth316.com/2-turbotemp.htm

*
Turbo tech (condensed entry level wheel/housing tech talk).*
http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArtic...-Tech-Compressor-and-Turbine-Map-Details.aspx


*Everything water injection *
http://www.max-boost.co.uk/max-boost/intake/WI.htm

*AFR/Lambda converter*
http://www.wallaceracing.com/air-fuel-lambda.php

*Engine Data*
http://www.carinf.com/en/e3102538.html

*Gear ratio calculator*
http://www.supradave.com/tech/gearspeed/comparator.php?do_what=

*Intercooler end tank design and flow*
http://forum.fiat-bg.org/download.php?id=72687

*TT alignment PDF*
http://www.kisolutionz.com/ttforum/wheelalign.pdf

*Gear ratio to MPH calculator by David Nguyen*
http://www.apexgarage.com/tech/gear_ratios.shtml 

*Online repair manual (Thanks ModsTTand!)*
http://elsaweb.spaghetticoder.org/nav/EN/Audi/TT-Coupe/8N/9/
http://elsaweb.spaghetticoder.org/nav/EN/Audi/TT-Coupe/8N/3/

*Various diagrams, drawings and schematics*
http://ttgallery.fotki.com/audi-tt-mk1-the-bir/concept__drawings/tt_diagrams_sketche/


Charts:

*speed reached at the top of second gear*

The TT has a final drive of 3.316:1 and second gear ratio is at 2.105:1 
with the overall tire diameters listed below, this is the mph that can be reached in second gear at various RPM

25.4"▼▼ (275/17 or 315/17) -- 24.8"▼▼(285/18) 
RPM ------------(MPH) ------ RPM----------- (MPH)
8000 rpm 87.00 mph ------- 8000 rpm 84.26 mph
7500 rpm 81.00 mph ------- 7500 rpm 78.99 mph
7000 rpm 76.00 mph ------- 7000 rpm 73.73 mph
6500 rpm 70.00 mph ------- 6500 rpm 68.46 mph
6000 rpm 65.00 mph ------- 6000 rpm 63.19 mph 
5500 rpm 60.00 mph ------- 5500 rpm 57.93 mph
5000 rpm 54.00 mph ------- 5000 rpm 52.66 mph
4500 rpm 49.00 mph ------- 4500 rpm 47.39 mph
4000 rpm 43.00 mph ------- 4000 rpm 42.13 mph
3500 rpm 38.00 mph ------- 3500 rpm 36.86 mph
3000 rpm 32.00 mph ------- 3000 rpm 31.60 mph
2500 rpm 27.00 mph ------- 2500 rpm 26.33 mph
2000 rpm 22.00 mph ------- 2000 rpm 21.06 mph


*Fluid capacity*


----------



## Atomic Ed (Mar 19, 2009)

Pick up a JBS manifold and I'll clean it up for ya. No charge.


----------



## Chuckmeister87 (Nov 10, 2009)

I see your GoPro, but no videos posted. Give us a taste of a ride in your car.


----------



## ModsTTand (Jul 8, 2009)

at last ur going to have all ur stuff in one thread . thank you  

sub'ed and fav'ed ....best of luck


----------



## jbrehm (May 16, 2006)

Love to have all your innovations in one thread, Max! You'll probably get banned now for being too useful for Vortex :laugh: 

What's your take on the AWIC for a daily? I really want to switch to one to clear up some space for some much needed cooling ducting in the lower grills, and I'd like to have the option of adding ice for the track since my engine bay gets _very_ heat soaked in hot weather.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Atomic Ed said:


> Pick up a JBS manifold and I'll clean it up for ya. No charge.


 I got really disappointed with JBS not owning up to the bugs in the design and looking to fix them. I have being trying to get Issam's attention about his prototype iconel version of 034, so if that hits a dead end, I'll settle to JBS and maybe take you up your offer on the cleaning. 




Chuckmeister87 said:


> I see your GoPro, but no videos posted. Give us a taste of a ride in your car.


 I had a few in my old Motorsport build thread, so I'll see what I can dig up for you Chuck. The videos were hosted by my co-driver so I'm not sure if they're still alive. 




ModsTTand said:


> at last ur going to have all ur stuff in one thread . thank you
> 
> sub'ed and fav'ed ....best of luck


 :beer:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

jbrehm said:


> Love to have all your innovations in one thread, Max! You'll probably get banned now for being too useful for Vortex :laugh:
> 
> What's your take on the AWIC for a daily? I really want to switch to one to clear up some space for some much needed cooling ducting in the lower grills, and I'd like to have the option of adding ice for the track since my engine bay gets _very_ heat soaked in hot weather.


 No more banning for me, I'm running out of ideas for new screen names :laugh: 

AWIC performance is awesome and even with my somewhat basic home made setup, I get results that would have never been possible with an air-to-air setup. With that said, I can't say for sure how suitable it is for daily driving; choice of components and how well the system was thought out, will play a big role on reliability (mainly pump life). I don't drive my car enough anymore to have a proper judgement on how well the pump I'm using will hold up at continuous duty on a daily basis. 

Same thing goes for other pumps, they might do well for a couple hours of duties every now and then, but die in a few months if used on a daily basis. Another thing is where the pump is placed in relation to the rest of the components, and the overall system pressure. These pumps hate to suck and last a lot longer when they are pushing fluid. Pump head pressure also play a role in pump life, so if you're doing it, plan to not have any restricting lines and fittings (everything else should flow better than the inlet and outlet of the pump to avoid straining it). IMO, if everything is well put together with these few things in mind, I don't see why it can't be done reliably. If manufacturers can pull it off, so can we without the budget and packaging restrictions that they face.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> No more banning for me, I'm running out of ideas for new screen names :laugh:
> 
> AWIC performance is awesome and even with my somewhat basic home made setup, I get results that would have never been possible with an air-to-air setup. With that said, I can't say for sure how suitable it is for daily driving; choice of components and how well the system was thought out, will play a big role on reliability (mainly pump life). I don't drive my car enough anymore to have a proper judgement on how well the pump I'm using will hold up at continuous duty on a daily basis.
> 
> Same thing goes for other pumps, they might do well for a couple hours of duties every now and then, but die in a few months if used on a daily basis. Another thing is where the pump is placed in relation to the rest of the components, and the overall system pressure. These pumps hate to suck and last a lot longer when they are pushing fluid. Pump head pressure also play a role in pump life, so if you're doing it, plan to not have any restricting lines and fittings (everything else should flow better than the inlet and outlet of the pump to avoid straining it). IMO, if everything is well put together with these few things in mind, I don't see why it can't be done reliably. If manufacturers can pull it off, so can we without the budget and packaging restrictions that they face.


 
Max, 

You can try to get your hands on a Toyota Tundra TRD supercharger pump. I will try to grab some part #'s off it next time I have my old mans truck around for moving things. But that is for a large displacement SC with ~2.5 gal holding capacity. He has over 30k on the thing without an issue. So for track and street use it might be a good use. The other pump that you might try out would be from a Ford Lightning Supercharged, those are popular with the VRT and that is what Tony @ EPL used on his 1.8T European Challenge car.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> Max,
> 
> You can try to get your hands on a Toyota Tundra TRD supercharger pump. I will try to grab some part #'s off it next time I have my old mans truck around for moving things. But that is for a large displacement SC with ~2.5 gal holding capacity. He has over 30k on the thing without an issue. So for track and street use it might be a good use. The other pump that you might try out would be from a Ford Lightning Supercharged, those are popular with the VRT and that is what Tony @ EPL used on his 1.8T European Challenge car.


 Noted, thanks!!! I will definitely give the TRD Tundra a try when my pumps (I bought two of them) kick the bucket. The one I'm using now is also on the loud side as it totally covers my inline Bosh 044 whine. For the price with warranty, self priming, continuous duty capability, and flow rate, it was not a bad choice to get me started, but the noise is not for everyone (I wouldn't be able to take it on a daily basis), and I have no idea how long it'll last.


----------



## steve-o 16v GLI (Jun 26, 2005)

Hey max I see you have spots reserved for more info. Id be interested to know what clutch/FW setup your running. I recently bought an 04 225 roadster that I have since been slowly upgrading and the clutch is the next big maintenance expense left. :thumbup: glad you finally have a thread to document the whole car!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> dogbone delete


Do whatttttttt?


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

I've got some photos to share. This is a fun car to drive


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

steve-o 16v GLI said:


> Hey max I see you have spots reserved for more info. Id be interested to know what clutch/FW setup your running. I recently bought an 04 225 roadster that I have since been slowly upgrading and the clutch is the next big maintenance expense left. :thumbup: glad you finally have a thread to document the whole car!


Steve, the clutch setup will be documented in this thread very soon. It is not an off-the-shelf kit and everything was custom built to keep engagement and modulation user friendly while being able to grab gobs of TQ. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Do whatttttttt?


Yup, I don't have such a thing in my car anymore  . What I'm running is a prototype from one of the respected companies in the 1.8t world. They have it designed for their 1000 HP shop car and only fitted on their car and mine. I don't know how much of it they want out in the public yet, so if you want I can give you info via PM or emails.


----------



## steve-o 16v GLI (Jun 26, 2005)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Steve, the clutch setup will be documented in this thread very soon. It is not an off-the-shelf kit and everything was custom built to keep engagement and modulation user friendly while being able to grab gobs of TQ. :beer:


:thumbup: pretty much what Im looking for. Dont really wana dump a g+ into a clutch/fw setup thats gonna be finnicky for a dd. I thought I remembered you posting somewhere that it was custom made for you. Ill keep my eye out for the update.:beer:


----------



## Kacz07 (Mar 4, 2012)

How big is the S4 MAF? Link to purchase?


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

225 maf = 3" od, 2.75" in, s4 maf = 3.25" od, 3" id


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yup, I don't have such a thing in my car anymore  . What I'm running is a prototype from one of the respected companies in the 1.8t world. They have it designed for their 1000 HP shop car and only fitted on their car and mine. I don't know how much of it they want out in the public yet, so if you want I can give you info via PM or emails.


So you didn't delete it, you have another solid version.  PM the details, good sir.


----------



## jbrehm (May 16, 2006)

Copy me on that PM! Even with BFI mounts all around, my engine still moves more than I'd like...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Kacz07 said:


> How big is the S4 MAF? Link to purchase?


It's the bigger S4 housing that I'm using, the sensor itself is still the OEM 225 sensor. The dimensions posted by Eric are correct (everything is from Audi's part bin). :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> So you didn't delete it, you have another solid version.  PM the details, good sir.


Oh yes, it's deleted! There is no actual pendulum mount to be found and you'll get it with the details/ pics as soon as I get to my laptop.:beer:



jbrehm said:


> Copy me on that PM! Even with BFI mounts all around, my engine still moves more than I'd like...


With this, you'd have to twist the frame to get pendulum movement. Details coming your way as well!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> It's the bigger S4 housing that I'm using, the sensor itself is still the OEM 225 sensor. The dimensions posted by Eric are correct (everything is from Audi's part bin). :beer:


Bigger would be the huge V8 one then, not the 2.7TT. 



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Oh yes, it's deleted! There is no actual pendulum mount to be found and you'll get it with the details/ pics as soon as I get to my laptop.:beer:


Well it may not be a "mount," but if there's something there I don't see how you deleted it. I guess I'll patiently await your info.  My black TT is getting more attention these days and I'll be up and running hopefully this spring so looking into future plans. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

> Bigger would be the huge V8 one then, not the 2.7TT.


I mean bigger than stock... and yes, the 2.7 housing is used and not the V8 version.




> Well it may not be a "mount," but if there's something there I don't see how you deleted it. I guess I'll patiently await your info.  My black TT is getting more attention these days and I'll be up and running hopefully this spring so looking into future plans. :thumbup:


Technically, you're right since there is something in place to stop pendulum motion.

" * dogbone * mount delete with substitution" is a better description for you.


----------



## Kacz07 (Mar 4, 2012)

Nice. Thanks. I just picked up an R32 MAF, which seems bigger. Got it from a guy who said his friend uses one on his 225 and it's def bigger. Guessing it's the same as the S4.


----------



## KN78 (Feb 2, 2010)

Beautiful.


----------



## deltaP (Jul 26, 2011)

opcorn:


----------



## deltaP (Jul 26, 2011)

Can you share more about your awic? Do you have a front mounted aw rad?
or do youhave a chilled reservoir? Iamgoing to the build a system with a fmaw rad with enough volume to properly cool the air charge based on a 94front celica turbo intercooled system ST205.7


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Technically, you're right since there is something in place to stop pendulum motion.
> 
> " * dogbone * mount delete with substitution" is a better description for you.


best description: a man's dogbone mount

Second description: Take rubber and replace with metal.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

deltaP said:


> Can you share more about your awic? Do you have a front mounted aw rad?
> or do youhave a chilled reservoir? Iamgoing to the build a system with a fmaw rad with enough volume to properly cool the air charge based on a 94front celica turbo intercooled system ST205.7


Clay, I'll be sending you a PM reply with more details about your questions on AWIC, but I run a front mounted heat exchanger. It's relatively small (12"x14") but I went all out to keep airflow consistently high over it. I have my OEM fans pulling air at high speed behind the heat exchanger at low speed. On long highways drives, the fans are not "on" because airflow is naturally high, so it's not needed.

I had plans to experiment with a second heat exchanger placed in one the SMIC locations and incorporate a trunk mounted beer keg into the loop to serve as heat sink, but seeing how efficient the system is, at low fluid volume but with high fluid/ air flow, I'm starting to reconsider. I have yet to see any heat soaking of the fluid because it is consistently being cooled with all the airflow I'm forcing through the heat exchanger.

A few pointers:

- keep fluid flow high and pressure low. Try not to downsize anywhere with fittings, bends etc. Whatever the OD on your pump inlet/outlet should remain constant throughout the system (also avoid unecessary bends).

- have the shortest line from heat exchanger outlet (cold side) to the pump then the core. This will ensure the most efficient use of the cooled fluid.

- have your pump lower than its feed source so it's gravity feed. These pumps in general hate to suck and do a better job a pushing fluid.

- make sure your heat exchanger inlet/outlet are horizontally place at the top. This will guarantee maximum efficiency and zero trapped air pockets.

- don't use more core than what you need. Most common mistake with AWIC is people choose oversize core that they don't have the capacity to keep up with in terms of fluid cooling.




Heat exchanger used


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DougLoBue said:


> best description: a man's dogbone mount
> 
> Second description: Take rubber and replace with metal.


It's pretty stiff!


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

*Another track TT.*
Hopefully Marcus will not object to me sharing my track TT.

H&R RSS Clubsports with higher-rate springs.
Black Forest adjustable rear anti-roll bar.
No front anti-roll bar.
Custom 4-wheel Wilwood brake system with 4-piston calipers and 2-piece rotors.
Front brake ducting to the front spoiler.
Carbon APR SCCA-spec rear wing.
"RS4" chin spoiler with custom front splitter
FWD with TT 225 engine running 26lbs of boost and FMIC.
Unitronic wideband MAF-less 630cc tune.
Custom velocity stack intake.
3-inch turbo-back exhaust.
Peloquin LSD and Southbend stage 3 clutch.
Valeo 3-row radiator and Mocal spoiler-ducted oil cooler.
Poly bushings at all pick-up points
SPC camber/caster-adjustable strut mounts..
A/C, radio and emissions delete.
Corbeau Forza racing bucket seats.
Rear seat delete.
BFG R1 on OZ Superleggera's (dry).
Dunlop Direzza Star-spec on BBS RD (wet/street).
NASA TTB approved.

http://public.fotki.com/Late-Apex/ttracecar/


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

^^^ No problem at all Steve, I actually welcome other real track TT to share their setup! We compare notes all the time in the background, so this could be the perfect place to share the valuable chats with the rest of the community. :beer::beer::beer:


----------



## Charlie_M (Mar 23, 2011)

Late__Apex said:


> *Another track TT.*
> 
> FWD with TT 225 engine running 26lbs of boost and FMIC.


Was FWD a design decision, or did you just start with what you had? I guess the trade-off depends on what tracks you have in mind. (Or maybe tracks vs cones ...)


----------



## Charlie_M (Mar 23, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> -FFE solid aluminum engine mount, FFE delrin transmission mount and dogbone delete





Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ...but again my very own TT was my wife's daily driver for years, although she would not come near it now (just idling, this "chick car" would vibrate most chick into an orgasm).


Added benefit ??


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Charlie_M said:


> Added benefit ??


Charlie, this brings a very direct connection between powertrain and chassis! It may not appear like something drastic to most, but once you get to feel the dynamic difference in how various inputs are transferred, it is a very nice improvement in terms of performance.

Although this is a great step for track performance, I would not recommend this to anyone that doesn't have that as their main priority. The vibration at idle and raw feel totally kills the refinement and OEM nature of the car. Personally, I wouldn't be able to take a car like this on a daily basis.


----------



## Charlie_M (Mar 23, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Charlie, this brings a very direct connection between powertrain and chassis!


Yeah I know. Sorry, I should use smileys more often  ... I was referring to your other comment, thinking maybe it could help the guys in the other thread arguing about whether the TT or B5 S4 is a better chick car.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Charlie_M said:


> Was FWD a design decision, or did you just start with what you had? I guess the trade-off depends on what tracks you have in mind. (Or maybe tracks vs cones ...)


Weight. 

It affects many factors including classing. Lower weight helps in all aspects of car performance - cornering, braking, etc, while AWD benefits are limited, primarily corner exit and in wet conditions. Admittedly, the VW-based rear beam axle is a poor design from a handling perspective, but the rears don't help much on a FWD car, anyway.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Charlie_M said:


> Yeah know. Sorry, I should use smileys more often  ... I was referring to your other comment, thinking maybe it could help the guys in the other thread arguing about whether the TT or B5 S4 is a better chick car.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Late__Apex said:


> Weight.
> 
> It affects many factors including classing. Lower weight helps in all aspects of car performance - cornering, braking, etc, while AWD benefits are limited, primarily corner exit and in wet conditions. Admittedly, the VW-based rear beam axle is a poor design from a handling perspective, but the rears don't help much on a FWD car, anyway.


With your class restrictions - can you convert the rear beam to independent and let the wheels spin on their own? Although a little heavier - I would think the more balanced weight distribution of the AWD be a benefit in itself.

Nice car BTW :thumbup:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

All_Euro said:


> With your class restrictions - can you convert the rear beam to independent and let the wheels spin on their own? ...


That is what Don Istook did with his Continental Tire Series TT. He took a Quattro car, removed the rear differential and then ran the car as FWD with the independent rear suspension. Fine for a pro car but overkill for a budget build like mine.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Late__Apex said:


> *Another track TT.*
> Hopefully Marcus will not object to me sharing my track TT.
> 
> H&R RSS Clubsports with higher-rate springs.
> ...


:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Had some nice functional features added tonight to the car by my buddy Gonzo. Some of you may or may not have seen/heard about Gonzo Tuning but it gets my seal of approval. On an engine that is getting ignored by the big tuning names that moved on to newer platforms, its refreshing to see guys like Gonzo still working at innovating for us. If you're looking to get chipped, I'd suggest you put Gonzo Tuning as a solid option. 

Now back to my car, this is what Gonzo implemented for me on my old school file remotely (all I had to do is link him to my laptop, plug the VCDS cable and turn-on the ignition): 

-* Stationary rev limiter* (set at 5K per my request... Lord knows how bad I needed this) 

-* Dynamic rev limiter bumped from 6900 to 7100* 

-* Delete of throttle cut on brake/throttle overlap*. This is so instrumental to my auto-x driving technique that relies on left-foot-braking to keep to turbo spooled and save time on pedal transition. I had to re-learn how to autocross with this stupid feature in the TT, needless to say that this thing was very frustrating to work around when your driving habits have become reflexes. I can't wait to be able to keep my foot deep in the throttle while braking and then shoot out of a turn with a spooled turbo like I got accustomed to with the DSMs and EVOs 

- *Write out of the deleted emissions*. I will miss my CEL companion but its nice to have light pop-up if something else is happening. 

Next autocross should be lots of fun! Thanks Gonzo for giving the cool functional things that made me want to spend on maestro prematurely. Now I can sit back and wait for all the key maps to be unlocked (if that ever happens) and for maestro to be sorted before spending on something that's still in experimental stages. :beer::beer::beer: 

*Edit* I also added these to the water injection setup: 

*Inline pre-filter and direct port dedicated solenoid placed right before the distribution block.*


----------



## ModsTTand (Jul 8, 2009)

Dear MAx, 

This Water injection setup of urs makes my synapses goes on overlap  if i may ask this : why the extra solenoid and and functionality ? 

Whats ur opinion Gonzo as a tuner ?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

ModsTTand said:


> Dear MAx,
> 
> This Water injection setup of urs makes my synapses goes on overlap  if i may ask this : why the extra solenoid and and functionality ?
> 
> Whats ur opinion Gonzo as a tuner ?


 Solenoids are used in water injection systems to control fluid flow on an on/off fashion. The controller is used to power a solenoid(s) to allow or stop flow to the nozzles. Ideally, you want a solenoid dedicated to each main line and placed as close to the nozzle as possible. This guarantees that no water/meth trapped in the system is sucked-in by vacuum. I use this one right before the distribution block to target the nozzles in the manifold. 

As far as Gonzo as tuner, I feel that he is on par with the big names tunes and offers the possibility of implementing some nice features to add functionality to the tune. Personally, after chatting with him back and forth, I will say that he has perfect understanding of the complicated inner workings of the ME7 and knows the proper strategies (there are always multiple ones) to get a solid tune. As far as I can tell, he is using the right strategy to modify fueling, something that some tuners have struggled with in the past. He takes care of all the boost limits and have a sound boost control strategy. I will say that Gonzo Tuning has grown into something really good from his early days as a tuner. I would recommend him to anyone as a top contender for a "stage flash".


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ...all I had to do is link him to my laptop, plug the VCDS cable and turn-on the ignition...


 This is really interesting. A big issue I've always had with the custom tunes available is being reliant of their dealers or the expensive flashing devices. 

Thanks for sharing this :beer:


----------



## ModsTTand (Jul 8, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Solenoids are used in water injection systems to control fluid flow on an on/off fashion. The controller is used to power a solenoid(s) to allow or stop flow to the nozzles. Ideally, you want a solenoid dedicated to each main line and placed as close to the nozzle as possible. This guarantees that no water/meth trapped in the system is sucked-in by vacuum. I use this one right before the distribution block to target the nozzles in the manifold.


 Thank you for clearing matter out , I was concerned about trapped water getting sucked by the vacuum on off-boost and so could multiple-Solenoids and having them close enough injectors eliminate such thing when installing WI setups and u just cleared that out.:beer: 



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> As far as Gonzo as tuner, I feel that he is on par with the big names tunes and offers the possibility of implementing some nice features to add functionality to the tune. Personally, after chatting with him back and forth, I will say that he has perfect understanding of the complicated inner workings of the ME7 and knows the proper strategies (there are always multiple ones) to get a solid tune. As far as I can tell, he is using the right strategy to modify fueling, something that some tuners have struggled with in the past. He takes care of all the boost limits and have a sound boost control strategy. I will say that Gonzo Tuning has grown into something really good from his early days as a tuner. I would recommend him to anyone as a top contender for a "stage flash".


  
After reading ur Opinion I guess some of our beloved members will go easy on Him and give him some space to grow/evolve even more.opcorn:


----------



## deltaP (Jul 26, 2011)




----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

deltaP said:


> I believe the name Gonzo might cause concern. If the company were called GTP Engineering, gonzo tuning and programming, it might help---


 I think it's 'Gonzo Tuning', but why can't a guy use his name or whatever for a company. As long as the product does its job and there is good customer relations, that's what should count. It's like the Madmax stuff, if the product is sound well backed, I don't think people care about the silly name. 

The majority of people giving Gonzo a hard time in the technical section are not even potential buyers. Any new kid on the block would get a hard time there, it's just the nature of the beast. I admit, I have been hard on him a few times myself, but that's because I felt that he kind of backed off from engaging into technical dicussions/debates (I understand his position as he's not trying to get any established member ticked off, when his goal is to establish respect and set a name for his business). 

Hopefully some of the loud voices on the technical forum, would follow my example and learn to give him a genuine chance to prove his worth. I'm sure that, like me, they won't be disappointed if they can get over themselves.


----------



## steve-o 16v GLI (Jun 26, 2005)

Good to hear the gonzo tune is up to your standards. I really felt he got a crappy welcome to the community. Lots of trash talkers but everyone who actually used his tunes seemed happy. I was debating doin his tune since he's not that far away and def an awesome price for what you get.


----------



## deltaP (Jul 26, 2011)

I will be sending him an IM. I have been reading his posts and I like what I see. I have also read from people who have worked with him and the reviews are great!! :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

With the 2012 SCCA Solo Nationals in the book, this is the car to beat in the newly restructured B-Street-Prepared (BSP). The class is populated mostly with S2000, M3, 350Z, and a few Corvettes. The car is well prepped and driven by Jason Uyeda:

- 18X11 wheels with 285/295 Hoosiers (as much tire as I do, but at least 500 lbs lighter)
- Low weight and CG (2500 lbs or less for BSP prepped cars)
- Decent power with ITB (300 WHP but only 220 WTQ so it's a momentum car vs point-n-shoot like the TT)
- Great handling (much better than the TT at least)
- Low traction compared to an AWD car like the TT (this is where I believe I can get the advantage to allow me to challenge on paper)












































I really feel that I can challenge for the win in this redesigned class. Being under the radar (not voluntarily) for the past year has paid off, I really didn't want the TT to be classed in ASP with the other AWD turbos and other potent cars (Evo, ST_I_, Solstice/Sky, Cayman S etc). If I can put down 350 AWHP and 400 AWHP safely and consistently, get the car in the low 3000 lbs (or even sub-3000), have a rear LSD fitted, I have a pretty solid chance on paper. I need to quit chasing power at this point because I'm pretty close to my mark, and focus on putting the car on a diet (much more expensive than making power on a turbo car). 

In the "to do" list for next season:
- Corbau Clubman seats
- Aftermarket airbagless steering wheel
- Radio/speaker/sub/disc changer removal (I know I should get the AC out too, but can't make peace with it yet. Please someone convince me  )
- Rear Peloquin LSD
- High flow exhaust manifold (fully ported/extrude honed stock unit, or cast aftermaket)


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Intake Mani!


----------



## seth_3515 (Dec 26, 2008)

Be sure to post your weight savings! I'm very interested in what you come up with and if there is something I missed. I have pulled out everything including the a/c. Still have full interior for the front though. I shaved some parts of the dash with the heavy metal backing and lost a few pounds there as well. I haven't got to weight the car for a precise number, just adding up what I lose. The exhaust had a crossmember (I'm fwd so I don't know I you have it) that weighed a good amount I was able to replace with some ingenuity and a welder. Next step is a Valero 3-row front radiator and custom fan setup. I didn't run a full exhaust, just went with a side exit to reduce amount of piping. I just need the most important weight reduction, lightweight rims to get rid of some unsprung weight. I'm really interested to see what you come up with. I tried to lose weight in places that wouldn't completely shatter the integrity of the TT. Interior wise I just removed the rear seat and relocated my betters there to get it as close to the CG as possible until I can get it corner balanced and will move it to the appropriate spot then.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Intake Mani!


Adam, while I got you on the hook what's you're take on this: 
I saw someone pick up a bunch of WHP on the dyno with a SEM on a small port head (transition spacers to mate the head and 70 mm TB). However, he a also lost significant WTQ in the process (from onset to midrange) and that's a bad tradeoff for my application. His car was a VW and also had cams, so not apple to apple to apple comparison, but got me thinking. I looked, but never found good straightforward data on a car with stock turbo, SP head, and throttle body. Also what would you say is the appropriate TB size to run?


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Adam, while I got you on the hook what's you're take on this:
> I saw someone pick up a bunch of WHP on the dyno with a SEM on a small port head (transition spacers to mate the head and 70 mm TB). However, he a also lost significant WTQ in the process (from onset to midrange) and that's a bad tradeoff for my application. His car was a VW and also had cams, so not apple to apple to apple comparison, but got me thinking. I looked, but never found good straightforward data on a car with stock turbo, SP head, and throttle body. Also what would you say is the appropriate TB size to run?


Just my .02c. I would never sacrifice torque for a HP gain in an Autocross car, unless the car was a High RPM, lightweight car such as a Miata or Honda...and the HP gain was very substantial.

Regarding TB size..for Auotocross I wouldn't go more more than 10 mm over stock. Anything larger messes up the mid range driveabilty, and that is all important for our use


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

seth_3515 said:


> Be sure to post your weight savings! I'm very interested in what you come up with and if there is something I missed. I have pulled out everything including the a/c. Still have full interior for the front though. I shaved some parts of the dash with the heavy metal backing and lost a few pounds there as well. I haven't got to weight the car for a precise number, just adding up what I lose. The exhaust had a crossmember (I'm fwd so I don't know I you have it) that weighed a good amount I was able to replace with some ingenuity and a welder. Next step is a Valero 3-row front radiator and custom fan setup. I didn't run a full exhaust, just went with a side exit to reduce amount of piping. I just need the most important weight reduction, lightweight rims to get rid of some unsprung weight. I'm really interested to see what you come up with. I tried to lose weight in places that wouldn't completely shatter the integrity of the TT. Interior wise I just removed the rear seat and relocated my betters there to get it as close to the CG as possible until I can get it corner balanced and will move it to the appropriate spot then.


Will do some in-detail comparisons when the seats arrive, I'll take the radio/speakers and do the seat as a single weight reduction project. 

_
(meant to post in your build thread about spring rates the other day, but ran out of time. I see that you plan on trying different rates on your rear coils, it won't work well because the shocks can't control much of an increase in rate due to their narrow valving. That's the reason why I tried to warn you against them in the beginning. IIRC, a 1k bumb in rate is all they will control properly. You'd have to get them revalved or move to a better shock, which pretty easy in the rear.)_


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Just my .02c. I would never sacrifice torque for a HP gain in an Autocross car, unless the car was a High RPM, lightweight car such as a Miata or Honda...and the HP gain was very substantial.


Trust me, I know better! Everything I've done to date is to boost TQ onset and keep it as fat as possible throughout the powerband. My mantra has been "I could care less about HP up top if it costs me a single foot pound where it really counts", and it's not about to change. My problem is that, I have not seen conclusive testing on various intake manifolds available nowadays as single variables... and can't afford to buy a few to test unless they are sponsored. I have heard that SEM unit retained TQ figures, but the dyno test I witnessed proved otherwise (although on a car with cams and a 70 mm TB). I am asking Adam because he is really versed when it comes to making power on a 20v, and maybe he can point out something that I'm overlooking.



Chickenman35 said:


> Regarding TB size..for Auotocross I wouldn't go more more than 10 mm over stock. Anything larger messes up the mid range driveabilty, and that is all important for our use


Here again, I'm asking Adam because he would know better than most what would work best, and probably tried them all. My plan was to run stock or maybe a 65 mm at the most, but I guess that's something I can test out pretty easily in a weekend of autocrossing (just swap back and forth with appropriate software tweaks, and let track feel and the clock sort it out). 

I'm getting excited to go mix it up with the S2Ks and M3s (they finished 2nd, 3rd, 4th behind the Honda, so can't be written out). For some reason, I don't feel shaken by them like I used to with the miatas in CSP. BSP's combined time for both courses at Nationals was 125.352 for the top dog, while the CSP champ was running 120s combined time (enough the clean ASP with the EVOs and even SSP with the Z06, Lotus, viper and Ferrari). It amazes me that the TT was ever classed with the miatas when they are clearly in a league of their own when it comes to tracking and autocross. :screwy:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Probably the wrong spot to discuss this but with Chickenman and Adam around I'll put it out for discussion. I have gone to great length to add caster in my car and gain dynamic camber. The results were as expected as I only needed -2.6 of front static compensation to get perfect temperature spread across the 295 Hoo-Hoo. At full load, with the extra caster, I am also getting a picture perfect perpendicular tire profile (contact patch not being lifted by camber going positive at the end of the dynamic curve). 

All that is nice and cute, but after my first set of 295 front Hoosiers and despite the ideal temp spread, the outer edges seems to take a lot more beating still. My only theory is that even if the whole thread width is remaining flat, the outer portion of the tire gets loaded more/faster with weight transfer (making it do more work). My theory seems to have holes in it because this should have impacted temperatures as well (at least on paper). 

Hoosier themselves recommend at least -3 to -3.5 of static camber for the square shouldered A6. The practice shows that most nationally competitive guys run -4 degrees or more on McCrapson front suspensions. Would this mean that I would need to go back to suboptimal static compensation angles to make the most out of them? I can easily add the camber but does a suboptimal camber curving worth it to keep a tire happy? I never had this problem with the V710 rounded shoulders but like the extra grip and transition speed of the Hoosier much better (295 is also ideal for a fitment and gearing compromise). What gives?


----------



## babarber (Nov 3, 2008)

theories and paper specs for alignment are good and all but the only true way to determine what you need is lap times

just add static camber until your lap times start to go the other way


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

babarber said:


> just add static camber until your lap times start to go the other way


I wish it was that simple 

Remember, my roots is in karting and road racing, the Solo thing is just the new hobby. What you described there, is basic "track tuning" which is specific to whatever track you did the testing in (within a certain range of conditions). This is common practice in road racing when you want to optimize for a track, but we're talking about a Solo car here. Solo is unique in many ways because you never get the same conditions or course ever. 

Say you were to test and apply your suggested formula for a slalom intensive runaway type course, the optimal camber setting would be totally off for a course with equal use of sweepers and transitions. Besides that, the need to optimize tire wear comes into play as well. So overall, tuning in Solo require some compromising to find that happy medium that will work in the greatest range of course combinations and also keep tire wear acceptable. This is what I'm asking about... kind of thinking if it make sense to give up optimal camber curving to help the specific Hoosier A6 work and last more efficiently over their usable life. Keep the inputs coming, they are greatly appreciated! :beer:


----------



## babarber (Nov 3, 2008)

i never really thought of it that way 
it works for my local club because most of the courses use the same elements just set up in different order, etc


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Autocrossing is a unique discipline that deviates from the normal practices of chassis tuning familiar to Road Racers and Track Day runners.

Because of the short course and violent transitions made in Autocrossing, normal tire data logging can lead you astray.

Setting camber angles by evening out Tire temperatures is not necessarily the optimum setup on an Autocross car. You seldom get courses long enough ( except at Nationals in a hot climate ) to stabilize the carcass temperature. Surface temperature readings ( as with an Infrared gun ) can be very inaccurate. Carcass readings with a proper tire probe is better, but again, the run times are so short that the tire carcass seldom reaches it's optimal range or even gets close to an even heat distribution.

For Autocross you have to give the car and tire what it likes. Often this means running more negative camber ( especially with Mac strut cars ) than what Skid pad testing and testing on a Road Course would indicate. 

The violent steering transitions during an Autocross often EXCEED the peak G readings of steady state cornering, that the same car can achieve on a Road Course. Road Racing also uses less steering lock and slip angles than Autocross. Transitional weight loading on the outside tire can also peak at a much higher value than when Road Racing. This all places additional load on the outside shoulder of the tire. Load that may not show up as heat ( because of the short time involved ) on a tire probe but it is still a "scrubbing" and weight load applied to the tire shoulder. And the only way to make the tire live is to decrease that outside load on the tire. Usually by adding extra Negative camber. EGOD and Scallops from Hell were evils solely inflicted on Autocross tires ( for the most part )

With Autocross, what you essentially have, is a cold rigid carcass, being thrown into VIOLENT maneuvers at maximum loadings for a very short period of time. With this criteria in mind, you have to make compromises...the normal " Text Book " methods do not apply 100%.

End of part 1:


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Part 2:

*Important Edit: Changed all references of Narrower " Taller " tire to Narrower Higher Aspect Ratio tire. Taller was a poor choice of words. Comparison of wide tire vs narrow tires would be with same overall diameters. Changes only in aspect ratio and possible rim sizing ( IE: 18 > 17 >16 )* Twas late at nite.....


Specific to Autocross setups. An Autocross car has to be able to make extremely quick transitional changes. A Road Race car with a " proper " Autocross setup would be, and should be... bloody scary to drive. Waaayy too pointy and " on the nose ".

But the Autocross setup, does pose some interesting challenges in tire selection. Much depends on the type of course you run ( Length, asphalt, concrete etc ) and *the climate* where you live. Cars in the Northern States and Canada cannot run as wide a tire ( particularly fronts on a RWD car ) as cars in the Southern climates. You simply can't get the tire's tread warmed up fast enough. ( Forget about warming the carcass. You better learn to drive on cold rigid carcasses if you live in the Pacific NorthWest ).

Bigger..is not always better. Particularly on the front tires of a RWD and AWD car. John Ames always tended to run a slightly narrower and ( Higher Aspect Ratio ) tire combination than his competition when he was campaigning the Mustang ( Mac strut car with poor camber curves )

Here is "some" of the reasoning. 

1: Braking sensitivity. A very wide tire ( EG: 315/35 x17 or 315/30x 18 ) has an extremely stiff carcass. This gives a high spring rate to the tire. With violent braking done in Autocross, the tire is less forgiving to lockup. Now...ABS will prevent lockup...but a narrower/HAR tire ( 265/45 x16 or 275/40x 17 ) will often stop quicker, even _with_ ABS.

The narrower and HAR tire has less internal spring rate, making it is less prone to rebound ( a tire carcass is undamped ). The narrower tire's tread surface will heat quicker under braking and the narrower tire carcass will tend to elongate and flow into the surface, creating a LARGER overall contact patch than a stiff wide tire. The narrow/HAR tire is much more forgiving to changing camber angles under braking than a wide low aspect ratio tire. All of these differences are exaggerated as the ambient temperature and course temperature drops.

2: Slow speed turn-in. A very wide and short sidewall tire can have slower turn-in response than a narrower/taller tire. Again this is due to the inflexibility of the sidewall and the high internal spring rate of the tire itself. The tire tread temperature also plays a big part, just as in braking.

Where the situation really gets bad with a very wide front tire is when you get into things like scrub radius and camber jacking in turns. Most production cars these days are designed with zero or negative scrub radius on the front. Wider rims and tires usually force you into using a combination with more offset..thus increasing positive scrub radius. This completely buggers the suspension tuning of the front. The more positive scrub radius that you have, the more problems you have. Increased sensitivity to camber jacking in turns. Increased corner scrub ( increased drag and wear on tire is never good ) Increased loadings on bearings and suspension components, including steering racks and PS pumps. 

Somewhere you have to find a happy " compromise " as Max mentioned. 

I ran 265x45 x16 V700 and V710's on my ESP Camaro car for years. I experimented with V710 315/35x 17's one year. Conclusion at end of season. 265's performed better under braking and slow corner turn-in. 315's were only better in high speed corners where 265's ran short of grip. The 265's put down more power on launch and slow speed corner exit as well. Mainly due to the flexibility of the HAR sidewall and the tread getting up to temperature faster ( NOTE: PNW ambient temps in the low 70 to low 80's range ). 

The car was one of the quickest Autocross and Hill climb ESP cars in the PNW when I campaigned it. I sold the car back in 2006. Had I kept it, I had come to the conclusion that I was running a bit short of grip in the rear for Hillclimbs and Road Race/Track Days. Had I kept the car, I was planning on stepping up to 275/40x17 fronts and 295/40x17 rears. The 315/35x17's had too limited of an operating range in regards to track configuration ( only faster in high speed corners such as at a FAST Road Course such as Portland International ) and they were too sensitive to low ambient temperatures ( useless under 75 -80f ambient ).


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

BTW..I've also run Yokohoma's and Hoosiers throughout the years...but that is another Looooonnnnng story.

Bottom line for me...Hoosiers are very good in a very narrow operating window. Lord help you if the weather got too cold ( below 75-80f ), or if the pits were a bit " dusty ", or if the surface isn't right ( Hoosier and smooth, hot, and clean asphalt = :thumbup: Hoosiers on anything else = :thumbdown: ). 

And you better have a fat wallet to run Hoosiers. BFG's, Yoko's and Kumho's...you could run those till the cord showed. They'd get progressively slower....but Hoosiers ( when I was running them, Circa A3's and A4's ) would go off from one weekend to the next. Just like the Pirelli F1 tires...they would " fall off the cliff " and the tire was useless...with about 50% of it's tread life remaining. 

Just my .02c :wave: :beer:


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

BTW. EGOD ( Evil Groove of Doom ) and SFH ( Scallops from Hell ) were unusual tire wear patterns that occurred on BFG DOT tires. Purely due to design errors that BFG never really admitted. ( well they did after most of their engineers left to work for Kumho ).

Our car club ( VCMC ) has close sponsorship tie-ins with Kumho. We got to talk to the chief Kumho race tire engineer at our yearly end banquet and got a preview of the V710, long before they went "public" in 2003. 

Can't remember the guys name now...but he was an ex-BFG Tire Engineer. He was very forth coming and held us spellbound like kindergarten kids being read Hansel and Gretel.

The Kumho V700 carcass was a direct copy of the first generation BFG R1 ( 206 compound ). Kumho had to get something up and running fast, and the 1st gen BFG R1 was the best carcass that the BFG engineers felt that they ever built. The later asymmetrical designs were the an admitted disaster ( see EGOD and SFH )....by the engineers themselves!! The 1st gen BFG tire was a favorite of many experienced drivers and no wonder that the V700 VictoRacer felt exactly the same as the original R1. The carcass and the compounds used on the V700 VictoRacer were virtually identical to the 1st gen R1...only the tread pattern was changed so that BFG couldn't sue them!!

The V710 incorporated new compounds and carcass revisions developed since the the original R1 design. Part of the design criteria was that the tire must outperform the V700 in every aspect. Overall grip, hot and cold performance, adaptability to different surfaces, and and a product life that was consistent and cost effective to the average racer. One thing Kumho would not compromise on was the "feel" of the tire. That they wanted to be the same as the original design...built way back in the late 1980's.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Excellent posts as usual Richard, and Thanks for taking the time to put together elaborate answers to my question!

I have found my answer in your first post:



Chickenman35 said:


> Setting camber angles by evening out Tire temperatures is not necessarily the optimum setup on an Autocross car.
> 
> The violent steering transitions during an Autocross carcass often EXCEED the peak G readings of steady state cornering ... Transitional weight loading on the outside tire can also peak at a much higher value than when Road Racing. This all places additional load on the outside shoulder of the tire. *Load that may not show up as heat ( because of the short time involved ) on a tire probe but it is still a "scrubbing" and weight load applied to the tire shoulder.* And the only way to make the tire live is to decrease that outside load on the tire. Usually by adding extra Negative camber. EGOD and Scallops from Hell were evils solely inflicted on Autocross tires ( for the most part )


I had a feeling that the tires were calling for more static compensation and were happier operating at higher dynamic angles. However, my road racing instincts were blinding me into thinking that an evenly probed temperature spread meant gold. It wasn't until the first set of front Hoosiers corded on their outer portion that it all came to me. It was an experimental set for me, as I am an usual V710 customer that made the switch to Hoosier a season ago because they had the "perfect" sizing/height for the TT's weight and gearing (square shoulders were also appealing on a front heavy 3000+ lbs car on taller sidewalls of 17").

As you confirmed, the frequent quick transitions of Solo had the outer front tires scrubbing more than the rest as a result load spikes; but their duration were short enough to not necessarily show on the probe temp spread (it doesn't seems to be the case in the non-steering axle that I believe will still benefit from tuning on temperature). I am going to listen to what the tires are telling me and ignore the suboptimal spot of the camber curve that they want to operate in.

Right now, I am sitting at -2.6 degree of front static compensation. I am going for -4 degrees on my next set and see where that takes me in terms of tire wear. :beer::beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

To touch a bit on your part 2, I ran 315x17 V710s previously and the slower response compared to a somewhat narrower thread width seemed to make sense (this was my response-vs-overall grip compromise). Despite my previous success with Kumho, my goal was to start aiming at Nats which called for the switch to Hoosiers. As you mentioned, they do have a narrower window of operation and are a lot less forgiving with temperature, pressure, and camber angles. On top of that they do "fall of a cliff" at about 20-30 runs as opposed to the gradually tapering 710s. However, they offer a clear advantage on response and grip, on a fresh set, over everything else (obviously operating within the discussed parameters). Furthermore, Hoosier had the perfect size and height to work with my real estate and gearing, so it made them the smart choice despite the heavy hit on the budget, only to get a truly effective 20-30 runs. I feel that they are the ticket for this car once I get them fully sorted (I haven't nailed the optimal pressure range yet). Next season should be loads of fun!


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Yes..if you want to win the Nationals, the Hoosiers are your best bet. Wallet is going to take a pounding though 

Kumho is coming out with a replacement for the V710 in the near future... Now if I can just find the article 

Gonna PM you about some setup ideas with your car :beer:

Made some important changes in Post #2 regarding Higher Aspect Ratio with same overall diameter tire.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

^^^ :beer:

Yeah, the goal is to sneak up at Nationals and contend for a jacket. The car, in a much stiffer CSP class, a lot less power and prep, trophied at National tours and ProSolos 2 years ago. I'm hoping to head to Nats with only a tour and a Pro as real practice (even sandbag a bit there if necessary) and draw no attention to myself. Last thing I want is to have people writing letters to get the TT out of BSP and classed with the other AWD boost buggies in ASP.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Hey Max. Your danged PM box is full again!! :laugh: :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Hey Max. Your danged PM box is full again!! :laugh: :beer:


OOPS! Cleaned up for a couple of days!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Wow, I missed a lot. :laugh: Max, I wouldn't take away anything in terms of a comparison with cam changes as indicative of a manifold causing a drop in torque. Isolate the variables, as you already know. That said, it's hard to say what I'd go with on a throttle size, because A) is there a compressor map for the K04-02x floating around? and B) even if there was, you're so far off of it with your chemical cooling that I don't know how sound it would be to base flow rates from power output from it. The reality is you'd be staying small port head, and therefore small port manifold (those transition spacers are such a joke). Again, just like the dual tip 250 hp comments in the other thread, (and I know you already know this) removing restrictions from the intake path lets the turbo not work as hard to make the same pressures. Larger plenum and runners designed with the injector out of the charge path are going to give gains across the rpm range and not affect low end torque in a negative way, assuming the plenum isn't retarded large. In fact, it may allow boost threshold to be hit SOONER in the rpm range. The biggest variable, as you know, would be throttle size, but a few passes on the dyno with different throttles via adapter plates would tell you what you needed to know. That said, you seem to think fueling would need adjusting to fully realize what each throttle did, whereas I think WOT = WOT. My inner knowledge of ME7.5 has probably grown outdated as I stopped paying attention a few years ago. 

The only basis to go off that I know of is the forumla from Corky Bell's Maximum Boost regarding throttle size:

Velocity = CFM/(throttle cross sectional area in^2) X (1 min/60sec)/(1 ft/144 in^2)

This doesn't take into account airflow at different rpms obviously, so your midrange monster may not fit here, as this looks solely at peak power airflow rate. Now a graph could easily be created at different flow rates to see where it may or may not impact your engine. The only guideline given is to not exceed 300 ft/sec peak velocity. I think I have a 65mm Audi throttle that I'd be willing to donate though.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

After crunching a few numbers, a stock displacement motor running at 35 psi (I think that's the number I've seen you throw around lately, not sure if that is spike, midrange, at redline?), a volumetric efficiency of 100% (yes, I know this is a mystery number, but we are F/I so in reality, using boost a pressure ratio vs performance of the NA 20v 1.8 is a vague guess on CFM), and a 65mm throttle, this setup would just be bumping over 300 ft/sec velocity at 7K rpms. I'm guessing you are getting 35 psi in the midrange, but less at redline? A quick boost plot and a MAF log to convert to CFM would tell us with decent accuracy what size throttle to run. Let me know if you want the spreadsheet. :thumbup:


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

courtesy Doug from this old thread: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5383841-projected-hp-on-highly-modified-k04-application


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

:laugh: So yes, anything over 25 psi is off the map.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Wow, I missed a lot. :laugh: Max, I wouldn't take away anything in terms of a comparison with cam changes as indicative of a manifold causing a drop in torque. Isolate the variables, as you already know. That said, it's hard to say what I'd go with on a throttle size, because A) is there a compressor map for the K04-02x floating around? and B) even if there was, you're so far off of it with your chemical cooling that I don't know how sound it would be to base flow rates from power output from it. The reality is you'd be staying small port head, and therefore small port manifold (those transition spacers are such a joke). Again, just like the dual tip 250 hp comments in the other thread, (and I know you already know this) removing restrictions from the intake path lets the turbo not work as hard to make the same pressures. Larger plenum and runners designed with the injector out of the charge path are going to give gains across the rpm range and not affect low end torque in a negative way, assuming the plenum isn't retarded large. In fact, it may allow boost threshold to be hit SOONER in the rpm range. The biggest variable, as you know, would be throttle size, but a few passes on the dyno with different throttles via adapter plates would tell you what you needed to know. That said, you seem to think fueling would need adjusting to fully realize what each throttle did, whereas I think WOT = WOT. My inner knowledge of ME7.5 has probably grown outdated as I stopped paying attention a few years ago.
> 
> The only basis to go off that I know of is the forumla from Corky Bell's Maximum Boost regarding throttle size:
> 
> ...


Adam, my main concern is that the bottle neck with a small port head might only be the TB plate diameter. Based on the back of the envelope calculations I have done, the stock manifold might already be flowing more than the head can move from onset to midrange (3k being the onset, 5k the midrange, and a 7k redline, giving me an effective 4k powrband). To put it in perspective, highlighted below is the the ideal volumetric flow (volume of air ingested by our engine) in the meat of my powerband.

*We have 1.8l of displacement or 108.7 cubic inches. With the 4 strokes, we have the intake valve on a single cylinder opening once every two revolutions. I know you already know all that but I want to keep everyone in the loop, so every two revolutions our engine moves 108.7 CI*

So, we are moving:

(using this formula: RPM X CID / 1728 X 2)



94.61 CFM @ 3K
126.15 CFM @ 4K
157.69 CFM @ 5k
189.23 CFM @ 6K 
220.77 CFM @ 7k

This is at unrealistic ideal situatuations and not even taking into account volumetric efficiency. As you pointed out, there is no real way, but an educated guess to pinpoint the exact volumetric efficiency that we are operating at. Obviously we are not operating at 100% VE, and optimistically I'd like to think we are somewhere around or above 75% 

With this crude data in hand, we can compare it to known tests performed on a flow bench for various manifolds.

The OEM units flowed roughly at 28 psi
150-156 CFM across the board

SEM at 28" Hg
271-275 CFM

Dahlback at 28" Hg
159-164 CFM

ABD at 28" Hg
180-184 CFM

APR at 28" Hg
251-257 CFM

(there are two newcomers in IE and 034, I am not including them since they haven't been independently tested yet).

So my conclusion on paper is that, in my goldilock region of 3K to 5k, anything above a stock unit is going to loose TQ. It would take 6-7k rpm for most aftermarket units to start to shine, and at that point, not really worth it. What's your take on my crude calculations?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> After crunching a few numbers, a stock displacement motor running at 35 psi (I think that's the number I've seen you throw around lately, not sure if that is spike, midrange, at redline?), a volumetric efficiency of 100% (yes, I know this is a mystery number, but we are F/I so in reality, using boost a pressure ratio vs performance of the NA 20v 1.8 is a vague guess on CFM), and a 65mm throttle, this setup would just be bumping over 300 ft/sec velocity at 7K rpms. I'm guessing you are getting 35 psi in the midrange, but less at redline? A quick boost plot and a MAF log to convert to CFM would tell us with decent accuracy what size throttle to run. Let me know if you want the spreadsheet. :thumbup:


In 3rd gear it spikes around 36-37 psi and it tapers down at around 5k to about 25-26 psi at redline of 7k. I would love to take a glance at that spreadsheet of yours, and definitely will take you up your offer on that 65mm TB (just PM me what's needed to make it happen). :beer:




20v master said:


> :laugh: So yes, anything over 25 psi is off the map.


Compressor efficiency maps mean nothing to me anymore! 

They are nothing but a map showing projected flow numbers at various known efficiency levels. For everyone else to understand, the goal of the compressor wheel is to create pressure, nothing else. The efficiency map shows how much energy (in percentage) is used to create pressure/boost as opposed to creating heat. For example, a compressor operating at the "ideal" 75% efficiency island is using 75% of the energy (which comes btw from the exhaust driven or turbine wheel) to make pressure and the rest is used to create heat. This is where you get the temperature Delta between compressor inlet and outlet, the percentage of the compressor wheel used to create heat determines the temp variance between inlet and outlet. 

In my case, as long as I can make pressure (aka boost) I'm fine. The air temperature will be cooled down at great levels before it is used. It is not unusual for rally teams to create compressor efficiency maps that fits their applications. Just like me, they run way off the manufacturer's compressor map by maxing out the compressor's ability to make pressure, but use water injection and race fuel to get good usable cylinder air charge. Old rally trick or formula that is also implemented by the turbo autocrossers like myself. :thumbup:


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ( Snip )
> 
> Compressor efficiency maps mean nothing to me anymore!
> 
> In my case, as long as I can make pressure (aka boost) I'm fine. The air temperature will be cooled down at great levels before it is used. It is not unusual for rally teams to create compressor efficiency maps that fits their applications. Just like me, they run way off the manufacturer's compressor map by maxing out the compressor's ability to make pressure, but use water injection and race fuel to get good usable cylinder air charge. Old rally trick or formula that is also implemented by the turbo autocrossers like myself. :thumbup: (/Snip)


Yep...Max's case is a bit unique. Correct me if I'm wrong...but SCCA classing rules don't allow him to change the Turbo. That has to remain stock ( although I believe that you can port and polish the housings ). You're stuck with what you have to run.

So wind the piss out of the turbo...cool the exiting Lava with hardware and chemicals.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> * As you pointed out, there is no real way, but an educated guess to pinpoint the exact volumetric efficiency that we are operating at. Obviously we are not operating at 100% VE, and optimistically I'd like to think we are somewhere around or above 75%
> 
> What's your take on my crude calculations?*


*

My take is that forced induction engines can operate at VE's higher than 100%. The 100% is only relative to atmospheric pressure. Even at .75 but a PR of 2.5-3, whihc you are operating at during midrange rpms, you're still way over 100. I've seen you reference training on engine tuning, whereas my experience in tuning is just the hobby side, not my job (production and design liason). In your experience, is VE never over 100%, even on FI engines?

Edit: I just popped over and asked our R&D guy (who has 20 years experienc at GM before working here) and he's in agreement that it would be better to look at your actual flow rates from the MAF (assuming there is no scaling going on there, ask Gonzo) and not make assumptions based off NA VE.

Edit #2: You don't even apply VE to your calculated flow rates. If you used .75 or .8, you'd almost be below what the OEM manifold flows, even at 7K. And those flow rates for manifolds were done with no throttle attached, aka you're going to reduce inlet cross sectional area by a small percentage, and therefore affect flow through the manifold. I go back and forth between pitching you to try the SEM and holding it for my 180Q (there's already one on my stroker setup), but it may come down to sending it to you for testing with the throttle body. Dyno's (load bearing) don't lie.  The only problem there is you'd have to tap it for your w/m nozzles, which could be done and would force me to run w/m injection if you decided the manifold didn't suit your needs. :beer::thumbup:

With the flow you are putting through it, especially at the pressure you see, I just can't believe that the OEM manifold isn't a choke point, especially with the injectors hanging out in port flow path.*


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> My take is that forced induction engines can operate at VE's higher than 100%. The 100% is only relative to atmospheric pressure. Even at .75 but a PR of 2.5-3, whihc you are operating at during midrange rpms, you're still way over 100. I've seen you reference training on engine tuning, whereas my experience in tuning is just the hobby side, not my job (production and design liason). In your experience, is VE never over 100%, even on FI engines?




From what I got from formal training (more focussed on tuning aspects), although possible, you hardly operate at 100% or higher for various reasons, and that's on our small turbocharged car. Theoretically, say I am making 30 psig of boost in the intake manifold and open the throttle valve, at 100% VE I should be able to cram in 31-32 psi of boost. The reality however, is that remaining exhaust gases (we are nowhere near perfect exhaust evacuation on a stock head/manifold/turbo/downpipe in the 1.8t), valve design restrictions, and heat of the charge, all comes into play to ruin the fun. 

In general, the VE will not change much unless alterations are made to the valves, combustion chamber and such, what will change is the absolute temperate and mass air. A bigger turbo, or a more efficiently intercooled car, will have much higher mass air than stock but the motor will still flow the same 94.61 CFM at 3000 rpm. The main factor being the much more efficient absolute temperature (actual temp+ 460F) and higher mass air. Keeping in mind that the volume V is constant for the motor, the variables in the equation becomes the absolute pressure PSIa (actual+14.7) and the absolute temperature and mass. The ideal and actual CFM flowed will change as a factor of rpm, absolute temp, absolute pressure, mass air etc, but the VE will remain under ideal regardless.

Real life example is:
I force the K04 to pressurize 30 psig which is 44.7 psi absolute, it is the same any turbo, bigger or not, making 44.7 psia (BT advantage is producing lower absolute temp at fixed mass, and being able to pressurize that amount at higher revolutions). At 3k I will be limited by the rigid 94.61 volume of the motor and functioning under max VE, regardless of turbo and components used.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

If you didn't operate at higher than 100% VE, then an FI engine wouldn't make any more power than an NA engine. The heating of intake air over ambient reduces the mass entering the cylinder, but the pressure overcomes this. Whether that fact is reflected in the density of the air entering the cylinder or the higher VE, it's got to show up in the basic engine power formula. You left VE out of your 1.8T CFM calculations, but didn't reference pressure ratio (PV=nRT). Again, I know you know all this, but spelling it out for anyone that wants to contribuite, but you have to account for it somewhere. 

Based on your calc....

94.61 CFM @ 3K = 167 g/sec @ .75 VE = 125 (you're flowing roughly 95 g/s here, ~57% VE)
126.15 CFM @ 4K = 222 g/sec = 167 (you're flowing roughly 210 g/s here, ~95% VE)
157.69 CFM @ 5k = 278 g/sec = 209 (you're flowing roughtly 240 g/s here, ~75% VE)
189.23 CFM @ 6K = 334 g/sec = 251 (you're flowing roughly 245 g/s here, ~73% VE)
220.77 CFM @ 7k = 389 g/sec = 292 (you're not even close, 63% IF you held the 245g/s :laugh

You can easily see, you're close to 100% at 4K. 

Yes, there will always be residual gas in the cylinder once the exhaust valves close, but taking into account that VE should rise with rpms due to swirl, tumble, squish, but primarily due to higher piston speeds creating quicker changes in pressure on valve opening, yours is dropping rapidly past midrange. A lot of this is due to cam specification, but this does lead me to believe you've obviously still got flow restrictions somewhere. You can't change the turbo by class rules, and you've obviously got a much more optimized intake tract that most if not all, but there will be pressure drop with the 2 bends, across the IC core, through the throttle, intake mani, and valves. Out of those which are the ones that haven't been modified, are the easiest to change, and weren't designed for what you're using them for?  If there's something I'm leaving out, as I haven't brusehd these cobwebs off in a while, I'm all ears. I miss Dr. Jones's engine class.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Some very good points Adam! The tested flow rates at the OEM manifold didn't account for TB and most likely the restriction created by injectors protruding in the flow path of the OE design. I'm not running a Gonzo tune (at least not yet), he only implemented some features over the existing file for me. That file has a MAF offset for some reason, so I wouldn't fully trust the logged readings. On top of that, I run a housing with a larger cross section which scales down the actual values (although by a known amount).

Reading back into it, it is becoming more obvious to me that modern turbocharged engines operate closer to 100% VE than I was saying (still won't go over 100% VE ). Certain standalone Engine management systems arbitrary even use 90-95 % in their VE table as a base for forced induction. Now, the question for you is how can I accurately use mass air rate values (lbs/min or G/s) to assess various known manifold air flow rate (CFM)?

Since we are switching to air mass rate and incorporating pressure to the equation, this is what I'm getting for the 1.8l motor at the Psia I'm running (for everyone else this is no longer applicable because we all run different pressure. To use the formula you'd have to input your own Psia and corresponding absolute temp) 

Using the formula n(lbs/min)= P (psia) X V(CFM) X 29 / (10.73 X abs temp)

Ideal lbs of air/min:


3k = 22.94 lbs/min
4k = 27.69 lbs/min
5K = 34.30 lbs/min
6K = 38.75 lbs/min
7K = 42.97 lbs/min

I am thankful for the help and the time you're taking to bring some much needed technical oversight. I see that there are restrictions left and room for improvement (both intake and exhaust side). Like you said, my intake track is flowing pretty well now, and I agree that the manifold/TB could be the remaining restrictions on that side of the motor, I just don't want to loose any TQ in the red highlighted range that is used the most while racing.

I would feel bad drilling your SEM and not being able to use it (although your future setup would be sweeter with direct port injection anyway ). As soon as I schedule a dyno day, I am going to contact you to see what we can do, but the 65 mm TB is a definite.


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

[URL="Volumetric Efficiency - How much air do 1.8Ls and strokers flow?]http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?4782445-Volumetric-Efficiency-How-much-air-do-1.8Ls-and-strokers-flow[/URL] :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Eric, the graph you posted is somewhat rigid as it doesn't account for engine speed aka rpm. The first 1.8l CFM numbers I posted took rpm into account at a NA level for the motor, but we are taking it a step further and bringing pressure and air mass into the the picture. 

Linky didn't work for me, so I searched it 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...kers-flow&highlight=Volumetric+efficiency+air

There are two graphs posted that are somewhat usable but at very low psi (18 psi is half what I run and doesn't do me any good). :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Let's see if I can consolidate everything we got so far in one post:

Adam got this below, based on our 1.8l motor volume at various RPM. He calculated ideal where VE = 1, then VE = .75, and finally what I was seeing in terms of VE% basing his results on one of my G/s logs.



20v master said:


> 94.61 CFM @ 3K = 167 g/sec @ .75 VE = 125 (you're flowing roughly 95 g/s here, ~57% VE)
> 126.15 CFM @ 4K = 222 g/sec = 167 (you're flowing roughly 210 g/s here, ~95% VE)
> 157.69 CFM @ 5k = 278 g/sec = 209 (you're flowing roughtly 240 g/s here, ~75% VE)
> 189.23 CFM @ 6K = 334 g/sec = 251 (you're flowing roughly 245 g/s here, ~73% VE)
> 220.77 CFM @ 7k = 389 g/sec = 292 (you're not even close, 63% IF you held the 245g/s :laugh


After that, since there is some kind of ECU based offset in my file (probably and old approach used back in the days to control fueling with boost increase), I went for what the motor is seeing. So I calculated everything by hand using known Psia, absolute temp, and Volume at various RPM and VE=1 (also added G/s conversions to make it more usable): 

formula is n(lbs/min)= P (psia) X V(CFM) X 29 / (10.73 X abs temp)

3k = 22.94 lbs/min ==> 173.19 G/s
4k = 27.69 lbs/min. ==> 209.05 G/s
5K = 34.30 lbs/min ==> 258.96 G/s 
6K = 38.75 lbs/min ==> 292.56 G/s
7K = 42.97 lbs/min ==> 324.42 G/s

At VE = .95 ------------------------------ At VE = .90 
3K = 164.53 G/s ------------------------ 3K = 155.87 G/s
4K = 198.59 G/s ------------------------ 4K = 188.14 G/s
5K = 246.01 G/s ------------------------ 5K = 233.63 G/s
6K = 277.93 G/s ------------------------ 6K = 263.30 G/s
7k = 308.19 G/s ------------------------ 7K = 291.97 G/s

Now I'm just waiting on Adam to tell me the best way to compare the data to the tested manifold flow rates.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Now I'm just waiting on Adam to tell me the best way to compare the data to the tested manifold flow rates.


That's not quite that easy.....

And sorry if I sparked a fire in you to start crunching numbers, it wasn't intended.  Anyways, I see you're taking flow numbers from the intake mani comparison I did. You are listing those as being at 28 psi, when they were at 28 in of vacuum. They were done with no throttle or injectors in place, only injector bungs and all vac ports blocked off. You'd be hard pressed to correlate those numbers in vac to a certain flow rate in positive pressure on the inlet and a different flow rate on the ports in vacuum at different rpms, and that doesn't take into account the pulses of pressure caused by valve cycling. Also, I never tested an SEM on the same flowbench. I don't see the specs on the SEM that you have numbers for, ie small vs big port, what size throttle bore, etc. So all that said, the intake mani result comparisons are just relative, not absolute enough to be able to predict performance. 

You can look at the dyno below to see the effects of changing from a small port passenger side manifold and throttle to a big port SEM manifold with 80mm throttle on an AEB head with a 3071R setup at 24 psi. I don't know specifics of the whole setup. It may have gone from a stock SMIC to a full FMIC at the same time, or it may have just been a piping change with the same core before and after to swap to driver's side throttle. Either way, I think it's safe to say going to a bigger IC and more piping would have contributed negatively, yet it's obvious there was no loss in torque at any rpms you'd be concerned about. First is the actual dyno, second is the same data plotted so it's easier to see (dark blue vs pink in second graph). 


















You can actually see the boost comes on harder and sooner with the SEM manifold.  Remember, peak volumetric efficiency is going to be at peak torque, which is defined by the camshaft profiles. Like I first said, I wouldn't take a loss of torque in low/midrange from a cam change as indicative of it being caused by the intake manifold. 

As for VE not going over 100%, that depends on your definitions I suppose. If you're comparing NA to FI peformance, then it most definitely is possible. If you're comparing theoretical, then yes, you'll never hit over 100 due to residual exhaust gas, and fuel occupying space that oxygen could be in for a straight volume at atmospheric pressure standpoint. 
:beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

28" HG??? That seems fairly high for the flow test, why did you test at such high vacuum that is outside of our motor's operating range? I never saw the result thread (maybe it got blackholed by mods protecting vendors). All I've seen is charts with individual runner, and overall flow comparisons between a host of manifolds used in various threads. I got the SEM manifold flow numbers off of their website and it stated "28 psi test pressure", so that's what probably got me mixed up with your test.

I guess that's where my attempt to make a theoretical comparison ends. I have no data where I can compare the OEM manifold to SEM in terms of flow (not that it would paint an overall picture applicable to my application that depends on transient response more than total flow). If I'm understanding this properly, there is no "real" full comparison under positive pressure (which would make more sense for a turbo car) between the manifolds for the 1.8t? How did the community come to the consensus that brand X (aka SEM) is the top performer for X,Y, and Z applications? :screwy:

I feel that I'm leaving this with more questions than answers


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?3098525-***1.8T-Intake-Manifold-Test-Results***


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> 28" HG??? That seems fairly high for the flow test, why did you test at such high vacuum that is outside of our motor's operating range? I never saw the result thread (maybe it got blackholed by mods protecting vendors). All I've seen is charts with individual runner, and overall flow comparisons between a host of manifolds used in various threads. I got the SEM manifold flow numbers off of their website and it stated "28 psi test pressure", so that's what probably got me mixed up with your test.


 
From the comparison thread...."This does NOT correlate into which will make the most power on a given setup. Intake manifold flow is dynamic and undergoes turbulence, heat change, as well as sudden transitions, like during a WOT lift to shift. All testing is done at 28 in of water to ensure accuracy in comparisons, but flow in vacuum is entirely different than positive intake manifold pressure."

Water, not mercury. This is what the flowbench that was used was setup for, what the flowbench operator always tests at, and was merely a reference to keep tests consistent from manifold to manifold. 



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> If I'm understanding this properly, there is no "real" full comparison under positive pressure (which would make more sense for a turbo car) between the manifolds for the 1.8t? How did the community come to the consensus that brand X (aka SEM) is the top performer for X,Y, and Z applications?


Correct, I've never seen a flow bench that tested under positive pressure. No one came to the conclusion that any brand is the best for a particular application. That probably fell under the realm of bigger must be better. However, the SEM had runners optimized by length and injector placement, a plenum volume based on engine size, and actual CFD analysis at much higher flow rates and pressures, as well as focus paid to pressure transitions (boost onset, two stage boost, WOT shifts, etc) in an effort to equalize flow among cylinders. I'm sure Pete @ IE put the same analysis into their manifold knowing his ME background, but I've never seen any of it. I doubt the ABD, RMR, APR, etc put that much effort into it. The beauty of the IE manifold is the modularity of throttle on either side, which will appeal to a lot of people. The whole point it to remove flow restrictions and provide enough of a "surge tank" volume as to not starve for flow at upper rpms. A bigger plenum with the throttle not at a funky angle alone will help with a lot of that, but the OEM runners definitely leave a lot on the table.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?3098525-***1.8T-Intake-Manifold-Test-Results***


Ahhh thank you!

This answers one my question, Adam's test was conducted at 28" of water, not 28" HG. Makes a lot more sense to me as 28" of H2o is roughly 2" HG. Maybe if I could find flow tests in positive pressure from the new IE and 034, a comparison can be made between these two and the mighty SEM. What do you say Dizzy (or axlekiller if you prefer :laugh?


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Ahhh thank you!
> 
> This answers one my question, Adam's test was conducted at 28" of water, not 28" HG. Makes a lot more sense to me as 28" of H2o is roughly 2" HG. Maybe if I could find flow tests in positive pressure from the new IE and 034, a comparison can be made between these two and the mighty SEM. What do you say Dizzy (or axlekiller if you prefer :laugh?


Or quickk03crap or ... we can go on ... but I digress. Let's also not forget that a Florida shop did a dyno of SEM to APR intake mani and the SEM didn't get the higher numbers, nor the fattest tq under the curve. I'll have to search around to find the actual dyno comparison. I am pretty sure his UN: 3071R-GLI


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

18T_BT said:


> Or quickk03crap or ... we can go on ... but I digress. Let's also not forget that a Florida shop did a dyno of SEM to APR intake mani and the SEM didn't get the higher numbers, nor the fattest tq under the curve. I'll have to search around to find the actual dyno comparison. I am pretty sure his UN: 3071R-GLI


Ahh, yes, the short Russian with his head tilted to the side, or should I call you kilmer420? Congrats on getting married, but I so don't miss you 1.8T know it alls that have nothing to add to the discussion but flames. He also did his dyno comparison on a small port head with two big port manifolds, at the biggest APR dealer in the US's dyno, and it wasn't even on the same day. There were several large holes in his comparison that made it easy to see it wasn't a true comparison, but don't let that get in the way of your conclusion.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Ahh, yes, the short Russian with his head tilted to the side, or should I call you kilmer420? Congrats on getting married, but I so don't miss you 1.8T know it alls that have nothing to add to the discussion but flames. He also did his dyno comparison on a small port head with two big port manifolds, at the biggest APR dealer in the US's dyno, and it wasn't even on the same day. There were several large holes in his comparison that made it easy to see it wasn't a true comparison, but don't let that get in the way of your conclusion.


Holly crap! Looks like I missed a couple of chapters of 1.8t drama on vortex. Funny thing is, members come and go, but the dynamics stay the same. You're not a contributing member if you haven't been banned at least 3 times.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Holly crap! Looks like I missed a couple of chapters of 1.8t drama on vortex. Funny thing is, members come and go, but the dynamics stay the same. You're not a contributing member if you haven't been banned at least 3 times.


I wouldn't say you missed anything. I know I haven't.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Oh how good it is to hear from you Adam. I am not sure how I was flaming. I remember seeing a dyno. I don't remember all the details behind it. Good luck to you and Leah...later


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

In my quest to put the car on a diet, I did a few free things today (the bulk of the weight is going to come down with swapping to lighter seats): 

I converted to a manually operating convertible top. The delete is legal in SCCA street prepared under update/backdate. Since the 180 TT roadster convertible is manually operated, I can backdate to it since they are part of the same model line.











While I have all 3 back panels removed I went ahead and deleted the CD changer, rear speakers, woofer and brackets. 





























As far as weight removed, it's not as much as I'd hope for... but I'll take anything I can get (especially when it free) . Total of 34.7 lbs that I no longer have to accelerate, stop, and make change direction on my poor tires. Next is the radio, front speakers, and finally the seats that will also serve a purpose beside weight removal.


----------



## Imola_TT (Aug 21, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I converted to a manually operating convertible top. The delete is legal in SCCA street prepared under update/backdate. Since the 180 TT roadster convertible is manually operated, I can backdate to it since they are part of the same model line.


Some '01 225 roadsters came with factory manual top too. 
I had one; leased it brand new, way back when.
I could drop that top in a fraction of the time it takes my '05 "power" top move the same distance.
Kinda miss that


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Imola_TT said:


> Some '01 225 roadsters came with factory manual top too.
> I had one; leased it brand new, way back when.
> I could drop that top in a fraction of the time it takes my '05 "power" top move the same distance.
> Kinda miss that


Thanks for the info! I thought all 225 came with the motorized setup, now I don't even have prove same line backdate legality since it's basically an "option". :beer:

Yeah, I don't miss the motorized thing because the manual operation is a breeze. The only question I have, is if the true manually operated ones had something to lock the top down when retracted. With the hydraulic setup the pressure in the struts kept it from bouncing if you hit a big bump. It's not a big deal but just wondering...


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Have u ripped all the insulation of the door panels and carpet ???


----------



## Imola_TT (Aug 21, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Thanks for the info! I thought all 225 came with the motorized setup, now I don't even have prove same line backdate legality since it's basically an "option". :beer:
> 
> Yeah, I don't miss the motorized thing because the manual operation is a breeze. The only question I have, is if the true manually operated ones had something to lock the top down when retracted. With the hydraulic setup the pressure in the struts kept it from bouncing if you hit a big bump. It's not a big deal but just wondering...


I don't remember anything locking the top in place...unless the boot was installed...which was...once.
But I also don't recall the downed top bouncing; though if I hit a big enough bump to bounce the top, I was probably concerned with other things in that split second, like continuing in the direction intended 

The manual may have been built slightly differently; I don't know enough about it technically to know the difference. There's got to be still be some manual-top roadsters out there in the world. If you run across an '01 amulet red that was originally registered in Illinois...that was likely mine. I'd love to hear she went to a good home.
Cheers!
:beer:


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Also if u rip of the panel behind the drivers door theirs a good size block of insulation just
Placed in a hole its kinda weird


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Can u remove air bags driver passanger and all the brackets and screws? 
I lost a lot of weight with the air bags and steering wheel ::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

01ttgt28 said:


> Can u remove air bags driver passanger and all the brackets and screws?
> I lost a lot of weight with the air bags and steering wheel ::thumbup:


I will pull the door cards this weekend and remove everything that's freeloading (insulation, unnecessary bracket etc.). The carpet has to remain per SCCA rules and I'm not ready to tackle the PITA hard floor insulation. The driver's airbags will be removed but will keep the passenger side airbag for various reasons (I often take people on joy rides and want them to have the best protection if something happens). My goal is to get the car to 3000 lbs or less without major surgery, A/C and crash bars are off the table for me at this point, so it's not the easiest thing for me to drop major weight. If I can get the weight/power ratio to 8.5 I'll be a happy camper. :thumbup:


----------



## Charlie_M (Mar 23, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> My goal is to get the car to 3000 lbs or less without major surgery, A/C and crash bars are off the table for me at this point, so it's not the easiest thing for me to drop major weight. If I can get the weight/power ratio to 8.5 I'll be a happy camper. :thumbup:


Have you removed the 15kg ballast weight at the left rear? You must have; I guess it's common knowledge with the TT experts, but I just heard about it and was really surprised that Audi did something like that. An attempt to increase polar moment of inertia and "stabilize" the car like the rest of the recall fixes?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Charlie_M said:


> Have you removed the 15kg ballast weight at the left rear? You must have; I guess it's common knowledge with the TT experts, but I just heard about it and was really surprised that Audi did something like that. An attempt to increase polar moment of inertia and "stabilize" the car like the rest of the recall fixes?


Yes, the boat anchor has been removed a long time ago! 

To my understanding it wasn't placed there to increase polar weight and affect the dynamic moment of inertia (a move that would increase the tendency to become unstable at speed). I believe the reason for the strategically placed piece, with an awfully weird shape and location, was to cancel harmonic vibration in the chassis. I see it as an effort to make in-cabin experience more refined.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yes, the boat anchor has been removed a long time ago!
> 
> To my understanding it wasn't placed there to increase polar weight and affect the dynamic moment of inertia (a move that would increase the tendency to become unstable at speed). I believe the reason for the strategically placed piece, with an awfully weird shape and location, was to cancel harmonic vibration in the chassis. I see it as an effort to make in-cabin experience more refined.


Yeah, but where is the resultant harmonic vibration when you remove it? :laugh: If anything, it would decrease understeer gradient, aka make you more likely to spin, so completely AGAINST the point of the spoiler/control arm recall. :screwy:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

20v master said:


> Yeah, but where is the resultant harmonic vibration when you remove it? :laugh: If anything, it would decrease understeer gradient, aka make you more likely to spin, so completely AGAINST the point of the spoiler/control arm recall. :screwy:


More likely to spin with it removed. Having a large cast mass like that at a far point from the engine can help isolate engine vibration waves that are translated through the body of the the car. 

With it there, you would think it would act like an old 911, but the thing about having some extra rear weight with stiff springs is it can keep the back tires from bouncing. My Corrado does this to a terrifying level if you do not know how to keep the car on the road. 

Now freeing up the back end is great providing that is what you want with more lift/oversteer. I got a nasty little surprise when I tossed my street tires back on  Was great once I got use to it again. For a novice driver it would only mean disaster.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Yeah, but where is the resultant harmonic vibration when you remove it? :laugh:


I have no idea! That would be more of a question for you, or Charlie, or Noah... all I know is that harmonic vibration dampening is out the window in my car with the solid mounts 



20v master said:


> If anything, it would decrease understeer gradient, aka make you more likely to spin, so completely AGAINST the point of the spoiler/control arm recall. :screwy:


Yes, I agree... but so insignificant in the grand scheme of thing when it comes to understeer gradient, that it became an acceptable compromise to increase in-cabin refinement. Think of it as running with or without a spare tire, it has such marginal effect to overall balance that it's negligible at best. At least that's how I see it, but who knows what good German stuff they were smoking that day :laugh:

PS: You weren't kidding, 034 really sucks!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> More likely to spin with it removed. Having a large cast mass like that at a far point from the engine can help isolate engine vibration waves that are translated through the body of the the car.
> 
> With it there, you would think it would act like an old 911, but the thing about having some extra rear weight with stiff springs is it can keep the back tires from bouncing. My Corrado does this to a terrifying level if you do not know how to keep the car on the road.
> 
> Now freeing up the back end is great providing that is what you want with more lift/oversteer. I got a nasty little surprise when I tossed my street tires back on  Was great once I got use to it again. For a novice driver it would only mean disaster.


I think their logic when facing the lawsuits was (with a German accent):

I can't increase rear mechanical grip --> I will increase rear aero grip with a small wing without creating too much drag --> I will also force the ungrateful bastards to understeer now with watered down control arms and have have electronics keep an eye them --> while I'm at it, I'll fix the harmonic vibrations that I screwed up and got lectured for by the boss (nobody will notice).


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

DeckManDubs said:


> but the thing about having some extra rear weight with stiff springs is it can keep the back tires from bouncing.


Where are these "stiff" OEM springs you mention?


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I think their logic when facing the lawsuits was (with a German accent):
> 
> I can't increase rear mechanical grip --> I will increase rear aero grip with a small wing without creating too much drag --> I will also force the ungrateful bastards to understeer now with watered down control arms and have have electronics keep an eye them --> while I'm at it, I'll fix the harmonic vibrations that I screwed up and got lectured for by the boss (nobody will notice).


 No harmonic issues if they used a VR6..."Hey Hans, pull that 3.6 VR6 out of there and put this more powerful never lose 1.8T in that TT prototype. The boss is still pissed that they sucked so much in the B5 chassis."

"Well the only way to make a 1.8t feel powerful is if we ditch the superior Quattro and make it FWD...I got it, we will use a clutched AWD, that is really FWD" 






20v master said:


> Where are these "stiff" OEM springs you mention?


lol, well stiff compared to older Audi's. Weak sauce compared to H&R's and the aftermarkets/even the more modern OEM stuff.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> lol, well stiff compared to older Audi's. Weak sauce compared to H&R's and the aftermarkets/even the more modern OEM stuff.



I'm with Adam here, the TT OEM spring rates are super soft... and I wouldn't say they are stiffer than older Audis (at least in the rear). With a much lower than a 1:1 rear motion ratio, the effective rear rates from the factory are pathetic, even in Audi's standards.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

New clutch ready to go in the car! I've been putting this off for too long, and this has been prohibiting me from hitting the dyno. I had a custom Kevlar one made before but somebody wanted it more than I did so that one is gone. The new one is with 50% uprated clamping load on the pressure plate. Full face cera-metalic disc (as much as I like the feel of Kevlar, I was advised by THE clutch expert to not use Kevlar on a dual mass setup). And to complete the setup, I made the decision to go dual mass flywheel. For the use I have, all the benefits in transmission and engine longevity forced me to go that route. Yes, it would be nice to cut some weight and have an engine that revs more freely, but the cons are not worth it IMO.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

One of my TT winter projects was to make the steering sharper! Jumping from an evo to a TT is quite a numbing sensation, and I always knew that something drastic needed to be done to rectify the situation. My idea of a solid Delrin forward control arm bushing, which was considered, developped, and manufactured by Mike at MCPI, was my first attempt. This helped with "waking-up" the steering feel by removing the slop from unnecessary deflection, but still was not sharp enough to satisfy my thirst for steering sharpness . Since we already have the quickest ratio on the platform, there wasn't anything to do there that would be SCCA SP compliant. The only move left, that would make a dramatic improvement, was to go the old school way with a smaller diameter steering wheel.  

The mechanics behind it, is that a shorter arc or distance is needed to cover the same angle of steering rotation. In other words, the same movement with your hands (steering input), equals a greater/faster change in direction. The effect is a much sharper and responsive steering at the expense of some leverage (the larger wheels require less efforts to make the tire move the same amount). Since we already have what feels to me like an over-assisted power steering, this will not be an issue and provide better feedback as a byproduct. I loved how a 330 mm steering wheel felt in the EVOs, but the TT needed more so I went with 310 mm. I was looking at an OMP with flat bottom, but a nice Sparco in the right diameter conveniently popped in the classifieds and I jumped on it! Black suede, with cut-off top and flat bottom, also never used made it a perfect candidate for the Job (I prefer alcantara but will be using gloves, so it should last pretty well). 

Driving feel is much improved, turn-in doesn't feel like a TT anymore, and I love it! The car follow orders now... instead of thinking about what you're asking it to do. The cluster isn't cut off badly at my sitting position, you loose a small part of the temp and fuel gauge but they are both still visible. 

*Comparison with the stock wheel* 











*View from my sitting position* 











*Random shot*


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

I like it. Now, all you need is a "Fast & Furious" style 500hp nitrous blast for those buttons, lol. 

P.S. What's the make & part number on the hub adapter? I've always been hesitant because I could not find a direct-fit part


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Nice thread...keep it up Max!:beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> I like it. Now, all you need is a "Fast & Furious" style 500hp nitrous blast for those buttons, lol.


 Steve, I was thinking "HPDE instructor ejecting seat button"! They'd come in handy next time they tell the wife it's too much car for her and to take it up gradually at a slow pace.  

Seriously though, if they stay they would be horn buttons, although I'm considering removing those as well. 



Late__Apex said:


> P.S. What's the make & part number on the hub adapter? I've always been hesitant because I could not find a direct-fit part


 Sparco part number is: 01502074CA and fits several other models as well. My wheel was purchased with the adapter but here is a link to the correct hub. :beer: 
http://www.ogracing.com/sparco-steering-wheel-hub-adapter-volkswagen-mk4-audi-a4-tt-porsche-997


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Twopnt016v said:


> Nice thread...keep it up Max!:beer:


 :thumbup:


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Changing that wheel must of been a big weight savings did u weight them ??? 
Just to see how many lbs you saved ??


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

01ttgt28 said:


> Changing that wheel must of been a big weight savings did u weight them ???
> Just to see how many lbs you saved ??


 Rick, I didn't think it was worth mentioning in my post because it wasn't a big weight improvement. 

Stock wheel with airbag and nuts ----> 9.6 lbs 
Sparco 310mm with hub --------------> 3.1 lbs 
Total weight saving --------------------> 6.5 lbs


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

^^^ Rick, BTW I also pulled the door cards looking for the square blocks you mentioned was free loading in the doors. The roadster doesn't have them (must be a coupe only thing)! The only thing that was in my door was an aluminum reinforcement plate. Light, structural for side impact protection, and not attached by nuts and bolts only (this last point makes removal of such items illegal per SCCA SP rules). 


The door plates I'm talking about in the roadster are the one in green in this schematic.


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yes, the boat anchor has been removed a long time ago!
> 
> To my understanding it wasn't placed there to increase polar weight and affect the dynamic moment of inertia (a move that would increase the tendency to become unstable at speed). I believe the reason for the strategically placed piece, with an awfully weird shape and location, was to cancel harmonic vibration in the chassis. I see it as an effort to make in-cabin experience more refined.


 It's just called a balance weight. There to offset the weight of the fuel in the tank. The fwd tank is far more bias to the passenger side. 

Don't think anyone is going to go spinning or have bad vibrations since most of us have had it removed more close to a decade now and not one complaint.


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Rick, I didn't think it was worth mentioning in my post because it wasn't a big weight improvement.
> 
> Stock wheel with airbag and nuts ----> 9.6 lbs
> Sparco 310mm with hub --------------> 3.1 lbs
> Total weight saving --------------------> 6.5 lbs


 
Still 6.5 lbs is pretty good a couple lbs here and their u will be at 2800lbs in no time :thumbup:


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ^^^ Rick, BTW I also pulled the door cards looking for the square blocks you mentioned was free loading in the doors. The roadster doesn't have them (must be a coupe only thing)! The only thing that was in my door was an aluminum reinforcement plate. Light, structural for side impact protection, and not attached by nuts and bolts only (this last point makes removal of such items illegal per SCCA SP rules).
> 
> 
> The door plates I'm talking about in the roadster are the one in green in this schematic.


 Where I found the block of foam that was just placed in a hole was after removing the CD change. 
It is located where the seat belts come through the panel behind the seat .the factory amp 
Is located in the same spot on the opposite side .


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

01ttgt28 said:


> Still 6.5 lbs is pretty good a couple lbs here and their u will be at 2800lbs in no time :thumbup:


 Yes my friend, every little bit counts and it adds up pretty quickly! :thumbup: 

I don't think I'll ever get the roadster to 2800 lbs while staying SP legal, or spending tons of money to make dry carbon parts. I am satisfied with anything sub-3000lbs though for a car that started at 3400+ lbs from the factory. 

The part that you circled in the schematic don't exist in the roadster, it is probably coupe specific. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

cincyTT said:


> It's just called a balance weight. There to offset the weight of the fuel in the tank. The fwd tank is far more bias to the passenger side.
> 
> Don't think anyone is going to go spinning or have bad vibrations since most of us have had it removed more close to a decade now and not one complaint.


 Well, Audi calls it a "Mass Damper" if that means anything to anyone but me! I am pretty sure it's not there to simply offset weight. If that was the case it wouldn't have been placed on the driver's side of a LHD car (think about our cross weights). What I'm entirely sure about, is that it has nothing to do with the weight of fuel in the tank. The only official mention I've seen of its function is in the details of the QS trim in Europe. Audi themselves didn't include the Mass damper in the QS because according to them, canceling chassis harmonic vibration is not a priority, and doesn't mesh with the raw philosophy of the Quattro Sport. 

Just like the cross tube/brace that we finally have a definitive answer that it is in fact structural, and can't be removed without negatively impacting the tub's resistance to flex. People will always speculate on things like that, and only going to the people that engineered these things will give us definitive answers. On the ballast, the original design study doesn't mention it, and it seems to be an afterthought. I can't say positively that it was only there to cancel chassis harmonics. It could have served dual duty and only technical data from the manufacturer can confirm or dismiss that sort of things, but at least there is some evidence that it is a Mass damper. (A tactic often used by manufacturers to control chassis harmonics - think 911). 

As far as making people spin, that is all out of the window once you start modifying your car (suspension, weight, CG modifications creates a whole new set of dynamics that has nothing to do with a stock car behavior and balance). In my case for example, once I installed coilovers and changed the car's balance, this thing was removed and dumped. With the new dynamics introduced there was no point carrying a heavy piece designed around stock balance, dynamics, and harmonics. So, to agree with one of the points that you made, there won't be any negative effects in most case (the big sample of QS is a testament that it is fine to run without it).


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I am pretty sure it's not there to simply offset weight. If that was the case it wouldn't have been placed on the driver's side of a LHD car (think about our cross weights). .


 If it was to offset weight, putting it in the rear would go against the theory of adding understeer in the recall fiasco, but what if it's just in the left rear to offset the weight of RHD cars since they sold more RHD globally then LHD? :screwy: Either way, like you said in an old post Max, I'd rather have a lighter car than a more F/R neutral car, all else equal. And I'm still considering putting the cross tube back, the fact that it's just my daily driver makes me not want to though. :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

What to do with a few hours to kill? Get an exhaust manifold project finally rolling! The whole 1.8t community have been discussing exhaust manifold improvements in several threads, but I had promised ED (atomic_Ed) that I was going to give a stock unit the love that it deserves. At this point, there are quite a few options available, but being a firm believer of cast units for their proven superior longevity, my choice is limited to the stock or JBS casts. JBS disappointed me because of the way they handled collector issues with their units, so that leaves me with porting the OEM mani as my first option. 

The stock manifold has very good port entry at the head flange. However, it really sucks at the collector side, and there is a good bit of tapering in the runner ID as they approach the collector. My goal is to tackle the collector issue with porting/polishing and gasket matching the turbo flange. The tapering in the runner ID will be taken care with extrude honing. 

*Phase 1: Porting * 

Stock collector has rough casting and pathetic runner exits. The collector merge for cylinder 1 and 4 needs some serious work. Cylinder 2 and 3 are shared and can be opened as well. Finally the flange is far from being close to the gasket ID. 











These areas painted in red will be completely shaved, and the rest will get a rough porting at first, and some smoothing/polishing before going for extrude honing. 


















Rough porting finished! Critical areas are shaved, flange and runner exits are opened considerably, and my EGT port is drilled and tapped. All I need is a quick round of smoothing and this bad boy is ready to be sent out for the extrude honing. 

First carbide round 









midway 









EGT port drilled and tapped 









Final rough port going deeper into the collector's throat 










Final collector smoothing and polishing 












*Phase 2: Extrude Honing* 

Stay tuned! 

*Phase 3: Ceramic Coating * 

Stay tuned!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Very nice! Will you hit the damn dyno, PLEASE?!?!?!?!?!


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

20v master said:


> Very nice! Will you hit the damn dyno, PLEASE?!?!?!?!?!


 X2 and take Doug with you also


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yes my friend, every little bit counts and it adds up pretty quickly! :thumbup:
> 
> I don't think I'll ever get the roadster to 2800 lbs while staying SP legal, or spending tons of money to make dry carbon parts. I am satisfied with anything sub-3000lbs though for a car that started at 3400+ lbs from the factory.
> 
> The part that you circled in the schematic don't exist in the roadster, it is probably coupe specific. :beer:


 Yeah oh well I tried . Do you know any company that makes a carbon fiber hatch or fiber glass ???


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yes my friend, every little bit counts and it adds up pretty quickly! :thumbup:
> 
> I don't think I'll ever get the roadster to 2800 lbs while staying SP legal, or spending tons of money to make dry carbon parts. I am satisfied with anything sub-3000lbs though for a car that started at 3400+ lbs from the factory.
> 
> The part that you circled in the schematic don't exist in the roadster, it is probably coupe specific. :beer:


 get the lower euro dash that's a few lbs lighter. And its about $150 from ecs


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Very nice! Will you hit the damn dyno, PLEASE?!?!?!?!?!





01ttgt28 said:


> X2 and take Doug with you also


 I will, as soon as the clutch is installed, and all the parts I want to test are in my hands! Pretty sure Doug will want to share the dyno time with me... if the car is in one piece! 




01ttgt28 said:


> get the lower euro dash that's a few lbs lighter. And its about $150 from ecs


 It's on the to do list with some lightweight replacement seats! As far as carbon fiber parts, you have to get dirty and start fabricating because there is nothing going for the platform on that front. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Smoothing and polishing of collector area is completed, and manifold is ready for some extrude honing action! 

Final work is pretty good! Considering how bad this thing was in stock form, I'm pretty happy with the results so far... let's see how much more we can improve on it!


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

lookin good Max :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

How much is extrude honing gonna run? I priced it out years ago and it was around $500 for the manifold I was interested in having worked...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Twopnt016v said:


> How much is extrude honing gonna run? I priced it out years ago and it was around $500 for the manifold I was interested in having worked...


 It's about $450 (+ shipping one way)! It's expensive, but I'd rather boost our economy than ship my money to JBS when they obviously don't care about the customers that keep the light on. :screwy:


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Smoothing and polishing of collector area is completed, and manifold is ready for some extrude honing action!
> 
> Final work is pretty good! Considering how bad this thing was in stock form, I'm pretty happy with the results so far... let's see how much more we can improve on it!


 you sure did get to work on this thing rather quickly, will you be doing a dyno before and after too see the results? :thumbup:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> It's about $450 (+ shipping one way)! It's expensive, but I'd rather boost our economy than ship my money to JBS when they obviously don't care about the customers that keep the light on. :screwy:


 I agree %100:thumbup: Plus extrude hone is the sh_t!


----------



## Atomic Ed (Mar 19, 2009)

Nice job on the porting Max! :thumbup: Opening up the flange diameter to where you and I are at will get you within about 85% of the flange area of a T25. You’ll reap some EGT and top end benefits for your efforts. I'm sure you're going to match up the hotside flange and gasket (if you use one) also. 

As a cautionary note, let's not forget the 034 manifold debacle. 034 extruded honed the OEM stock manifold as part of development of the prototypes. This extruded honed OEM became part of the "master mold" of their final design. When I compared the 034 manifold to the OEM manifold, I found the 034 manifold to weigh 1 pound less than the OEM! The wall thicknesses of the 034 mani runners were way too thin and, in my opinion, wouldn’t survive many heat cycles. (The other problem was poor casting techniques by the foundry, but that’s another story.) So my recommendation is to be very conservative with the extrude hone. Save some material for support strength. 

Kinda sad, but I still think 034 had the right idea on the manifold design. If they had a better foundry to work with, and a better casting material, they would have captured this market. 

Also, be sure to find a company that will ceramic coat the mani inside and out. This will help eliminate hot spots and spread the heat load around. 

Are you ready to do your own head porting now that practiced on your mani?  I may give it a try later.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

EuroSpic_TT said:


> you sure did get to work on this thing rather quickly, will you be doing a dyno before and after too see the results? :thumbup:


 Yeah, I didn't drag my feet on that one! The goal after the clutch is in, is to get some solid baseline numbers and start individually testing/dynoing parts like exhaust manifold, a 65 mm throttle body, some intake manifold stuff (kinda top secret at this point), etc. (I also want to test MBT once again because things may have changed with all the flow improvements done since last time).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Atomic Ed said:


> Nice job on the porting Max! :thumbup: Opening up the flange diameter to where you and I are at will get you within about 85% of the flange area of a T25. You’ll reap some EGT and top end benefits for your efforts. I'm sure you're going to match up the hotside flange and gasket (if you use one) also.
> 
> As a cautionary note, let's not forget the 034 manifold debacle. 034 extruded honed the OEM stock manifold as part of development of the prototypes. This extruded honed OEM became part of the "master mold" of their final design. When I compared the 034 manifold to the OEM manifold, I found the 034 manifold to weigh 1 pound less than the OEM! The wall thicknesses of the 034 mani runners were way too thin and, in my opinion, wouldn’t survive many heat cycles. (The other problem was poor casting techniques by the foundry, but that’s another story.) So my recommendation is to be very conservative with the extrude hone. Save some material for support strength.
> 
> ...


 Ed, you're not kidding when you say that we're getting close to T25 flange territory! On my manifold port job I got up to 1.80" diameter at the collector flange . You could probably match T25 flange surface area on a JBS unit with the kind of material available for porting. Just so everyone can keep this into perspective, these are life-size drawings of my enlarged port compared to a standard rectangular T25 (there are so many variations and shapes of T25 to make your head spin) 

*Still trailing the T25 but not by much, this thing will definitely hold its own! * 

















In regards to 034's mishap, their extrude-honed prototypes were fine. The ones tested on actual cars haven't failed till this day (I've checked). Their problem wasn't wall thickness post honing because there is plenty of material to work with (at least 3 time more than the relentless bull that is being pushed right now, I'm sure you've seen the infomercial thread in the technical section). The real problem was poor material and/or improper casting (Spartiati had one that I tried to buy at one point for testing purposes and it didn't look dense at all, the casting seemed very porous to say the least). There are many stages of extrude-honing and I'm going for something light compared to what can be achieved with a full bore job. The mani will be coated both in and out (haven't decided what coating to go for yet). And as you have guessed, there will be some turbine massaging to accommodate the increase and properly mate the two flanges. I am quite excited to see the dyno results before and after. :beer: 

Although it would be a very fun project, no head porting for me! Class restriction prohibits anything to the motor internally. Even replacement rods can't be lighter than stock :screwy: (thank God FFE had some old school IE rods that were within specs or I would've needed custom rods).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

New Sachs DMFW arrived! Thanks Doug for the super deal you linked me to, I payed $100 for it and seriously thought it was so cheap that it was going to be a scam. I was pleasantly surprised to see it show up, brand new, legit, in original box and everything. This bad boy is going to get the custom uprated treatment and I'm done with this clutch business. 

(If anyone is interested in the other one I was originally going to use, let me know! I'll let it go for cheap, basically less than the price of the upgrade. There is nothing wrong with it, I'm just the OCD type. :beer


----------



## Atomic Ed (Mar 19, 2009)

I suggest that you also consider cryogenic treatment before doing the ceramic coating. Cryo treament won't help if there is already any micofractures, but it will increase the longevity of your mani by reducing the intergranular voids. BTW, cryo treament is a good idea for treating your brake rotors also. Helps with warpage. I use Nitrofreeze. Ask for Ryan there. 

I still have my 034 manifold laying around. I gave them my feedback on the casting issues that came from myself and my best friend who is a level III welding and materials inspector. He does independent acceptance testing for several large companies that do business in China. His analysis was that the pour and mold temps were too low causing silcone contamination. The casting material itself seemed to be close to OEM, but he didn't actually do a materials analysis. Too bad they didn't listen to him. 

It's looking good Max! Throw some filler material on top of the collector and hog it out some more!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Atomic Ed said:


> I suggest that you also consider cryogenic treatment before doing the ceramic coating. Cryo treament won't help if there is already any micofractures, but it will increase the longevity of your mani by reducing the intergranular voids. BTW, cryo treament is a good idea for treating your brake rotors also. Helps with warpage. I use Nitrofreeze. Ask for Ryan there.
> 
> I still have my 034 manifold laying around. I gave them my feedback on the casting issues that came from myself and my best friend who is a level III welding and materials inspector. He does independent acceptance testing for several large companies that do business in China. His analysis was that the pour and mold temps were too low causing silcone contamination. The casting material itself seemed to be close to OEM, but he didn't actually do a materials analysis. Too bad they didn't listen to him.
> 
> It's looking good Max! Throw some filler material on top of the collector and hog it out some more!


 I can only speculate because this is well beyond my area of expertise. But adding to what you said, the 034 mani seemed very "porous" to me, and lacking OEM-quality density. It can be seen in the picture below but is a lot more obvious in person. 











Cryo treating is a good idea! I've switched the world challenge BMW from work to cryo treated rotors, and loved the improvement to longevity... I don't know if I want to go that crazy with the manifold, unless the procedure isn't that expensive. With a good coating inside and out, I feel good about it lasting for a very long time! (I will however give that place you mentioned a call to see how much it is for the service and make a decision):beer: 

I've thought about the filler trick when I was planning the project, I chickened out because I didn't know how the weld would adhere to the material after many heat cycles. If I did it, I would be tempted to really hog it out, and that could be asking for trouble when you're not sure of the weld's ability to take the heat abuse and expansion by itself.


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

Opps double post


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

When did ya get a 034 manifold!?

Glad the clutch worked out!

Now we've gotta get it in the car...


----------



## Atomic Ed (Mar 19, 2009)

Cryo isn't that expensive. Along the same lines as ceramic coating. Give Nitrofreeze a call and they'll give you an over the phone quote.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DougLoBue said:


> When did ya get a 034 manifold!?
> 
> Glad the clutch worked out!
> 
> Now we've gotta get it in the car...


 That manifold isn't mine! I'd never buy one brand new, knowing how they hold up.:screwy: 

It's really up to you when you want to do the clutch with me! :thumbup::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Atomic Ed said:


> Cryo isn't that expensive. Along the same lines as ceramic coating. Give Nitrofreeze a call and they'll give you an over the phone quote.


 Ed, at $55 for the cryo treatment it's going out this weekend! Thanks for telling me about this place, I used to pay $95 per rotor years ago! :banghead:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Max you said Sachs DMFW but that says LUK? Whats up with that? LUK is good stuff none the less.:thumbup:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Ed, at $55 for the cryo treatment it's going out this weekend! Thanks for telling me about this place, I used to pay $95 per rotor years ago! :banghead:


 No doubt:thumbup: I have a new manifold I'm about to go to work on and then probably send to them. You can't beat that price:thumbup: Thanks Doug!:beer:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Steve, I was thinking "HPDE instructor ejecting seat button"


 A fun moment in the new Bond movie comes to mind. 

I have an AMU head inbound - time to open up the exhaust ports (at least).


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Late__Apex said:


> A fun moment in the new Bond movie comes to mind.
> 
> I have an AMU head inbound - time to open up the exhaust ports (at least).


 36mm:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Twopnt016v said:


> Max you said Sachs DMFW but that says LUK? Whats up with that? LUK is good stuff none the less.:thumbup:


 Yes, I believe it's manufactured by Sachs but using Luck's components. Kind of like H&R using Bilstein PSS components to manufacture their own coilover kits. 

Box, paperwork, and instructions were all from Sachs!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> A fun moment in the new Bond movie comes to mind.
> 
> I have an AMU head inbound - time to open up the exhaust ports (at least).


 


Twopnt016v said:


> 36mm:thumbup:


 The AMU exhaust ports are 33 mm, is there enough material on a small port to go to 36 mm??? 

*Edit* 

There is enough material to go as big as 36 mm on the exhaust ports of a small head, but I wouldn't do it! A gasket match of the exhaust port is as far as I'd go, if I was allowed such a modification. Port in the far left of the picture below is matched to the gasket, the rest is stock! (I think that's the way to do it Steve)


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

A Track TT exiting The Carousel at Road America - as seen on Speed.


----------



## jbrehm (May 16, 2006)

I've always felt that the SMFW is crappy on these engines/tranny - my car has never felt the same after ditching the DMFW, even with a Fluidampr on (not that I expected it to have nearly the same effect as a DMFW). Max, are you aware of any Sachs Motorsports DMFWs? Something that would have my torque? I'd switch back if I could be relatively sure I could get two years of a DMFW...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

jbrehm said:


> I've always felt that the SMFW is crappy on these engines/tranny - my car has never felt the same after ditching the DMFW, even with a Fluidampr on (not that I expected it to have nearly the same effect as a DMFW). Max, are you aware of any Sachs Motorsports DMFWs? Something that would have my torque? I'd switch back if I could be relatively sure I could get two years of a DMFW...


Unfortunately, nothing that I'm aware of Jeremy! DMFWs are tuned to a TQ range, they would have to have a few different ones manufactured with specs to match various applications, with different output targets. Your best bet if you were to switch back (especially with the massive TQ output your beast is capable of generating), is to find someone with enough tooling and knowledge to uprate the spring capacity to match your output. Short of that, I'd stay with a SMFW in your particular case. :beer:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The AMU exhaust ports are 33 mm, is there enough material on a small port to go to 36 mm???
> 
> *Edit*
> 
> There is enough material to go as big as 36 mm on the exhaust ports of a small head, but I wouldn't do it! A gasket match of the exhaust port is as far as I'd go, if I was allowed such a modification. Port in the far left of the picture below is matched to the gasket, the rest is stock! (I think that's the way to do it Steve)


Gasket match should be 36mm. Small port head=33mm--> Bigport head =36mm--> Stock exhaust mani gasket=36mm:thumbup:

*edit* The gaskets is actually 40mm...see pic below...


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Now have my head (AMU) and exhaust manifold (Relentless V2).

My AMU head measures 33.7mm at the exhaust port and the V2 mani measures 38mm at the flange and an ID of the runners of almost 35mm. I'm looking forward to same die-grinder time after the holidays are over. 

If I were to run it as is, the exhaust flow would start at 33.7mm (exhaust port), step out to 38mm for about 6mm (1/2 of the flange) and then taper back down to the 35mm runner. This sounds like a recipe for turbulence and flow restriction. I'd much rather it flow from the valves to the exhaust port at the 38mm diameter then restrict down to the 35mm runner diameter by way of the weld bead.

I can "port match" to 1" depth without penalty. I'll see what that gets me. I need to get or make some internal calipers to see what diameter the runners are at 1" depth.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Wish I had taken picture of my port job this August looks very similar. Too bad you can't match exhaust ports to the manifold.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> Now have my head (AMU) and exhaust manifold (Relentless V2).
> 
> My AMU head measures 33.7mm at the exhaust port and the V2 mani measures 38mm at the flange and an ID of the runners of almost 35mm. I'm looking forward to same die-grinder time after the holidays are over.
> 
> ...


Steve, in the head, I'd just smoothly transition from the 38 mm to whatever it is at the 1" class restricted depth - Not really looking to open up deep in the head since its going to neck down again to 35 mm. Ideal would be to keep it constant at 35mm (maybe weld fill the flange-to-runner step so you can keep it smooth and constant). Problem is gasket ID is at 40 mm, custom gasket maybe???


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Steve, in the head, I'd just smoothly transition from the 38 mm to whatever it is at the 1" class restricted depth - Not really looking to open up deep in the head since its going to neck down again to 35 mm. Ideal would be to keep it constant at 35mm (maybe weld fill the flange-to-runner step so you can keep it smooth and constant). Problem is gasket ID is at 40 mm, custom gasket maybe???


You are reading my mind. 
1)) A 1" port-match is allowed without penalty but I CAN do a full P&P for a 1% weight penalty, which may be worth it. I'll have a better idea once I get around to measuring the head. 
2) I thought about filling the flange-to-primary transition and smoothing it out. I need to understand the flow from valve to exhaust port better first. Who knows, maybe I will be able to open up the flange too.
3) I have already identified the various gasket brands available locally for me to compare. I'll be making a shopping trip soon.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> You are reading my mind.
> 1)) A 1" port-match is allowed without penalty but I CAN do a full P&P for a 1% weight penalty, which may be worth it. I'll have a better idea once I get around to measuring the head.
> 2) I thought about filling the flange-to-primary transition and smoothing it out. I need to understand the flow from valve to exhaust port better first. Who knows, maybe I will be able to open up the flange too.
> 3) I have already identified the various gasket brands available locally for me to compare. I'll be making a shopping trip soon.


:thumbup: keep us posted!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

My manifold project is practically finished! Got it cryo-treated, and I coated it externally with a ceramic compound to keep heat where it belongs. I will coat it internally as well, but I'm waiting for the proper tooling to arrive in the mail.

My original plan was to extrude-hone it, but I decided against it at the end. I felt that the project was turning into something exotic that's not easily replicable without dropping some substantial coin. After a discussion about manifold porting with my EVO peeps, MAPerformance seems to be the best in the game. I contacted them and they wanted $350 to do our manifold. If they can do it... so can I! The rest consisted in acquiring the right tools and a bit of fabrication (welding some honing and cutting bits to long flexible shanks), but I got it done!

Every runner is ported all the way to the collector. The ports are 40 mm at the flange and gradually tapering. However, everything is much more opened than stock, throughout the length of all 4 runners. Time consuming, but I feel that this will serve me well! And the best part is that I can replicate it for the price of cryo treatment, using the one in the car right now as my back up spare.

*Top*




















*Ports and runners opened all the way to the collector (40 mm at the flange)*



































*Bottom and collector*


----------



## babarber (Nov 3, 2008)

i love that manifold 
great work:thumbup:


----------



## peter139 (May 4, 2005)

Wow nice job. Comparing to the pics on page 4 it looks a big improvement.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

babarber said:


> i love that manifold
> great work:thumbup:





peter139 said:


> Wow nice job. Comparing to the pics on page 4 it looks a big improvement.


Thanks guys! I'm waiting to see numbers to declare victory - and even then, longevity have to be put to the test, but I think I gave it the best shot at being a success! :beer:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)




----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

:laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


>





[email protected] said:


> :laugh:


 :laugh:


----------



## Atomic Ed (Mar 19, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> My manifold project is practically finished! Got it cryo-treated, and I coated it externally with a ceramic compound to keep heat where it belongs. I will coat it internally as well, but I'm waiting for the proper tooling to arrive in the mail.
> 
> My original plan was to extrude-hone it, but I decided against it at the end. I felt that the project was turning into something exotic that's not easily replicable without dropping some substantial coin. After a discussion about manifold porting with my EVO peeps, MAPerformance seems to be the best in the game. I contacted them and they wanted $350 to do our manifold. If they can do it... so can I! The rest consisted in acquiring the right tools and a bit of fabrication (welding some honing and cutting bits to long flexible shanks), but I got it done!
> 
> ...


Looks great Max! I too tried to hone out the runners using a flex shaft, but I had limited luck. (The flex shaft kept binding). Some pics of your honing setup wuld be appreciated!

I'm also interested in the DIY ceramic coating. Let us know how it works out in the long run.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Nice job on the mani, Marcus. :beer: That must have taken some time. Curious, how much weight did you remove?

I've got my head stripped down. There is a little overhang of a few of the valve seats on the the short-side of the intake side. 










Also, the outsides of the intake valves have some shrouding in the combustion chamber but there does not appear to be enough room to do anything about it (I need to get a head gasket). It's probably not much of an issue with the 3-valve intake configuration. The intake port size matches the valve sizes pretty well but the exhaust side port is undersized. This looks like it will be a dressing-up instead of a porting with the exception of opening up the exhaust port to match the flange at 39mm.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Nice job Max! It would be nice to see what tools you used. :thumbup:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Before









After cleaning up the runner/valve seat junction. 









The overhang removed was about 1/16" and considering that it was on the short-side, this quick and easy clean-up should bear fruit. I still need to get in there with a sanding roll and smooth out my grinding marks a little and remove the small build-up of carbon where the valve seat meets the side of the combustion chamber.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Atomic Ed said:


> Looks great Max! I too tried to hone out the runners using a flex shaft, but I had limited luck. (The flex shaft kept binding). Some pics of your honing setup wuld be appreciated!
> 
> I'm also interested in the DIY ceramic coating. Let us know how it works out in the long run.





tedgram said:


> Nice job Max! It would be nice to see what tools you used. :thumbup:


This is what I did:

I adapted two flexible shafts welded to a pair flex-hone bits (1" and a 1.25"). With two flex points (a very flexible primary and stiffer sprung secondary flex point) you could go through the runners all the way to the collector merge. 

The only drawback is that (although it will port and open the runners quite well) it doesn't allow me to get a polish finish all the way through. The polishing bits aren't able to deform, or compress like the flex-hone ones, so they can't efficiently work if adapted to a flex shaft. It could be possible to get a polished finish throughout by finding and ordering fine grit flex-hone bits, but I didn't go through the trouble. 

As far as the ceramic coating, I need some time to run it to see how well it holds up internally. I've successfully used the external compound before but never tried the internal stuff. :beer:

The whole contraption (1" bit)









The highly flexible primary flex point









The stiffer secondary flex point









The bore/hone bit that gets tacked into the flex shaft


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> Nice job on the mani, Marcus. :beer: That must have taken some time. Curious, how much weight did you remove?


Thanks Steve! Unfortunately, I don't have a scale that is sensitive to small changes in weight like that (mine is accurate to 1-2 lbs). You're correct, it took some time to finish the whole thing to my standards. I did each runner seperately in different days, spending a couple of hours on each one, plus a few hours I had already spent on the collector. Time consuming, but well worthy the effort for guys like you and I!



Late__Apex said:


> Also, the outsides of the intake valves have some shrouding in the combustion chamber but there does not appear to be enough room to do anything about it (I need to get a head gasket). It's probably not much of an issue with the 3-valve intake configuration. The intake port size matches the valve sizes pretty well but the exhaust side port is undersized. This looks like it will be a dressing-up instead of a porting with the exception of opening up the exhaust port to match the flange at 39mm.





Late__Apex said:


> Before
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Looking good, that step was nasty and you should see a nice little improvement from this clean up! :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Atomic Ed (Mar 19, 2009)

Late__Apex said:


> The overhang removed was about 1/16" and considering that it was on the short-side, this quick and easy clean-up should bear fruit. I still need to get in there with a sanding roll and smooth out my grinding marks a little and remove the small build-up of carbon where the valve seat meets the side of the combustion chamber.


If you get bold and want to dive into doing your own port work, here's a couple of links fyi:

http://www.audi-sport.net/vb/a3-s3-...er-head-work-ie-porting-polish-gasflowed.html 

http://www.clubgti.com/showthread.php?202798-8v-cylinder-head-porting-with-flow-test-results&

I'm going to pick up a spare head and give it a go.....maybe.


----------



## Atomic Ed (Mar 19, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> This is what I did:
> 
> I adapted two flexible shafts welded to a pair flex-hone bits (1" and a 1.25"). With two flex points (a very flexible primary and stiffer sprung secondary flex point) you could go through the runners all the way to the collector merge.
> 
> ...


Much better setup than what I cobbled together. I used a Dremel collet on the end of a smaller diameter flex shaft inside a hand held guide tube. It worked Ok if you were careful to keep it from binding, but if it bound, the flex shaft would kink. Might want to try my setup if you want to polish the insides of the runners.

This is a nice design. Might be a market for these for guys like me. Maybe a snap-on head that would fit a standard drill flex shaft.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> This is what I did:
> 
> I adapted two flexible shafts welded to a pair flex-hone bits (1" and a 1.25"). With two flex points (a very flexible primary and stiffer sprung secondary flex point) you could go through the runners all the way to the collector merge.


Interesting technique. :thumbup: I have connecting rod flex-hone that might be just the right size for the three intake runners. I bet that would be fairly productive in removing material on the aluminum head. Intuitively, it seems like it would provide a well-shaped and well-flowing port, too. What grit is your flex hone?

I am apprehensive about removing too much material. You can clearly over port a normally aspirated engine by killing intake velocity. I wonder if the pressurized intake flow in turbocharged engines negates that issue?


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Here is the "machining" apparatus I will use to port my heads. I have ordered a very-coarse grit Flex Hone sized for each the intake and exhaust runners. I will set the drill press to only go as deep as the valve seat and then oscillate the hone in-and-out of the runner.










Why not just hog them out with a bur? 
1) I don't have ready access to a flow bench. The bur removes material quite fast on these aluminum heads and it would be easy to remove too much and/or be inconsistent. By using the flex-hone it will be fairly easy to get a uniform port size both valve-to-valve and cylinder-to-cylinder. 
2) Much like extrude honing, the flex hone will naturally apply more pressure in areas of obstruction or irregularity creating a smoother flow.

Thanks to Marcus for the a-ha moment.:beer:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Digging the flex hone method. Heading to Brush Research now to shop for tools for the AEB I just bought.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

20v master said:


> Digging the flex hone method. Heading to Brush Research now to shop for tools for the AEB I just bought.


Not sure about the intake runner diameters on the AEB, but my AMU head measured out at about .75". I bought a 40-grit 1" flex hone for my intake side. If I bore it our to the full 1", that calculates to over 50% more area in each runner. My car (road race) spends nearly all its time between 4,000rpm and 7,000rpm and I will be running higher-lift cams so the extra flow will be appreciated.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

^^^ It's nice that you guys are expanding the flex hone brush idea, it works quite well! Steve, on my mani job, I did 80 grit (remove most material) and 180 grit only, but for the head you may want something finer as well to wrap up the finish. The rig looks quite good btw! :thumbup:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ^^^ It's nice that you guys are expanding the flex hone brush idea, it works quite well! Steve, on my mani job, I did 80 grit (remove most material) and 180 grit only, but for the head you may want something finer as well to wrap up the finish. The rig looks quite good btw! :thumbup:


I ran my 180-grit through the head as a test and it didn't remove much, that is why I opted for the 40-grit. Since it can only remove up to the diameter of the hone, I'm not too worried about the bite. I also selected the Aluminum Oxide abrasive that is specified for softer metals like aluminum. That will give be a margin for error in case I contact the hardened valve seat. The AO should not cut that much. I'll use the 180 for a finish.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Not much of an update but the car has been out for a clutch project. Between the cold spell and finding time to work on things, this has taken me over a month. First, I installed the wrong pressure plate in the car (it's my fault, I didn't double check the core that I got from a shop and sent it to be modified. Well, it was the wrong PP and was a few mm too thick and rubbed on the housing). I had to drop it again and put the correct modified PP in (this time I used a brand new core to be modified). The clutch is finally in, and all I need to do is put the car back together and finally some dyno time! The car is also going back to daily duties for a bit, until I get another beater.


*These pics show the slight diffeence in the PP height (enough to rub the housing). Clutch in, and correct PP bolted finally.*


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Some nostalgic pictures of a good time that I never posted! This winter thing is killing me, I can't wait for racing season again!

*SCCA National event*


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Alright! Finally some numbers from the BEAST! That way all of us on K04's can have a record/target to beat.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Alright! Finally some numbers from the BEAST! That way all of us on K04's can have a record/target to beat.


Target/benchmark --- Yes!
Beat ------------------- I don't know! :laugh::laugh:

Can't wait to see the numbers myself!


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

I hear ya Max. Spring cannot come soon enough!


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

That z3 coupe looks awsome some people hate that look but I love them


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

01ttgt28 said:


> That z3 coupe looks awsome some people hate that look but I love them


I love them too, not just for the look but for what they are! There are two people I race with that have them, and they transform into amazing pieces of engineering when done right! I don't see why anyone would not like such iconic looking performance machines, but people knock on 3rd gen RX7, 4G63T EVOs, late model Supra Turbos too, all of them cars that I would sell organs to have in my garage. 

How's the new ride repairs coming along? You haven't posted much progress in the TT as well, nice weather is right around the corner my brother!!!


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I love them too, not just for the look but for what they are! There are two people I race with that have them, and they transform into amazing pieces of engineering when done right! I don't see why anyone would not like such iconic looking performance machines, but people knock on 3rd gen RX7, 4G63T EVOs, late model Supra Turbos too, all of them cars that I would sell organs to have in my garage.
> 
> How's the new ride repairs coming along? You haven't posted much progress in the TT as well, nice weather is right around the corner my brother!!!


Not much alex is working on 2 cars for me lot of money :facepalm:

But where waiting on the machine shop :facepalm:

So my question to u is do u race against all those cars ???
I know theirs different levels or classes but just wondering what your up against


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

I found this at the auction its not to expensive 

https://www.iaai.com/Vehicles/VehicleDetails.aspx?auctionID=13247443&itemID=14250891&RowNumber=4


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

01ttgt28 said:


> I know theirs different levels or classes but just wondering what your up against


At the time, the TT was in C Street Prepared (CSP) and swimming in miata infested waters. There were a few MR-2, rx-7 but mostly a spec-miata class. 

*These things*



























Nowadays, in the redesigned SCCA street prepared, the car is classed in BSP with the S2K's, E46 BMWs, some Porsches, C4 corvettes etc.

*this is what I have to deal with now*


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Car is finally running a proper clutch! A few heat cycles to have the surfaces properly mate and I'll be getting some much anticipated dyno figures. Stay tuned! :beer:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Good to hear Max!!! Going to be a good season!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> Good to hear Max!!! Going to be a good season!


It should be Noah, I can't wait to drive again!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Small update: 

My full metal mounts vibrated a bunch of things loose, including my front control arm bolts, which is a bit scary. I am going to have come up with a long term solution (Nordlocks or something) to secure things, or chicken out by swapping the metals inserts for the original VF poly ones. 

My AWIC pump died too! I realized this after looking at logs from my baseline dyno session over the weekend, IAT were unusually high for what this car can do in terms of charge cooling. It's a good thing I had a good water injection setup and E85 because it could have been a costly failure (the redundancy of safety features in the build is paying off). I wasn't expecting much from the pump (very cheap HF one) and I have another one laying around. However, I'm thinking about buying one of those Bosh pumps and be done with it (the fact that they are much quieter in operation is what's really tempting me). What do you guys think?


----------



## deltaP (Jul 26, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Small update:
> 
> My full metal mounts vibrated a bunch of things loose, including my front control arm bolts, which is a bit scary. I am going to have come up with a long term solution (Nordlocks or something) to secure things, or chicken out by swapping the metals inserts for the original VF poly ones.
> 
> My AWIC pump died too! I realized this after looking at logs from my baseline dyno session over the weekend, IAT were unusually high for what this car can do in terms of charge cooling. It's a good thing I had a good water injection setup and E85 because it could have been a costly failure (the redundancy of safety features in the build is paying off). I wasn't expecting much from the pump (very cheap HF one) and I have another one laying around. However, I'm thinking about buying one of those Bosh pumps and be done with it (the fact that they are much quieter in operation is what's really tempting me). What do you guys think?


Aircraft safety wire should hold the bolts in place.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Safety-Wire...Parts_Accessories&hash=item5d3c60b25f&vxp=mtr

Scroll down and look at his setup.

http://www.commanderforums.org/foru...ssion/6417-hey-boys-i-joined-airdam-club.html


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

The Bosch pump that's used in Ford OEM AWIC's?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

deltaP said:


> Aircraft safety wire should hold the bolts in place.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Safety-Wire...Parts_Accessories&hash=item5d3c60b25f&vxp=mtr
> 
> Scroll down and look at his setup.
> ...


For some reason I don't see the safety wire trick as a clean and permanent solution, to me it's more of an "on the fly" type of thing. Track safety inspection might give a hard time about it too... thanks for the input Clay:beer:



20v master said:


> The Bosch pump that's used in Ford OEM AWIC's?


Yes! There are a few versions of it and they last a pretty decent time in this kind of applications (although still wear items).


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> For some reason I don't see the safety wire trick as a clean and permanent solution, to me it's more of an "on the fly" type of thing. Track safety inspection might give a hard time about it too... thanks for the input Clay:beer:


Max, you should not have any issue with safety wire. I prefer Loctite/painting bolts with a paint pen to make sure they are not backing out. A lot of vintage guys have to run safety wire on their center lock wheels to keep the nut from flying off.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Small update:
> 
> My full metal mounts vibrated a bunch of things loose, including my front control arm bolts, which is a bit scary. I am going to have come up with a long term solution (Nordlocks or something) to secure things, or chicken out by swapping the metals inserts for the original VF poly ones.



You could try something like this (but DIY of course)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/150995082900?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1558.l2649


or this: 

http://www.034motorsport.com/engine-components-18t-k03k04-turbo-locking-flange-p-1300.html


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Small update:
> 
> *My AWIC pump died too*! I realized this after looking at logs from my baseline dyno session over the weekend, IAT were unusually high for what this car can do in terms of charge cooling. It's a good thing I had a good water injection setup and E85 because it could have been a costly failure (the redundancy of safety features in the build is paying off). I wasn't expecting much from the pump (very cheap HF one) and I have another one laying around. However, I'm thinking about buying one of those Bosh pumps and be done with it (the fact that they are much quieter in operation is what's really tempting me). What do you guys think?


I spoke too soon, the pump was fine. All that it needed was a 10 amp fuse to start pumping fluid in all its glory. :thumbup::thumbup: 

I finally got to install my 82C thermostat that I've been wanting to do for a while now. I also got a real man boost gauge that reads to 45 psi of boost, and still reads vacuum. 

Now I can go over the 30 psi mark and not be in the dark dialing boost by estimating clicks on an MBC


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

I thought you had installed the T'stat a while back, no?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> I thought you had installed the T'stat a while back, no?


Nope, I had tried a used "working" T-stat off the classified that behaved weirdly in the winter time (not allowing the car to warm up on quick highway drives). That one was removed for the OEM stat, and a new 82C one has been sitting on the shelves for a while now, but never installed. We'll see how much improvement this provides to the improved cooling that I'm already getting.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

It certainly can't hurt. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Here is a video of the car on the rollers this past weekend (thanks Jeff!)

http://youtu.be/j_RITf5S4dE


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Here is a video of the car on the rollers this past weekend (thanks Jeff!)
> 
> http://youtu.be/j_RITf5S4dE


niceee niceee :thumbup:


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Results? Good I hope :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

tedgram said:


> Results? Good I hope :thumbup:



Results were not bad Ted! Most of my mods, videos, and dyno graphs are posted in the first couple of post of the first page. Last weekend I was consitently doing 405 AWTQ/300 AWHP at 30 psi and stock manifolds.


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Results were not bad Ted! Most of my mods, videos, and dyno graphs are posted in the first couple of post of the first page. Last weekend I was consitently doing 405 AWTQ/300 AWHP at 30 psi and stock manifolds.


are these results with the ported manifold you did the work on? and when are u going for more numbers with more boost?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

EuroSpic_TT said:


> are these results with the ported manifold you did the work on? and when are u going for more numbers with more boost?


This is still with the stock non-ported manifold. The goal was to go back to the dyno with the ported manifold as the only variable to record the changes. I tried to swap the manifolds last minute and a stripped stud forced me to abort the swap (not enough time to pull the head, extract studs, and put it back together the night before the dyno session). Since I had already scheduled the dyno day with some buddies, I just messed with my fueling, dialed my part-throttle output and dynoed again at the same base 30 psi. 

When I have the ported mani installed, I'll go for another round at 30 psi to monitor the gains, and then bring the boost back up for some all out numbers. :beer:


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> This is still with the stock non-ported manifold. The goal was to go back to the dyno with the ported manifold as the only variable to record the changes. I tried to swap the manifolds last minute and a stripped stud forced me to abort the swap (not enough time to pull the head, extract studs, and put it back together the night before the dyno session). Since I had already scheduled the dyno day with some buddies, I just messed with my fueling, dialed my part-throttle output and dynoed again at the same base 30 psi.
> 
> When I have the ported mani installed, I'll go for another round at 30 psi to monitor the gains, and then bring the boost back up for some all out numbers. :beer:


oh ok ok, sounds goodddd cant wait to see what the change is with the manifold and than the all out numbers. i shall be seeing u this weekend if ur not busy :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

EuroSpic_TT said:


> oh ok ok, sounds goodddd cant wait to see what the change is with the manifold and than the all out numbers. i shall be seeing u this weekend if ur not busy :thumbup:


Yeah, you can come by anytime after 1:00 pm Saturday. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

With two "balls" in my engine bay (coolant and AWIC fluid) , I've been monkeying around with power steering reservoir placement. I first relocated the OEM reservoir under the rail, but that didn't work out too well. Next was to buy or fab a smaller reservoir that can be squeezed in the limited space in between my balls (they are pretty big from what I heard!).  

Almost pulled the trigger to buy something already made, when I remember that I had a brand new A/C dryer tank somewhere in the garage. These things are made with nice thick wall aluminum (can drill and tap it), and would work perfect for a custom reservoir. They are filled with chambers, filter screens, and desiccant that needs to be gutted out - A big hole at the top and needle nose players took care of that in a matter of minutes. Drill and tap for the proper size barb fittings, a freeze out plug as a cap, a small mounting bracket, and the project was completed. 

It came out pretty good for something custom and done with stuff laying around. The custom reservoir is nice and tucked out of the way, and easily reached for a refill. A coat of wrinkle black paint or powder coat will take care of the cosmetic finish (not that I really care how it looks under the hood, as long as it's functional).


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Good idea! And, btw… nothing wrong with form *&* function


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> btw… nothing wrong with form *&* function


 Got some candy pink spray paint to send me? :laugh: 

J/K, it's just not my priority right now, one day when I get the functionality and reliability to go along with the performance, I'll go on a "pimp my ride" rampage. :beer:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Got some candy pink spray paint to send me? :laugh:
> 
> J/K, it's just not my priority right now, one day when I get the functionality and reliability to go along with the performance, I'll go on a "pimp my ride" rampage. :beer:


 Lol - sorry, I'm not quite that fancy! Someday I do want to clean, paint/refinish things under the hood though. 

I hear you on priorities… the want list keeps getting bigger but the need list, well, needs to stay on top :thumbup: 

You must admit though - your engine will be so much easier to work on when the bay is neat and tidy. Might even run a touch cooler too


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Just wanted to post up some findings from the HPDE I just did that confirm some of Max's results. I had my reservations about the thought that the TT suffered airflow problems because I never had similar issues in my Mk4 GTI. Even with the 82*C thermostat and no FMIC, in ~60*F weather, my peak coolant temps from the event were *104*C*! That only took ~10 minutes (~5-6 laps of a 1.4 mile course) with the defrost on full blast/high heat the entire time after starting with 85*C coolant temps when I entered the course. I was reading this value from the HVAC display. This was all with the ECU commanding a K03 tapering boost curve as I'm on an AWP ECU, so less boost than even a properly chipped 225, and this isn't some high speed course either. I think max speed I hit on the straight was ~95mph. I didn't log intake temps or ignition timing, but I'm sure they were suffering just as badly. The three row radiator is so cheap, it should be a no brainer for anyone looking to control temps versus going to an external oil cooler first, though those aren't that expensive either. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Just wanted to post up some findings from the HPDE I just did that confirm some of Max's results. I had my reservations about the thought that the TT suffered airflow problems because I never had similar issues in my Mk4 GTI. Even with the 82*C thermostat and no FMIC, in ~60*F weather, my peak coolant temps from the event were *104*C*! That only took ~10 minutes (~5-6 laps of a 1.4 mile course) with the defrost on full blast/high heat the entire time after starting with 85*C coolant temps when I entered the course. I was reading this value from the HVAC display. This was all with the ECU commanding a K03 tapering boost curve as I'm on an AWP ECU, so less boost than even a properly chipped 225, and this isn't some high speed course either. I think max speed I hit on the straight was ~95mph. I didn't log intake temps or ignition timing, but I'm sure they were suffering just as badly. The three row radiator is so cheap, it should be a no brainer for anyone looking to control temps versus going to an external oil cooler first, though those aren't that expensive either. :beer:


Thanks for posting validation of what others see as "preaching" and often challenge. I don't even try to convince people anymore that the front end design in the TT is not allowing enough airflow for what the OEM cooling system can control. Add a huge FMIC on top of it, and you lost everything that the cooler IAT would have offered. Try explaining to people around here that timing pull from coolant temp is no different than timing pull from IAT and you're a lunatic with nothing better to do with its time. 

Share your results after the radiator upgrade! :thumbup:


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

This has me a little worried about my A2W setup. As I spoke to you before, the size of my heat exchanger is supposed to be about the same size as the radiator (haven't seen it yet, just what I was told). I already got my mechanic to purchase a reservoir, but since I'm still going to be using the huge exhanger, do you think its going to cause heating issues? I already have a oil cooler but will that be enough?


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

If its over 70 deg, running a full tank of C16 is a must to help keep detonation in check. I normally pull my bumper vents to allow as much surface area of air flow available for the side mounts and radiator. On a customers track Corrado running a 1.8t, we found removing the center grille dropped temps back to the 210-220 deg F range from the 240-250 it normally runs. 230-250 I would take some cool down time and perhaps back off a little bit. But anything under that is fine, power will be down from heat soak when comparison to street driving.

Phil and I were discussing drilling holes behind the plate cover to allow extra air flow. The only trick will be is machining out the rebar and re-welding it back up for strength and improved air flow.

I run a 180 deg thermostat and low temp fan switch with Lubro Moly GT1 race oil 15-60 iirc. And on top of that full 116 octane race gas.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

One thing that may really help radiator air flow is some grille vents in the hood. You can't get air flow through a radiator if the engine compartment is packed like a sardine can and creates a high pressure zone.

I added hood vents to my Camaro when I started using it for track days and temps dropped 20 f.


----------



## jbrehm (May 16, 2006)

I can't believe people even challenge the notion that the TT has horrible cooling characteristics - they must drive like my grandma. I had nearly every line under the hood fire-sleeved, and had dozens of little tweaks to manage the heat.

Before my car was a TL, I had parts for the following:

- Low-temp thermostat and fan switch, of course
- Hood louvres
- Honeycomb grill
- Thermostatic oil cooler with a thermostatic fan
- Mishimoto rad (luckily they let me trade it for the 3.2 rad for my A3, which also has cooling issues)
- AWIC so I could free up room in the front, and provide better cooling for the rad
- One duct for each brake, and one duct to provide airflow to the exhaust mani/turbo/DP

I'm not sure how much the last would have helped - I was going to do some testing to determine its efficacy - or how much it would affect aero at high speeds.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Jeremy, what happened to your car?!?!?!?!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Jeremy, what happened to your car?!?!?!?!


What kind of Jedi master are you, if you haven't felt the huge imbalance in the force with Jeremy's and Doug's car out for the equation? Both beasts got into accidents that made them TL


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> What kind of Jedi master are you, if you haven't felt the huge imbalance in the force with Jeremy's and Doug's car out for the equation? Both beasts got into accidents that made them TL


 I did hear about Dougs little paint swapping with an inanimate object


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> What kind of Jedi master are you, if you haven't felt the huge imbalance in the force with Jeremy's and Doug's car out for the equation? Both beasts got into accidents that made them TL


Yeah, I knew about Doug's but missed Jeremy's. Pour a little :beer: out x2. :thumbdown:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Recent logging session revealed that my replacement water injection pump isn't self-priming. I was getting no juice until I manually primed the pump for a good 10 seconds. It's not a big deal because E85 can take the load by itself, but it's an extra step that I have to remember when heading to the track. The dash-mounted LED that shows pump operation still comes "on" when the controller powers the pump, but nothing comes out until it's primed. 

I'm posting this to remind people that these systems aren't trouble free, and if you don't have good failsafes, you shouldn't see them as too reliable (or you'll go boom). I can see why all these evos tuned with big boost and aggressive timing blow/melt stuff because they think that they're fully covered with water/meth injection. Be safe and get proper failsafes people! :beer:


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

Yupp people think just because they have watermeth there safe to run insane timing and boost carefree. My friend washed out the rings on his evo on the dyno at no limit motorsport because the "safe"injection box failed.. Go figure. None of these systems are fail proof. If you've been to FFE in the past year probably seen his car there its white evo9 MR. Ed did the forward facing manifold on it the car is a monster now. 


Sent from my postoffice using a carrier pigeon


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> I did hear about Dougs little paint swapping with an inanimate object


This will only lead to more reliable and more enjoyable things in the future :thumbup: No sad faces here! :beer:


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

DougLoBue said:


> This will only lead to more reliable and more enjoyable things in the future :thumbup: No sad faces here! :beer:


Agreed


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Latest evolution of my wastegate actuation saga. The external springs on the OEM actuator is a nice and effective solution... but when you're trying to get an actuator that cracks open at 3 psi to do so at 28 psi, you quickly run out of real estate to hook external springs. 

This solution gets me started with a canister that cracks open at 25 psi and don't see full travel until 35 psi. I doubt I'll need external springs with this one, no matter what pressure is seen in the hotside (I might not even need a boost controller, just run wastegate pressure ). I'll try to do some runs tonight and report my findings!

OEM actuator cut off and new hig psi actuator welded to OEM bracket with rod trimmed to length.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Ordering some AFCO springs while playing GT4? :laugh: What is the upgraded actuator off of?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Ordering some AFCO springs while playing GT4? :laugh:


:laugh: :laugh: 



20v master said:


> What is the upgraded actuator off of?


 
The actuator is off of a MHI turbo (almost everything foreign in the car is going to be from a Mitsu)


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Did some testing with the new actuator today. It's unbelievable how static bench testing differ from actual practice, testing the actuator revealed how powerful internal pressure in the turbine is in real life. The same actuator that needed (bench tested) 25 psi to crack open and 35 for full travel, only gives me about 21-22 psi in 3rd gear with full pressure signal going to it (meaning my wastegate pressure is now 22 psi). 

Why the difference? In real life, there is also bunch of internal pressure inside the turbine housing acting on the flap. The internal turbine pressure + the pressure signal from the actuator act together to overcome the spring and blow the wastegate door open. This shows the importance of upgrading the actuator spring rate when trying to get decent boost out of these turbos. 

Let the spring game begin! I'm going to add one 10 lbs external spring and see if that gets me around 30 psi wastegate holding capacity. The goal is to have around 30 psi wastegate pressure and be able to hold over 20 psi at redline without having an army of springs on the thing.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

*Project exhale!*

I have discussed somewhere before about my idea to incorporate an expansion chamber to the downpipe in my car. In short the idea is to help the backpressure inherent to the turbine housing design by somewhat extending its release area and volume. This should work for all hybrids or pushed K04 (especially mine). Our great people at 42 Draft Designs, once again, came onboard and made it happen for me and the rest of us on pushing small frame turbos. I am so greatful (the whole community should be too) to have companies like 42 DD that still cares and are open to develop things for our beloved platform. Here are a few teaser pics of what the prototype looks like, and I will probably start a new thread to share all the results and data from this and my ported high flow exhaust manifold. :beer: 


Bored out flange to accomodate a 3.5" primary extention and then expanding to the 4" chamber


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)




----------



## TTC2k5 (May 23, 2008)

Let me be the first to ask the stupid question (for those of us that have no idea of why this is a good idea: Why, why, why? Not questioning the wisdom of the move but interested in understanding the physics/mechanics behind this...if that makes sense. 

Max, 

what does this do for the performance? Positive and negative. [I know you would do this unless the postives significantly out way the negatives.] You say, "In short the idea is to help the backpressure inherent to the turbine housing design by somewhat extending its release area and volume." In doing so, what are the expected results...in laymans terms please ? 

Is this a track upgrade or street upgrade too? What would you expect to see in the way of unintended consequences? 

cheers, 

bob


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

If the exhaust gas is so high of a temperature and pressure that it's expansion is limited inside the exhaust due to pressure post turbine, this will allow that expansion to be completed smoothly instead of creating turbulence in the DP (which you don't want). That's my simplified take on it. Max will have a better description I'm sure. :laugh: You won't see benefits/gains from this unless you are REALLY pushing the turbo, aka more than chipped or slightly increased chipped boost levels.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

TTC2k5 said:


> Let me be the first to ask the stupid question (for those of us that have no idea of why this is a good idea: Why, why, why? Not questioning the wisdom of the move but interested in understanding the physics/mechanics behind this...if that makes sense.
> 
> Max,
> 
> ...


 Bob, it's a bit hard to fully explain without getting into concepts that may fly above the head of the average enthusiast. Adam kind of packaged it nicely, but I have a feeling that you may need more to comprehend the whole idea and its effect. In laymans terms, on a turbo setup, you want to have high velocity pre-turbine (done by having consistent manifold runner size and no extreme collector choke), and no backpressure post turbine. To do so post-turbine, you want to provide the exhaust gases a way to expand right after exiting the exducer in order to prevent backpressure. This over-simplified explanation can be illustrated by how the engineers at Audi designed the downpipe in 225 TT our the newer TT-RS. They simply added expansion chambers into the design (like the one I'm doing) to prevent backpressure. I posted this before and it will help visualize the idea of why this is important and very beneficial: 



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> You're correct Ed, the JBS (and any higher flowing manifold that doesn't represent a choke point like the stock unit) will be an improvement to his spool (and overall power) on his eliminator.
> 
> However, I feel that it doesn't end there. The turbine housings are also highly choked-up by the downpipe section of the exhaust (even with 3" all the way to the atmospheric dump). These small turbine housings were designed to work best with expansion chambers, and we are just ignoring that and compounding the problem by demanding high pressure ratios from these baby snails. Look at how Audi designs their stock downpipes (although with much lower output in mind), they all include a nice expansion on the downpipe where it meets the turbine housing. This is very important and needed even more in our cases (hybrids, eliminators, or simply maxing out the stockers). For X inches choosen as an exhaust piping size, we need to have a Y inches expansion that matches that choosen diameter to meet the housing (there is no golden ratio and the overall pressure ratio is what dictates what would be ideal).
> 
> ...


 Expected application: any small frame turbo/hybrid that's pushed beyond its comfort zone (26-27 psi). Street or track, it doesn't matter, it's the pressure ratio that you're operating in... the higher it is, the more gains you'll see. 

Expected result: improved spool, higher ability from midrange to top-end to keep up with the increasing VE of the motor. There is no negative compromise to performance with such a mod (as long as it is properly executed). 

Expected drawbacks: slightly higher exhaust tone, increased packaging difficulty. 

I'm not the first to succesfully do it (OEM or aftermarket), I'm just the first lunatic looking to push the stock hardware to levels never attempted by others. Most people are fine with the norm and the gains from a 3" pipe mated to a turbine housing and flange that's larger than 3"... for me, leaving room on the table simply doesn't cut it!


----------



## TTC2k5 (May 23, 2008)

Max, 

So If I understand this right, by having the increased expansion area, you significant reduce the back pressure that would otherwise inhibit the turbo's abilility to spool up. Yes? And as Martha would say, that's a very good thing.  

bob


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

You've got it Bob... From the sounds of it! 

And Max...as always. Impressed and would love to see this come to fruition! Too bad I already have the 42DD unit in there! Interesting that the industry as a whole (especially the likes of APR, etc that sell complete setups) don't consider these things in their "well engineered" kits. 

All hail Mad Max! 

Joe


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

TTC2k5 said:


> Max,
> 
> So If I understand this right, by having the increased expansion area, you significant reduce the back pressure that would otherwise inhibit the turbo's abilility to spool up, *and not slow down considerably as the engine speed goes up and the turbine can't evacuate the gases fast enough *. Yes? And as Martha would say, that's a very good thing.
> bob


 Fixed for you Bob... but yes, that's pretty much it! :thumbup:


----------



## TTC2k5 (May 23, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Fixed for you Bob... but yes, that's pretty much it! :thumbup:


 Yea...that was what I meant to type.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I did my first event of the season today with the TT (well, half of it ). I'm glad I did this to work out a few bugs instead of having to deal with them at Waterfest. I was on street tires which is a good thing to get the rust out my driving. The car was doing pretty good handling-wise, until my coolant ball sagged low enough to rub on a pulley and start a leak (the two mounting tabs on the ball where melting from the underhood heat). 

I thought I'd never say this, but I think the car is spooling too fast, going through the revs too quickly, and I'm sitting on the rev limiter all the time now in second gear. This is very annoying because you either have to shift in power spots or lift to get back into it. My limiter is set at 7100 rpm right now and I don't know how much more the stock valvetrain can take safely. Any experienced and educated inputs would be greatly appreciated. I want/need to raise the limiter a bit, but don't want to drop one of those notoriously weak exhaust valve in the process. So, how high can I spin the stock head components safely and consistently? TIA!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

^^^ After the mechanical DNF explained in my previous post, I got the chance to jump in a beast to finish the event. An Evo X with power, suspension, and 315 Hoosiers all around. The car ended up being the second fastest car of the event (off by a second in raw time) behind a well driven SSP Porsche GT3 (Evo is classed one step lower in ASP). 

Overall it was a great NY Region SCCA event! 

The beast: 

























In action: 

















Some other cars at the event, including this already fast TT-RS that my buddy just picked up (should be a nice battle at Waterfest :thumbup::thumbup


----------



## nemo1ner (May 5, 2004)

I think that is the same Evo that shows up to the NNJR and MSNE events at the meadowlands. I usually see him at almost every event. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

nemo1ner said:


> I think that is the same Evo that shows up to the NNJR and MSNE events at the meadowlands. I usually see him at almost every event. :thumbup:


 Yep, that's him! Satiago AKA Santi, he is very active racer in the NY/NJ area, and an awesome guy. :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I thought I'd never say this, but I think the car is spooling too fast, going through the revs too quickly,


----------



## nemo1ner (May 5, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yep, that's him! Satiago AKA Santi, he is very active racer in the NY/NJ area, and an awesome guy. :thumbup::thumbup:


 Yep, same guy. That car is ridiculously fast.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I did my first event of the season today with the TT (well, half of it ). I'm glad I did this to work out a few bugs instead of having to deal with them at Waterfest. I was on street tires which is a good thing to get the rust out my driving. The car was doing pretty good handling-wise, until my coolant ball sagged low enough to rub on a pulley and start a leak (the two mounting tabs on the ball where melting from the underhood heat).
> 
> I thought I'd never say this, but I think the car is spooling too fast, going through the revs too quickly, and I'm sitting on the rev limiter all the time now in second gear. This is very annoying because you either have to shift in power spots or lift to get back into it. My limiter is set at 7100 rpm right now and I don't know how much more the stock valvetrain can take safely. Any experienced and educated inputs would be greatly appreciated. I want/need to raise the limiter a bit, but don't want to drop one of those notoriously weak exhaust valve in the process. So, how high can I spin the stock head components safely and consistently? TIA!


 I've been told by Bob Quindazzi with stock valve train not to exceed 7500 RPM.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


>


 The stupid short gearing in that 6 speed O2M is killing me. Having a turbo car spooling and moving through the revs so quickly is every auto-xer's wet dream. Now, I finally achieved it but it's not usable because of the gearing. :banghead: 

What do you think I can get away with with the stock head components as far as rev limits? I'm sitting on the limiter for 2-3 seconds at every power spots (there is also an annoying stumble/hick-up after you get off the limiter before the throttle is restored).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

nemo1ner said:


> Yep, same guy. That car is ridiculously fast.


 Yeah dude, I'm still pumped from chasing Randy Petshauer in the red SSP GT3 with that Evo.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Someone is autoX a Ford Falcon, neat. Did it have a Windsor in it? I almost bought one of these in HS because it was cheap. 


I've been beating on my motor to 7800rpm on stock valve train (GT30R, AEB head, bigger intake mainfold etc) for years, haven't dropped a valve bouncing of the rev limiter (maybe not as often as you) but definitely in 1st/2nd. I am sure Adam has done similar if not higher RPM for more miles?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

tedgram said:


> I've been told with stock valve train not to exceed 7500 RPM.


 Cool! I'm at 7100 now, so I'll flash for 7500 and hope for the best. I could use everything I can get.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> Someone is autoX a Ford Falcon, neat. Did it have a Windsor in it? I almost bought one of these in HS because it was cheap.


 All I know is that it was loud, fast in the straights, and had to park it through the corners like all C-prepared cars... Oh almost forgot, the owner had the mullet that seems to be a pre-requisite to running these wild beasts.:laugh: 



18T_BT said:


> I've been beating on my motor to 7800rpm on stock valve train (GT30R, AEB head, bigger intake mainfold etc) for years, haven't dropped a valve bouncing of the rev limiter (maybe not as often as you) but definitely in 1st/2nd. I am sure Adam has done similar if not higher RPM for more miles?


 Thanks Val! That's going to help a lot 7100-7800 limiter bump... Doing the happy dance at work. :thumbup:


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

I bet that falcon weighs more than your TT, so it has to be a pig in the turns  


I set it to 7800 because I did have it at 7500 and figured, maybe I could potentially let my foot shift at 7500 so I don't get the dreaded delay of which you speak, but DBW isn't fast enough for my foot it seems  or the opposite, haha. So, I left it at 7800 with no ill effects for many years now. I remember Frankie use to use like 8200rpm on stock valve train, but most folks try sticking to the 7500 number for extra precaution.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

I spun stock AEB's to 8400 for a long time before a valve finally dropped. I'd think 7500-7750 wouldn't cause any issues, but there's no guarantees. Also, the history of the head I had that dropped a valve was unknown (mileage, oil used, etc). It was a quick fix to get the car back on the road at the time. I was just crusing at 45 mph when it dropped too. I'm of the opinion that EGT's play more of a roll in it as well as valve guide wear, more so than max rpms. 

Carnage = :thumbdown:


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

What about the limit of the stock springs creating valve float at high RPM's... or is that just a myth?

I'd agree with Adam that EGT is the main killer of hollow valve stems. I think I weakened my stock exhaust valves over time with a crappy tune and relentlessly beating on it. When I dropped a valve I was driving like a grandma at about 15mph. This was on pump gas and Uni though.

With Max's E85/water/awic I think his in cylinder temps are very low. I think we've chatted about his EGT's being higher due to trying to move 35+ psi through a K04.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> I spun stock AEB's to 8400 for a long time before a valve finally dropped. I'd think 7500-7750 wouldn't cause any issues, but there's no guarantees. Also, the history of the head I had that dropped a valve was unknown (mileage, oil used, etc). It was a quick fix to get the car back on the road at the time. I was just crusing at 45 mph when it dropped too. I'm of the opinion that EGT's play more of a roll in it as well as valve guide wear, more so than max rpms.
> 
> Carnage = :thumbdown:


 Ok cool, thanks for the reassurance that this thing can be spun close to 8K without blowing on the first few passes. I have very high pressure on both side of the exhaust valves, but my EGTs are low (considering the amount of heat the turbo is generating). I have decided on setting the limiter at 7800 rpm, Gonzo is doing a few other things for me on the reflash and hopefully I can't track test it this weekend. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DougLoBue said:


> *What about the limit of the stock springs creating valve float at high RPM's... or is that just a myth*?
> 
> I'd agree with Adam that EGT is the main killer of hollow valve stems. I think I weakened my stock exhaust valves over time with a crappy tune and relentlessly beating on it. When I dropped a valve I was driving like a grandma at about 15mph. This was on pump gas and Uni though.
> 
> With Max's E85/water/awic I think his in cylinder temps are very low. I think we've chatted about his EGT's being higher due to trying to move 35+ psi through a K04.


 Doug, I'm pretty sure the fear with valve float is simply passed along the internet from other platforms with the problem. There is this bench test video where our head was spun to 7500 rpm without any sign of float whatsoever. I think the Achilles' heal of our top end is the exhaust valves weakness to extended heat. Time will tell because I'm gonna push it! 

1.8t head rotation test at 7500 rpm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3HwJDxgLUU


----------



## jbrehm (May 16, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The stupid short gearing in that 6 speed O2M is killing me. Having a turbo car spooling and moving through the revs so quickly is every auto-xer's wet dream. Now, I finally achieved it but it's not usable because of the gearing. :banghead:


 Convert to DSG!  I wasn't sure about the DSG at first, but not having to shift 94 times in 3 blocks of rush hour traffic is heavenly. Not having to pull the tranny for biannual clutch work is also appreciated :laugh: Seriously though, a DSG would have to shave a good amount of time from your runs; although, I'm sure it's not legal in your class. 

IIRC, I was spinning 7500RPM (daily occurrence) before my head was built - no issues whatsoever.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

jbrehm said:


> Convert to DSG!  I wasn't sure about the DSG at first, but not having to shift 94 times in 3 blocks of rush hour traffic is heavenly. Not having to pull the tranny for biannual clutch work is also appreciated :laugh: Seriously though, a DSG would have to shave a good amount of time from your runs; although, I'm sure it's not legal in your class.
> 
> IIRC, I was spinning 7500RPM (daily occurrence) before my head was built - no issues whatsoever.


 Jeremy, I don't think I'd be able to deal with tranny internals made out of glass, although if feasible a complete swap from 3.2TT would be legal for my class. :laugh:

Plenty of people seems to have spun the motor to 7500-7800 RPM without instant failure. I think I should be fine for a while raising the limiter to 7800 RPM; but again with the kind of abuse I put components through, who knows how it'll hold up. We'll see!


----------



## jbrehm (May 16, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Jeremy, I don't think I'd be able to deal with tranny internals made out of glass, although if feasible a complete swap from 3.2TT would be legal for my class. :laugh:


 Max, you know better than to follow the status quo!  There are a few guys that I've talked to that are over 600wTQ with the stock DSG clutch packs and a tune. You didn't think I'd settle for NA 3.2 power, did you? :laugh: I have a 6262 here I'll be putting on, or possibly a 6766 if I feel the itch for more. 

In any case, it's obviously up to you to decide whether or not it's worth trading the $$$ for the shaved times and no more clutch changes. For how much work you put into squeezing every tenth out of every system in your racecar, I'm surprised that you've never mentioned going DSG. 

Superb work on the exhaust, as usual!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

jbrehm said:


> Max, you know better than to follow the status quo!  There are a few guys that I've talked to that are over 600wTQ with the stock DSG clutch packs and a tune. You didn't think I'd settle for NA 3.2 power, did you? :laugh: I have a 6262 here I'll be putting on, or possibly a 6766 if I feel the itch for more.
> 
> In any case, it's obviously up to you to decide whether or not it's worth trading the $$$ for the shaved times and no more clutch changes. For how much work you put into squeezing every tenth out of every system in your racecar, I'm surprised that you've never mentioned going DSG.
> 
> Superb work on the exhaust, as usual!


OH, I know that you can't stay without big power (I'm also counting down how long Doug will stay playing with baby power before he goes through withdrawals). :laugh: 

I am going by what the racers in Europe are reporting from track use on them (I've even talked, through several emails, to a guy that did a swap on a 1.8t lupo). The reports are that they are a definite improvement in shifting speed, but whatever is gained through the quickness is lost through the lack of feedback (not inspiring is how the racers are describing it). Everyone in the racing circle seems to agree that they're very good in upshifts but leaves the driver banging their heads in the downshifts because the rev-match is not dialed for racing purposes. The guy in the lupo told me that they only did it because they do endurance racing and it helps the drivers with fatigue although they all hate it and are not faster overall in a single lap. 

I also see that a lot of reinforcement work need to be done to make them reliable for track environment. That's not a big deal but I also wonder how that smart box would react to my left-foot-braking habit (would likely freak out and/or brake prematurely). I have made my mind though on a dog box when I finally graduate to a bigger turbo and racing class.


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

Mk2 GTI. 1.8T. Haldex. 5857. 2014 :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DougLoBue said:


> Mk2 GTI. 1.8T. Haldex. 5857. 2014 :laugh:


I knew it! Not stroked??? As you know, the 5857 is borderline unusable with only 1.8L of displacement.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

DougLoBue said:


> Mk2 GTI. 1.8T. Haldex. 5857. 2014 :laugh:


Winning. :thumbup:


----------



## jbrehm (May 16, 2006)

DougLoBue said:


> Mk2 GTI. 1.8T. Haldex. 5857. 2014 :laugh:


Nice. Makes me want to hang on to my Haldex swap, which is basically all that's left of my car.


Max, can you elaborate on beefing up the DSG for racing? Admittedly, everyone that I talked to about the DSG limits was not doing any heavy road racing. Are these guys running DSG software? The stock programming definitely has some blips, but it's obviously all software related, and I'm pretty sure it will be ironed out with some UM programming. PM me if you want to keep it off your thread.


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

DougLoBue said:


> Mk2 GTI. 1.8T. Haldex. 5857. 2014 :laugh:


You got a good life insurance policy yet Doug? opcorn:


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> You got a good life insurance policy yet Doug? opcorn:



You know it chief! I'm so happy Verdict has decided to sponsor the project! 

You guys all coming by this weekend? :beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DougLoBue said:


> You know it chief! I'm so happy Verdict has decided to sponsor the project!
> 
> You guys all coming by this weekend? :beer::beer:


+ you always wear a helmet... or is it the signature earflap hat? :laugh:

Are we doing Bottomz-up? eace:eace:


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

DougLoBue said:


> You know it chief! I'm so happy Verdict has decided to sponsor the project!
> 
> You guys all coming by this weekend? :beer::beer:



 We will be down Saturday! 
:beer::beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Made an interesting discovery that's worth sharing while flashing a much needed bump in rev limit over the weekend. The Long Term Fuel Trims in my early 01 AMU narrowband car is disabled from the factory. Although having LTFT is a good thing for most, not having it explains what allowed me to have that much control and consistency over my fuel curve by using Unisettings/Lemmiwinks. Others with wideband and perhaps later generation AMU ECUs with enabled LTFT have struggled it seems to make fuel curves modifications that remains as consistent after adaptation. 

While loading the new file with bumped rev limiter, we tried enabling LTFT to see what effect it would have on the car. The result was a complete failure, the fuel curve was all over the place once it started adapting (almost as if the Unisetting tweaks were all zeroed out). Flashing the car with LTFT disabled again (same lambda request map and everything) solved the weird behavior. Consistent WOT fuel curve with the ability to raise or lower it (by an overall percentage) with Unisetting. I thought I'd share! :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Came home today to find a box from 42DD waiting for me. Nice it's my experimental prototype downpipe with 4" expansion chamber! 

Same exceptional quality and craftsmanship that comes with any 42DD product (I wouldn't expect any less from this 5 star crew). This came just in time to be installed and tested before waterfest.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Anyone calling dibs on my standard 42DD downpipe? After this is fitted tonight and dyno tested on Friday, I won't have any use for the 3" one (and it's in mint condition).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Installed, and taken for a non-spirited test drive. Initial toughts are that it sounds awesome (engine has a different, meaner tone with the new downpipe. Spool up feels great, but I wasn't pushing it so I can't really assess the power delivery differences. Easier to install than the standard DP, and not a single clearance issue (despite the enormous 4" expansion). Thank-you John and the rest of the crew at 42 DD, you guys are the best! 


The installed pics don't do it justice, the thing is ginormous, and will really open up the choked, unwanted spiral flow for some good turbulent flow out the hotside. Can't wait to see what it does on the dyno.


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

Mmm that thing looks beastly!! Can't wait to see the dyno numbers and comparison to the previous 3in. 


Sent from my postoffice using a carrier pigeon


----------



## deltaP (Jul 26, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Anyone calling dibs on my standard 42DD downpipe? After this is fitted tonight and dyno tested on Friday, I won't have any use for the 3" one (and it's in mint condition).


Dibs?!


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

They did a great job making that beast fit in such a small spot. Well done 42 :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

deltaP said:


> Dibs?!


You got a PM Clay! :beer:


----------



## 96AAAjetta (Jul 7, 2008)

Loving that downpipe Max! With people like you constantly coming up with improvements and new gadgets, this platform may never die. Now we just need an intelligent, informed owner base with massive bank accounts, and all will be well. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

96AAAjetta said:


> Loving that downpipe Max! With people like you constantly coming up with improvements and new gadgets, this platform may never die. Now we just need an intelligent, informed owner base with massive bank accounts, and all will be well. :thumbup:


Yeah, intelligent owner base is key to keep moving forward with the platform Josh (massive bank accounts helps but can only get you so far). With all the young kids buying these cars lately and "stancing" them, I'm not 100% sure we're headed in the right direction. Oh well... time will tell, mine isn't going anywhere (unless I crash it knock on wood) and I have a laundry list of development projects in line for me to tackle on this platform. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Finally got a chance to modify a stock MKIV R rear swaybar to use in the car. The R32 rear bar is 15 mm instead of our stock post-recall 14 mm one, and better sized for the chassis without being too stiff and inducing unwanted inside rear wheel lift. Like the stock bar, I drilled some new holes to give it some adjustability (helpful when racing because you can setup for low grip asphalt to high traction surfaces like concrete, on the fly). 

As far as driving feel, it's a nice bump in rear stiffness over stock (very noticeable). I'd say it's a cheap and worthy upgrade for our cars that is not overpowering like some of the huge aftermarket rear bars that create more problem than solutions. 



*Outer hole is stock, while the inner hole is drilled to provide a significant percentage increase in bar rate*


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Made an interesting discovery that's worth sharing while flashing a much needed bump in rev limit over the weekend. The Long Term Fuel Trims in my early 01 AMU narrowband car is disabled from the factory. Although having LTFT is a good thing for most, not having it explains what allowed me to have that much control and consistency over my fuel curve by using Unisettings/Lemmiwinks. Others with wideband and perhaps later generation AMU ECUs with enabled LTFT have struggled it seems to make fuel curves modifications that remains as consistent after adaptation.
> 
> While loading the new file with bumped rev limiter, we tried enabling LTFT to see what effect it would have on the car. The result was a complete failure, the fuel curve was all over the place once it started adapting (almost as if the Unisetting tweaks were all zeroed out). Flashing the car with LTFT disabled again (same lambda request map and everything) solved the weird behavior. Consistent WOT fuel curve with the ability to raise or lower it (by an overall percentage) with Unisetting. I thought I'd share! :beer:


This is interesting... I've been noticing that my Unisetting fueling tweaks don't seem to be working either.

For example - I've just installed an OEM big port intake mani and had to switch from the TT225 injectors to the stock 1.8T's... 386cc down to 317cc's. LTFT were at +21% so I upped the fuel on load accordingly --> LTFT were still at +21%. I reset fuel on load to zero and swapped an adjustable FTR instead.

So problem solved but I do plan to swap this Unitronic for a Gonzo tune fairly soon... wonder if we should try disabling LTFT as well?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> This is interesting... I've been noticing that my Unisetting fueling tweaks don't seem to be working either.
> 
> For example - I've just installed an OEM big port intake mani and had to switch from the TT225 injectors to the stock 1.8T's... 386cc down to 317cc's. LTFT were at +21% so I upped the fuel on load accordingly --> LTFT were still at +21%. I reset fuel on load to zero and swapped an adjustable FTR instead.
> 
> So problem solved but I do plan to swap this Unitronic for a Gonzo tune fairly soon... wonder if we should try disabling LTFT as well?


Having LTFT is the proper way of doing things (something goes wrong, it adapts within a certain range), so with a Gonzo tune I wouldn't go disable it for the sake of being able to do Unisetting fueling tweaks that sticks. I am still using this hacked narrowband job in my car just because I haven't invested in a wideband ECU, conversion harness, and tune. It works damn well for what it is, so I'm not in a rush to go change it, but it's not ideal by any means. Getting a proper tune with fuel adaptation enabled is the right way of doing it (don't be a stubborn cheapie like me :laugh.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

A couple of weeks ago I upgraded my VCDS software from 11.11.1 to 11.11.6 for my Hex + Can and I am now having a hard time getting Unisettings into my ECU. I can get in after numerous trys but when trying to make changes have to make numerous trys again it's been a real pain. :banghead: Ross-tech used to have a list of older software but can't seem to find it now, would like to go back to 11.11.1.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

JohnnyLlama. said:


> It seems that most people do not know that LTFT's do not work properly on these ECU's


Are you referring to AMU ECU's, or all narrowband 1.8T ECU's, like ATC, AWD, etc. 



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Made an interesting discovery that's worth sharing while flashing a much needed bump in rev limit over the weekend. The Long Term Fuel Trims in my early 01 AMU narrowband car is disabled from the factory. Although having LTFT is a good thing for most, not having it explains what allowed me to have that much control and consistency over my fuel curve by using Unisettings/Lemmiwinks. Others with wideband and perhaps later generation AMU ECUs with enabled LTFT have struggled it seems to make fuel curves modifications that remains as consistent after adaptation.
> 
> While loading the new file with bumped rev limiter, we tried enabling LTFT to see what effect it would have on the car. The result was a complete failure, the fuel curve was all over the place once it started adapting (almost as if the Unisetting tweaks were all zeroed out). Flashing the car with LTFT disabled again (same lambda request map and everything) solved the weird behavior. Consistent WOT fuel curve with the ability to raise or lower it (by an overall percentage) with Unisetting. I thought I'd share! :beer:


Explains why most of your suggestions for my AFR didn't make sense to me and didn't produce the expected results. I really need to install a wideband. :laugh:

DP looks awesome. :thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

JohnnyLlama. said:


> Early AMU. I *think* later AMU has it fixed but all the examples I've seen all have LTFT's nuked.
> 
> ATC is OK. I was thinking of flashing Max with ATC software and go from there but I think that's an exercise in futility when he can just upgrade to a wideband setup.


Interesting. Is the only way possible to tell by seeing the AFR curve shift with setting changes if you don't have anything other than VAG COM/Unisetting?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Are you referring to AMU ECU's, or all narrowband 1.8T ECU's, like ATC, AWD, etc.
> 
> Explains why most of your suggestions for my AFR didn't make sense to me and didn't produce the expected results. I really need to install a wideband. :laugh:
> 
> DP looks awesome. :thumbup:


In the AMU engine code ECUs, it seems to be limited to early generations only. I've seen later AMU cars where LTFT was active. I don't know if it's the same with the other engine codes, and I never really thought too much of it and simply assumed it was something specific to the old school "stage 1" flash that was on the car.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

JohnnyLlama. said:


> Block 032 will have the second value stuck at 0%


Correct, the 2nd value of my block 32 (labeled "Part Throttle value") always stayed at zero from day one. The short term (labeled "Idle Value) always worked though!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> In the AMU engine code ECUs, it seems to be limited to early generations only. I've seen later AMU cars where LTFT was active. I don't know if it's the same with the other engine codes, and I never really thought too much of it and simply assumed it was something specific to the old school "stage 1" flash that was on the car.


What's your build date?


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Having LTFT is the proper way of doing things (something goes wrong, it adapts within a certain range), so with a Gonzo tune I wouldn't go disable it for the sake of being able to do Unisetting fueling tweaks that sticks. I am still using this hacked narrowband job in my car just because I haven't invested in a wideband ECU, conversion harness, and tune. It works damn well for what it is, so I'm not in a rush to go change it, but it's not ideal by any means. Getting a proper tune with fuel adaptation enabled is the right way of doing it (don't be a stubborn cheapie like me :laugh.


Gottcha - this and the follow up responses are filling in the gaps about the condition you're seeing… just wanted to double-check on how specific this LTFT case was :beer:

Haha, I agree about the tune too. I would have upgraded already but I've recently blown the seals in my turbo - she smokes like a chimney on any kind of load or vacuum :facepalm: I'll fix that and then see about the tune


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Gottcha - this and the follow up responses are filling in the gaps about the condition you're seeing… just wanted to double-check on how specific this LTFT case was :beer:
> 
> Haha, I agree about the tune too. I would have upgraded already but I've recently blown the seals in my turbo - she smokes like a chimney on any kind of load or vacuum :facepalm: I'll fix that and then see about the tune


Time to move up to the K04-02X? 

There's is one in the TT classified for $150 and I'll have a spare exhaust manifold soon when I install my ported unit. I think it would be a nice upgrade for you!


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

A chronicle of a different track TT. 

Off to NASA Time Trials at Autobahn


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Good luck at the Time Trials :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Good luck at the Time Trials :thumbup::thumbup:


X2, show them how it's done in a TT Steve!

BTW, I love the old school van hauler, done in a true grassroots fashion :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Time to move up to the K04-02X?
> 
> There's is one in the TT classified for $150 and I'll have a spare exhaust manifold soon when I install my ported unit. I think it would be a nice upgrade for you!


Lol… you're a bad influence man… up to no-good & doing it with a smile… I have some unfinished testing to do with the K03 and then we'll see!

Nice job with the manifold BTW… can't wait to hear how it performs :thumbup:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> X2, show them how it's done in a TT Steve!
> 
> BTW, I love the old school van hauler, done in a true grassroots fashion :thumbup::thumbup:


I ruptured a turbo-to-charge pipe hose and couldn't find a replacement. You're running much more boost than me. What silicone connectors do you use?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> I ruptured a turbo-to-charge pipe hose and couldn't find a replacement. You're running much more boost than me. What silicone connectors do you use?


I grew tired of wrestling with the OEM ones (keep on failing with elevated boost and temperature). I went to my local hydraulic hose place and grabbed a heavy duty 90 silicone reducer. Never had a problem since, and it's been over two years seeing a lot of pressure.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I grew tired of wrestling with the OEM ones (keep on failing with elevated boost and temperature). I went to my local hydraulic hose place and grabbed a heavy duty 90 silicone reducer. Never had a problem since, and it's been over two years seeing a lot of pressure.


Mine wasn't OEM. It was a 4-ply from Silicone Intakes supposedly rated to 200 PSI. I suppose it could have been defective (or mis-rated). Any additional information about the piece you have would be appreciated.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> Mine wasn't OEM. It was a 4-ply from Silicone Intakes supposedly rated to 200 PSI. I suppose it could have been defective (or mis-rated). Any additional information about the piece you have would be appreciated.


Steve, not all silicone hoses are created equal. That's why I went to the hydraulic hose place, these guys have some serious heavy duty stuff. The one I got, I could barely get it move squeezing with both ends (rigid because of the extra reinforcement). Your local hydraulic hose place should have similar stuff, just bring yours as a sample so they can match the angle and inlet/outlet ID. I don't have the exact specs on it, but I went for something with high burst pressure and temperature rating. 

In reality, for the position of that hose and using the stock metal outlet pipe (rigidly mounted), a hump hose is what would be ideal to allow some room for deflection without having the hose stressed and failing on a consistent basis. In the 225 setup, I found that not using the bracket closer to the firewall helps. The bracket towards the nose of the car is plenty to secure the pipe and deleting the second one helped relieve some of the stress on the hose. Spring-loaded constant pressure T-bolt clamps are a good idea everywhere but even more so at that location (where keeping constant pressure on the hose is key).


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> In the 225 setup, I found that not using the bracket closer to the firewall helps. The bracket towards the nose of the car is plenty to secure the pipe and deleting the second one helped relieve some of the stress on the hose.


I think you are spot on that charge pipe movement is a significant contributor to the failure. However, my thinking was going in the opposite direction. Since the turbo is mounted hard to the block, I thought it made more sense to fix the charge pipe closest to the turbo (upgrading my fabricated rear bracket which likely has some flex). At the front, I feel there is a sufficient length of silicone to allow the necessary flex where the charge pipe connects to the chassis (FMIC piping) where the movement needs to be - especially with my VF mounts.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> I think you are spot on that charge pipe movement is a significant contributor to the failure. However, my thinking was going in the opposite direction. Since the turbo is mounted hard to the block, I thought it made more sense to fix the charge pipe closest to the turbo (upgrading my fabricated rear bracket which likely has some flex). At the front, I feel there is a sufficient length of silicone to allow the necessary flex where the charge pipe connects to the chassis (FMIC piping) where the movement needs to be - especially with my VF mounts.


 
Problem with making the after-charge pipe solid next to the compressor outlet, is that turbo's hotside, through expansion/contraction (with the severe and rapid heat cycles), will glow orange and move several mm and back everytime you really get on it. The hose is what absorbs all this heated stress when the pipe is fixed, and that's why I think a hump hose might be a good idea at that location, or allow the pipe to move with the turbo.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Problem with making the after-charge pipe solid next to the compressor outlet, is that turbo's hotside, through expansion/contraction (with the severe and rapid heat cycles), will glow orange and move several mm and back everytime you really get on it. The hose is what absorbs all this heated stress when the pipe is fixed, and that's why I think a hump hose might be a good idea at that location, or allow the pipe to move with the turbo.


This looks like the one. This would fit my modified charge pipe. 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/161065246676?item=161065246676&viewitem=&vxp=mtr










They refer to it as 5-ply. I'm trying to confirm the strength. This pic of a different hose by the same manufacturer and seller seems to show four layers of reinforcement which would mean 5 layers of silicone - stronger than the one that burst (which had four of silicone and three of reinforcement).


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

Hmm I'm missing this coupler on my project TT.... late Apex how is your charge pipe modified?


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

DougLoBue said:


> Hmm I'm missing this coupler on my project TT.... late Apex how is your charge pipe modified?


The resonator is removed and 2.5" OD straight pipe welded in its place.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Do you notice any change with the resonator removed?


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

tedgram said:


> A couple of weeks ago I upgraded my VCDS software from 11.11.1 to 11.11.6 for my Hex + Can and I am now having a hard time getting Unisettings into my ECU. I can get in after numerous trys but when trying to make changes have to make numerous trys again it's been a real pain. :banghead: Ross-tech used to have a list of older software but can't seem to find it now, would like to go back to 11.11.1.


 Problem has progressed to the point were I'm only getting com errors on my laptop no matter what software I'm trying and same with Liquid gauge. Hope replacing my DLC plug will fix the problem. 
Not being able to advance my ignition timing hurt my top speed at the time trials this weekend even though my boost never dropped below 20 psi in sixth gear. Set my record with 9 psi at 6000 rpm last year couldn't get my rpm over 5700 in sixth.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

tedgram said:


> Do you notice any change with the resonator removed?


It was removed when I got it.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> This looks like the one. This would fit my modified charge pipe.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/161065246676?item=161065246676&viewitem=&vxp=mtr
> 
> 
> ...


This should work (especially having an expending hump)! The more reinforcement layers, the better but with ebay stuff it's always a gamble with manufacturing quality. I would definitely give that one a try though. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I got a chance to make seat brackets and install some OMP RS seats I recently scored. The seats are nice, light, strong, a perfect fit for the tight roadster interior, and have FIA homologation. They tip the scale at 25 lbs with bracket, which a big improvement over the OEM heavy weights. 

Seating position spot on now (not off center like OEM) and super supportive. There is provision for anti submarine belt(s) in 5 or 6 points layouts, so I'll probably upgrade to that later. Perfect timing for waterfest autocross competition over the weekend.

Driver side fitment:










My co-driver AKA the Stig (who kindly took off work to come over and help me with this) testing the seating position:


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Interesting steering wheel. Where is it from?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

tedgram said:


> Interesting steering wheel. Where is it from?


D style Sparco 310 mm


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

Looking good Max:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

warranty225cpe said:


> Looking good Max:thumbup:


Thanks brother!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Any plans to tip the scales while at E-town? Good luck this weekend. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Any plans to tip the scales while at E-town? Good luck this weekend. :beer:


Yeah, I'd love to see where it's sitting at nowadays. Thanks, I need the luck (especially in the drag competition)!


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yeah, I'd love to see where it's sitting at nowadays. Thanks, I need the luck (especially in the drag competition)!


Max, please get someone to take some good video. ic:


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

Needs the 45 PSI boost gauge installed :laugh:

Nice seats :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DougLoBue said:


> Needs the 45 PSI boost gauge installed :laugh:
> 
> Nice seats :thumbup::thumbup:


It is installed, I was just using old pictures to show Ted the steering wheel. Seats are really nice, even without the add-on bolsters and lumbar supports, you're going to like it!


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> It is installed, I was just using old pictures to show Ted the steering wheel. Seats are really nice, even without the add-on bolsters and lumbar supports, you're going to like it!


I bet I will... if I fit! I'll need to your personal diet plan :beer::beer::beer::beer:


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I got a chance to make seat brackets and install some OMP RS seats I recently scored. The seats are nice, light, strong, a perfect fit for the tight roadster interior, and have FIA homologation. They tip the scale at 25 lbs with bracket, which a big improvement over the OEM heavy weights.
> 
> Seating position spot on now (not off center like OEM) and super supportive. There is provision for anti submarine belt(s) in 5 or 6 points layouts, so I'll probably upgrade to that later. Perfect timing for waterfest autocross competition over the weekend.
> 
> ...



NICE Max! Good Luck this weekend! 

-Joe


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Good luck Max! Kick some butt!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

JohnnyLlama. said:


> Should've sold me your steering wheel :thumbup:


If you told me when I was taking it apart, it would've been yours.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

RabbitGTDguy said:


> NICE Max! Good Luck this weekend!
> 
> -Joe





[email protected] said:


> Good luck Max! Kick some butt!


Thanks guys, I'll try my best to make the MK1 TT community proud!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

warranty225cpe said:


> Max, please get someone to take some good video. ic:


I'm going to try to get some half way decent ones for the autocross tomorrow. :beer:




20v master said:


> Any plans to tip the scales while at E-town? :beer:


Full tank of gas with me in it is 3255 lbs, so the car is 3100 lbs with all fluid topped off. (As a reference, Boulderhead's roadster was in the 36xx lbs with driver).


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Good to know! Still 45 lbs more than mine


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Good to know! Still 45 lbs more than mine


I'm happy with 3100 lbs in the heavy roadster with a full tank of gas. There is some good weight to drop still with lighter brakes and wheels. I have wet dreams of a stripped coupe though!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

JohnnyLlama. said:


> I saw your car a couple times but didn't get a chance to catch up.
> 
> I talked to Jeff, though. He made it to finals? Woot woot


Yeah, Jeff made it to the finals but lost to the same Golf R that took me out on the previous round. That car was setup for drag racing with drag radials, a real 2 step, flat shift... not to mention the guy had multiple practice runs in the morning to prepare for the surface and track conditions. That car was just too much for us to handle with our autocross/road racing cars. I made him sweat though when we went, we were neck and neck the whole time with him pulling a little with every flat shift. He ended up getting me by a few tenth (not bad for a car that is trapping 95 mph against another one trapping 105 mph).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Today was a challenge for the TT at the autocross competition.

First, I lost the middle hanger on my exhaust (rubber mount broke), this ended up putting to much stress on the rear hanger and the hole exhaust fell in the middle of my 4th run in the morning. All the rest my runs were lost while I was fixing the exhaust for my co-driver to get his runs. 

Next was my AWIC pump blowing fuses. When it does, I have no intercooling (my Water Injection was also out for the count too due to another dead pump :banghead. With no intercooling, the heat build up so much pressure and exploded my plastic reservoir. I fixed this by running a close loop system with no reservoir. 

The final punch came from us spraying everything with water to keep things cool in between runs (radiator, heat exchanger, AWIC core etc.). In the process, we may have sprayed some wire or something that shorted the ECU and possibly fried it. The car just died and would not start. It cranked, but had no spark. We checked everything from crank sensor, cam sensor, down to every single fuse and relay, but everything was good. We finally threw the towel when VCDS and Unisetting confirmed that there is no communication from the ECU. Left the car there and hoping to be able to go get it back within the next few days with another ECU with immobilizer defeated. I already have a wideband sensor and all I really need is one of those raceline harness conversion (if someone has one and can lend it temporarily, it would be great). 

Besides that, with only half of the runs, I was still able to bring back some hardware and a first place trophy. I also had fastest time of the day for most of the event until the TT-RS beat that time by a hair while the old girl was disabled. The car is really a rocket (when she runs :laugh.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ...with only half of the runs, I was still able to bring back some hardware and a first place trophy. I also had fastest time of the day for most of the event until the TT-RS beat that time by a hair while the old girl was disabled. The car is really a rocket (when it runs :laugh


Epic battle… between you and the TT - but you still pulled it off!!! Lol - Nice work Max; great to hear your perseverance paid off :beer:


----------



## VW indahouse (Feb 25, 2012)

Max just read your chronicle cover to cover. Some top quality work and brilliant ingenuity happening here. Congratulations on a great read :beer:

Do you mind If I get your thought's on the benefit of your exhaust expansion chamber and whether it's benefits (which I'm guessing are to mostly increase spool and turbo efficiency and curb EGT's) out weight the possible loss of exhaust velocity still being a small frame turbo? 

Thanks very much.


----------



## nemo1ner (May 5, 2004)

The car was seriously quick. I was working the course when you and the TT-RS were running. He was also chipped by the afternoon I believe. 

Great driving. :thumbup:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Sorry about your problems - I can relate. However, as I'm sure you appreciate, these are the consequences of pushing the envelope. The sorting out process is frustrating but the community benefits from your efforts.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Way to work through your problems. I was getting com errors from my VCDS and Unisettings last weekend but my car would still run. Good luck with another ECU. Just a thought, had that problem with my wife's A4 couldn't find anything towed to dealer turned out to be a fuseable link to the ECU.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Epic battle… between you and the TT - but you still pulled it off!!! Lol - Nice work Max; great to hear your perseverance paid off :beer:





nemo1ner said:


> The car was seriously quick. I was working the course when you and the TT-RS were running. He was also chipped by the afternoon I believe.
> 
> Great driving. :thumbup:


Thanks guys!



Late__Apex said:


> Sorry about your problems - I can relate. However, as I'm sure you appreciate, these are the consequences of pushing the envelope. The sorting out process is frustrating but the community benefits from your efforts.


Yes my friend, it's all good. I would do it again any day, and I don't think I would change one thing (except maybe having AAA or having it trailered on long distance events like you're doing :laugh. 



tedgram said:


> Way to work through your problems. I was getting com errors from my VCDS and Unisettings last weekend but my car would still run. Good luck with another ECU. Just a thought, had that problem with my wife's A4 couldn't find anything towed to dealer turned out to be a fuseable link to the ECU.


Hopefully it is something simple like a fuseable link that was overlooked. DougLobue talked some sense into me today and I'm just going to tow the car back today and deal with the issue at home. Bringing spare ECUs and trying to diagnose/fix the problem away from a garage is not the best approach as there is no guarantee it'll get fixed.


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Glad to hear Doug convinced you to tow the car back. Fixing in a parking lot always sucks 

Sucks that you ran into so many problems with the pumps. Perhaps some other OEM pumps perhaps? You can check out some boat bilge pumps as well Max, they are designed to run all the time for long periods. 

Good job on kicking but even with the problems :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

VW indahouse said:


> Max just read your chronicle cover to cover. Some top quality work and brilliant ingenuity happening here. Congratulations on a great read :beer:
> 
> Do you mind If I get your thought's on the benefit of your exhaust expansion chamber and whether it's benefits (which I'm guessing are to mostly increase spool and turbo efficiency and curb EGT's) out weight the possible loss of exhaust velocity still being a small frame turbo?
> 
> Thanks very much.


Firstly, the expansion-chambered downpipe provided a huge improvement in spool-up time. It was there and very noticeable from the first WOT pull after the install. But at the track, it became very clear that this thing is a success and a must-have for anyone that takes turns in Motorsport conditions. It just made the car a rocket coming out of slow turns where spool time would be taxing any turbo car. The best way I can describe what it did in the spooling characteristics, is the car slingshots out of turns now, instead of steadily accelerating from them. 

Secondly, in terms of the physics behind it, there shouldn't be any loss of velocity but in fact improved flow out of the hotside. Normally, airflow coming out of the turbine wheel is in a spiral shape (the speed of the spinning wheel dictates the direction of the flow, which could be either following the blade rotation or spiralling in a counter rotation). This spiral effect is not ideal for flow and also reduces the gases velocity. By expanding the area right after the turbine, you effectively allow the otherwise spiraling exhaust flow to become turbulent. When the flow becomes turbulent (whirlpool-like), it allows the gases to move faster away from the choke point (turbine wheel and housing size). This is why you're able to achieve an improvement in flow and velocity by doing this. The closer to the exducer you can expand, the more effective the result will be, but obviously we all have to deal with space and packaging restrictions. 

I don't have the dyno data to quantify the results over the entire powerband, and didnt log/compare peak EGT differences yet. However, I can already say that the improvement in spool alone is well worth it for applications like mine and yours. Stay tuned and the raw data will be available in this thread as soon as the car is back and running again. :beer:

The dynamics involved in providing expansion to the spirally gases:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

... and a bit of explanation of the concept (better than mine ).


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

Well done Max!!! :beer:

Do you think that a BT like mine would benefit from running an expansion chamber. What kind of improvements do you think I might see by adding a 4" expansion chamber, on my 5858?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

So your drag times were without water injection and with no AWIC flow? 95mph and only gaining 18mph on the back half are not indicative of what this car can do. Ouch to track day troubles.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Dowski12 said:


> Well done Max!!! :beer:
> 
> Do you think that a BT like mine would benefit from running an expansion chamber. What kind of improvements do you think I might see by adding a 4" expansion chamber, on my 5858?


Steph, any turbo where there is some substantial turbine-side restriction will see some benefits to doing this. The question is: are you pushing the turbine hard enough to reach it's design limits?

First thing would be to determine the design qualities or flaws, and then find out if your operating conditions are a going to be problematic for the packaged hardware. A 5858 IMO is not even running hard if your not motivating it to compress 40+ psi for you - and if your going to make the turbo work like God intended it to do, an expansion-chambered downpipe for the hotside will always be beneficial. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> So your drag times were without water injection and with no AWIC flow? 95mph and only gaining 18mph on the back half are not indicative of what this car can do. Ouch to track day troubles.


Adam, the drag runs were without water injection (pump was confirmed dead even before leaving home), and possibly without intercooling as well. I realized first thing the next day at the autocross (which is BTW 10 times more taxing on components) that my AWIC pump fuse was blown and leaving me with no intercooling.

I am not versed enough in drag racing dynamics to fully interpret the back half mph gain vs the trapped speed in the 1/8 mile. All I know is that the driver sucked, didn't really care too much (A/C blasting all day), and was a big let down to what the car could really do if setup and driven well.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Glad to hear Doug convinced you to tow the car back. Fixing in a parking lot always sucks
> 
> Sucks that you ran into so many problems with the pumps. Perhaps some other OEM pumps perhaps? You can check out some boat bilge pumps as well Max, they are designed to run all the time for long periods.
> 
> Good job on kicking but even with the problems :thumbup::thumbup:


Noah, the quality of the standard water injection pumps is terrible. These things fail on the regular which sucks because it's one of these things you'd want to be reliable. I am really getting tired of changing water injection pump after water injection pumps. 

As for the pump used in my AWIC, it has not failed completely yet. It was blowing fuses every couple of runs at the track, but the heat, and us spraying to cool things down, may have contributed to the fuses popping. I'm also not sure if higher amperage fuses is needed for the harsh operating conditions. 

My plan is to run a twin pump setup with OEM spec pumps like the Bosh that you recommended, but I wanted to kill the pair of utility pumps I purchased initially for the project. I don't think I want/need to complicate the setup with a big tank that would house a bilge pump (harder to fix at the track if needed). However, if I decide to give up on water injection because components are proving to be so unreliable in track conditions, I'll definitely improve the AWIC potential with a trunk mounted ice reservoir with a huge bilge pump. We'll see how this plays out! :beer:


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Today was a challenge for the TT at the autocross competition.
> 
> First, I lost the middle hanger on my exhaust (rubber mount broke), this ended up putting to much stress on the rear hanger and the hole exhaust fell in the middle of my 4th run in the morning. All the rest my runs were lost while I was fixing the exhaust for my co-driver to get his runs.
> 
> ...


Sorry to hear about your woes Max, but you kept the community proud! 

On the wideband swap with IMMO defeated ECU. Can run a few leads to the new ECU and such instead of having to get the wideband harness from Raceline. I did it this way when I converted to wideband (Maestro on AWP ECU) with no issues. 

I want to get that modified dp so badly! 

Said Golf R...have to say. With the advantages that FSI/direct injection has in smooth, reliable power over us (just taking the wife's Tiguan for example)...its amazing that you were hanging with him, etc. The simple mods and power that the FSI guys are able to achieve from "simple" (but expensive) things or even just a flash is truly impressive and even more so a "feat" on your end with still having success! 

Joe


----------



## misternoob (Oct 25, 2009)

JohnnyLlama. said:


> You might be pushing the AWIC pump a little too hard?
> 
> Or maybe your fuse/wire cannot cope with the load?
> 
> ...


*cough*I have a TT that would welcome all sorts of upgrades*cough* 

I'm really annoyed at myself for not going to WF this year. Looks like I missed a lot.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> As for the pump used in my AWIC, it has not failed completely yet. It was blowing fuses every couple of runs at the track, but the heat, and us spraying to cool things down, may have contributed to the fuses popping. I'm also not sure if higher amperage fuses is needed for the harsh operating conditions.
> 
> :beer:


Aren't you running the AWIC pump on a relay? How much amperage do they draw?

Found a couple of interesting sites on Bilge Pump Reviews. Rule pumps seem to be recommended often for reliability. Attwood and Jabsco ( Impellor style, not diaphram ) also look good.

http://www.bestbilgepumpsreviews.com/

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/bilge_pumps.htm


----------



## VW indahouse (Feb 25, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Firstly, the expansion-chambered downpipe provided a huge improvement in spool-up time. It was there and very noticeable from the first WOT pull after the install. But at the track, it became very clear that this thing is a success and a must-have for anyone that takes turns in Motorsport conditions. It just made the car a rocket coming out of slow turns where spool time time would be taxing any turbo car. The best way I can describe what it did in the spooling characteristics, is the car slingshots out of turns now, instead of steadily accelerating from them.
> 
> Secondly, in terms of the physics behind it, there shouldn't be any loss of velocity but in fact improved flow out of the hotside. Normally, airflow coming out of the turbine wheel is in a spiral shape (the speed of the spinning wheel dictates the direction of the flow, which could be either following the blade rotation or spiralling in a counter rotation). This spiral effect is not ideal for flow and also reduces the gases velocity. By expanding the area right after the turbine, you effectively allow the otherwise spiraling exhaust flow to become turbulent. When the flow becomes turbulent (whirlpool-like), it allows the gases to move faster away from the choke point (turbine wheel and housing size). This is why you're able to achieve an improvement in flow and velocity by doing this. The closer to the exducer you can expand, the more effective the result will be, but obviously we all have to deal with space and packaging restrictions.
> 
> ...


Sold, thanks Max just what I wanted to hear. Plus very interested in your data for comparison when shes up and running again. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

JohnnyLlama. said:


> You might be pushing the AWIC pump a little too hard?
> 
> Or maybe your fuse/wire cannot cope with the load?


That's probably the case, I tested the pump in regular driving, some hotlapping, and local autocrossing, but never to the kind of abuse that WF autocross competition put on a car that's been pushed like we do (20 runs per driver with no time to cool down in between runs). 



Chickenman35 said:


> Aren't you running the AWIC pump on a relay? How much amperage do they draw?
> 
> Found a couple of interesting sites on Bilge Pump Reviews. Rule pumps seem to be recommended often for reliability. Attwood and Jabsco ( Impellor style, not diaphram ) also look good.
> 
> ...


I don't have it on a relay (I know I should) and just used the inline fuse provided with the pump (also used the same gauge wire that came standard with the pump wich is probably streesed for the heated environment, extended continous duty conditions). The entire system is going to get re-visited for some "bulletproofing", I have decided to just run a trunk mounted ice box with a bilge pump. I'll use the Rule 1500 which is commonly use in this type of application and even overkill for my capacity. Although I was enjoying a simpler and smaller water system (less weight really), I need redundancy, reliability, and more capacity/potential. Thanks for the links! :beer:


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Just thinking about the plumbing with a Bilge pump using a bottom screen type inlet. How does one prevent air pockets from forming in the system if a bilge pump is used? I can see that keeping air out of the system could pose a problem. An inline Bilge Pump would be easier to keep air pockets out, as compared to a bottom inlet Bilge Pump. 

Depending on AWIC being used and it's location, the intercooler could be higher than the reservoir tank, and that would not be ideal. I supposes an expansion tank placed attached to the tank and placed higher that the intercooler core might work. If intercooler core lower than reservoir tank the problem is not so difficult. 

Inline pump would be easier to use with an Ice Tank, as it is essentially a closed system if you use coiled copper or aluminium tubing in the ice box. Like a " Moroso Cool Can " ( Fuel cooler ). Ice Tank with a bottom feed pump would take some careful planning...... Hmmmm

Edit: Found a couple of interesting threads on building AWIC setups. Specifically for situations other than Drag cars:

http://www.iwsti.com/forums/water-m...r-cooling/199117-t-gs-air-water-ic-build.html

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2147929


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Just thinking about the plumbing with a Bilge pump using a bottom screen type inlet. How does one prevent air pockets from forming in the system if a bilge pump is used? I can see that keeping air out of the system could pose a problem. An inline Bilge Pump would be easier to keep air pockets out, as compared to a bottom inlet Bilge Pump.
> 
> Depending on AWIC being used and it's location, the intercooler could be higher than the reservoir tank, and that would not be ideal. I supposes an expansion tank placed attached to the tank and placed higher that the intercooler core might work. If intercooler core lower than reservoir tank the problem is not so difficult.
> 
> ...


With an Ice box and internal bilge pump, all you need a high mounted reservoir/tank like the one I have currently. As long as the reservoir fluid return inlet is plumbed at the top, and the feed to the pump is at the bottom, the system will self burp any air running in the system before it reaches the pump. It's also a good practice to fill the reservoir a bit under the return inlet level, this way the tank is never pressurized and act as an overflow/expansion tank. 

Some decent reads with the links for anyone looking to get their feet wet with AWIC. There is also a good one in Vortex from back in the days:

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...m-users-I-have-a-question&highlight=AWIC+data


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Aren't you concerned about CG with a high mount reservoir? Considering all that we do to lower the CG for cornering, I would think that you would want to put the reservoir tank for ice/water mix as low as possible???

Or are you running a tall cylinder type reservoir, with a low CG level for water and just the return line up high? That would seem to make sense. Kind of like a small dry sump tank....


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Aren't you concerned about CG with a high mount reservoir? Considering all that we do to lower the CG for cornering, I would think that you would want to put the reservoir tank for ice/water mix as low as possible???
> 
> Or are you running a tall cylinder type reservoir, with a low CG level for water and just the return line up high? That would seem to make sense. Kind of like a small dry sump tank....


I'm not too concerned about the CG difference of a small plastic reservoir with a high fill point in the bay. Even if it had an small impact (which is negligible), it's a needed compromise to have a fluid system free of air pockets (same type of deal as the OEM coolant ball, it could be mounted lower in the frame, but wouldn't serve its purpose).

As you have guessed, I in fact run a modified cylindrical reservoir from RCI with a high return point, a low feed point in the bay, and a bottom mounted drain. I previously ran a second coolant ball, but needed an easy drain solution, and a larger fill neck to replaced the heated fluid dumped with ice water when autocrossing.

The reservoir is the larger black tank on the passenger side of the intake manifold.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

After towing the car back home from Waterfest (which didn't go too smoothly), I went through the car and fixed all the all the little things that needed some work:

- Water injection fixed and back in the mix
- AWIC fixed, revised and fully operational
- Exhaust fixed (was only patched to work at WF)
- Alignment done (had to disconnect the tie-rods to get the car on the trailer because I went there without the keys and steering was locked :facepalm.


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

So interesting read! Keep them coming MAx!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Did a non-competitive test-n-tune event over the weekend, got tons of runs, seat time, and most importantly tested lots of things back-to-back: 

- ran boost at 30 psi, then 33 psi, 35 psi, 37 psi, back to 33 psi and 30 psi as control runs. The clock and behavior on track seems to suggest that 33 psi in second gear is the sweet spot with the current suspension/tire setup. At 30 and 33 psi, I'm able to put power down anytime without wheel spin (I mean anytime from before an early-apex all the way to the exit). At 35-37 psi, straight line acceleration is insane. However, if the wheel aren't pointed straight, the OEM front EDL and open rear diff can't keep up with that much power (maybe more tire would do the trick, so the 315s fronts I used to run may be making a come back soon). 

- Dialed my tire pressure. What a difference, 32 psi hot provided so much front grip and no sidewall roll over that the car feels like a newer EVO (if not better) in transitions and sweepers.  I am carrying so much speed through slaloms, that it is unbelievable that a car that started as understeering pig can become such a handler with the right mods. 

Tested my OEM R32 rear swaybar on the stiff holes, and on asphalt (no so grippy lot) I'm picking up the inside rear tire on anything tight. This prevents you from feeding full throttle until that tripoding wheel is back on the ground, forcing the issue results in a very unsettling pogo-like acceleration (very common with EVOs). I know now that I need to dial the rear bar back to the R32 OEM setting and hopefully that's enough to cure it - if not, I'm going to have to go back to the original 14 mm TT bar. 

- Also tested adding ice to the AWIC setup and increasing the system fluid capacity with a rear mounted keg. The aluminum keg act as a heat sink in the trunk and adds much needed fluid volume. The Keg can take 3 autocross runs before feeling warm to the touch. Unfortunately, none of the logs while on track were successful. The makeshift strap I did for the laptop didn't survive the violent nature of autocrossing and a bumpy lot with lots of elevation changes. Anyway, adding ice to the mix brings the keg temperature (to the touch) back to cool levels in about 1 min. After that, it takes about 3 runs to elevate the keg temp back to where it was before the ice. I know this not scientific without logs or a temp probe (even an IR laser to measure the keg outside temp would provide better data), but that's all I had with the laptop shutting down mid run. 

In conclusion, the car is in a place it has never been in terms of chassis development (probably a place no other MK4 car has been). I can honestly say that besides better brakes, LSD solutions, and a bit of sorting, this car can take on anything in its class. I am still grinning from being able to keep up with a sorted 08 BMW M coupe that is preparing for SCCA Nationals in a couple of weekends with hopes of competing for a national title. I know I'm not too far from the mark with some room stil left for improvement. 

3 runs at 30 psi (best of 57.xx) - 2 runs at 33 psi (best of 55.xx) - 2 runs at 35 (best of 56.xx) - 2 runs at 37 psi (best of 56.xx) - back to 3 runs at 33 psi (best of 55.xx) - and finally going to original 30 psi for the rest of the runs (best of 56.xx). The M coupe had a better time with a 55.275 vs my 55.286, that's what you call "by a hair".


----------



## FatAce (Jan 30, 2012)

Awesome Max! All your hard work is paying off, hopefully everything will be 100% dialed in soon.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Awesome. Just...awesome.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

FatAce said:


> Awesome Max! All your hard work is paying off, hopefully everything will be 100% dialed in soon.


 Thanks, that's the plan! I have pretty much all the data I needed, and have broken/upgraded 99% of the weak links. Goal is to have her fully dialed before the season ends and start working on the biggest weak link... the nut behind the wheel. 

This weekend's victim is the turbo outlet pipe that busted on the run before last! Already contacted the company and found out that this one was rated at 350*C and ordered one rated at 500*C (they also happen to make aerospace and custom stuff, as well as TIP and lower rated hoses for our cars. 
http://www.venair.com/en/industrial/products/


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Awesome. Just...awesome.


 I really can't believe that these cars had so much potential and never caught up in the mainstream road racing/autocrossing world with classes dominated by similar AWD turbo platforms. Awesome is the right word for the TT.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I rally can't believe that these cars had so much potential and never caught up in the mainstream road racing/autocrossing world with classes dominated by similar AWD turbo platforms. Awesome is the right word for the TT.


 Shhhhhhh.


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

Damn! Looks like I missed a good weekend :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

Thats awesome Max! Congrats man. That BMW must be pretty quick.


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I really can't believe that these cars had so much potential and never caught up in the mainstream road racing/autocrossing world with classes dominated by similar AWD turbo platforms. Awesome is the right word for the TT.


 Agree 100% 

The past ten track events I have found a lot of very seasoned veterans commenting on how well my TT does out on the track with some very very fast cars. 

Even with 300wtq, let alone the torque your throwing down Max. The most wild thing is that when it rains, the platform shines even more with the ability to crush everything. I personally enjoy rain track days the most. 

The weakness on the road course is the brakes and needing more rear grip under acceleration, even with a competition controller. 

Considering that most heavy hitters like GT3's C6 Corvettes and E46/E92 M3's have some pretty insane suspension setups available to them that are right off factory backed teams with lots more R&D, I think with a lot of the work that has been put into the MK1 TT over the past couple years is really starting to show.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DougLoBue said:


> Damn! Looks like I missed a good weekend :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


 You did! So many runs, I was giving some up. Perfect to get some seat time and baseline the golf. 



warranty225cpe said:


> Thats awesome Max! Congrats man. That BMW must be pretty quick.


 Thanks, the Z4 based M coupes came with 330 hp 3100 lbs stock, massive brakes, M series suspension on short wheelbase and room to stuff a lot of rubber under the fenders. With the mods allowed in the class, I wouldn't be surprised if the car is putting down 400 whp and is sub-3000 lbs race weight.


----------



## jbrehm (May 16, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> . . . I am still grinning from being able to keep up with a sorted 08 BMW M coupe that is preparing for SCCA Nationals in a couple of weekends with hopes of competing for a national title.


 Jesus, I believe in you buddy, but I did not expect a result like this! Good ****in' job! :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> *The weakness on the road course is the brakes* and needing more rear grip under acceleration, even with a competition controller.


 Noah, I feel the same way about the brakes. I was discussing it with my co-driver after Waterfest, and we both complained and agree that with the acceleration the car is capable of doing now, the OEM brakes are no longer up to the task. We were leaving tons of time on the table because we had to prolong our braking zone in order to avoid entering the corners too hot. I feel that some serious brakes that aren't heavier than stock, or require 18" wheel to fit over the rotors will take my car to the next level. 

I may have to follow your lead with the Porshe calipers (I assume that you are making brackets), because before I was thinking of simply swapping to R32 front calipers. I haven't really looked into it but the question is what brake upgrade will be lighter, provide better stoping power, and still allow me to retain 17" wheels/tires? 

More rear grip is not an issue in my car (if anything, I have too much rear grip and not enough unprovoked rotation). I know you haven't gone into details sorting your suspension like I did, but it can be done, and I have the formula. :beer:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Wow - nice work Max :thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Noah, I feel the same way about the brakes. I was discussing it with my co-driver after Waterfest, and we both complained and agree that with the acceleration the car is capable of doing now, the OEM brakes are no longer up to the task. We were leaving tons of time on the table because we had to prolong our braking zone in order to avoid entering the corners too hot. I feel that some serious brakes that aren't heavier than stock, or require 18" wheel to fit over the rotors will take my car to the next level.
> 
> I may have to follow your lead with the Porshe calipers (I assume that you are making brackets), because before I was thinking of simply swapping to R32 front calipers. I haven't really looked into it but the question is what brake upgrade will be lighter, provide better stoping power, and still allow me to retain 17" wheels/tires?
> 
> More rear grip is not an issue in my car (if anything, I have too much rear grip and not enough unprovoked rotation). I know you haven't gone into details sorting your suspension like I did, but it can be done, and I have the formula. :beer:


 
Dont waste your time on the R32 brakes. I had a setup but sold it due to the massive increase in weight. The rotors alone weigh 24lbs each. The calipers weigh ~ an additional 8lbs each with carriers. 

I am putting a Boxter kit together that uses the stock rotors. The carriers can be directly sourced from Neuspeed. I cannot justify making one set when I can buy a set for a little more than the cost in materials. Four Seasons Tuning is working on getting something together once I figure out the correct brake lines that are needed and tested out. 

As you and your co-driver noticed, you have to ride the hell out of the brakes in order to scrub off the speed. This results in lots of heat build up in the calipers and rotors. A Cayman Cup guy explained some tips that you want to hit the brakes as hard and as fast as possible then get off them. Rigid calipers with 1500hp worth of braking power is what you really need for our use at events. 

Calipers can be scored pretty cheap. I picked up two sets for $700


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Noah, I agree on the rainy track events. I barely slowed down at my event in March while everyone else either drifted or waited out the rain. :laugh: As for brakes, I wasn't making the power you guys are, but with my C4S/Turbo calipers (don't know how they compare to Boxster fronts in piston/pad sizes) on stock discs, I had no issues with brakes all day as far as overheating, fade, and having to brake early. Stomp them hard, get off the pedal, and on to the next corner. My brakes and tires were the most impressive part of my setup IMO. I'll know how they hold up to a bigger track when I hit Road Atlanta in November. It's all about the monoblocks. :thumbup: I hate floating calipers. :thumbdown:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> Dont waste your time on the R32 brakes. I had a setup but sold it due to the massive increase in weight. The rotors alone weigh 24lbs each. The calipers weigh ~ an additional 8lbs each with carriers...


 Thanks for posting the tip… I had been planning on buying the R32 brakes in the future. 




20v master said:


> ...It's all about the monoblocks. :thumbup: I hate floating calipers. :thumbdown:


 Interesting - can you elaborate on the advantages/disadvantages?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

All_Euro said:


> Interesting - can you elaborate on the advantages/disadvantages?


 The inherent flex that comes with a two piece sliding caliper leads to all kinds of deficiencies. The Tyrolsport calipers stiffening kit is supposed to help (I've got no experience with it), but you're still using one piston to squeeze (more correctly, press one pad into the disc, pushing the disc into the other pad) as opposed to two pistons squeezing from each side. This can lead to uneven pad wear. Assuming the monoblock caliper is a four piston design, you get more piston area behind your pads, which are usually also larger (pad swept area is the biggest contributor to braking performance), as well as more even pad pressure application due to the design of smaller piston leading ahead of the larger rear piston. As an added benefit, most monoblock calipers allow you to change the pads without removing the caliper from the disc. :thumbup:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

20v master said:


> The inherent flex that comes with a two piece sliding caliper leads to all kinds of deficiencies. The Tyrolsport calipers stiffening kit is supposed to help (I've got no experience with it), but you're still using one piston to squeeze (more correctly, press one pad into the disc, pushing the disc into the other pad) as opposed to two pistons squeezing from each side. This can lead to uneven pad wear. Assuming the monoblock caliper is a four piston design, you get more piston area behind your pads, which are usually also larger (pad swept area is the biggest contributor to braking performance), as well as more even pad pressure application due to the design of smaller piston leading ahead of the larger rear piston. As an added benefit, most monoblock calipers allow you to change the pads without removing the caliper from the disc. :thumbup:


 Awesome - exactly the type of info I was looking for :beer:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> Four Seasons Tuning is working on getting something together once I figure out the correct brake lines that are needed and tested out.


 Also, forgot to mention, all you need is the correct banjo bolt and copper washers to use OEM or aftermarket braided lines. At least in the case of the calipers I use, that was all I needed.


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

20v master said:


> The inherent flex that comes with a two piece sliding caliper leads to all kinds of deficiencies. The Tyrolsport calipers stiffening kit is supposed to help (I've got no experience with it), but you're still using one piston to squeeze (more correctly, press one pad into the disc, pushing the disc into the other pad) as opposed to two pistons squeezing from each side. This can lead to uneven pad wear. Assuming the monoblock caliper is a four piston design, you get more piston area behind your pads, which are usually also larger (pad swept area is the biggest contributor to braking performance), as well as more even pad pressure application due to the design of smaller piston leading ahead of the larger rear piston. As an added benefit, most monoblock calipers allow you to change the pads without removing the caliper from the disc. :thumbup:


 
The Tyrols help. But I found while good for entry level drivers, they leave a lot on the table and as you noted, still allow one pad to wear faster than the other. In my case after 6 events I was down to 50% and 75% pads. Piston side being the 50%. 




20v master said:


> Also, forgot to mention, all you need is the correct banjo bolt and copper washers to use OEM or aftermarket braided lines. At least in the case of the calipers I use, that was all I needed.


 Yup. But personally I keep banjo's far away from brakes when ever possible. Especially on cars that see a lot of track duty. Not saying that they are more prone to failure, just personal preference.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Since we're on the subject: 

What's the difference between the Porsche calipers mentioned before? Weight, availability, pricing? 

Will both these calipers work with the OEM rotors and fit under 17" wheels? 

What are the options for brackets and lines?


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Since we're on the subject:
> 
> What's the difference between the Porsche calipers mentioned before? Weight, availability, pricing?
> 
> ...


 My boxster calipers are using stock diameter rotors. Not sure if they would clear 17s. I remember seeing somewhere that 18s at a minimum were a must. Im sure you could fit them with a little spacing.


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Since we're on the subject:
> 
> What's the difference between the Porsche calipers mentioned before? Weight, availability, pricing?
> 
> ...


 The regular Boxters PN 986.351.422 and 986.351.421 should clear 17's without issue. I guess a good thing to test tonight perhaps if I get time. The biggest problem normally is the back spacing depending on the spoke design. IIRC 17" O.Z Superleggera's clear without issue and BBS CH's. 

I have a spare hub, so I can mock it up tonight with the caliper rotor with the CH's and some Enki RPF1's as well as the O.Z's. 

ECS Tuning - Stage 2 Version 1 Porsche Boxter Brake Kit 
_ NOTE: Wheel spacers may be need to clear most wheels_ 

Would suck to have to go to 18's  

Edit * From CL to outer radius is 6.75" so 13.5 inner rim diameter is needed.


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

So 17" wheels as follows:

BBS CH 16.5" inner clearance
OZ Superlleggra 16.5" inner clearance
Enki RPF1's 15.5" inner clearance


Back side of spoke clearance I still need to check. But it looks pretty good.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Noah, I feel the same way about the brakes. I was discussing it with my co-driver after Waterfest, and we both complained and agree that with the acceleration the car is capable of doing now, the OEM brakes are no longer up to the task. We were leaving tons of time on the table because we had to prolong our braking zone in order to avoid entering the corners too hot. I feel that some serious brakes that aren't heavier than stock, or require 18" wheel to fit over the rotors will take my car to the next level.
> 
> I may have to follow your lead with the Porshe calipers (I assume that you are making brackets), because before I was thinking of simply swapping to R32 front calipers. I haven't really looked into it but the question is what brake upgrade will be lighter, provide better stoping power, and still allow me to retain 17" wheels/tires?......


 Max, I would like to suggest the Wilwood front brake kit for you. It is insanely light, reasonably priced and will easily fit 17" wheels. They are 4-piston, very rigid two piece (bolted together) calipers with two-piece rotors. Another plus, they have a good selection of pads that are relatively inexpensive and inexpensive rotor rings. 

http://www.wilwood.com/BrakeKits/Br...140-8276&year=2001&make=Audi&model=TT&option=


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

I run fat fives with 20mm spacers over my big reds on stock discs.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Would be nice to find some reasonable priced calipers to replace our stock ones. Would be nice to have more braking power being on a budget doesn't help. I would go with used if I could find some.


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

DC Auto is great for chasing down Porsche parts :thumbup: 

http://dcauto.gotdns.com:4000/ 

http://dcauto.gotdns.com:4000/illustration/index/833038536


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Thanks for all the inputs guys, it's very appreciated! From what I've gathered from the discussion, the Wilwood seems the best option for me with reasonable pricing, great weight saving over OEM with 2-piece rotors. The Porsche options look like they could be done on a budget if buying used and retaining OEM rotors, buy provide comparable (if not better) performance. If I land on a smoking deal on a set of Porsche calipers, I won't pass on it, but the ability to run 15" wheels with very light 2-piece rotors for under $1000 is hard beat.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Thanks for all the inputs guys, it's very appreciated! From what I've gathered from the discussion, the Wilwood seems the best option for me with reasonable pricing, great weight saving over OEM with 2-piece rotors. The Porsche options look like they could be done on a budget if buying used and retaining OEM rotors, buy provide comparable (if not better) performance. If I land on a smoking deal on a set of Porsche calipers, I won't pass on it, but the ability to run 15" wheels with very light 2-piece rotors for under $1000 is hard beat.


 Yeah, the lighter weight would benefit you, but I got my calipers used with OEM Porsche pads for $300, carriers for $100, and already had SS lines. I just had to source and modify the correct banjo bolts, but that leaves me stuck with 17" wheels. Did you really mean 15" wheels? I'm assuming you'd go with an 11" disc then?


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Late__Apex said:


> Max, I would like to suggest the Wilwood front brake kit for you. It is insanely light, reasonably priced and will easily fit 17" wheels. They are 4-piston, very rigid two piece (bolted together) calipers with two-piece rotors. Another plus, they have a good selection of pads that are relatively inexpensive and inexpensive rotor rings.
> 
> http://www.wilwood.com/BrakeKits/Br...140-8276&year=2001&make=Audi&model=TT&option=


 I couldn't agree more. The really big deal is the availability of proper racing pads at reasonable prices. Racing pads for the Boxster calipers are going to be easily twice as expensive as Pads for a WilWood or other standardized size race caliper. However, I would not buy the WilWood pads. There are much better options available such as PFC or Mintex Racing ( FR series ) . 

For serious Track Days or Road Racing, the problem with the WilWood kit, such as the one linked to above, is that the rotor thickness is too thin to be effective under repeated hard use. Edit: .081" is inadequate to properly dissipate heat for really fast cars on a hard braking track. You'll be much better off going to a 1" rotor or better yet 1.25". I'd also suggest not using the DynoPro calipers but instead moving up to the Forged 4 or 6 piston Superlites. This will open up a HUGE range of pads that are used by thousands of Circle Track Racers. Pad is much larger and thicker than the DynoPro series and are often cheaper. 

On my Hillclimb/Trackday Camaro ( 3,270 lbs ) I ran WilWood forged Superlites ( 4 piston ) front and rear. Front rotors were 12.19 x 1.375 " ( Coleman Nascar short track rotors ) and rears were 4 piston Superlites on the factory 11.8" x .8" rear . Pads were Mintex FR1 front and rear. This car could run all day long, at maximum attack, on Tracks that are notoriously hard on brakes. Rotor temps stayed between 800F to 1,000F on the fronts ( depending on Track ) which was well within the working range of the Mintex FR 1 pads. 

The Mintex FR series pad are an absolutely AWESOME pad. Better retardation and rotor wear than PFC 01 or PFC 03. The amazing thing about the Mintex pads are that they will work when nearly stone cold and they do not wear rotors!! They were recommended to a group of us running serious Track Day Pony cars by a connection we had with Joe Gibbs Racing. One of the cars was a 620hp 1980 Pontiac Trans-AM that weighed 3,800 lbs and went like a Bat out of Hell. He used WilWood Gen-III calipers with 13" x 1.25" WilWood or Coleman rotors. Mintex FR pads as well. 

Note: Mintex recommended going straight to the top of the line FR 1 pads on our cars because of the weight, HP and brake intensive track that we ran on. The FR1 was recommended for Short Track Nascar Sprint cup cars and high downforce cars such as Grand-AM and Indy Car ( when they ran steel rotors )...apparently the weight of out cars threw us into that league for braking duty!!


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Thanks for all the inputs guys, it's very appreciated! From what I've gathered from the discussion, the Wilwood seems the best option for me with reasonable pricing, great weight saving over OEM with 2-piece rotors. The Porsche options look like they could be done on a budget if buying used and retaining OEM rotors, buy provide comparable (if not better) performance. If I land on a smoking deal on a set of Porsche calipers, I won't pass on it, but the ability to run 15" wheels with very light 2-piece rotors for under $1000 is hard beat.


 If trying to fit 15" wheels, you might find a Corrado set of Wilwoods dynalites might be the best. You can run 11" Corrado rotors and the calipers and carriers only weigh 2.5lbs a side. This is what I run on my Corrado with awesome success. 

http://www.momentummotorparts.com/store/braking.asp


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Other post getting too long. 

Regarding pads. If you can find them..the Mintex FR Racing series cannot be beat. However, they usually have to be purchased through a Nascar Brake supplier and they are only made for proper racing calipers. You won't get them for Boxster calipers or DynoPro's . I'll see if I can dig up our contact name. Can't remember it off the top of my head.... 

As a second choice I woul highly recommend the PFC range. Either the 01 or 03 compound. Yes these are EXTREME pads. But they work almost as well as the Mintex pads when cold and they do not eat rotors ( Cold or Hot ). 

Note on rotors and wear. Having proper RACING rotors is essential for rotor life. Racing rotors ( WilWood, Coleman, AP etc ) have much higher quality steel alloys made to withstand the high temperatures and wear encountered during Road Racing or Track Days. OEM factory iron rotors are seldom made of the correct alloys for racing ( Exception being cars like Porsche ). 

Have a dedicated set of Track-Day/Road Race rotors and a set of street rotors. This eliminates the problem of incompatible pad transfer material. 

If you're going with a build it yourself... A very good source for Rotors, Pads and Calipers is: www.pitstopusa.com


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

15" wheels? Are you changing the setup? I thought you ran 17's?


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Chickenman35 said:


> For serious Track Days or Road Racing, the problem with the WilWood kit, such as the one linked to above, is that the rotor thickness is too thin to be effective under repeated hard use. Edit: .081" is inadequate to properly dissipate heat for really fast cars on a hard braking track. You'll be much better off going to a 1" rotor or better yet 1.25". I'd also suggest not using the DynoPro calipers but instead moving up to the Forged 4 or 6 piston Superlites. This will open up a HUGE range of pads that are used by thousands of Circle Track Racers. Pad is much larger and thicker than the DynoPro series and are often cheaper.


 I run .81" rotors on my Track TT without overheating (yet). Anything thicker will require custom hats or spacers under the hats (to clear the ball joint). 

I agree the Superlites are a better caliper. That is what I have on my custom setup.


----------



## CupraR Carl (Jul 28, 2013)

Great car Marcus, Its evolution is testamant to your engineering skill and knowledge. The developments you've made in the wmi and down pipe design alone is massive. The attention to detail is what i appreciate and proving to unlock the big gains. 

Do you think Draft42 would be happy to make another version of your downpipe design and who would be the best person for me to email within the organisation. Thankyou.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Found the link to the Nascar brake supplier that was recommended to us. Pro Systems Brakes. 

Note: Their Website is undergoing a re-construction, so the Online Catalog does not have live links to all of their products. IE: Only showing two brands of pads when they carry more. They also carry a complete line of WilWood Calipers, as well as AP, Alcon, Brembo etc. Phone them for pads and equipment. 

http://www.prosystembrakes.com/catalog/


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> 15" wheels? Are you changing the setup? I thought you ran 17's?


 Yes, 17" on the current setup... but beeing able to run 275/15 A6 on 15X10" wheels, lower the overall CG by an inch without loosing any suspension travel, significantly lower the yearly tire budget, better clearance for less poking offset in the front, and finally dropping 100+ lbs in brakes/wheels/tires over the current setup, sounds really good to me. :heart:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Found the link to the Nascar brake supplier that was recommended to us. Pro Systems Brakes.
> 
> Note: Their Website is undergoing a re-construction, so the Online Catalog does not have live links to all of their products. IE: Only showing two brands of pads when they carry more. They also carry a complete line of WilWood Calipers, as well as AP, Alcon, Brembo etc. Phone them for pads and equipment.
> 
> http://www.prosystembrakes.com/catalog/


 Thanks again for providing all these options and helpful links! I think I've made up my mind with the Wilwood set on the default rotor thickness they offer. The car is been specifically build to shine in Solo with no plans on seriously road racing it without a proper cage, so I think the 0.81" rotors should be able to do fine. Now my questions to you are: 

what do you think that upgrading the DynoPro calipers from the kit to the Superlite will offer in terms of measurable performance? Longevity? 

Are they really worth the premium in terms of time gained on typical 60 seconds courses?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> If trying to fit 15" wheels, you might find a Corrado set of Wilwoods dynalites might be the best. You can run 11" Corrado rotors and the calipers and carriers only weigh 2.5lbs a side. This is what I run on my Corrado with awesome success.
> 
> http://www.momentummotorparts.com/store/braking.asp


 :thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> :thumbup:


 I have two sets of dynalites that I rebuild every 20k. Takes about an hour to clean and put new seals into the calipers. Under repeated braking from 160mph to 50 on back to back pulls, they stand up to the abuse. BP20 pads is most likely what you will want to look into Max, they are way more powerful at clamping down than HP + 


:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

CupraR Carl said:


> Great car Marcus, Its evolution is testamant to your engineering skill and knowledge. The developments you've made in the wmi and down pipe design alone is massive. The attention to detail is what i appreciate and proving to unlock the big gains.
> 
> Do you think Draft42 would be happy to make another version of your downpipe design and who would be the best person for me to email within the organisation. Thankyou.


 I know that they made a rig to be able to replicate the 225 TT version prototyped for my car. For other configurations, you would have to contact John Pelton and tell him Madmax sent you: [email protected] 

The 225 AWD version was very hard to pull off due to the available space while still achieving the flange oversizing and 4" chamber, but other versions would be a lot easier to design and produce. Contact them, they are an awesome group to deal with!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> I have two sets of dynalites that I rebuild every 20k. Takes about an hour to clean and put new seals into the calipers. Under repeated braking from 160mph to 50 on back to back pulls, they stand up to the abuse. BP20 pads is most likely what you will want to look into Max, they are way more powerful at clamping down than HP +
> 
> 
> :thumbup:


 So, dynalites it is Noah? What's the verdict on on the DynaPro line and how much better are the Superlites? :beer: 

Edit: found some info on the difference 


" 
The dynalite: Its a smallish caliper (seven inches in length).. 
Piston area of 4.80" Pad volume of 2.1 
http://www.wilwood.com/Calipers/CaliperList.aspx?subname=Forged Dynalite 

The dynapro: Again, a small caliper 
Piston area of 4.80" Pad volume of 3( I dont get that number, it uses the same 3.96" pad as the dynalite) 
http://www.wilwood.com/Calipers/CaliperList.aspx?subname=Dynapro Lug Mount 

The superlites: Now the calipers are getting bigger!! (9.5" caliper VS a 7" caliper) 
Piston area of 5.18 and pad volume of 4.9 (big jump) 
http://www.wilwood.com/Calipers/CaliperList.aspx?subname=Forged Superlite 

Billet superlite: similar to the forged superlites 
Piston area 5.18 Pad volume of 4.9. 
http://www.wilwood.com/Calipers/CaliperList.aspx?subname=Billet Superlite 4  Lug%20Mount "


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> So, dynalites it is Noah? What's the verdict on on the DynaPro line and how much better are the Superlites? :beer:
> 
> Edit: found some info on the difference
> 
> ...


 These were the replacements for the original Billet Dynalites. 

The weight difference between the Superlights and Dynalites is very small. Pick whatever has the best mounting solution (I prefer radial mounts like the Porsche calipers) 

It will really boils down to rotor size, master cylinder volume and mounting. I built a couple kits back in the day to use the later style Forged units as MMP had not caught up with the curve yet. 



Biggest reason I went with Porsche over Wilwoods is the dust boots that protect the piston and bore. And to keep the parts easy to get for quick replacement, if in a jam I can always get a caliper or some pads at the local Porsche dealers. My Wilwoods some times have been a PITA to get pads / Seal kits for in a hurry, thus I keep a full spare set of pads/calipers and seals for the Corrado just in case.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> These were the replacements for the original Billet Dynalites.
> 
> The weight difference between the Superlights and Dynalites is very small. Pick whatever has the best mounting solution (I prefer radial mounts like the Porsche calipers)
> 
> ...


 Cool, thanks for the info Noah!


----------



## burk_art (Mar 24, 2006)

Max, I had a custom forged superlite setup. the calipers were excellent, pads were cheap and extremely easy to swap given the bridge-bolt design. What finally got me was two things easily avoided one way or another - I needed shims to center/offset the rotor (1" rotor) from the ball joint (the 'kit' wasn't extremely precise, you can see the scar in one rotor in some pics), as well as some hat re-designs of my own to solve the problem that I never followed up on wrt fabrication, and the rotor/shim assembly wasn't locked so wheel changes were a bit of a pain even with alignment studs. dig through the album though, you might find something to help you make a decision.

http://public.fotki.com/GorTT/wilwood-forged-sup/

Will


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

burk_art said:


> Max, I had a custom forged superlite setup. the calipers were excellent, pads were cheap and extremely easy to swap given the bridge-bolt design. What finally got me was two things easily avoided one way or another - I needed shims to center/offset the rotor (1" rotor) from the ball joint (the 'kit' wasn't extremely precise, you can see the scar in one rotor in some pics), as well as some hat re-designs of my own to solve the problem that I never followed up on wrt fabrication, and the rotor/shim assembly wasn't locked so wheel changes were a bit of a pain even with alignment studs. dig through the album though, you might find something to help you make a decision.
> 
> http://public.fotki.com/GorTT/wilwood-forged-sup/
> 
> Will


 Wow, good to know Will! I'm pretty sure I just landed on a used set of Willwood calipers, I will need brackets and lines, but will have them made instead of going to Willwod. Now, I'm feeling a bit shy with getting 2-piece rotors from Willwood. Thanks for posting (didn't even know you were in here until I saw the fotki)! :beer:


----------



## burk_art (Mar 24, 2006)

yeah, not here a bunch but started following this thread a month or so ago - too interesting not to! :thumbup:

Anyway, the deal here might have been the rotor thickness - now that I think about it, the shim was about half the difference, say 8mm, between the thinner rotor and the 1" rotor, but this was all the kit builder and not Wilwood. Their 2-piece was fine, though I'm not positive anymore if the hats were Wilwood or just the rotors, but clearly the hat offset was the issue, which is where I got into my hat designs - one other thing to pay great attention to, I should have mentioned it before, is the difference between the caliper pad surface and the actual rotor size - if you look at the pics you'll see I was carrying more rotor than needed - a mismatch between the rotor ring (or the overall diameter of the rotor) and the hat diameter - another thing I tried to correct when I was playing around.

Good luck! opcorn:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

burk_art said:


> yeah, not here a bunch but started following this thread a month or so ago - too interesting not to! :thumbup:
> 
> Anyway, the deal here might have been the rotor thickness - now that I think about it, the shim was about half the difference, say 8mm, between the thinner rotor and the 1" rotor, but this was all the kit builder and not Wilwood. Their 2-piece was fine, though I'm not positive anymore if the hats were Wilwood or just the rotors, but clearly the hat offset was the issue, which is where I got into my hat designs - one other thing to pay great attention to, I should have mentioned it before, is the difference between the caliper pad surface and the actual rotor size - if you look at the pics you'll see I was carrying more rotor than needed - a mismatch between the rotor ring (or the overall diameter of the rotor) and the hat diameter - another thing I tried to correct when I was playing around.
> 
> Good luck! opcorn:


 Gotcha, I assumed the kit was from Willwood!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Another event in the book this weekend! I ran with my local Porsche club on a course that didn't flow well in the tight sections, but with huge power sections that favored cars with a lot of horsepower. The car did well (considering the issues found today when fixing and prepping it for the next round of racing). 

I moved the modified R32 swaybar back to the softer stock setting, and that seems to have cured 99% of the tripod action on sharp tight turns. This allows me to be 100% on the throttle as soon as the car is pointed without the unsettling pogo action. This makes me feel that the 14mm TT bar on stiff would have been good too, but the R32 one is staying in there. :thumbup::thumbup: 

One thing that I always wanted to test was the possible benefit of running the heat at full blast to lower coolant and engine operating temp. Half of the graph is with the heat off, the second half (a bit before the 2000 time period) I turned the heater on. The drop in coolant temp is enough to prove an advantage and make me an informed believer from now on. 











I also finally got a full log of IAT during a run. Initial charge temp was steady at 40*C before the run. The bulk of actual time on course is towards the end of the graph (between 3000-4000 time period). Water injection and AWIC was able to contain the charge temp to 42*C and lower it to 38*C when injecting at WOT. 











As far as the car's performance, it handled like a dream. No understeer anywhere, nice rotation on throttle lift and braking, and I was able to put power down whenever needed. The power however felt flat, and something was not totally right. I also noticed low vacuum at idle, and a miss that felt like low-load misfires. Despite all that, I came home with a 3rd place trophy. I ran a best of 43.xx, the. there was a full track BMW M3 with a 42.xx, and the fastest car of the day at 40.xx was a well prepped and driven GT3-RS. Not bad when a hairdresser car with problems is 3 seconds off the mark from a car that's in a faster SCCA class... I'll take it. 


The TT 


















I was able to take care of that Z4 M coupe from last weekend :wave: 










The full race car that ran a 42.xx 




























The fastest car locally (running a 40.xx), one day...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

With the power issues felt at the autocross, I decided to investigate and fix the issue right away for next weekend. Everything, including Vagcom, pointed towards ignition misfires. I tested all 4 coilpacks, changed the plugs but the problem remained. 



Before going crazy looking for electrical issues that could be causing what registers as a misfires, I wanted to try something else. At the track, I noticed lower than usual vacuum readings, and that's even when there wasn't any noticeable stumbles in the idling characteristics. This lead me to believe that I may have developed a large vacuum leak. Since my charge piping is rather short and everything is visible, what could it be? I pressure tested the system and found the following: 

Big tear in the vacuum line from PCV system to the manifold. I will never know how much boost I was loosing with such a big tear in a vacuum hose of such large ID. 









I also found this at developing at around 30 psi. The threads in the aluminum bung for the custom pressure sensor location was leaking liberally. Some thread sealant took care of it in 5 min. 












Moral of the story is to always pressure test as a routine check (especially if you're pushing things, or track your car). Leaks pop up at any time and sometime can be tricky to diagnose.:beer:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Any time I'm racing, whether drag or road course, the defroster is on high heat full blast. Any way to get more heat out = a good thing. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Any time I'm racing, whether drag or road course, the defroster is on high heat full blast. Any way to get more heat out = a good thing. :thumbup:


 Yeah, I knew that and always did it in between runs at autocross (my road race cars never have heat ). The thing is you do these things as good practice and rarely have a true gauge of if it's really beneficial or not not (kind of like folding your outside mirrors at autcross to reduce drag and blind spots). At least I know, with some data, that I'm not turning my car into a sauna for no reason. :laugh:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yeah, I knew that and always did it in between runs at autocross (my road race cars never have heat ). The thing is you do these things as good practice and rarely have a true gauge of if it's really beneficial or not not (kind of like folding your outside mirrors at autcross to reduce drag and blind spots). At least I know, with some data, that I'm not turning my car into a sauna for no reason. :laugh:


 Well, I've monitored coolant temps while cruising on the highway in the summer in my GTI, then switched the heat on, and instantly saw 2-4* drop, so I knew it was having an impact since that's at speed with good airflow. While stopped/staging, it has the same effect even without the airflow, but the airflow makes it more effective obviously. With the TT, it's even easier to see with the climate control coolant temp trick. :thumbup:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> D style Sparco 310 mm


 Max, can you comment on how far this wheel is (in/out) compared to the OEM? I think you are using the Momo adapter and I'm assuming that is a flat dished wheel? 

How is the wiper/turn signal clearance?


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Thanks again for providing all these options and helpful links! I think I've made up my mind with the Wilwood set on the default rotor thickness they offer. The car is been specifically build to shine in Solo with no plans on seriously road racing it without a proper cage, so I think the 0.81" rotors should be able to do fine. Now my questions to you are:
> 
> what do you think that upgrading the DynoPro calipers from the kit to the Superlite will offer in terms of measurable performance? Longevity?
> 
> Are they really worth the premium in terms of time gained on typical 60 seconds courses?


 My reasoning for suggesting the Superlites was based on the assumption that you were going to do more Track days and Solo-Trials. 

If car is primarily only for Autocross then the DynoPro kit from WilWood is certainly adequate. BP20 pads are good for Autocross as mentioned. 

If building your own system with custom parts make sure that the piston area is correct and close to stock. The WilWood kit will give the correct piston area. Try and stay as close to that as possible. 

Edit: So specs on the WilWood kit with DynoPro calipers shows a Piston Area of 3.0. piston calipers with 1.38" pistons: 

http://www.wilwood.com/Calipers/CaliperProd.aspx?itemno=120-7376 

So if you buy some used calipers( Superlights etc ) , make sure that the piston area is around 3.0.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

BTW, I'm running Porsche Boxster calipers on my A4 with A8 rotors ( 312 mm ). Calipers are great, but Pad prices for Track Day pads are a bit rich. Maybe Noah can suggest something? Note: Not all that big a fan of Hawk pads. 

Going to try Akebono Euro Ceramic pads for the street. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> Max, can you comment on how far this wheel is (in/out) compared to the OEM? I think you are using the Momo adapter and I'm assuming that is a flat dished wheel?
> 
> How is the wiper/turn signal clearance?


 
Steve, the wheel is a flat dish while the OEM had more positive dish to it. However, with the adpter, the Sparco ends up a bit farther than OEM position (not by much though). This gives a bit more clearance to the wiper and turn signal stalks, and allow to use a more reclined seating position.

It is to be noted that it took a little bit getting used to when racing, but I love it and would recommend it to anyone who's road racing or autocrossing. The needed adjustment is because you can still go hand-over-hand on most stuff, but on the really tight stuff that are sometimes found in Solo, it requires a real shuffle due to the flat portion. No big deal as it is the proper way anyway, but if you had "bad steering habits" welded into your brain like me, this forces you to weed them out.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Chickenman35 said:


> BTW, I'm running Porsche Boxster calipers on my A4 with A8 rotors ( 312 mm ). Calipers are great, but Pad prices for Track Day pads are a bit rich. Maybe Noah can suggest something? Note: Not all that big a fan of Hawk pads.
> 
> Going to try Akebono Euro Ceramic pads for the street. :thumbup:


 I have some pads leftover from when I used Boxster calipers. They are Mintex Xtreme pad and are discontinued. Stillen is the main tuner that promoted them - see the attached link. They are fully capable of going from street to track although they are a bit dirty in street use. I would compare them to Hawk HP+ but without the rotor wear issues. I'll let them go for $40 shipped (new). I think I have two sets but I'm not sure. 

http://www.stillen.com/products/brake-pads/xtreme-high-performance-brake-pads-100313/


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Chickenman35 said:


> BTW, I'm running Porsche Boxster calipers on my A4 with A8 rotors ( 312 mm ). Calipers are great, but Pad prices for Track Day pads are a bit rich. Maybe Noah can suggest something? Note: Not all that big a fan of Hawk pads.
> 
> Going to try Akebono Euro Ceramic pads for the street. :thumbup:


 http://www.pelicanparts.com/catalog/shopcart/986M/POR_986M_BRKpad_pg3.htm 

Personally I love my HP+'s on my stock calipers, but they dont have enough clamping force and repeatability. My plan is to them on the Boxters to get a base line for the upgrade. Then depending on how the end of the season goes with them, I will perhaps look into something like the Pagid Orange RS 4-4 or Pagid Black RS 14.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I had a home made lip in the front of the car and it was stalling my front splitter project. The lip was too short and would force me to locate the splitter too far from the ground (almost 5"), or I would have to add a sealing piece between the splitter and the lip. 

I decided to make a taller air dam that would seal my splitter and put it at aproximately 3" of ground clearance which is a good compromise between functionality and practicality. I located the new air dam in a recessed position instead of the leading edge of the bumper. The point of a recessing an air dam is to accentuate the differential between the low pressure area and initial high pressure zone (creating a better stagnation point), which makes the splitter more effective at the lower speed of autocross. It came out pretty good in terms rigidity and is not too much of an eyesore (in the grassroots world of autocross, aero bits can look pretty extreme in order to get results at low speed). Next is mounting the splitter, stay tuned! 










Another angle


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## VW indahouse (Feb 25, 2012)

:thumbup::beer:


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Max, we think the same this is from last years meet have my splitter cut out haven't needed it yet. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

tedgram said:


> Max, we think the same this is from last years meet have my splitter cut out haven't needed it yet. :thumbup:


Nicely done Ted, it looks real clean! 

Mine had to be a bit wider because my front ride height is taller, and I purposely made my sides more recessed to accentuate the anti-lift effect in the corners. How much ground clearance did you end up with? My concern with the splitter I'm about to install is that it will reduce so much front lift that I would have to do something right away with the rear to restore the current balance (hopefully it won't be too loose to be undrivable). What material did you use for your splitter? 

PS: I couldn't help but notice, is the bottom screen tape to force you to look ahead? :thumbup:


This is what mine looks like in day light


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Material is 3/32" aluminum sheet there is no flex. Made in three pieces so it wouldn't take up much space in back of my car. There is about 2 1/2" of ground clearance. It keeps the front of the car from lifting at speed. 
The sheeting and tape between hood and windshield were for aerodynamics but didn't allow heat to escape. Car was overheating after my 2 1/2 mile runs so they were removed. Thinking of putting some narrow slots in them to see if that helps.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

tedgram said:


> Material is 3/32" aluminum sheet there is no flex. Made in three pieces so it wouldn't take up much space in back of my car. There is about 2 1/2" of ground clearance. It keeps the front of the car from lifting at speed.
> The sheeting and tape between hood and windshield were for aerodynamics but didn't allow heat to escape. Car was overheating after my 2 1/2 mile runs so they were removed. Thinking of putting some narrow slots in them to see if that helps.


Nice, I'm going for Alumilite vs aluminum or abs plastic that I considered. I am exactly at 2.84" with the air dam without the splitter. Hopefully with the splitter and around 2.75" of clearance it generates enough anti-lift to not need to space the splitter lower and having to seal the gap. Oh well, testing will tell...

That's right, I forgot for a second that you did land speed and was thinking road racing. :thumbup:


----------



## MalcolmMk3 (Jun 21, 2008)

I noticed in the last few front end shots of your car that the headlights are slightly 'misaligned', is that an actual fitment issue or did you do that on purpose for a bit extra air flow under the hood?

Also curious about your rim and tire setup. Are you running the same offsets front and back? I don't see anything mentioned other than 17x10 et 35 with 1" adapters but from the pics shown the rims don't look the same. The fronts look like they have significantly more dish to them. Have you been keeping track of, or playing with your wheel track ratio front to back to help with handling at all?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

MalcolmMk3 said:


> I noticed in the last few front end shots of your car that the headlights are slightly 'misaligned', is that an actual fitment issue or did you do that on purpose for a bit extra air flow under the hood?
> 
> Also curious about your rim and tire setup. Are you running the same offsets front and back? I don't see anything mentioned other than 17x10 et 35 with 1" adapters but from the pics shown the rims don't look the same. The fronts look like they have significantly more dish to them. Have you been keeping track of, or playing with your wheel track ratio front to back to help with handling at all?


It's actually poor fitment from the the bumper and hood. This came as a result of shimming the hood rearward mounting points to tilt the hood so there is a gap by the windshield (the weatherstrip is also trimed in the back and the resulting lip folded). The functionality mods didn't help, but the bumper is also poorly aligned too, but it's at the bottom of my priority list to unbolt it just to fix it. Next time the bumper cover comes off, I'll do a better job at aligning it (I'm a hack when it comes to cosmetics).

Sorry for the confusion, this list is super old, copy/pasted from the old build thread in the motorsports section, and needs to be updated. The current wheel spec is:

-Front
17 X 10.5" +32 offset with a 1" spacer and running BF Goodrich R1-S (315)

-Rear
17 X 9.5" +35 offset with a 1" spacer and running BF Goodrich R1-S (275)


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Steve, the wheel is a flat dish while the OEM had more positive dish to it. However, with the adpter, the Sparco ends up a bit farther than OEM position (not by much though). This gives a bit more clearance to the wiper and turn signal stalks, and allow to use a more reclined seating position.


Max, when you get a chance would you measure the distance between the wheel's mounting flange and the flat, rectangular face of the steering column trim. I got into a tank-slapper on cold tires last weekend in Madness at Mid Ohio and turned on my wipers (looking like an idiot, I suspect, haha). I need knuckle clearance!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> Max, when you get a chance would you measure the distance between the wheel's mounting flange and the flat, rectangular face of the steering column trim. I got into a tank-slapper on cold tires last weekend in Madness at Mid Ohio and turned on my wipers (looking like an idiot, I suspect, haha). I need knuckle clearance!


Haha, whenever doing emergency maneuvers, I used to be darn good at doing the embarrassing wiper act in the EVO. Somehow, I don't do it in the TT although the wiper stalk is long and very close to the wheel (makes no sense to me and probably has to do with the different seating position).

This is what I got Steve:
3.5" from flat face of steering column trim to the wheel

3" of clearance on the turn signal stalk

2.25" of clearance on the wiper stalk


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Thanks for those measurments, Max. 

As you know, I have been fighting blown turbo-to-chargepipe elbows this season. I have decided that, since the angle of the charge pipe is not 90 degrees to the compressor outlet, the aftermarket silicone 90s are under stress once installed. This stress is creating a weak spot at the charge pipe t-bolt. I have decided to try the Forge turbo outlet hose which, in addition to being a quality aftermarket piece, is formed to replicate the OEM's non-90 degree angle (probably about 110 degrees). This should eliminate the preloading or stress point.

The other issue I see is this. There is no way that these multi-ply reinforced, silicone elbow should be popping at 25-30 lbs of boost. I have concluded that the radiant heat from the exhaust manifold, which is just a couple of inches away, is a contributing factor in the failures. I have a metal heat shield above the manifold but is does not extend all the way to the turbo outlet. Consequently, I have decided to add a heat blanket between the silicone hose and the manifold as seen here:










I used a the DEI Versa-Shield with the 2000 degree radiant coating and doubled it up to give more insulation. It is tucked all the way down over the lower t-bolt and extends up past the charge pipe t-bolt. It is secured, as you can see, by two screw clamps for ease of adjustment or removal.

Hopefully, these two changes will solve my problem.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Late__Apex said:


> The other issue I see is this. There is no way that these multi-ply reinforced, silicone elbow should be popping at 25-30 lbs of boost. I have concluded that the radiant heat from the exhaust manifold, which is just a couple of inches away, is a contributing factor in the failures. I have a metal heat shield above the manifold but is does not extend all the way to the turbo outlet. Consequently, I have decided to add a heat blanket between the silicone hose and the manifold as seen here.


Eh, I think it's more the angle. Are you talking about the OEM hose or aftermarket? I have a 45* coupler on my GT35R comp outlet that is closer to the exhaust manifold than the OEM K04 hose is, and I've never had an isse with it. That said, that isn't a conclusive statement due to different manifolds, turbos, boost levels, etc. Also, I removed all the wheel liners and engine bay shields on that setup for max airflow in the bay to control temps (aka we're back on the topic of heat issues in the TT engine bay due to poor airflow). I've never measured, but what is the outlet ID/OD on the K04? You'd have to get a silicone piece that is a transition, but is there an available cast aluminum elbow that could be welded onto the comp outlet to allow you to use a generic straight or 45* coupler/reducer to connect to the charge pipe? I know it is very difficult to remove the K03 compressor housings. Is the same true for the K04? That was a long reply but I'm sure others have had the issue and remedied it, but I've never pushed the K04 setup enough to have an issue with the OEM hose.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I did my last autocross event for the season over the weekend. It was a good season, I learned a ton about the car, what works, and what still needs improvement. 

The suspension is very sorted and the car handles amazingly well for 3100 lbs front heavy car with McPherson strut design. I'm generating so much grip that I'm slightly picking up the whole side of the car on certain turns. Picture below almost captured it, and several people came up to me saying "do you know that you're sometimes lifting two wheels on some turns?"





The car needs better brakes... big time. The stock system which was adequate for the car before, is now being overwhelmed everywhere. Any full acceleration and I'm struggling to slow the car quickly enough to make the next turn. This is my priority for next season and should take the car to the next level. 

The setup has plenty of usable power and I think I have a winning formula for the application. The E85 with water-injection combo cooled with AWIC is moving the car very well, but that's when it holds. At high boost (35+ psi), I'm always popping something. When it's not some intercooler hose, it's something else. I'm going to do some "bulletproofing" in the off season and overbuild the known failure points (silicone junctions etc.). 

The big news is that the stock turbo finally called it quits. After 5 racing seasons with a lot of abuse, 13 years of operations, I can say without a doubt that this was the best and most rugged factory turbo I've abused. The little bugger is reliable and can take epic beatings without failing. In the afternoon session, while looking to set the fastest time of the event, the snail went in dramatic fashion. In a long power section that forced the car to ride the rev limiter for what felt like forever, I got a sudden loss of juice followed by a superb cloud of smoke.  I'm already making plans for a replacement and that might come with a twist. 


If you're going to kill a turbo, that's the way to do it! 


A few more pics at the event (no more non-functional rear spoiler. Matching autocross-functional abominations are in the works front and rear)


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

That's what I'm talking about. If its going to die, do it in grand style!:laugh:


----------



## [email protected] (May 14, 2009)

Smoke show!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Pulled the turbo this afternoon. The compressor wheel is destroyed but the turbine wheel stayed intact and still spins freely. It looks like the shaft broke and the hotside half stayed true while the cold side made contact with the housing.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Carnage!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Carnage!


 


For some reason I was expecting worse. It seems that I got away with just oil in the system, and having to get my IC core cleaned.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Are you going to stick with a stock turbo to stay in your class or is it time to upgrade?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I think I'm going to try a hybrid and see how much faster the car gets while keeping everything else compliant to the current class. If the power and time gained is worthy of moving up in class, I'll keep the hybrid. I'm thinking 450 AWTQ/400 AWHP and losing at least 400 Lbs would be necessary to make a significant change. Anyway, testing a hybrid for a year should be a fun and revealing experience for me and the community. :beer:


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Pulled the turbo this afternoon. The compressor wheel is destroyed but the turbine wheel stayed intact and still spins freely. It looks like the shaft broke and the hotside half stayed true while the cold side made contact with the housing.


That's impressive :beer:

So now its on to (slightly) bigger and better things?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> That's impressive :beer:
> 
> So now its on to (slightly) bigger and better things?


Yes, slightly bigger! I can finally play with the big boys (you and Steve ).


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

That's what I figured, so the real question is which hybrid?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> That's what I figured, so the real question is which hybrid?


That's the million dollar question! I don't know how much I can reveal in the open yet, but I have a few things in mind.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> That's the million dollar question! I don't know how much I can reveal in the open yet, but I have a few things in mind.


The one from down under?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> The one from down under?


Info and data will be up once it's installed!


----------



## taverncustoms (Feb 18, 2011)

hey sorry if i missed it. but what are you doing for: 
subframe bushings/reinforcements front and rear. 
and front controll arm rear bushings? 
and rear control arm front bushing?
got any pics? I'm guessing you have done something creative here lol :thumbup:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Suspension:
> - 17X10 5zigen fn01rc
> - 295 Hoosier A6 front/back
> - Revalved H&R RSS (listed for R32) with custom spring rates (700lbs/1300lbs)
> ...





taverncustoms said:


> hey sorry if i missed it. but what are you doing for:
> subframe bushings/reinforcements front and rear.
> and front controll arm rear bushings?
> and rear control arm front bushing?
> got any pics? I'm guessing you have done something creative here lol :thumbup:


:wave:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

taverncustoms said:


> hey sorry if i missed it. but what are you doing for:
> subframe bushings/reinforcements front and rear.
> and front controll arm rear bushings?
> and rear control arm front bushing?
> got any pics? I'm guessing you have done something creative here lol :thumbup:


The front subframe bushings are all stock. The roadster comes from the factory with solid 2-piece subframe bushings, so there is no need to upgrade. The rear is not much of a concern since it's not a turning axle and is not subjected to so much load, therefore not flexing as much as the front. The chassis however could use some reinforcement in the back. The heavier V6 came with factory rear chassis braces that could help things. I plan to install them at some point. 

Roadster solid subframe bushing part numbers and picture
8N0 199 282C - UPPER BUSH (X2)
8N0 199 282D - LOWER BUSH (X2)









Rear v6 TT factory chassis bracing that ties the chassis the diff and and diff brace (look under the the two plastic panels for the braces).










The roadster and V6 subframe are also reinforced from the factory vs the regular coupes. There are two diagonal rear braces that tie the subframe to the chassis. Those are good strategic improvements, but I also added a custom cross brace that ties the two diagonal bracing mounting points together. This creates a nice triangulation of bracing (see pic below).






Some ideas if you want to modify your existing subframe instead of doing a V6/roadster swap









Front control arm rear bushing has been on the to-do list for years. There is not a street-prepared compliant solution for it yet. I got with Mike at MCPi and came up with a real slick solution that would be SCCA legal, but the project stalled because there was not much positive feedback from the community. Without an interest, it didn't make financial sense to do the engineering, manufacturing and R&D just for my car. Maybe one day this community will have enough interest for suspension and handling parts and we can revive the project. If you're building for Modified and Prepared classes, there is the powerflex rearward bushing for the front control arm. It is an improvement over stock, but there is still too much flex left in there (not really a Motorsport solution). 

Rear control arm front bushing? We don't have rear control arms, our multi link has trailing arms and upper/lower lateral links (what the community somehow calls rear control arms). If you're talking about the trailing arms, whiteline and powerflex I believe have poly solutions but I haven't done them. They are not critical to handling IMO as long as the lateral links don't allow to much dynamic flex. 


More pics to come!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The roadster and V6 subframe are also reinforced from the factory vs the regular coupes. There are two diagonal rear braces that tie the subframe to the chassis.


Just a note, my black 01 225 coupe subframe has these, but my aviator 01 225 and the blue 02 225 we just picked up don't have these, so at some point they weren't limited to verts and 3.2's.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Just a note, my black 01 225 coupe subframe has these, but my aviator 01 225 and the blue 02 225 we just picked up don't have these, so at some point they weren't limited to verts and 3.2's.


Maybe a subframe swap was done by a previous owner?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Maybe a subframe swap was done by a previous owner?


As neglected as this poor car was, I doubt it unless it was damaged so extensively that it had to be replaced, which after my last accident, I doubt is possible.


----------



## taverncustoms (Feb 18, 2011)

I would think because the control arms attach to the rear sub frame that the stiffening would improve high G load handling, sure the mad max arms are great but they attach to a sub frame mounted on soft rubber bushings and that is a separate assy from where the trailing arms attach. so I'm betting there is more movement then you think. and have you seen the options at USRT? they have some very nice bushings & race parts.


----------



## taverncustoms (Feb 18, 2011)

also because the tailing arm bushings affect the rear toe durrning braking & acceleration this would cause great improvement on an AutoX track. same goes for the rear controll arm bushings in the front. just my 2cents.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Make it too stiff and it will cause understeer then snap oversteer. The rear is designed to change small amounts to aid in a active rear steering like the rear axle beam setups.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

taverncustoms said:


> I would think because the control arms attach to the rear sub frame that the stiffening would improve high G load handling, sure the mad max arms are great but they attach to a sub frame mounted on soft rubber bushings and that is a separate assy from where the trailing arms attach.


Reading your last 2 posts, I think you're blending together chassis flex and normal deflection through dynamic suspension motion. They are two separate things and should be viewed as such. Chassis flex (aka 5th spring) is mostly a result of lateral loads twisting the chassis when cornering and/or riding over bumps, this is independent of suspension motion. In general, most of that chassis flex affects the end of the car where the turning axle is located (aka the front). To be TT specific, from my experience our rear does not need much stiffening (if any). I don't know what kind of loads you will be subjecting your car to, but on my car with 315 race rubber and 1.3 G sustained, it's not an issue. As I mentioned before, the roadster subframes are NOT mounted on soft rubber, but metal mounts wrapped in a thin insulating layer of rubber (so there you have your solution for frame mounts). If anything needs bracing in the rear subframe it's the inner brackets for the lateral links that are rather flimsy and could use some reinforcement. 




taverncustoms said:


> so I'm betting there is more movement then you think. and have you seen the options at USRT? they have some very nice bushings & race parts.


My bet, based on what I've experienced tracking the car over the last 5 seasons, is that there is less rear movement than you think. The rear v6 braces that I posted are as far as I go with rear flex, but what do I know. 

I am fully aware of Scott's offerings, as he is a supplier for a few of my stuff. The solid frame mounts are pointless if you start from a roadster/V6 car - he offers a reinforced front subframe, but a factory-reinforced roadster subframe with the custom brace I posted provides the same level of rigidity. He has that tubular IDF front control arm that is not legal until running in prepared, and modifying the OEM arms with non-deflecting delrin bushings would net the same performance (minus the lower unsprung weight). The host of other bushings and camber compensating components are all part of the TT folklore by now and we're all aware of their existence. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

taverncustoms said:


> also because the tailing arm bushings affect the rear toe durrning braking & acceleration this would cause great improvement on an AutoX track. same goes for the rear controll arm bushings in the front. just my 2cents.


Agree! However, all of these have nothing to do with chassis flex. The things you mentioned here are *suspension* joint deflection. BTW, some of it is needed in certain locations or you can introduce binding and scrubbing. The rear trailing arms for example, you can't go rigid with the bushings because the natural movement isn't vertical but slightly diagonal. It's the lateral link's job to limit that intended lateral play that is part of the design (most multi-link rears are designed this way). If you've already stiffened things with the lateral arms, I'd be careful with restricting flex at the trailing arms (and vice versa). Just like camber, dynamic toe changes is inherent to the design articulation, it can be limited up to a point, but not removed, or totally restricted without major issues. 

...and don't take my word for it, the TT self study touched on that with their description of the rear suspension. Go check it out! 

So to conclude, as Noah has warned, be careful with looking to go stiff everywhere. Just because some of it is good, more is not necessarily better.


----------



## MalcolmMk3 (Jun 21, 2008)

Are you currently using your pre-turbo w/m nozzle? Do you think that could have had something to do with the way the shaft seemed to snap in half like that and leave the compressor wheel still spinning freely?


----------



## taverncustoms (Feb 18, 2011)

thanks max i will continue to learn. :thumbup: but it would be interesting to see how a TT handles without all that soft rubber.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

taverncustoms said:


> thanks max i will continue to learn. :thumbup: but it would be interesting to see how a TT handles without all that soft rubber.


The handling will be better but not at a good $ per second ratio. On top of that the wear point change and can cause more expensive items to wear out. Hubs/spindles are not cheap when they get worn out in a couple seasons. 99% of the money spent would be better spent on a couple days at a Skip Barber or Team O'Neil driving school. After doing a one day event at a rally school, my rain times are only 1 sec slower than dry times. Most drivers are 3-5 secs slower in the rain.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

MalcolmMk3 said:


> Are you currently using your pre-turbo w/m nozzle? Do you think that could have had something to do with the way the shaft seemed to snap in half like that and leave the compressor wheel still spinning freely?


I haven't been running water injection at all for the past few local events. My pump isn't self-priming and needs a manual prime before each event (the process only takes 20 seconds and just require to turn a knob), but this little annoyance prevented me from using water injection when the turbo failed. If anything, I'm thinking that the cooler wet compression would've helped keep shaft temperature lower and may have been saving the turbo for the length of an autocross run. My speculation is that the old and tired bearings with the excessive speed I forced the assembly to spin to make so much boost finally took its toll. I don't see any sign of oil cocking, so lubrication wasn't limited.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

20v master said:


> Just a note, my black 01 225 coupe subframe has these, but my aviator 01 225 and the blue 02 225 we just picked up don't have these, so at some point they weren't limited to verts and 3.2's.


Here's my 01' 225 Coupe subframe…


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Here's my 01' 225 Coupe subframe…


Yep, that's the standard coupe subframe. This is what the one in my roadster looks like with the diagonal reinforcements (v6 are the same way too).


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Nice - I like the four point brace a few pics back… looks light and fairly rigid. Thanks for posting that :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

After a lot of thinking and bench racing/exchanging ideas with some auto-xers, I've decided to move up to a higher SCCA class... F-prepared. With the stock turbo done, I wanted to experiment with more potential, and this meant hybrid or aftermarket turbos.

I thought long and hard about Street Modified (SM). However, the high dollar budget for that class, and the fact that the TT's natural weight wouldn't allow it to be a contender within the rule set, were big deterrents. SSM (two-seater variant of sedan SM) would have been a fun class to compete, but the cars that are competitive start at a much lower weight, and everyone can make big power in the class (not looking to build something that I know wouldn't be competitive). 

Competitive SSM cars are all sub-3000 lbs platform with real aero work and big power. 




























































Now, SCCA prepared is a whole different ball game. Lots of serious modifications are allowed on a standalone rule set (almost unlimited suspension  and ability to remove tons of weight off the chassis), and real platform equalizers makes it very appealing for people like me who love the building and fabrication aspect of the sport. There are a few drawbacks (AWIC, water injection, aren't allowed and you have to run a 46 mm restrictor on the turbo inlet), but I couldn't pass on the idea of a 2700 lbs AWD TT with 400+ AWTQ and fixed front suspension geometry. This is going to be fun!


Cars that populate F-prepared are some seriously wild machines and I can't wait to build my own:


----------



## jbrehm (May 16, 2006)

I'm sooooo looking forward to what you do here, Max! I think it's a good call that you moved up - even if the TT platform ends up holding you back a bit - you definitely have the moxie to overcome a handicap. :thumbup:

I've really been wanting to see what you can do with a larger-than-stock turbo as well.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

jbrehm said:


> I'm sooooo looking forward to what you do here, Max! .......
> 
> I've really been wanting to see what you can do with a larger-than-stock turbo as well.


DItto and ditto! :beer:


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Yeaa haaa!! Good luck on the project Max. Now that looks like fun. Those FD RX7's sure were pretty cars...and so light. They would be very hard to beat in SSM.

Always wanted to own one of those since I first saw them at an Auto Show in 1993. Mica Yellow is the color I want...of course it just happens to be the rarest color of all 

We'll see what I end up with next year when I sell the Audi. Could be a 2006-2009 350z, Scion FRZ ( Lava Orange ) or an FD RX7 if I can find a nice one that hasn't been abused.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

jbrehm said:


> I'm sooooo looking forward to what you do here, Max! I think it's a good call that you moved up - even if the TT platform ends up holding you back a bit - you definitely have the moxie to overcome a handicap. :thumbup:
> 
> I've really been wanting to see what you can do with a larger-than-stock turbo as well.





20v master said:


> DItto and ditto! :beer:


I have a few wicked ideas in mind (making a gtx2863 sing or try something I've had on the shelf for a while now), but I gotta give the hybrids a try first. If I can get a solid 400+ AWHP out of one, that'll be the ticket. That FP Subaru in the last picture is making close to 500 AWTQ and 413 AWHP through the 46 mm inlet restrictor, so it's definitely doable.

<a href="http://photobucket.com/" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1218.photobucket.com/albums/dd417/madmax199/Madmax%20pix/BE8C718C.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo BE8C718C.jpg"/></a>


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

There's definitely an advantage in PAX moving to FP vs SSM, I'm sure you won't have a problem making up the time difference from CSP with the new allowances :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Yeaa haaa!! Good luck on the project Max. Now that looks like fun. Those FD RX7's sure were pretty cars...and so light. They would be very hard to beat in SSM.
> 
> Always wanted to own one of those since I first saw them at an Auto Show in 1993. Mica Yellow is the color I want...of course it just happens to be the rarest color of all
> 
> We'll see what I end up with next year when I sell the Audi. Could be a 2006-2009 350z, Scion FRZ ( Lava Orange ) or an FD RX7 if I can find a nice one that hasn't been abused.


FD rx7 are awesome, never driven an FRZ but that would be an interesting car to get into... as far as the 350Z, I'd rather find another hobby .


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> There's definitely an advantage in PAX moving to FP vs SSM, I'm sure you won't have a problem making up the time difference from CSP with the new allowances :thumbup:


To be honest, I wasn't really influenced by the PAX when making the decision as I'm a raw-time and FTD-chasing kind of guy. You're 100% correct though, FP having a lower PAX index vs SSM is sweet (especially when the fun factor of a prepared-built car is much higher IMO than an SSM one... or should I say $$M :laugh. 

0.877 FP
0.858 BSP (TT was re-classed from CSP after the last SP shuffle) 
0.881 SSM


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Can't wait to see what you have up your sleeve… snapping the shaft on your K04 seemed to be just the right kind of encouragement to make the move


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> To be honest, I wasn't really influenced by the PAX when making the decision as I'm a raw-time and FTD-chasing kind of guy.


Theoretically those two go hand in hand though, at least at the national level. A raw time difference between equally competent drivers in an SSM vs. BSP vs. FP car is what translates into the PAX multipliers derived each year. 

In your case (and in mine) where the car is a fixed variable, then it's very possible for the car to achieve faster raw times and compete in a class with a more favorable PAX multiplier if you know the limitations of your car and how your car responds under the different sets of allowed modifications.

For me, moving to SMF was an obvious choice. Less of a PAX penalty, no DSP modifications held back and tons of additional new allowances. Being able to pull an additional 200 pounds out of the car and being able to nearly double the power output was truly having your cake and eating it too.


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Guess who else just made the leap to FP? :wave:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> Guess who else just made the leap to FP? :wave:


Yeah Jeff, that's awesome! I got excited when I saw your post in the tech section about weight reductions. Is it a totally new car and build, or just another shell for you to swap your existing engine and drivetrain? 

Don has made the leap to FP as well with his Evo, just with the 3 of us and some co-drivers we can have a class at regional National events (which guarantees that someone is walking out with contingency money). 

I will be making the 46 mm restrictors for the Evo and TT soon, let me know if you want one made and I'll go for 3 of them. 

PS: down to 2800 lbs in my car already with lots of heavy things left.


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yeah Jeff, that's awesome! I got excited when I saw your post in the tech section about weight reductions. Is it a totally new car and build, or just another shell for you to swap your existing engine and drivetrain?
> 
> Don has made the leap to FP as well with his Evo, just with the 3 of us and some co-drivers we can have a class at regional National events (which guarantees that someone is walking out with contingency money).
> 
> ...


I'm excited, just not sure how I am going to get the car to events legally :laugh:

My minimum weight is 1,956.1 lbs, which is going to be all but impossible. I am picking up a shell prepared for hardcore road racing, but that fits the bill for FP competition perfectly. Swapping the engine, trans and select parts from my old car over to the new one. Starting weight with a 1.8T, 02M and full tank of gas was 2,275. I can knock that down a bit with the lighter 02J, carbon hatch, lighter suspension and brake components, and less fuel in the tank. Seems like 2,19x lbs is going to be the lower limit unless I can come up with something else creative.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Doors weigh a ton. You can probably shave 100 lbs easily by gutting the doors. Reinforcement bars, windows and lift mechanisms are very heavy. For a dedicated Race Car you can go crazy. ... all you need outer door skins shells ( Or CF skins ) and 1/16" Lexan or Polycarbonate side windows. Sawzall all of the inner door panel out and gut EVERYTHING. Obviously only for serious competition and only if rules allow it. 

Rear window is also very heavy. Lexan/Poly rear window weighs next to nothing. Keep the front Safety glass. Usually a rules requirement and Lexan/Poly carbonate scratches too easily. 

Don't go crazy with the SS Braided Aeroquip. Use something like Earls Pro-lite for vents and things like Turbo drains. SS braided gets surprisingly heavy...it all adds up.

Most interior bracing and interior skins can be eliminated if a Roll Cage is used. Dash area is another place that has a lot of extraneous weight. 

Got my Datsun 1200 Race car down to 1405 lbs years ( Decades actually ) ago. Started getting fancy with the SS Aeroquip and added 25 lbs. Every single interior panel was cut out or Swiss cheezed. Roll Cage was the only thing holding it together :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> I'm excited, just not sure how I am going to get the car to events legally :laugh:.


I haven't figured that one out either 



4ceFed4 said:


> My minimum weight is 1,956.1 lbs, which is going to be all but impossible. I am picking up a shell prepared for hardcore road racing, but that fits the bill for FP competition perfectly. Swapping the engine, trans and select parts from my old car over to the new one. Starting weight with a 1.8T, 02M and full tank of gas was 2,275. I can knock that down a bit with the lighter 02J, carbon hatch, lighter suspension and brake components, and less fuel in the tank. Seems like 2,19x lbs is going to be the lower limit unless I can come up with something else creative.


2,200 lbs range is pretty light, and with the kind of power that we're able to make with forced induction I wouldn't worry about getting to the exact minimum weight. With my car, the factor is 1.2 (0.75 piston engine + 0.375 for forced induction + 0.075 for AWD), this puts me at 2,160 lbs min weight. Add +100 lbs penalty for wheels over 10" wide and I'm looking at 2,260 lbs which is practically impossible unless taking a radical approach to weight reduction (not a fan of the chopped windshield, no alternator, no starter prepared cars). I'm realistically looking at 2,600 lbs with the stuff I'm comfortable removing, this will give me roughly a 6.5 weight/power ratio which is acceptable (anything under 7.0 is good for an FP build). Next season should be fun, especially with Don's Evo for us compete against.


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I haven't figured that one out either
> 
> 
> 
> 2,200 lbs range is pretty light, and with the kind of power that we're able to make with forced induction I wouldn't worry about getting to the exact minimum weight. With my car, the factor is 1.2 (0.75 piston engine + 0.375 for forced induction + 0.075 for AWD), this puts me at 2,160 lbs min weight. Add +100 lbs penalty for wheels over 10" wide and I'm looking at 2,260 lbs which is practically impossible unless taking a radical approach to weight reduction (not a fan of the chopped windshield, no alternator, no starter prepared cars). I'm realistically looking at 2,600 lbs with the stuff I'm comfortable removing, this will give me roughly a 6.5 weight/power ratio which is acceptable (anything under 7.0 is good for an FP build). Next season should be fun, especially with Don's Evo for us compete against.


Where are you getting those weight factors from? The 2012 and 2013 rules have it stated as 0.75x for piston, 0.45x for FI and 0.1x for AWD. Where can I find some big 5x100 wheels for my car? I'm shooting for a #/WHP under 5.5 

By the end of next summer hopefully I'll have a tow vehicle and trailer we can share.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Doors weigh a ton. You can probably shave 100 lbs easily by gutting the doors. Reinforcement bars, windows and lift mechanisms are very heavy. For a dedicated Race Car you can go crazy. ... all you need outer door skins shells ( Or CF skins ) and 1/16" Lexan or Polycarbonate side windows. Sawzall all of the inner door panel out and gut EVERYTHING. Obviously only for serious competition and only if rules allow it.
> 
> Rear window is also very heavy. Lexan/Poly rear window weighs next to nothing. Keep the front Safety glass. Usually a rules requirement and Lexan/Poly carbonate scratches too easily.
> 
> ...


I know... I know, there is a lot that can be done but I'm not fully committed to destroying the car to make it fast... yet. As you know, there's a lot that could be done within the rules, and typical fully-prepped roadsters have the windshield and pillar chopped off, which turn the cars into wild creations that are a bit too rich for my blood (at least visually). Some of the things you mentioned are also not applicable because I'm a roadster, things like rear window don't exist anymore since the rag top has been deleted. 

Right now I'm sitting at 2,800 lbs with A/C, carpet, convertible top, AWIC, water injection, radio/speakers, crash bars, miscellaneous interior brackets and plastic panels removed. I'm working on a lighter/shorter aluminum exhaust that should save some good weight. The interior floor insulation hasn't been removed yet, there is at least 50 lbs worth of that junk (and that's being conservative). I'm also working on a light roll bar that will not take away safety from the OEM system, but save 10 lbs. 

I'm not taking the dash skin, heater system, door cards and door glass out because I plan to get a factory hardtop and I need working windows and some kind of an interior. I may be taking the kamikaze mission of driving the car to events in the short term, so these things are off limits for now. if I can get the car down to 2600 lbs, I'll be a happy camper as this would be light enough to be competitive with my power and traction potential.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> Where are you getting those weight factors from? The 2012 and 2013 rules have it stated as 0.75x for piston, 0.45x for FI and 0.1x for AWD.


My numbers were crunched using an old 2011 rulebook (last time I did a full autocross campaign). Using the factors you posted which are probably current, my base factor is 1.3. That gives me a 2,340 lbs base min weight + 100 lbs wheel penalty = 2440 lbs. Closer to being attainable but not practically possible for what I'm doing overall in terms of weight reduction. 



4ceFed4 said:


> Where can I find some big 5x100 wheels for my car?


I don't know of any big (10" or more) wheels in 5x100 bolt pattern that doesn't weight as much as your car. For what we're doing, you could do two things:

a) adapt to a bolt pattern that has options (5x114.3 for example) 
b) go custom with CCWs or expansive exotics like the Volks etc.

Shameless plug -> I have a set of 5 zigen FN01-RC in 17x9 5x114.3 with 1" adapters that you can have for cheap. These will ideally take up to 295 rubber which should be a decent upgrade for your weight. 



4ceFed4 said:


> I'm shooting for a #/WHP under 5.5


Go ahead, rub it in since you know I can never touch that. :laugh:



4ceFed4 said:


> By the end of next summer hopefully I'll have a tow vehicle and trailer we can share.


Nice, doing the happy dance now!!!


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Shameless plug -> I have a set of 5 zigen FN01-RC in 17x9 5x114.3 with 1" adapters that you can have for cheap. These will ideally take up to 295 rubber which should be a decent upgrade for your weight.


I may be interested in those. I've never been a fan of adapters, but if they've stayed solid on your car then that's as good of an endorsement as I need. I may borrow one at some point to see if they clear my new front brakes and how the offsets look on my car. I know that ESM and some others make knock offs of BBS RS and other wheels in very wide fitments that I could run reverse staggered, but I assume those are all going to weigh in somewhere in the mid 20 pound range.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> I may be interested in those. I've never been a fan of adapters, but if they've stayed solid on your car then that's as good of an endorsement as I need. I may borrow one at some point to see if they clear my new front brakes and how the offsets look on my car. I know that ESM and some others make knock offs of BBS RS and other wheels in very wide fitments that I could run reverse staggered, but I assume those are all going to weigh in somewhere in the mid 20 pound range.


I have one that's loose and with some old Hoosier road race tires mounted on it. You can stop by and borrow it any time to test your fitment. 

Those knock offs aren't viable options IMO for their obvious weight, but also their unknown ability to flex under load with wide grippy tires (I've seen pictures of people polishing/milling their Evo calipers trying to autocross with flexy wheels on r-comp). RPF1s for example are at the border of what's usable and move at least 1 mm unde load, that's why I stopped using them when the tires began brushing my struts on most right handers and some left handers. If your fitment is tight (most likely will on the front of any MKIV), you need to be careful with wheel selection once you start going wider than 275's.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

While the 5Zigen FN01-RC are nice cast (reasonably light) wheel and a good option for you. If you don't want adapters you can get the drag DR31 or DR38 from discount tire for cheap (350-400 shipped to your door for a set of 4) and they come in 5x100 17x9 with a variety of colors and offsets and weigh within ~2lbs of the 5Ziegen. I haven't checked in a while, just a suggestion. 

If you want to go into the 9+ inch realm you will be hard pressed to find anything under 20lbs that isn't super expensive if not a cast wheel. I know SSR and VOLK made some 17x9 but not 10's unless custom ordered and that's a pretty penny. Enkei RFP1 comes in 17x10 but not 5x100. The ESM wheels are 17x10 5x100 and weigh ~22lbs.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> While the 5Zigen FN01-RC are nice cast (reasonably light) wheel and a good option for you. If you don't want adapters you can get the drag DR31 or DR38 from discount tire for cheap (350-400 shipped to your door for a set of 4) and they come in 5x100 17x9 with a variety of colors and offsets and weigh within ~2lbs of the 5Ziegen. I haven't checked in a while, just a suggestion.
> 
> If you want to go into the 9+ inch realm you will be hard pressed to find anything under 20lbs that isn't super expensive if not a cast wheel. I know SSR and VOLK made some 17x9 but not 10's unless custom ordered and that's a pretty penny. Enkei RFP1 comes in 17x10 but not 5x100. The ESM wheels are 17x10 5x100 and weigh ~22lbs.


Val, the Drag DR31/38 are 23 lbs in the offsets that would work for the front of our platform. That's 4lbs over the cast 5Zigen that are already pushing it in the weight department but somewhat acceptable at 19 lbs. This also brings them to the next point I mentioned, how prone to flexing are they? With 16 lbs of rotational weight added to what is considered the limit in weight and unknown rigidity, they might not be a smart choice for a car looking to be competitive (several Rota offering are in the same predicament with a bit too much weight than usable). 

Beside that, you're spot on with the high rollers and wide size, pretty much everything has to be custom and super expensive. Enkei regularly makes runs of 17x10 5x100 but in a high positive offset for the S2000 and WRX guys (have to be pre-ordered and it sometimes take months to be delivered). They would need a little spacing (10-15 mm) to work for us, but this about the best solution for a light inexpensive wheel that can still be auto-xed/road raced (providing your clearance isn't super tight because they flex quite a bit). The next best budget option IMO is the FN01-RC and after that just go with custom CCW classics in their lightweight race version (a couple of lbs lighter than the regular ones).


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

I'm definitely going to need 18s to run tire sizes that make sense. What are your thoughts on 996 wheels? Good size and offsets with adapters, weigh 20 pounds front, 22 rear. Shouldn't be any issues with flexing either...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> I'm definitely going to need 18s to run tire sizes that make sense. What are your thoughts on 996 wheels? Good size and offsets with adapters, weigh 20 pounds front, 22 rear. Shouldn't be any issues with flexing either...


Im not too familiar with them, but being that they're OE they should be plenty strong. I'm curious as to why 18s are needed for you to run tire size that make sense?


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Im not too familiar with them, but being that they're OE they should be plenty strong. I'm curious as to why 18s are needed for you to run tire size that make sense?


I don't think I have room for a taller tire, which looking at the current offerings for the v710 and R1S would limit me to a 255-40-17. In 18" size I can fit a 285/30 no problem.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

4ceFed4 said:


> I don't think I have room for a taller tire, which looking at the current offerings for the v710 and R1S would limit me to a 255-40-17. In 18" size I can fit a 285/30 no problem.


I've always liked going with the shortest tire that I can find. I'll give away 10mm in width in a second if I can gain an advantage in CG and shorter gearing with a shorter tire. The 285/30 x 18's at 24.8" tall look good on paper if gearing works out. As Audi's typically have long gearing it should be an advantage.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Crap..just accidentally deleted a post that I spent 15 minutes working on :facepalm:

Had to do with not going too low on aspect ratios on a steering tire. IE: less than a 40 series. Will post back later this evening.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> I don't think I have room for a taller tire, which looking at the current offerings for the v710 and R1S would limit me to a 255-40-17. In 18" size I can fit a 285/30 no problem.





Chickenman35 said:


> I've always liked going with the shortest tire that I can find. I'll give away 10mm in width in a second if I can gain an advantage in CG and shorter gearing with a shorter tire. The 285/30 x 18's at 24.8" tall look good on paper if gearing works out. As Audi's typically have long gearing it should be an advantage.



Jeff, I'm sure you already know how I feel about having/making room for wheels and tires . Now that we're in Prepared, a class of nearly unlimited chassis and suspension allowances, making room should not be the issue for whatever wheel/tire you choose. The 18" in 285 width is a great tire for street prepared cars with limited room and big brakes. But if you look closely, Hoosier have two 17" tires that are short enough to work at that width range you're looking at. The 275/*35*/17 and their 295/17 are about perfect in 17" without adding the extra weight/cost of 18" tires and alloys - they are short, with fast transitional response due to their low profile, and fit the bill. The 295 Hoosiers are the best all around R-comp I've ever used on 3,000 lbs car and their 275/35/17 is that same type of amazing oddball but for a lighter car. The problem with the Hoo-Hoo is the price tag and lower wear, but you should have significantly better wear at your weight now. 

<a href="http://photobucket.com/" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1218.photobucket.com/albums/dd417/madmax199/Madmax%20pix/504FA10F.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo 504FA10F.jpg"/></a>

This is how I feel overall about the tire situation in prepared, being that I've built two E-prepared car and an XP monster before. You can run r-comps and try to make the best of it, but they're not the ideal of preferred choice. Bias-ply slicks offer better consistency, are cheaper, last longer, and have much higher grip at their optimal temp range. However, they don't come in big diameters, and 15 or 16" are the choice for cars in the 2,000 lbs range, while 13s are preferred for light sub-2,000 lbs cars. In your car, long term, I'd be all over 23.5 bias ply in 15" ideally or 16" as a compromise. If I was personally building your car, I'd go for light 15x7 5x100 wheels (Kosei K1, or 949 6UL) and run cantilevers slicks. I was able to put 280 mm of rubber on the ground with Goodyear cantilevers on 7" wide wheels (Doug has those wheels/tires for his autocross project). Getting the ideal and fast setup in Prepared often require shrinking the front brakes, but that's what it takes to be fast. 

In my car, my long term plan is to get a set of Wilwoods that will allow 15" to fit and get custom wheels made so I can run true slicks.

Richard, I feel that using tires to help gearing is a Stock or street prepared thing. In classes like prepared were the gearing changes are open, people usually go for custom and optimized gearing for their cars.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

While we're on the wheel and tire topic, my short term plan is to optimize my existing setup until I have a set of Willwood fronts brakes and some custom wheels made. I want to reduce the width of the car overall and bring the tires under the bodywork. This will allow me lower the CG another inch without clearance issues, the suspension geometry will get redesigned to fix anything that's not optimal. 

This endeavor will require two things:

- Front
Fabricating shock relocating adapter housing (this is getting worked on as we speak, so stay tuned)

- Rear
Folding down the outer portion of the factory upper spring has to clear 10" wheels at a higher positive offset. Get adapters in smallest possible width to move these bad boys inward without touching anything. The outer lip of the top spring hats were folded down with a BFH (forgot to snap pics and will have some in a few). My good people at 42DD came through once again with a set of 15 mm adapters to replace the monsters I had before. The whole thing save me 4 lbs total in the rear and the wheel/tire setup is barely poking in the back with 10" wide wheels wrapped in 295 rubber. 




























*Edit*: pic of the folded upper spring hat


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ( Snip) Richard, I feel that using tires to help gearing is a Stock or street prepared thing. In classes like prepared were the gearing changes are open, people usually go for custom and optimized gearing for their cars.


I think I did not make myself clear. It is a very effective way to instantly reduce CG. There are serious advantages to be gained by in reducing rotational inertia with a smaller diameter tire and rim. Losing rotational weight is always a bonus. 

I always changed the gear ratios to match the track..that is a given. Sometimes I had to change transmission ratios UP to get the RPM ratio where I wanted them, but I always found the smallest diameter tire ( of sufficient width ) to be the best option. I've always run clases ( Canadian rules ) where changing transmission ratios and diff ratios were allowed. 

And I certainly agree with using proper racing slicks whenever you can. ( That was part of my post that I accidentally deleted ). One of my favorite cars was a 1970 240Z MOD class running 23 x 8.5 ( W2 ) Goodyear Cantilevers on 13 x 7" rims. 10 inches of tread width on a 7" rim. Loved those cantilevers!! Car also had 3.90 diff gears vs stock 3.3. It handled like a slot car and accelerated like a Bat out of Hell. It was a blast!! :laugh:


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

I did run SCCA Prepared and Mod cars for many years in my earlier days. And we still have a grandfathered Canadian Street Prepared class ( SP 4 ) for big Pony cars.


BTW. The Canadian SP rules ( as run in BC ) from the mid-1980's to current, are basically the same as as SCCA Street Prepared rules, except we had very liberal modifications allowed to the engine,suspension and drivetrain. You can't run slicks...but you could run your Audi TT with full engine mods and ANY Turbo Mods, any drivetrain combination or modification ( You could even swap trannies and diffs out of different model lines ). Brakes were free as was ANY suspension mod or replacement. Any type of chassis bracing was allowed and you could freely change mounting points of the suspension and chassis. This allowed the Mustangs to switch from a 4 link suspension to a Torque arm rear suspension for example. Any Roll Bar or Roll Cage ( bolt in weld in...we didn't care ) and chassis bracing was allowed. 

You did have to run a stock engine block, so no swapping of engines. But you could update backdate to the model line. So my 1986 Camaro could run a 350 carburated engine with a 5 speed transmission ( GM only sold the 350 FI engine on Auto cars, but transmissions were unrestricted with our rules). I could not however stick an LS1 or a Big Block engine in it. 

Costs were controlled by a point system, so that the competitors didn't show up with full GT1 cars. You could put on CF hoods and fenders...but that added to your points penalty so that you may not be able to do all the suspension mods that you liked. Basically you ended up with a Road Legal, Full interior Race car car that could be driven to the event. Sort of like Street Mod but no engine swaps allowed.

It was a very good system and we still run it to this day for our HillClimb and Time Trials classes. It was a member driven class. We modified the rules to what the members wanted to run, not the otherway around. 300- 350 HP Big Turbo AWD 2,800 lb Talons ran heads up against 400 - 600 HP Pony cars. * A Balls to the Walls streetable TT would still be greeted with open arms ( and a little fear  ) up here!! * :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> I*A Balls to the Walls streetable TT would still be greeted with open arms ( and a little fear  ) up here!! * :thumbup:


GET ONE!!! You know you want it ... or maybe it's me that wants you get one so we can compare notes. :laugh:

Your street prepared sounds fun, I'd still be playing there if it was that open with allowed modifications here in the US. The tight allowances got me feeling claustrophobic with all the cars I tried in the class.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Picture dump of one of the many projects I'm working on right now. Using the factory hoops as a core, I built a true 4-point roll protection around it. It will be light enough (lighter than the factory setup), a true bolt-on roll bar that uses existing holes and can easily be removed with 8 bolts. I'm also making a modified steel version for road racing that will have a conventional single roll hoop, but forward and rearward braces. The project is basically finished with all the pipes notched and fitting like a glove. All that's left is to cut two plate for the rear anchor points to be bolted, and welding everything. Not sure if I want to powder coat it or stay with the factory OEM theme. 



































































Tools I used: 
- turned my drill press into a makeshift pipe notcher with a hole saw and an XY vice.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Well done Max :thumbup:


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> Well done Max :thumbup:





tedgram said:


> :thumbup:


:beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Another project I'm attempting is a Top Mount Intercooler (TMIC). It's a compromise in terms of raw efficiency and more prone to heat soak than the typical FMIC, but there is no denying the response advantages of having short and straightforward piping. 




















The TMIC is something I want to test, and if it's not efficient enough, I made real room for a FMIC. With no A/C condenser to block the upgraded radiator that has been completely sealed as well, it should decently if ever needed. Everything will be shrouded too if I end up going that route and an external oil cooler to alleviate the work put on the coolant/oil exchange is in the works.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Hey Max 

I know these are sold, but a good option for a great price not to mention they whey sub 15lbs for 17x10 so the 16x10 is probably even less:


http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?4386219-FS-Bogart-Race-3-peice...


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

I bet it was hard to make the cut in the hood, haha.

I've always thought that mounting the FMIC at the top of the radiator would be a great solution for the piping length issue. Run the charge pipe straight through the lock carrier to the FMIC and then back through to the throttle body. It would also remove the "pre-heating" of the bottom of the radiator (where the engine draws its coolant).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> Hey Max
> 
> I know these are sold, but a good option for a great price not to mention they whey sub 15lbs for 17x10 so the 16x10 is probably even less:
> 
> ...



Val, thanks for the suggestion! I was looking at custom Bogarts, CCW, Keizer etc. when I found the best kept secret in the racing community... Spin Werks. 


Their series 82 is at 16 lbs for 16x10" and go for a little over $300 a pop. You can't beat that for custom aluminum wheels that are proven to be solid enough on many racing applications. (I have two on order). 


http://www.racerpartswholesale.com/product/2335/Series_82_Wheels


16x10 wrapped on 23.5x11 bias-ply slicks












On a car


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Yeah, I saw your other post on these and was searching for something else and stumbled upon them. Spin Werks are popular in the drag racing crowds as well as Exospeed, Circle Racing, Welds, Lensos etc. So, why order only 2 now, are you switching your TT to 2WD to make it easier on the competition :laugh:


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

It takes some balls to cut a hood like that! But like the direction this is heading in. BTW nice notches on the roll bar :thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

18T_BT said:


> Yeah, I saw your other post on these and was searching for something else and stumbled upon them. Spin Werks are popular in the drag racing crowds as well as Exospeed, Circle Racing, Welds, Lensos etc. So, why order only 2 now, are you switching your TT to 2WD to make it easier on the competition :laugh:


Don't need 10's in the rear.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> Yeah, I saw your other post on these and was searching for something else and stumbled upon them. Spin Werks are popular in the drag racing crowds as well as Exospeed, Circle Racing, Welds, Lensos etc. So, why order only 2 now, are you switching your TT to 2WD to make it easier on the competition :laugh:





20v master said:


> Don't need 10's in the rear.


I only got two because that's all I can fit in the budget right now, and I have two fresh rubbers that I need to use. I will get another pair for the rear once I burn through the tires I have sitting around. And I will run 10" in the rear, that's what I have fitted on the car now.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

PLAYED TT said:


> It takes some balls to cut a hood like that! But like the direction this is heading in. BTW nice notches on the roll bar :thumbup:


Yeah, I don't know if it takes balls to molest a POS "carbon fiber" hood that's mostly fiberglass with a top layer of carbon, fits poorly, and weighed 1.5lbs more than stock. :laugh:


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yeah, I don't know if it takes balls to molest a POS "carbon fiber" hood that's mostly fiberglass with a top layer of carbon, fits poorly, and weighed 1.5lbs more than stock. :laugh:


That looks like a 1.5lb cut out:laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

PLAYED TT said:


> That looks like a 1.5lb cut out:laugh:


That hood has been lightened up (got 10 lbs out of it), the cut out, although not needed anymore, will stay out and a grill will go in its place.


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Max,

Saw your TMIC option. Any results?

I'm looking to replace my stock dual intercoolers and wanted to know your opinion on the Tyrolsports ($$$).

In the under $700 range, any FMIC options that you can see are advantageous?

So little info out there on psi drop, core cooling density and area, etc available that it makes it hard to decide...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Converted2VW said:


> Max,
> 
> Saw your TMIC option. Any results?
> 
> ...


Hey bud, the TMIC idea was scrapped because my new class allow openings in the hood, but no scooping. The Tyrolsport SMICs are awesome IMO, they are the perfect balance of charge cooling while being conscious of the implications of blocking airflow to an inefficient OEM cooling system. 

As far as a truly efficient FMIC overall under $700, I don't think that there is one unless you're going to fab and do a lot of the work yourself. APR has a pretty decent vertical flow setup that I didn't even know existed until recently, but as you'd imagine is in the $1000+ range. Your best bet for something good at your price point is to buy a good core and fab or get cast tanks to build your own unit (piping solution will need to be factored, but a $80 universal eBay piping kit get almost all of that taken care of). Another idea is to look in the used market for a decent FMIC and do the fitment and piping work yourself. For example, used aftermarket Evo 8/9 FMIC (or even a stock one) can be found fairly cheap - if you take care of the piping and fitment work, this could be a good enough setup for most applications (obviously within a certain range of heat generation and flow).

Edit:

In terms of dimension, this is what an Evo FMIC represent in front of our bumper











And from under the bumper with the crash bar removed (the crash bar is structural and an insurance/safety liability, so take that into consideration when making FMIC decisions).


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Treadstone has a nice selection of shallow profile end tanks as well as APR style front mounts...

http://www.treadstoneperformance.co...ercoolers:+Cast+Aluminum+Intercooler+Endtanks

http://www.treadstoneperformance.com/view.phtml?f_cat=Intercoolers:+Complete+Intercoolers


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Treadstone has a nice selection of shallow profile end tanks as well as APR style front mounts...
> 
> http://www.treadstoneperformance.co...ercoolers:+Cast+Aluminum+Intercooler+Endtanks
> 
> http://www.treadstoneperformance.com/view.phtml?f_cat=Intercoolers:+Complete+Intercoolers


Treadstone has decent cores and affordable cast end tanks for a budget IC build. Their cores are not as good as Garret or Bell cores in terms of flow vs internal fin density, but they're better than some of the eBay crap.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Time for some update! I posted about this in the technical forum, but I have been working on a hybrid setup for the car. After playing with the stocker for way too long, I wanted something that would remain conscious of my thirst for early spool, but flows better up top (my old stock torque curve plummeted past the midrange due to anemic turbine flow). 


I made the decision to go with a Gonzo GTT-X (225TT/S3 AWD fitment) as my blank canvas. My first thing is that I wanted an 11 blade turbine wheel. The other hybrids with the stock K04-02x housing (this far) have used standard spec OEM 12 blade turbine wheels. There is nothing wrong with the 12 blade, but the new GTT-X/madmax project made a less restricting 11-blader possible for me and the rest of the community (less restriction up top means higher flow without the inefficiency losses that a cut-back/clipped wheel would have introduced). 


From the GTT-x I'm getting roughly a 37 lbs/min compressor, and high flow 11 blade RS6-spec turbine wheel. Don't think for a second that this is an infomercial for Gonzo. The turbo is my blank canvas and this is where my Madmax works begin. 


1) The most inherent flaw in the K04 IMO is the turbine housing flow characteristics. These things flow horribly (not only because of the choked down turbine throat area), but also because of the inherent offset in the housing that sends a good portion of gas flow towards a nasty wall/lip in the turbine discharge (towards the downpipe flange). My goal for a long time was to take care of that with porting. So, I went to town cutting and polishing that brand new GTT turbo until the BW turbine design/casting flaws were corrected to my liking.


2) Manifold collector-to-turbine inlet. These areas have plenty of meat and generally left untouched. There is quite a bit to gain from porting there and I'm not going to pass on it.


3) Wastegate and Actuator
The wastegates are one of the limiting and problematic aspects of these small frame turbos, especially the hybridized versions. With mine I'm going to go externally gated with an atmospheric dump (aka screamer pipe). 


4) This hybrid is nothing without a supporting cast. Bringing exhaust flow to it will be a high flow manifold (with integrated outlet for the external wastegate pipe) . On the exit side, turbine flow will be mated to my nice 4" expansion-chambered downpipe that tapers to 3.5" then finally to 3" all the way back to the dump.


I hope this will help remove some of the mysteries surrounding small frame turbos, how to make power with them, and invite more TT owners to go the hybrid way. 

Now the picture dump of hotside work:

*
Turbine housing comparison (you can spot the slightly larger gate door on the hybrid)*











*
This is what you see when looking through the turbine throat headed to the downpipe flange. There is sharp lip left from the wastegate divider, and good percentage of airflow is directed toward a stepped wall at the exit flange.*






















*These marked area needs porting to promote unrestricted flow in and out of the turbine housing*


































*And now some 'after' shots of the porting results:*


*Inlet*

























*Outlet throat and stepped flange *


















*This what you see now looking down the turbine throat now. All the restrictions are gone but there is plenty of material on the housing wall. *

























*Hotside porting done and hotside test fitted with a stock mani to see how everything is matching*




















More to follow, I think this combo should redefine what can be done with hybrids on our cars.[/QUOTE]


----------



## FatAce (Jan 30, 2012)

Glad to see you've finally put this up in here. I've been stalking you in the 1.8t forums but it's much less cluttered in here. I'm stoked to see you squeeze all the potential out of this build.


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

Looks good max. Let's see this thing back on the road and ripping it up!


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

WOW!!! Just WOW...


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

I saw a side by side comparison in person. it is quite impressive :thumbup: I can only imagine how much better it's going to perform!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

FatAce said:


> Glad to see you've finally put this up in here. I've been stalking you in the 1.8t forums but it's much less cluttered in here. I'm stoked to see you squeeze all the potential out of this build.


Excited to see what it'll do too! 




PLAYED TT said:


> Looks good max. Let's see this thing back on the road and ripping it up!


It should be back together as soon as the weather gives us a break, my garage is an ice box and I avoid it at all cost lately. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Dowski12 said:


> WOW!!! Just WOW...





tedgram said:


> :thumbup::thumbup:


You two have been hiding, glad to see ya still lurking. :beer:



racin2redline said:


> I saw a side by side comparison in person. it is quite impressive :thumbup: I can only imagine how much better it's going to perform!


Enough spying Mike!


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Love the porting on the turbo! I was chatting with a fellow that did a lot of work on the European Car 996 Turbo Challenge. He said with porting the heads, exhaust collectors and turbo's to maximize flow they put down 600hp from a car that originally made 420. Other mods included better cooling and software. But this style of use what you have to the n~th power is :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

DeckManDubs said:


> ...this style of use what you have to the n~th power is :thumbup::thumbup:


:beer::beer:


----------



## max13b2 (Jul 24, 2007)

Been following this in the 1.8T forum and loving every minute of it. Excited to see the results once its all back together. 

Any thoughts on a Madmax K04 Hybrid Porting Service? :laugh:


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> You two have been hiding, glad to see ya still lurking. :beer:


Not hiding just busy. Traded waiting for my car to get done for flying helicopters


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

max13b2 said:


> Been following this in the 1.8T forum and loving every minute of it. Excited to see the results once its all back together.
> 
> Any thoughts on a Madmax K04 Hybrid Porting Service? :laugh:


Not as a service. It takes way too much time and attention to do properly, but I wouldn't mind doing it for a few forum friends.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Another thing I recently did to the car is a GM coil conversion. Our vag 1.8t cars use a coil on plug (COP) setup that is not the most powerful. Ignition problems, ranging from harness deterioration from its proximity to the turbo area, to constant premature coil failures since they are asked to do more than they're build to handle, are very common. A good upgrade for many performance cars that use coils with built-in igniters is to convert to LS1/LS2 coils. They are very well built (way overbuilt for our cars), much more powerful even at our factory dwell times, and are coil near plug (CNP), which means they can be mounted away from the valve cover and hot turbo area. This conversion is an upgrade that could serve any TT at all levels of tuning, but for cars like mine that are pushed way above factory levels they're a must.

The conversion requires:

-LS2 coils (LS2 coils, especially the yukon truck ones with built-in heat-sinks are more powerful and durable than the older LS1 coils)

-Spark plug wires and lead to be made

-VAG-GM harness conversion (a reversible conversion harness can be made, but I just soldered the GM plugs into my harness because I don't ever see the need to go back). 

-Dwell adjustments. It's not totally needed because these coils are more powerful even at factory dwell curve (they will be under-driven and last forever with our lower stock dwell), but ideally a bump in dwell time to match the coils will give a much more powerful spark to the combustion process. 



I picked up a set of regular LS2 coils, Aurora 8.5 mm plug wires that needed some finishing touch, male LS2 coil pigtails, some bracket spacers and went at it (Thanks Richard!). I made a holding bracket with some spare metal and mounted the coils on the passenger side next to the timing belt cover. This location, away from the turbo area will keep the coils running cooler, and allow the harness to be re-routed under the intake manifold instead of being constantly heat soaked in the original factory location.


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

keep it up max, really liking where this is going :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

Damn Max that looks good. Cant wait to see more


----------



## FatAce (Jan 30, 2012)

Brilliant idea, clean setup as well. :thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2013)

Sick I bet a plug and play kit would sell. Specialy seeing all the money spent on T-shirt/Tsi conversions.

What was the total cost and where did you source the parts I want to be the first one to steal your idea

Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch Q using Tapatalk 2


----------



## burk_art (Mar 24, 2006)

Max - what are the alum cylinders - are the short ones modified from the long and are they inserted into the plug recess as spacer collars?


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> Sick I bet a plug and play kit would sell. Specialy seeing all the money spent on T-shirt/Tsi conversions.
> 
> What was the total cost and where did you source the parts I want to be the first one to steal your idea
> 
> Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch Q using Tapatalk 2


It's all in the FAQ...and with due regards to Max...it was from a thread which I started :laugh: ( Which I stole from the RX8, DSM and UR Quattro crowd )

All your part numbers, kits necessary for making Custom HT leads, LS coil terminals and wiring diagrams, dwell table and Vendors recommendations are linked below. Make sure you read the WHOLE article. Especially the Caveat about ME5.92 ECU's ( AEB's ). Some great info there.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5563383-LS2-Yukon-coil-conversion&highlight=LS2+coil

To gain maximum advantage with these coils with a BT and high boost ( 20+ psi ) the dwell tables do have to be tweaked over stock. Spartiati is trying out some new coil dwell settings settings. As soon as the weather warms up ( and snow disappears ) he can do some proper testing. El-Ray and a few other members have been using LS2 coils for some years.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> Sick I bet a plug and play kit would sell. Specialy seeing all the money spent on T-shirt/Tsi conversions.
> 
> What was the total cost and where did you source the parts I want to be the first one to steal your idea
> 
> Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch Q using Tapatalk 2


Check out the LS2 thread in the FAQ. A Plug and Play harness was available courtesy of Toby Lawrence. :thumbup: :beer:

Edit: Just noticed that Toby's pictures of the finished Plug and Play harness were removed from LS2 thread. They were very high quality. Might have been some advertising conflict with Forum admins :wave: Maybe give him a PM? :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Sick I bet a plug and play kit would sell. Specialy seeing all the money spent on T-shirt/Tsi conversions.
> 
> What was the total cost and where did you source the parts I want to be the first one to steal your idea
> 
> Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch Q using Tapatalk 2



As Richard pointed out it's not a new idea, the MR-2, Supra, rx-7, and DSM communities have been doing this as an upgrade for a long time. Richard is the one that started the trend in the 1.8t community with his DIY discussion thread (probably inspired by the UR Quattro guys). Total cost for everything would depend on what you get to do the conversion (OEM vs aftermarket, regular LS2 vs Truck coils, new vs used, fancy bracket vs using the ugly GM holding plate, soldering male plugs vs properly doing conversion harnesses, etc). To be honest it's super easy to DIY as long as you can solder 16 wires. 



burk_art said:


> Max - what are the alum cylinders - are the short ones modified from the long and are they inserted into the plug recess as spacer collars?


The aluminum cylinders are spacers to properly space out the coil on a bracket. Short and long ones are used in A B B B A arrangement in upper and lower coil mounting holes. A threaded rod is then inserted through everything with two end plates of some sort to finish it off. Pretty simple to make and mount in a remote location in the bay.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> To gain maximum advantage with these coils with a BT and high boost ( 20+ psi ) the dwell tables do have to be tweaked over stock. Spartiati is trying out some new coil dwell settings settings. As soon as the weather warms up ( and snow disappears ) he can do some proper testing.


I've been collecting info to tweak and optimize the dwell time on mine when the car is put back together. It will be interesting to see and compare what Steve and I come up with as ideal. 





Chickenman35 said:


> Check out the LS2 thread in the FAQ. A Plug and Play harness was available courtesy of Toby Lawrence. :thumbup: :beer:
> 
> Edit: Just noticed that Toby's pictures of the finished Plug and Play harness were removed from LS2 thread. They were very high quality. Might have been some advertising conflict with Forum admins :wave: Maybe give him a PM? :beer:


I contacted Toby not too long ago, and he was still up to building some harnesses. If someone wants to track him down and give it a try, his work is really top notch. Good guy too! :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I've been collecting info to tweak and optimize the dwell time on mine when the car is put back together. It will be interesting to see and compare what Steve and I come up with as ideal.


Just for general discussion...as I'm sure Max knows all this: :wave:

The LS2 coils open up a whole new world of ignition possibilities. VAG 1.8T coils hit a dwell " roof " around 3ms as Bruce Bowling had proven. More dwell does not increase Secondary output, it just creates more heat which is DEATH to the 1.8Tcoils.

However, the LS2 coils DO keep increasing in power output above the recommended 5ms. Heat naturally goes up, but as the LS2 coils are more robust, they seem to be able to handle it. The RX7/8, DSM, Supra guys etc have all been able to run up to 7ms in the mid-range with apparently no issues for many years. Of course dwell has to taper off at higher RPM's as running too much dwell will shorten spark duration. But it's the mid-range, full boost cylinder pressures that are the highest and cause the most issues with spark blow-out ( Steve was having this problem recently ) . So you can fatten up the Dwell curve in the mid-range if 5 ms is not enough ( and it should be ).

No point in going above 7ms though. Bruce's tests showed less secondary output gains and more heat above that figure. Plus the LS2 coils have a default " Fail Safe "maximum dwell figure that kicks in above approx 9ms. 

And of course always run the minimum dwell required to extend coil life.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

One other thing worth discussing, is that both Steve and I have switched back to running a " Street Plug " for daily driving and and reserving the cold 8 series plugs for track days only. Particularly in the winter, with short runs, longer times on richer " warmup " maps and limited ability to use full throttle ( IE: Snow, Ice, Rain )...the 8's are proving to be too cold for DD. You simply can't run them hard enough to get the center ceramic to reach " Burn off" temperature. This results in Soot or " Deposit " fouling and misfires under high load. BTW, the center ceramic does not have to be " Black " with soot to misfire. A dark tan will do it ( Deposit fouling ).

On my Stage 1 DD, I found I was deposit fouling fresh BKR7ES plugs due to short winter runs ( Non-Freeway ). Usually took about 1,000 km till they started to misfire ( Edit: Hard pulls in upper gears over 15psi ). The plugs didn't look bad...a slightly darker tan than my normal 45 miles commutes on the Freeway. But they were getting deposit tracking over the center ceramic. Switching back to BKR6Es plugs ( 15 to 18 psi Boost ) kept them above the " Burn off " temperature and totally eliminated the misfires. For Track Days I will simply pop in a fresh set of 7's.

Steve had the same issue, but as he runs *much higher boost pressures* than me, his plugs were a range higher. 8's in Winter and DD were causing issues with mis-fires due to deposits on center ceramic. Switching back to 7's for the street solved the issue. Something to consider... :beer:

My Audi is the " tamest " of the DD cars that I have run in a long time. I always used to run two heat ranges of plugs. One set for street and one set for Track Days/Hillclimbs. Don't know why I got away from the practice. Getting lazy I guess... :facepalm:


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

Nicely done Max...as always! 

Joe


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Chickenman35 said:


> One other thing worth discussing, is that both Steve and I have switched back to running a " Street Plug " for daily driving and and reserving the cold 8 series plugs for track days only. Particularly in the winter, with short runs, longer times on richer " warmup " maps and limited ability to use full throttle ( IE: Snow, Ice, Rain )...the 8's are proving to be too cold for DD. You simply can't run them hard enough to get the center ceramic to reach " Burn off" temperature. This results in Soot or " Deposit " fouling and misfires under high load. BTW, the center ceramic does not have to be " Black " with soot to misfire. A dark tan will do it ( Deposit fouling ).
> 
> On my Stage 1 DD, I found I was deposit fouling fresh BKR7ES plugs due to short winter runs ( Non-Freeway ). Usually took about 1,000 km till they started to misfire ( Edit: Hard pulls in upper gears over 15psi ). The plugs didn't look bad...a slightly darker tan than my normal 45 miles commutes on the Freeway. But they were getting deposit tracking over the center ceramic. Switching back to BKR6Es plugs ( 15 to 18 psi Boost ) kept them above the " Burn off " temperature and totally eliminated the misfires. For Track Days I will simply pop in a fresh set of 7's.
> 
> ...



I never had misfire issues when I ran BKR8EIX in my stroker for 50K miles, but it was a 10:1 CR motor and I never ran less than 20 psi, and I live in the south so not nearly as cold during winter months, but I also did a lot of highway miles for commuting. Interesting results.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

20v master said:


> I never had misfire issues when I ran BKR8EIX in my stroker for 50K miles, but it was a 10:1 CR motor and I never ran less than 20 psi, and I live in the south so not nearly as cold during winter months, but I also did a lot of highway miles for commuting. Interesting results.


Never had any misfires with BKR7E plugs either when I was doing a lot of daily highway miles. The Highway miles will get the plugs up to " Burn off " temperature for long enough. But I've been off work with a work related injury for 8 months and making many more short trips now. Very little Freeway miles. It's the shorter trips and cold winter months that are causing the issue for me now. Steve did run into the same issue with the 8's, and running 7's for DD solved his issue. Steve's in the North as well. 

When I ran carburated cars, two sets of plugs were a must have. Pretty much SOP on carbed Race cars or Weekend Warriors in the PNW. As noted, climate and driving conditions play a big part. It is something to consider if you are having some " Mystery " misfire problems under Street driving and running cold plugs. 8's are a pretty darned cold plug for a DD from my experiences.... particularily for us " Northern " drivers. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Just for general discussion...as I'm sure Max knows all this: :wave:
> 
> The LS2 coils open up a whole new world of ignition possibilities. VAG 1.8T coils hit a dwell " roof " around 3ms as Bruce Bowling had proven. More dwell does not increase Secondary output, it just creates more heat which is DEATH to the 1.8Tcoils.
> 
> ...


Richard, through my researches on optimal dwell for the LS2 coils, I have found that running them too far over that 5 ms threshold is not impossible but not ideal (even if it's only around the problematic peak TQ region). 

The GM dwell tables have voltage offset, and at normal 12-14v operating range they do not go past 5 ms at peak TQ, plus taper quite a bit to around 3.5 ms by redline. AFAIK (please post if anyone have info indicating something else) we do not have voltage compensation maps, and our dwell map is only load by rpm (with a second map indicating maximum allowable dwell). I think the proper way to approach this, on a car by car basis, is to log voltage under load to establish a solid baseline (I know in my car I run around 13v throughout a typical 3rd gear pull, but I'll have to monitor other gears and the resulting voltage changes). With the voltage baselined, then our dwell can be adjusted to mirror what the GM engineers saw appropriate for their coils. In my case for example, I have some stuff up my sleeves to help cold start on E85. I plan on fattening the dwell at the lowest rpm columns which are 440 rpm and 480 rpm to help firing at starter motor speed.

The problem I found with running dwell as high as 7 ms under load and healthy 12+ running voltage is that the risk of the coils self-firing in protection mode is very high. Some people have found inconsistencies between coils (which is normal between manufacturers) with their self-firing thresholds, so it has to be accounted for safety. I've seen reports on EFI university forums that some users were seeing scatter and over-dwell discharge as low as 4.7 ms and ~ 13.6 volts. 

The bench tests like the one Bruce did are great for knowing output and can be used as a gross starting point to dial dwell on a 2D or 3D map, but also do not tell the whole story. A coil tested for a few minutes will not behave like one that has been loaded for 30+ minutes (road racers like myself know this well because it is not uncommon to only develop ignition weakness and blowout late in a session or race because of heat soaking - then everything goes back to normal after cool down). 

Also, the cars I've seen, while researching, that are running up to 7 ms at peak torque are mostly drag cars (abusing things only for 10 sec or less with long cool down period), and they only do so to fulfill the requirements of big HP and ridiculous boost (think 1000+ hp supras with 50+ psi of boost). It would be terribly unusual to find a 1.8t application that requires such extremes... and if one did, closing the gap would be a much smarter solution because a coil self firing due to over-dwelling can be as dangerous as pre-ignition. 

I plan on taking a methodical and logical approach to adjusting my dwells and I'll post/report my findings on your great technical thread. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> One other thing worth discussing, is that both Steve and I have switched back to running a " Street Plug " for daily driving and and reserving the cold 8 series plugs for track days only. Particularly in the winter, with short runs, longer times on richer " warmup " maps and limited ability to use full throttle ( IE: Snow, Ice, Rain )...the 8's are proving to be too cold for DD. You simply can't run them hard enough to get the center ceramic to reach " Burn off" temperature. This results in Soot or " Deposit " fouling and misfires under high load. BTW, the center ceramic does not have to be " Black " with soot to misfire. A dark tan will do it ( Deposit fouling ).
> 
> On my Stage 1 DD, I found I was deposit fouling fresh BKR7ES plugs due to short winter runs ( Non-Freeway ). Usually took about 1,000 km till they started to misfire ( Edit: Hard pulls in upper gears over 15psi ). The plugs didn't look bad...a slightly darker tan than my normal 45 miles commutes on the Freeway. But they were getting deposit tracking over the center ceramic. Switching back to BKR6Es plugs ( 15 to 18 psi Boost ) kept them above the " Burn off " temperature and totally eliminated the misfires. For Track Days I will simply pop in a fresh set of 7's.
> 
> ...






20v master said:


> I never had misfire issues when I ran BKR8EIX in my stroker for 50K miles, but it was a 10:1 CR motor and I never ran less than 20 psi, and I live in the south so not nearly as cold during winter months, but I also did a lot of highway miles for commuting. Interesting results.






Chickenman35 said:


> Never had any misfires with BKR7E plugs either when I was doing a lot of daily highway miles. The Highway miles will get the plugs up to " Burn off " temperature for long enough. But I've been off work with a work related injury for 8 months and making many more short trips now. Very little Freeway miles. It's the shorter trips and cold winter months that are causing the issue for me now. Steve did run into the same issue with the 8's, and running 7's for DD solved his issue. Steve's in the North as well.
> 
> When I ran carburated cars, two sets of plugs were a must have. Pretty much SOP on carbed Race cars or Weekend Warriors in the PNW. As noted, climate and driving conditions play a big part. It is something to consider if you are having some " Mystery " misfire problems under Street driving and running cold plugs. 8's are a pretty darned cold plug for a DD from my experiences.... particularily for us " Northern " drivers. :beer:



Just like Richard is saying, when the TT was a dual purpose car and running BKR7E's, I ran a street and a track gap because at cold operation with low loads, the tight gap that prevented blowout at WOT, caused misfires. There might be some truth the heat range causing problems on a street driven car in colder climates, and worth investigating. It could have been what I was experiencing, but toying with the gap between street and track cured it for me. Steve should try that on a set of 8's to see, especially if his setup is showing sign that the 7's are running hot at full load (you don't want to get caught with your pants down). 

The X factor here could also be that Steve runs on pump gas (with meth) and less boost, while Adam's example and mine where most likely pushing higher cylinder pressures with stroked high CR (Adam), and E85 with ~35 psi of boost for me. Our setups dictated the need for the colder 8 range plugs, Steve's may not have, and might have been within the cylinder pressure/temperature range of a 7 plug. I never had a problem with my NGK iridium 8's, even when the car is casually driven and the temperature is low. Now that it's more toy than anything else, it will only see operation over 50 degrees, and most of it use will be under full load... the colder 8's are a must for me.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Chickenman35 said:


> Never had any misfires with BKR7E plugs either when I was doing a lot of daily highway miles. The Highway miles will get the plugs up to " Burn off " temperature for long enough. But I've been off work with a work related injury for 8 months and making many more short trips now. Very little Freeway miles. It's the shorter trips and cold winter months that are causing the issue for me now. Steve did run into the same issue with the 8's, and running 7's for DD solved his issue. Steve's in the North as well.


Well I also ran them my last year and half of engineering school, which was a 3 mile commute from my house. Again, climate and the compression ratio, probably made the difference here, not the miles driven. Not discounting your experience, just saying it's not necessarily going to happen to everyone that runs 8's.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Just like Richard is saying, when the TT was a dual purpose car and running BKR7E's, I ran a street and a track gap because at cold operation with low loads, the tight gap that prevented blowout at WOT, caused misfires. There might be some truth the heat range causing problems on a street driven car in colder climates, and worth investigating. It could have been what I was experiencing, but toying with the gap between street and track cured it for me. Steve should try that on a set of 8's to see, especially if his setup is showing sign that the 7's are running hot at full load (you don't want to get caught with your pants down).


Running the BKR7E's gapped @ .026" for normal street use has been fine. However, I have found after two full tanks of C16 during a weekend track event that I have to swap the plugs out with new ones prior to switching back to pump gas. I attribute it to as you say Max, the higher operation temps during WOT track days and after when your putting around even a little build up can cause a random stutter (single misfire) then be fine. The strange thing is this misfire only happens when I creep up to say 10psi in say like 4th gear at low rpm, then ease off the throttle as the desired road speed is achieved. It is so random that is has not shown up in long duration logs or is repeatable in any sort of way. 

Thus I am leaning towards perhaps one of the coils is starting to buy the farm due to four hard years at the track, just theory at this point.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> Running the BKR7E's gapped @ .026" for normal street use has been fine. However, I have found after two full tanks of C16 during a weekend track event that I have to swap the plugs out with new ones prior to switching back to pump gas. I attribute it to as you say Max, the higher operation temps during WOT track days and after when your putting around even a little build up can cause a random stutter (single misfire) then be fine. The strange thing is this misfire only happens when I creep up to say 10psi in say like 4th gear at low rpm, then ease off the throttle as the desired road speed is achieved. It is so random that is has not shown up in long duration logs or is repeatable in any sort of way.
> 
> Thus I am leaning towards perhaps one of the coils is starting to buy the farm due to four hard years at the track, just theory at this point.


Noah, it sounds like you might be the perfect candidate for Richard's street/track plug idea. Run a set gapped tight a .026" for your track duties, than switch to your street plugs that can be gapped looser to prevent the random low-load misfire.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Noah, it sounds like you might be the perfect candidate for Richard's street/track plug idea. Run a set gapped tight a .026" for your track duties, than switch to your street plugs that can be gapped looser to prevent the random low-load misfire.


I'll will try it out for sure with as soon as the snow melts


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

More power and a better flowing manifold coming soon to an auto-X near you!


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

20v master said:


> More power and a better flowing manifold coming soon to an auto-X near you!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> More power and a better flowing manifold coming soon to an auto-X near you!





DeckManDubs said:


>


Yeah, it's official! SEM is on board supporting the Madmax project, I'll be rocking the best 1.8t intake manifold on the market. A proper review and and some data will follow before the racing season begins. Some very exciting stuff in the works for the car!


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yeah, it's official! SEM is on board supporting the Madmax project, I'll be rocking the best 1.8t intake manifold on the market. A proper review and and some data will follow before the racing season begins. Some very exciting stuff in the works for the car!


Excellent - congrats.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

As mentioned in the last few posts, I landed a sponsorship with SEM. They are a very good company that makes a great product for our motor. I think it's awesome when companies support and give back to the community that allows them to be successful. I got recommended by some people on the forum and was contacted by SEM. Coincidentally, I always saw their manifold as the best one in the market and wanted to run one... it just wasn't fitting in my tight yearly racing budget that has little left over after two sets of rubber each season. 


I got their manifold, throttle body adapter, and transition phenolic spacer. I decided to run a 65mm throttle body for the best all around flow and response (charge piping is 2.5" or 63.5mm). I also opted for their big port unit since it gives me room to grow if I ever decide to experiment with a big port head in the future. 


Everything showed up in the mail the other day and I'm excited to have one of the missing pieces of my wish list. This will definitely help me get closer to that 400 whp goal for this coming season. Sprayed a coat of powder and mounted it, time for charge piping!


----------



## Boulderhead (Oct 21, 2012)

Very nice Max, looks like that manifold has enough vac ports to feed all components a dedicated line. This is well deserved for all that you do for the community, and I'm looking forward to all of your work yet to come for 2014.. best of luck this racing season :beer:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

:thumbup: opcorn: :thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

:beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Boulderhead said:


> Very nice Max, looks like that manifold has enough vac ports to feed all components a dedicated line. This is well deserved for all that you do for the community, and I'm looking forward to all of your work yet to come for 2014.. best of luck this racing season :beer:


Thanks Tony! Yes, it's very convenient to have a manifold with all the vaccum port needed and not needing to add a vacuum manifold to run extra ports. My 65mm throttle body also has extra ports, I had to plug one of the manifold ports so I can use the vacant TB nipple. This manifold is truly a nice piece of engineering, from performance potential to fit and finish, it has it all!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> :beer:


:beer::beer:

While I have you two engineers on the hook, what do you guys think about me incorporating a coolant feed to the TB? It has the port for it and should be easy to execute. Worth it, or not worth the trouble on a track car?


----------



## aircooled56 (Jul 6, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> :beer::beer:
> 
> While I have you two engineers on the hook, what do you guys think about me incorporating a coolant feed to the TB? It has the port for it and should be easy to execute. Worth it, or not worth the trouble on a track car?


Not worth the trouble, especially on a track car.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> :beer::beer:
> 
> While I have you two engineers on the hook, what do you guys think about me incorporating a coolant feed to the TB? It has the port for it and should be easy to execute. Worth it, or not worth the trouble on a track car?


Skip it, no benefit. And since 1.8T's don't come with it stock, and you've never had a frozen throttle plate yet, it's safe to say you won't ever need it.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Ok cool, I'll loop the nipples for now and pull them later when they're confirmed useless. I was thinking since the TB is of a slightly different construction (at least a bigger plate with more mass), and came with it from the factory, it might be something that's needed for cold weather operation that may not be necessary on the smaller units (less mass for the same driver motor). Thanks for the inputs!


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Did you powder coat it or just paint it? I presume because it's easier to keep clean?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> Did you powder coat it or just paint it? I presume because it's easier to keep clean?


I powdercoated it! Just one coat though, because of the rough finish on the manifold it's a bit textured. One of these days when I have it out, I'll bake a second coat on it so I get that perfect smooth and glossy finish.

... And yes, I chose powdercoating over painting for ease of cleaning and durability.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Boulderhead said:


> Very nice Max, looks like that manifold has enough vac ports to feed all components a dedicated line. This is well deserved for all that you do for the community, and I'm looking forward to all of your work yet to come for 2014.. best of luck this racing season :beer:


You took the words right out of my mouth :beer: My sentiments exactly.

Good Luck Max!! Looking forward to reading more about your projects and racing :beer::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> You took the words right out of my mouth :beer: My sentiments exactly.
> 
> Good Luck Max!! Looking forward to reading more about your projects and racing :beer::thumbup:


Thanks Richard, I'm getting very excited about the upcoming racing season with a lot more power and less weight aboard! :beer:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Rotate the throttle so the plate opens to the side of the plenum opposite the runner entries.:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Rotate the throttle so the plate opens to the side of the plenum opposite the runner entries.:thumbup:


Was that something tested to give an improvement or something that seems logical and theoretically "should" work? I've tried and tested every possible orientation on the stock TB and found no discernable difference (onset, midrange and up-top the recorded g/s was the same). I know WOT testing only tell half of the story, but is there anything to back up the need to have a certain plate opening orietantion? I'll gladly switch it, but would like to know how/where the results from the change were found.


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

Looking real good man!

What are your plans for direct port water? Going to tap the spacer?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DougLoBue said:


> :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
> 
> Looking real good man!
> 
> What are your plans for direct port water? Going to tap the spacer?


Thanks Doug, no water injection allowed in the new class that Jeff, Don and I are building for :-(


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Was that something tested to give an improvement or something that seems logical and theoretically "should" work? I've tried and tested every possible orientation on the stock TB and found no discernable difference (onset, midrange and up-top the recorded g/s was the same). I know WOT testing only tell half of the story, but is there anything to back up the need to have a certain plate opening orietantion? I'll gladly switch it, but would like to know how/where the results from the change were found.


Don R's CFD work when designing the manifold.


----------



## Don® (Oct 11, 2011)

Nice :thumbup:

BTW - Here is an Independent Magazine Dyno test on a 2003 20th GTI by Modified Magazine.

•Unitronic Stage 2
•SEM Intake - Small port - 60mm TB
•SEM 3" Turbo back w/ high flow catalytic
•APR FMIC w/ custom SEM IC piping
•AEM CAI










Article: http://www.modified.com/tech/1312-sem-motorsports-intake-manifold/


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

^^^ Can't ask for more!!! Power increase across the rev range on a car with basic level of modification, a peak of +35 WTQ and 20 WHP in the meat of the powerband, and achieving all that with 1.7 less boost. This manifold is truly the Biznizz! I'm sure a car with the level of boost and modification that mine has, will see even more gain. :thumbup::thumbup: :beer:


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Chickenman35 said:


> You took the words right out of my mouth :beer: My sentiments exactly.
> 
> Good Luck Max!! Looking forward to reading more about your projects and racing :beer::thumbup:


Same here.
Glad to see your efforts are well rewarded Max.


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

What class are you going to be running in?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> This manifold is truly the Biznizz!


Yup, that's why I have three of them.


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

blackfnttruck said:


> What class are you going to be running in?


F Prepared :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Converted2VW said:


> Same here.
> Glad to see your efforts are well rewarded Max.


Thank you Sir!



blackfnttruck said:


> What class are you going to be running in?


As Jeff said, I'll be running in F-prepared. With two other local cars making the plunge, it should be a fun class locally and nationally (lots of trash talking about who's car is going to be faster :laugh.



20v master said:


> Yup, that's why I have three of them.


You're a SEM pimp!


----------



## nemo1ner (May 5, 2004)

I find it funny that you're making the move to another class while me and my gf are doing the same. :laugh: The TT is going from DS to DSP this season. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

nemo1ner said:


> I find it funny that you're making the move to another class while me and my gf are doing the same. :laugh: The TT is going from DS to DSP this season. :beer:


 SP is very fun class to be in, especially in an AWD turbo car post limited-boost era! Not sure if all TTs are in the same SP line, but wouldn't it be DS to B-SP?


----------



## nemo1ner (May 5, 2004)

Why would it fall into BSP? Don't tell me there have been changes in classing.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Proposed and approved in 2011, the FWD and Quattro MK1 TT were moved from DSP (where they were classed briefly after being in CSP for a long time) to BSP. This happened when they did the entire SP shuffle because of the Evo's and "AWD" domination in the old BSP.

Most of the old ASP cars where classed in a newly created SSP - The boost buggies (Evo/Sti) where dumped in ASP with some other cars they have no business competing against (although still winning somehow) - The S2000, Bimmers, old-bsp Corvettes, TT, and some others were left to battle it out in BSP - and finally CSP staying mainly a spec miata (with a few unicorn Mr2 and old rx7), while the rest of the SP classes (DSP, ESP, and FSP) keeping their status quo intact and untouched. 

Here is the fastrack proposal that was ultimately approved:
http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/Documents/Fastrack/11/11-fastrack-june-solo.pdf


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Max. Have you decided on tires? Slicks?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yes Richard, I'm going to run Goodyear R250 slicks (makes no sense to be in prepared an not take advantage of the tire allowance). I was even thinking of getting a pair of softer R170 and try them in the rear - this combo worked really well in my XP Evo and got me almost even wear between the axles, and the ability to always get heat in the rear. 

I've decided on 11.5x23.5x16 on 16x10" wheels, but since I have wheels and tires to burn from the last setup, I'll probably really make a final decision mid season.


----------



## nemo1ner (May 5, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Proposed and approved in 2011, the FWD and Quattro MK1 TT were moved from DSP (where they were classed briefly after being in CSP for a long time) to BSP. This happened when they did the entire SP shuffle because of the Evo's and "AWD" domination in the old BSP.
> 
> Most of the old ASP cars where classed in a newly created SSP - The boost buggies (Evo/Sti) where dumped in ASP with some other cars they have no business competing against (although still winning somehow) - The S2000, Bimmers, old-bsp Corvettes, TT, and some others were left to battle it out in BSP - and finally CSP staying mainly a spec miata (with a few unicorn Mr2 and old rx7), while the rest of the SP classes (DSP, ESP, and FSP) keeping their status quo intact and untouched.
> 
> ...


That is silly. I'm not sure what they were thinking moving it there while the R32 (essentially the same crap) stays in DSP. The TT is going to get stomped on by the s2000's and M3s. I guess I will be making some adjustments to drop down to STX.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Don't get scared off by the classing, I still think a well-prepared BSP TT can compete and win. Remember, you're the only car in BSP with AWD, getting the car down to 3000 lbs with 400 WTQ/300 WHP and running 315 rubber all around is possible. Another thing to consider is that the TT (just like the boost buggies) aren't fast cars from the factory, it takes a certain level of modification to bring their true potential out, STX (or anything below SP) would really cap how competitive the MK1 TT is in Solo... ask me how I know!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Time to give an update on my JBS-style cast manifold project. I decided to go externally wastegated with the hybrid turbo. The idea is to not recirculate bypass gases back into the turbine discharge area. This will help reduce the high temperature and backpressure that always hunt these stock frame turbos.

The flat collector on the JBS design offers a perfect spot for a welded or bolt-on outlet flange. I went with a welded v-band to test the prototype, but I'm having v-band flanges made that will make it a bolt-on mod if anyone wants to replicate my insanity. 

I also ported the runner entrances (gasket match) to avoid any restriction if at some point I get to gasket-match the head as well. 









In-car fitment





Runner entrance before and after:


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

Insanity! Can't wait to see the gains from this


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

For those wondering if the JBS-style manifold fits with my 4" expansion chamber, it's a bit tight but clears. 






















and with v-band installed:


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

:thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Sep 17, 2013)

opcorn:


*Text for orders and customer support 24/7 908-259-4860*


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

this looks awesome cant wait to see your results buddy, what kind of power goals you have or do you think you are going to see from the new setup? i know last year u hit 405 AWTQ/300 AWHP.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Looks good Max!!!


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

as always Max...lookin' good! 

That SEM and the modded JBS really turned out quite nice...

Joe


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

Thats pretty close but hey it fits!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] Performance said:


> :thumbup:





[email protected] Performance said:


> opcorn:
> 
> 
> *Text for orders and customer support 24/7 908-259-4860*


Hey gang! 



DeckManDubs said:


> Looks good Max!!!





RabbitGTDguy said:


> as always Max...lookin' good!
> 
> That SEM and the modded JBS really turned out quite nice...
> 
> Joe


Thanks guys! 



PLAYED TT said:


> Thats pretty close but hey it fits!


That's what she said!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

EuroSpic_TT said:


> this looks awesome cant wait to see your results buddy, what kind of power goals you have or do you think you are going to see from the new setup? i know last year u hit 405 AWTQ/300 AWHP.


Hey Juan, how is it going? I'm shooting for 450 AWTQ and 400 AWHP with the new setup without the need to spin the turbo as fast as I used to. Excited to see what she puts out, especially when the car is sitting at 2,700 lbs now!


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Hey Juan, how is it going? I'm shooting for 450 AWTQ and 400 AWHP with the new setup without the need to spin the turbo as fast as I used to. Excited to see what she puts out, especially when the car is sitting at 2,700 lbs now!


ohhh same old same old, nice niceee, cant wait to see you crush those numbers. what you do to get it down so light? is it somewhere throughout these pages?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Not really detailed in the thread, but took out a bunch of things that weren't mandated to be in place by the class rules. Major things were the interior carpet, convertible top, AC, moving back to air to air intercooling (60 lbs saved), and a bunch of interior/exterior panels that were freeloading (including the heavy glove box).


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

2700 lbs !? that is fantastic!!!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> 2700 lbs !? that is fantastic!!!


Yeah Noah, being below 2,800 lbs sounds great in TT land, but when Jeff's Golf is sitting at 2,000 lbs with identical powerplant under the same class rules, I can only feel grossly overweight. Should be interesting though, more power and less weight = zoom zoom!


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

DeckManDubs said:


> 2700 lbs !? that is fantastic!!!


This^


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Not really detailed in the thread, but took out a bunch of things that weren't mandated to be in place by the class rules. Major things were the interior carpet, convertible top, AC, moving back to air to air intercooling (60 lbs saved), and a bunch of interior/exterior panels that were freeloading (including the heavy glove box).


is that the only reason u decided to go back to air to air intercooling? i felt like you were solid on the water to air


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yes, the air-to-water was super solid! A class change made it illegal (as well as water injection), that's why I had to go back to air-to-air. Losing 60 lbs in the process was well received by my weight loss plan though.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Manifold, turbo, and downpipe mounted and fitting quite nicely. Almost looks like all 3 aftermarket components were designed together as a system. :thumbup:


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

That looks great Max :beer:

Hopefully tomorrow or Wednesday I'll have some time to stop by, I'll shoot you a text tomorrow!


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Manifold, turbo, and downpipe mounted and fitting quite nicely. Almost looks like all 3 aftermarket components were designed together as a system. :thumbup:



Is that the oil feed hard line going past the Turbo exhaust flange Max? If so, it might be an idea to slip some heat sleeving over the line. Edit: And the O2 sensor wiring.

Surprised the O2 sensor doesn't have heat sleeve from Manufacture. My A4 NGK replacements have heat sleeve/fire sleeve as did Factory OEM. All the way down to the sensor itself. Even my AEM WB o2 sensor has a silicone thermal sleeving attached, and I'm going to enclose it in another layer ( DEI heat sleeve )


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Good thinking Richard! The way these turbos love to glow red, it might be a good preventive mod to wrap that one oil line (although the engineers didn't see the need for a shield there). The O2 sensor wiring has the heavy duty loom to protect it, it's just off when I snapped the pic. :beer:


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Good thinking Richard! The way these turbos love to glow red, it might be a good preventive mod to wrap that one oil line (although the engineers didn't see the need for a shield there). The O2 sensor wiring has the heavy duty loom to protect it, it's just off when I snapped the pic. :beer:


I don't think the engineers ever dreamed of 30lbs of boost!! :laugh:


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

Chickenman35 said:


> I don't think the engineers ever dreamed of 30lbs of boost!! :laugh:


Yeah they would probably look at Max like:sly::what:


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

PLAYED TT said:


> Yeah they would probably look at Max like:sly::what:


No way K04 was built for powaaaaaa


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> I don't think the engineers ever dreamed of 30lbs of boost!! :laugh:


You mean to tell me that they didn't anticipate some lunatics across the pond asking for 30+ psi from components designed for only half of that? What where they thinking, some kind of hairdresser's car? 



PLAYED TT said:


> Yeah they would probably look at Max like:sly::what:


I can only imagine the look on their faces, Hans look "a Yankee hairdressing as a hobby, and full time cone-chasing..."


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

^:laugh:


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Manifold, turbo, and downpipe mounted and fitting quite nicely. Almost looks like all 3 aftermarket components were designed together as a system. :thumbup:


It does look quite happy in there! 

Can't wait to get the twins going!


Joe


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Lol at cone-chasing 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

On the ground and ready for baseline testing on the new setup. Made some lower bumper grill blockoff plates, and improved the intercooler vs cutout placement.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Can't wait to hear how it goes next weekend


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> Can't wait to hear how it goes next weekend


Got the package today with a lovely surprise Noah, you are the Man! :beer::beer:


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Got the package today with a lovely surprise Noah, you are the Man! :beer::beer:


:thumbup:


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

results and baselines soon to follow...

can't tell you how excited I am for you Max and hopefully me in a few short weeks!!!

Joe


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Got the package today with a lovely surprise Noah, you are the Man! :beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Time for some mega update:

Car has been running for a while now with the new hybrid turbo. I still have some things to iron out, but the initial results are promising. I have developed a reoccurring exhaust leak at the turbo to manifold junction due to the bolts constantly backing out. I think long term I'm going to re-do my exhaust manifold with a bolt-on wastegate outlet flange, this will allow me to run a 3-bolt locking ring to permanently cure the issue with the bolts backing out. I need to tune the dwell setting and the AFR curve for the new turbo. I have finally broken and will do a wideband ECU conversion and just tune the new ECU from scratch. 

Now to the good stuff, I got the car (although untuned) on the dyno to collect baseline numbers. To my amazement, the car pulled a best of 425 AWTQ/ 403 AWHP on a Mustang dyno that reads much lower than the usual dynojets. When this thing is fully sorted, it will be a beast! 

I was also having some high coolant issues with some hotlapping. This seems inevitable with a FMIC blocking so much airflow to the radiator and the inherent lack of flow through our engine bay. As a solution, I added a hood extractor vent which works lovely. The coolant temp has fallen back to normal again, even after some mucho beating (an external oil cooler will also be installed soon to further help the situation with oil/coolant exchange). 

Now, the picture dump:

*Latest engine bay configuration* 









*
External wastegate and atmospheric dump tube
*










*How she sits with the new front end openings and hood vent*









*Mass airflow figures with the new setup

*









*On the rollers
*









*Highest number (after I added timing and grossly dumped fuel to prevent running lean) *









*3 run WTQ/WHP average
*


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Awesome Max!!!! I want to go for a hot lap with 400awtq!!!


----------



## TTazRS (Feb 1, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I was also having some high coolant issues with some hotlapping. This seems inevitable with a FMIC blocking so much airflow to the radiator and the inherent lack of flow through our engine bay. As a solution, I added a hood extractor vent which works lovely. The coolant temp has fallen back to normal again, even after some mucho beating (an external oil cooler will also be installed soon to further help the situation with oil/coolant exchange).


Max, 

Have you thought about removing the trim piece at the top of the engine bay? I believe Steve (ModShack) experimented with this years ago and saw a noticeable decrease in engine temperature. Just a thought :beer:









http://forums.audiworld.com/showthread.php?p=17194406


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> Awesome Max!!!! I want to go for a hot lap with 400awtq!!!


Once she's sorted and running right, you can take her out anytime you want Noah! :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

TTazRS said:


> Max,
> 
> Have you thought about removing the trim piece at the top of the engine bay? I believe Steve (ModShack) experimented with this years ago and saw a noticeable decrease in engine temperature. Just a thought :beer:
> 
> ...



You know, it's a good thing you brought this up. I never removed and tested that piece when the car was still street driven because I feared possible issues with water getting around the ECU. Now that the car is only a track toy, I don't know why it skipped my mind to remove/test it. I have to remove the trim soon to install a wideband ECU, it definitely isn't going back. It's a low pressure zone, and won't be as effective as venting closer to the front, but after seeing how much pressure is building under the hood at 40+ mph, anything to de-pressurize the bay is a big plus. Good observation and thinking! :beer:


----------



## TTazRS (Feb 1, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> You know, it's a good thing you brought this up. I never removed and tested that piece when the car was still street driven because I feared possible issues with water getting around the ECU. Now that the car is only a track toy, I don't know why it skipped my mind to remove/test it. I have to remove the trim soon to install a wideband ECU, it definitely isn't going back. It's a low pressure zone, and won't be as effective as venting closer to the front, but after seeing how much pressure is building under the hood at 40+ mph, anything to de-pressurize the bay is a big plus. Good observation and thinking! :beer:


No problem! :thumbup:


----------



## Rford71 (Sep 1, 2011)

Great results👍


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

TTazRS said:


> No problem! :thumbup:


:beer::beer:



Rford71 said:


> Great results


Thanks Rob!


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

How do you know how much pressure is building? You have me all worried now about my set up and I have even started looking at bumpers. :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> How do you know how much pressure is building? You have me all worried now about my set up and I have even started looking at bumpers. :laugh:


Val, I didn't measure, but it's a lot!!! At least a couple of psi at moderate speed. Before the securing pins, the now flexible hood (lost a good chunk of its rigidity with some weight reduction), looked like a party ballon getting filled at speed. The hood itself isn't air tight with the body, and I had all of the firewall portion of the hood weatherstrip removed -- for this to happen, the pressure differential between air entering and escaping the bay must be substantial. 

Actually, bumpers and amount of front facia openings aren't the culprit, it's the lack of airflow exiting the bay that is a problem. Lots of air coming in, but not enough is coming out and causing the pressure buildup that ultimately restricts the necessary flow over the radiator. I used to speculate that the TT's front facia was the problem, but my recent findings have made it clear... we need more flow past the bay. :beer:


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

i always liked the way this hood was done and always thought about doing it :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Juan, anything that helps alleviate the bay pressure will help. However, placing vents that far back and into the high pressure zone will significantly reduce the effectiveness of the vents - and might even force more air into the bay as speed increases (further exacerbating the issue). 

In my car for example, I had a huge hole in the middle of the hood from an aborted previous project. I could have used it out of convenience, but instead patched it (huge pain in the neck) and cut a new one in the front portion because it's the low pressure zone. I understand aesthetics may want to make you do it this way, but IMO if you're doing such a molestation, it has to be for function primarily.


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

well thanks for explaining that to me properly :thumbup:


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

Hey max what are you using for a belly pan ? And how do you think it effects the pressures in the engine bay in conjunction with your modified hood? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Mike, I'm not running a belly pan now (have a splitter going for race days but it's too close to the ground to be driven around). A belly pan of any sort add to amount of air trapped, and increases the ability for the bay to build up pressure. The smart move for me would be to run without one, but the front grip advantage of having an air dam and a splitter element is too great for me to pass on... call it a healthy compromise.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ...It's a low pressure zone, and won't be as effective as venting closer to the front, but after seeing how much pressure is building under the hood at 40+ mph, anything to de-pressurize the bay is a big plus. Good observation and thinking! :beer:


Max, I think you may have misspoke there. The base of the windshield is a HIGH-pressure area. Is it higher-pressure than your engine compartment? I don't know. Your hood vent seems to be optimally located. One other location for outflow might be the back corners of the hood. 

Another idea that seemed to work for me on my track TT was to remove all (or most) of the fan shroud. I don't know how much time you sit idling at an event (when you would want the shroud to increase efficiency of the fans) , but once moving I found that it restricts flow through the radiator. I cut the right side completely off and removed that fan (I had A/C delete).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> Max, I think you may have misspoke there. The base of the windshield is a HIGH-pressure area. Is it higher-pressure than your engine compartment? I don't know. Your hood vent seems to be optimally located. One other location for outflow might be the back corners of the hood.
> 
> Another idea that seemed to work for me on my track TT was to remove all (or most) of the fan shroud. I don't know how much time you sit idling at an event (when you would want the shroud to increase efficiency of the fans) , but once moving I found that it restricts flow through the radiator. I cut the right side completely off and removed that fan (I had A/C delete).


Correct Steve, low pressure zone at the front leading portion of the hood, and transitioning to the highest pressure at the base of the windshield. When idling at the track, I have both fan wired on high on a toggle switch and that seems to take care of thing when the car is static. :beer:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Correct Steve, low pressure zone at the front leading portion of the hood, and transitioning to the highest pressure at the base of the windshield. When idling at the track, I have both fan wired on high on a toggle switch and that seems to take care of thing when the car is static. :beer:


Sounds like you could lose the shroud, then. You will get some benefit. :beer:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Oh, another huge help in keeping my track TT cool was a good-sized, legit oil cooler in the passenger lower vent space with that grill opened up.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Steve, did you keep the oil/water exchange or divorced the two system in the track car? 

I have an oil cooler, sandwich plate, and auxiliary filter mount waiting for me to have lines made. I haven't done install yet because I'm still debating if it would be beneficial for my use of the car to retain or divorce the heat exchange. What are your thoughts since each approach have their specific pros and cons? :beer:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Steve, did you keep the oil/water exchange or divorced the two system in the track car?
> 
> I have an oil cooler, sandwich plate, and auxiliary filter mount waiting for me to have lines made. I haven't done install yet because I'm still debating if would be beneficial for my use of the car retain or divorce the heat exchange. What are your thoughts since each approach have their specific pros and cons? :beer:


I call the OEM oil cooler configuration an oil heater. Mine was gone right away. This also allowed me to re-route the coolant lines which are a bit of a Gordian knot in the stock configuration. Way too much coolant flow bypasses the radiator. When I was done the only feed to the crack pipe was from the heater core and turbo coolant outflow. If you are sufficiently warming up your engine before runs, which I am sure you are, I see no benefit to the OEM cooler arrangement.

I used a sandwich plate but kept the OEM filter location. Do you even have room left in your engine compartment for a remote filter location?:laugh:










Here is a pic of how I mounted my cooler in the right void. Obviously, the back side of this vents into the fenderwell via the liner vents


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

Is there any sort of quick and dirty diagram you could throw up as to your revised coolant routing? I am planning a 3-row radiator ASAP and would like to take care of routing and such when I do that job, but a picture would help me plan and start getting parts together...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> I call the OEM oil cooler configuration an oil heater. Mine was gone right away. This also allowed me to re-route the coolant lines which are a bit of a Gordian knot in the stock configuration. Way too much coolant flow bypasses the radiator. When I was done the only feed to the crack pipe was from the heater core and turbo coolant outflow. If you are sufficiently warming up your engine before runs, which I am sure you are, I see no benefit to the OEM cooler arrangement.
> 
> I used a sandwich plate but kept the OEM filter location. Do you even have room left in your engine compartment for a remote filter location?:laugh:
> 
> ...


Awesome Steve! This confirms what I was thinking with divorcing the oil/heat exchange and getting rid of the exchanger/oil heater. The vortex "know it all" in the 1.8t technical section were making a strong case for retaining the stupid thing, but like most thing, their ideas are based on zero practice, let alone some track abuse that doesn't last less than 15 seconds and a 1/2 hour of cool down. Thanks buddy, the thing is hitting the dumpster as soon as get my lines made to do the install. :thumbup::thumbup:

PS: I have already done major reconfiguration to eliminate all the unneeded bypass in the coolant system. This is the last one still in the loop and I'll be happy to get rid of it.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

l88m22vette said:


> Is there any sort of quick and dirty diagram you could throw up as to your revised coolant routing? I am planning a 3-row radiator ASAP and would like to take care of routing and such when I do that job, but a picture would help me plan and start getting parts together...


I am going on memory here. A diagram will be complicated because of varying configurations - for instance, my car did not have the after-run pump. For a street driven car that wants to retain the oil cooler and after-run pump the modifications will be less radical.

From the coolant outflow from the head there are basically 6 "taps" off the main coolant flange and an intermediary junction.
1- Upper rad hose to junction and then radiator
2- Heater core returning to crack pipe
3- Death star (overflow bottle) returning to crack pipe (but small diameter so doesn't bypass much coolant.)
4- oil cooler retuning to crack pipe
5- after-run pump to turbo coolant feed
6- Aux, which is intended, I think, as a safety bypass in the event of a heater core clog (and closed thermostat) because it mine was routed directly to the crack pipe.

I removed the intermediary flange, eliminated the oil cooler feed and the "Aux" bypass feed (I didn't have the after-run.) I also rerouted the Death Star feed across the front of the engine compartment to service an auxiliary water temp gauge thereby eliminating the hard lines across the firewall.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

P.S. This may be Master of the Obvious info, but a low-temp thermostat, correctly oriented, is another easy step for the overheating issues in the TT.:beer:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Awesome Steve! This confirms what I was thinking with divorcing the oil/heat exchange and getting rid of the exchanger/oil heater. The vortex "know it all" in the 1.8t technical section were making a strong case for retaining the stupid thing, but like most thing, their ideas are based on zero practice, let alone some track abuse that doesn't last less than 15 seconds and a 1/2 hour of cool down. Thanks buddy, the thing is hitting the dumpster as soon as get my lines made to do the install. :thumbup::thumbup:
> 
> PS: I have already done major reconfiguration to eliminate all the unneeded bypass in the coolant system. This is the last one still in the loop and I'll be happy to get rid of it.


Max, pay attention to the mating surface on the oil filter manifold. I chased a seepage that I'm convinced was related to a nick or poor casting on that surface. A little clean up may save you the same irritation. I suspect the sandwich plate gasket is thinner/harder and more sensitive to surface irregularities than the OEM cooler one.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

If you run in cooler weather, you may want to consider a Mocal Thermostatic Sandwich Plate. These bypass oil to the cooler until it reaches a minimum operating temperature. Usually 180 F.

http://www.racerpartswholesale.com/product/13462/Sandwich_Plates#reviews

Also available as an inline Thermostatic Bypass.

http://www.racerpartswholesale.com/category/Remote_Oil_Thermostats


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Why we are talking cooling, I thought I might as well mention PS pump cooling. I've found that the standard PS cooling solution for most cars of any manufacture is totally inadequate when it comes to Autocross and Track Days. A small Automatic transmission cooler is very effective and can make a dramatic difference in PS fluid temperatures and it's longevity. I use a Hayden 401 which is more than adequate.

I have an Audi A4 ( gasp!! ) and the standard PS cooler line consists as a single loop of aluminium tubing in front of the radiator. It is inadequate for Autocross and Track Days. I believe that the TT has several loops in the line, but packaging may not be ideal. Might be an idea to monitor the PS fluid temp and if it gets too high ( over 190 F ), then switch to an Auxiliary cooler.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Why we are talking cooling, I thought I might as well mention PS pump cooling. I've found that the standard PS cooling solution for most cars of any manufacture is totally inadequate when it comes to Autocross and Track Days. A small Automatic transmission cooler is very effective and can make a dramatic difference in PS fluid temperatures and it's longevity. I use a Hayden 401 which is more than adequate.
> 
> I have an Audi A4 ( gasp!! ) and the standard PS cooler line consists as a single loop of aluminium tubing in front of the radiator. It is inadequate for Autocross and Track Days. I believe that the TT has several loops in the line, but packaging may not be ideal. Might be an idea to monitor the PS fluid temp and if it gets too high ( over 190 F ), then switch to an Auxiliary cooler.


Yep, great and necessary mod the use I have for the car. I did that when I replaced the clutch a year or so ago - the difference was substantial, I no longer boiled PS fluid at the end of long runs with the fat race tires. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Had to pull the turbo to fix a broken stud holding the exhaust manifold to the head. It created a nasty leak since each stud of the bottom row are shared for each adjacent runners. Turbo is back on now and the leak situation is resolved. I'm waiting for a TIP donation from Badger5 (Bill gave one of his 80mm TIP for me to test on the project), once it arrives, testing and tuning on the new setup will resume. The airflow increase from the much larger TIP will be interesting to see on a turbo that runs aggressive level of boost.


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

opcorn:opcorn:


----------



## Fight1 (Jul 29, 2013)

Can you take some good pictures of how you the TIP and your brake lines end up and also measure how deep the TIP throat 
at the Turbo ends up when your are happy with fitment? Might be helpful for others fitting a B5, as getting it on/off for adjustment is really no fun I intended to get the measurements with mine, but forgot in the end.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yep, great and necessary mod the use I have for the car. I did that when I replaced the clutch a year or so ago - the difference was substantial, I no longer boiled PS fluid at the end of long runs with the fat race tires. :thumbup:


I kinda figured that you'd already done this... :laugh:


----------



## max13b2 (Jul 24, 2007)

Fight1 said:


> Can you take some good pictures of how you the TIP and your brake lines end up.


I'm interested in this as well. If all goes smooth, we should see Bill about a group buy :thumbup:


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

^ x2, I want one but I know LHD cars can have clearance issues


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Fight1 said:


> Can you take some good pictures of how you the TIP and your brake lines end up and also measure how deep the TIP throat
> at the Turbo ends up when your are happy with fitment? Might be helpful for others fitting a B5, as getting it on/off for adjustment is really no fun I intended to get the measurements with mine, but forgot in the end.





max13b2 said:


> I'm interested in this as well. If all goes smooth, we should see Bill about a group buy :thumbup:





l88m22vette said:


> ^ x2, I want one but I know LHD cars can have clearance issues


Got the Badger5 TIP installed and ended up trimming about an inch off the turbo end of the TIP to get a fitment I was comfortable and happy with. Without trimming, the brake lines are crushing and digging into the silicone way too much IMO. Pics below, and mass airflow data will follow


Comparo with your typical silicone TIP









Trimmed this much (part sticking past the clamp) at first, but it wasn't enough and I had to trim more










Final trimmed piece










Fitment by the brake lines. One brake line is still resting on the TIP, but not nearly deforming it as it normally would without the trimming - the other line clears completely. Not a bad tradeoff with a little work considering the flow improvement that the piece offers! 









*

Edit: this is how much I trimmed in total (about an inch) from the two rounds of removing material on the turbo-side end of the TIP

*


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Nice Max!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Need numbers! Good job Max on guinea pigging.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> Nice Max!


:beer:



20v master said:


> Need numbers! Good job Max on guinea pigging.


Sucks, but I went right out and was excited to see the airflow changes on my setup from the just the TIP, but it seems that my MAF sensor had kicked the bucket. It reads fine and logs properly at idle and low-load cruising, but as soon at it sees elevated loads with higher voltage, it reads fractions 0.x G/s throughout. I also get a low resistance code stored, which brings the sensor to read normally again if cleared, but same problem every time I put load on it. 

I will have to baseline the new sensor with the standard TIP to be able to get accurate before/after data. It sucks because I was not looking forward to the removing/installing/reinstalling dance that is necessary to gather the proper data. Maybe having some local vag buddies over with some beer will motivate me to get on it (Doug, Jeff, Mike, are you guys listening???) :laugh:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Got the Badger5 TIP installed and ended up trimming about an inch off the turbo end of the TIP to get a fitment I was comfortable and happy with. Without trimming, the brake lines are crushing and digging into the silicone way too much IMO. Pics below, and mass airflow data will follow
> 
> 
> Comparo with your typical silicone TIP
> ...




thanks for pictures


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> thanks for pictures


Thank you Bill for a great product and supporting the community by sending me a TIP to test and run on the car! :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

A few pics of my roll protection modifications. I used the iconic factory roll hoops and built around it to stay true to the look while providing acceptable roll protection. I'm thinking of black for a stealth finish, but some ricer influence have proposed orange. What do you guys think?


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Looks good, a little easier to navigate than my setup haha.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Looking good Max :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

No orange! How about clear or silver for seat hoops black for bracing. :thumbup:


----------



## Rford71 (Sep 1, 2011)

Real nice job Max👍, I would go with black.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Nice - been enjoying the progress you've been making. I'd go black too considering your engine bay and the rest of the exterior... bright bars would kind of stick out like a sore thumb


----------



## max13b2 (Jul 24, 2007)

Brushed and Clear... I would keep it raw dog... It would also match the rest of the interior highlights

Sent from my Vivid 4G using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Thanks guys! I'm going with black and keeping the stealth theme going. I did consider the brushed aluminum at first, but it's way too much work (stripping the factory anodizing is a challenge that I'm not looking to take on). :beer::beer:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

I'd leave the OEM hoops silver and paint the additional support satin or low-gloss black.


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

^ this! 

That'd be super stealth


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Late__Apex said:


> I'd leave the OEM hoops silver and paint the additional support satin or low-gloss black.


seconded :thumbup:


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Is powdercoating an option? Then choose any color...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Late__Apex said:


> I'd leave the OEM hoops silver and paint the additional support satin or low-gloss black.





badger5 said:


> seconded :thumbup:


I gave the two tone black-support-bars look a try (by wrapping it in electrical tape to get a visual idea on how it would come out if painted). It's looks pretty good, but I think I'd like all black better. 



tombrian102 said:


> whooooofffff :| a beast its realy a beast !!!!!!


Thank you!



18T_BT said:


> Is powdercoating an option? Then choose any color...


Powder coating is not really an option because the baking process is done at 400* for at least half an hour. This potentially weakens the metal structurally, enough to be rejected as a smart option for wheels and roll bars/cages that will see real track action. :beer:


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Many rolls bars are powder coated and used in sanctioned events. Kirk Racing for instance powders almost all of theirs and their aren't a jinxy company. I am not trying to convince you to do it, but to say it 'potentially' weakens the metal isn't really a measurable thing. Your exhaust undergoes tons of heat cycle well over 400 degrees and weather elements and last a very long time. Yes, it's also not responsible for a roll over either but your roll bar isn't really exposed to the elements like an exhaust. If you are still running 315's it'll take a lot to tip over your TT unless you hit an embankment or giant curb! The other option is UV powdercoating usually used when a roll bar is welded into the car etc. All I know is that electrical tape has to go


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Val, circa 2006-2008 I had just graduated college, was broke, and volunteered for a lot of corner working, then eventually moved up to tech inspection for SCCA (that was my only way to afford road racing due to the cost of entry fees). Cages with improper diameter tubing, cages without inspection holes (required to measure the bar thickness), bolt-on and powder coated cages, were all red flags that we usually looked for when inspecting cars. I'm not saying it can't be used, but not the best practice if you're serious about safety. Paint would do without compromising the very purpose of adding roll protection... safety.

Let's not forget we're dealing with aluminum, not DOM or CM. The real sanctioning bodies, like SCCA and NASA only allow aluminum if it was already part of the factory roll protection, and the rest of the cage is built around it. I'm not going to push my luck just because powder coating will offer a nicer finish, it's a track car and visual appearance will always have to take a backseat to performance and safety. 

PS: the electrical tape was just to have a visual of how the proposed two tone finish would look


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Hey Max. Haven't seen many new posts lately. Any updates on the TT and how is your season going? :beer:


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2013)

Everyone seems to hate on it here but plastic dip is a great option if you have a piece you want to paint in place or easily change the color/finish on. I personally like the look of dips finish just me though.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Hey Max. Haven't seen many new posts lately. Any updates on the TT and how is your season going? :beer:


Hey Richard, I've just been really busy with family stuff and haven't been updating the thread. My season is a bit slow - I have done a few events with the car, including waterfest, but haven't taken it out as much as I'd want to due to reasons explained below. 

The car, in acceleration phases, is a rocket with the new hybrid setup. So much so that I'm having a hard time keeping the tires from lighting up (all 4 with fresh and fat r-comps) at full boost. My solution for now (until I can find more mechanical grip and/or finally get going on adding aero grip) has been to bottle the TQ by caping boost at 27 psi to retain full traction on course. 

Now, that was the good part! All that power and lowered weight has brought a magnifying glass to other areas of the car that were somewhat acceptable before, but are in need of immediate attention now:

1) I need brakes, and I mean SERIOUSLY need more braking power. Once the car gets going, you need luck and a prayer to get it slowed down in acceptable distance to make a turn. I'm overcooking stuff everywhere in normal Solo courses, and it's near suicidal in ProSolo or road racing situations. Waterfest for example was held on the road course at Raceway Park needing 4th gear changes twice (in my stock-geared 6 speed O2M) on the front straight before T3. That entire front straight was only broken down in half by a tight offset that required a 4-3 downshift and real braking, I still don't know how made it back in one piece with the brakes the way they were. Before WF, I installed a new master, booster, and flushed the system with fresh fluid, so it's definitely the brakes being inadequate for the speeds I'm reaching. I am pretty much set on a set of 4-piston Willwood dynapro with two piece rotors and full track-spec pads (they will also allow me to run 15" or 16" wheels ). I'm not against any suggestions for BBK but I'm not running bigger than 17" wheels on a prepared car. 

2) I am also really having gearing issues with this close ratio six speed box. It was bad before with the stock turbo, but now it's making the car almost unusable in autocross (kind of like the 6 speed Evos MR, that couldn't get autocrossed at a serious level without a final drive or gear box change). The lower gears are just too damn short now, I'm on the 7100 limiter about half way of any power section (a third gear upshift is possible, but you loose as much time as riding the limiter than with the needed downshift at the next braking zone). I've been looking at a European TDI (or at least a US R32) final drive swap as a solution. Being stuck in between gears is so frustrating that I'm considering parking it and just co-driving with friends until I solve the stupid short gearing problem.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

A few pics taken this season: 

New FP look




















WF road course solo 












Somehow hustled some wood with the car trying to kill me every time I got on the front straight


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Congrats Max!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Congrats again on the results. It's awesome to see the power gains you have achieved giving great results (it's probably all the throttle body ), even though it highlights other shortcomings. I haven't done the math, but the diesel gears I assume would be harder to come by, so are the R32 finals too long to use with the TT gears? I don't know that FWD 02M gears would be enough of a change what you are trying to achieve, but I actually put those gears in an 02M/Q case last weekend, but the project car has no engine to report back on how they work out.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ...I need brakes...


Max, I would be happy to share my TrackTT brake setup. The rears may not be appropriate because you will lose the emergency, but the fronts provide over 30% more brake torque than the stock setup and 38% more than the Wilwood kit for $840 parts cost a few years ago. In addition you'll need to get the brackets waterjetted or robo-plasmaed and welded but I can provide the CAD file. I think mine cost about $90 to fab. If you want more pressure you could substitute a caliper with larger pistons - Wilwood has many options. (I_ never_ locked my brakes on track with my setup so there is even more deceleration to be had.)


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Late__Apex said:


> Max, I would be happy to share my TrackTT brake setup. The rears may not be appropriate because you will lose the emergency, but the fronts provide over 30% more brake torque than the stock setup and 38% more than the Wilwood kit for $840 parts cost a few years ago. In addition you'll need to get the brackets waterjetted or robo-plasmaed and welded but I can provide the CAD file. I think mine cost about $90 to fab. If you want more pressure you could substitute a caliper with larger pistons - Wilwood has many options. (I_ never_ locked my brakes on track with my setup so there is even more deceleration to be had.)


30% more than 3.2 front brakes, or 30% more than 1.8T 312mm front brakes? More details needed please.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

20v master said:


> 30% more than 3.2 front brakes, or 30% more than 1.8T 312mm front brakes? More details needed please.


1.8T, but ironically, according to the brake torque calculator I use, the brake torque between the two TT setups is just about the same. Obviously, the 3.2 brakes will have better heat-sink characteristics, but about the same brake torque. Given that both cars use the same rear brakes (225) they were probably trying to maintain balance.

My front setup used Wilwood Forged Superlite Internal 4-piston calipers with 41mm pistons, the hats from the Wilwood TT BBK with custom rotor rings (330x20 vented) and brackets. This caliper can be bought with up to whopping 48/44mm pistons which would offer nearly 70% more brake torque, all else equal. 

My setup maintained pretty close to the factory bias with over 60% more overall brake torque (when my larger rears were factored in). The thing stopped like a beast with surprisingly easy pedal effort. With my OEM 225 brakes I always felt like I was going to bend the brake pedal, haha.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Max. I would suggest going with the Forged Superlites as well. Better caliper than the DynaPro in my opinion and the SuperLite has a larger pad than the DynaPro. Both in area and thickness. This extends pad life greatly and that reduces your long term costs.

The other big advantage to using the Superlite pad is that it a standard size ( 7420 series ) that is used on THOUSANDS of Amatuer and Pro Circle Track and Road Race cars. Everything from the smallest dirt tracks all the way up to Arca and Nascar classes. This gives you a huge selection of pads from many different companies at inexpensive prices. Depending on Manufacturer, Superlite pads are often cheaper than DynaPro pads. 

WilWood BP10 pads or Hawk HPS pads are more than sufficient for DD and the fastest Autocross. For Track Days go straight to the best quality Race pad that you can get. Don't be afraid of going too high in friction compound. PFC 01 or 03 series will pop your eyeballs out, you will never fade them, they work cold, yet they are easy on rotors.

Some of the Tech support lines, including WilWood, really underestimate the demands that Amateur Track Day racers put on the pads. Most of us don't have proper cooling due to the difficulty of adding brake ducting to a DD. That really raises the demands on the pads ( and rotors ) 

Edit: BTW, one of my favorite places to buy Race parts ( Universal ) is www.pitstopusa.com

Tons of stuff for all types of Circle Track and Road Racers. Good place to buy calipers and pads as well. Lug mount Superlites are typically $149 with Free Shipping there. They have some specials on right now and Superlite lug mount with Thermolock pistons are as low as $161 each.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Some pictures of brakes on my old Hillclimb/Autocross/Solo1/TrackDay Camaro. Older Generation Superlites with 12.19" x 1.375" ( 310mm x *35mm* ) Coleman short track rotors. Mintex FR1 pads ( Nascar short Track, Indy car, Heavy GT1 and ALMS compound ) which are fantastic pads, but unfortunately hard to find these days. 

ProSystems brakes may have them and are a great source for Professional Parts and Service: http://www.prosystembrakes.com/


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

Chickenman35 said:


> Some pictures of brakes on my old Hillclimb/Autocross/Solo1/TrackDay Camaro. Older Generation Superlites with 12.19" x 1.375" ( 310mm x *35mm* )


Wow, those are fattie rotors! I had spec'd out a setup using 1.25" thick rings but never got to it before selling the car. It would have required spacers _behind_ the rotors to get the clearance which I wasn't thrilled with but cheaper than custom hats.

I've used Pitstop USA too but bought my calipers from Jegs, IIRC.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Somehow hustled some wood with the car trying to kill me every time I got on the front straight


hey!
well done on the trophy

did you get to the dyno with the old girl or get your maf figures logged yet?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Need numbers! Good job Max on guinea pigging.





badger5 said:


> hey!
> did you get your maf figures logged yet?


I finally got a chance to log MAF values with a new unit. I've had the new sensor for a while but couldn't find the stupid bit for the screws and kind of put it in the back burner. Here is a 3rd gear pull I did today, it's registering 293 G/s at peak load. So far I've seen 302 G/s in higher gears which a lot higher than what my previous best was. 

So the Badger5 80mm intake got me from 281 G/s to 293 G/s in third gear. A healthy 12 G/s increase in airflow throughout the powerband just from a TIP... FANTASTIC (and must be noted that the gains seen are in comparison to a performance Forge TIP, not the stock unit). Well done Bill! :beer:


----------



## UCFQuattroguy (Jul 5, 2005)

Good lord, man. That thing hits like a ton of bricks, and early, too!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yeah Justin, it hits early and hard... but most importantly sustains close to 300 G/s to redline. For a small frame snail, I'm really happy with the setup!


----------



## UCFQuattroguy (Jul 5, 2005)

The more I look at this build, the more and more I hope Gonzo is open to developing a Longitudinal 1.8T setup when my K03 takes a dump.


----------



## hunTTsvegas (Aug 27, 2012)

Inbox is full sir. If possible, care to email [email protected]. It'll be easier and I've got a few additional questions. Thanks!


----------



## taverncustoms (Feb 18, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> hey



I'm a little disappointed max. is that really the only picture your gonna post of that Hood!!!!!! lol


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

hunTTsvegas said:


> Inbox is full sir. If possible, care to email [email protected]. It'll be easier and I've got a few additional questions. Thanks!


No problemo, will clear out the PM box and shoot you an email with my contact info so you can ask the questions. :beer:



taverncustoms said:


> I'm a little disappointed max. is that really the only picture your gonna post of that Hood!!!!!! lol


Hey bud, I haven't seen you around in a while, how's your track build going?

Hood:


----------



## aircooled56 (Jul 6, 2006)

I like the hood, looks familiar :laugh:

What is the purpose of the additional holes?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

aircooled56 said:


> I like the hood, looks familiar
> 
> 
> What is the purpose of the additional holes?



Yeah man, the vented hood is aircooled inspired! 


The extra holes should provide more depressurization while moving, but the main intent is to allow as much hot air to vent out when stationary after hotlapping (our firewall-side turbo setups add another element to the whole heat and cooling dilemma).


----------



## taverncustoms (Feb 18, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Hey bud, I haven't seen you around in a while, how's your track build going?


thats a good looking hood. I'm always lurking around here, most of the time i try not to get dragged into the hater threads on here, I ran out of room to work on the race car in my 1 car garage so I upgraded the garage and bought a new house. more will be happening this winter  :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

taverncustoms said:


> thats a good looking hood. I'm always lurking around here, most of the time i try not to get dragged into the hater threads on here, I ran out of room to work on the race car in my 1 car garage so I upgraded the garage and bought a new house. more will be happening this winter  :thumbup:


Nice, congrats on the new garage, the house is just an added bonus! I hear you on avoiding the shenanigans, I try to steer clear of the drama as much as possible too... although it's not always possible.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I decided today to bolt a stock TT MAF sensor/housing to test some recent concerns that I may have been maxing out the sensor. Well, the sensor seems to not register any higher in the much smaller factory housing, just flatlining lower in the rev range. This confirms that I am in fact seeing the ceiling of what the sensor can register (even in the larger 83 mm ID housing).

I have two choices as a remedy, run another compatible sensor from the vag family with a higher airflow ceiling, or increase the cross section around the sensor even more with a larger housing. The higher reading sensor seems like the better solution as the fueling won't need so much tweaking to get right. I'm going to give this idea a go! 
*
Graphing the stock MAF housing and sensor on a 3rd gear pull
*


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

I'll have to look at my old graphs, but I could have sworn I've seen higher than 298. Any ideas what OEM applications have sensors with a higher threshold?


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

I know the hitachi MAF for 2.7t can read upwards of 400g/sec in a 85mm housing not entirely sure of the Bosch units 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Holy airflow Batman!


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

20v master said:


> Holy airflow Batman!


That's what I'm sayn! 

I wish I can figure out why my vcds won't log 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

racin2redline said:


> I know the hitachi MAF for 2.7t can read upwards of 400g/sec in a 85mm housing not entirely sure of the Bosch units
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



From what I hear, the Hitachi MAF's are quite reliable too... I imagine you'd need to adjust your software and wiring to accommodate?


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

All_Euro said:


> From what I hear, the Hitachi MAF's are quite reliable too... I imagine you'd need to adjust your software and wiring to accommodate?


You'll probably need to rescale it to the 1.8t 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Switch to wideband and RS4 MAF. Just do it mang


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Chickenman35 said:


> Is that the oil feed hard line going past the Turbo exhaust flange Max? If so, it might be an idea to slip some heat sleeving over the line.


I never got to doing this, and lately I have been closely monitoring oil and coolant relationship (want to decide if I should divorce or retain the oil/coolant exchange). With the oil/coolant exchange still operational, the coolant is always hotter than the oil... but that's only under normal operating conditions. 

Go for consecutive 4th gear pulls without much cool down period, and the oil temp sharply spikes past the coolant temp. It gradually goes back down while the coolant stays soaked with heat from the exchange. I have seen the coolant rise as high as 121* C with enough non-stop hotlapping. It gets back down quickly with less than constant full-duty, but that's not a good behavior (will be installing an external oil cooler and remote secondary filter soon). 

So, to get back to that line that's nearly touching the turbo hotside, I decided to take a look at it today. Well, at full blast and the hotside glowing, the line is basically resting on the turbine housing. This is heating that line in that specific spot by unacceptable levels. I even think that this may have some bearing on the way the oil/coolant temps spike so much with continuous beating. 

Tomorrow I'm wrapping the line after I move it away (as far as possible) from the turbine housing. The pic below is with the offending line bent a bit to not rest as close to turbine housing, but ideally it needs to move away more.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Yeah... that oil line looks like it's getting a Ton of heat. I think it may be worthwhile ditching the hardline completely and running a longer AN line much farther away. Heat sleeve the AN line as well.

From the second picture I'd be worried about heat fatigue having affected that hard line.

XRP, Earl's and Aeroquip all make quality products. XRP has some interesting products.



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> <img src="http://i1218.photobucket.com/albums/dd417/madmax199/Madmax%20pix/Manifold%20external%20wastegate/image-53.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo image-53.jpg"/>


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yeah Richard that's the plan, next time the turbo or manifold is out I'm switching to a steel braided hose to properly move the line away. For now, I'm just going to create more clearance and heat-shield it. A proper external oil cooler is going in next week as well, so the shared cooling load should be reduced back to manageable levels. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Got a chance to fit an external oil cooler on the car. It's been cold here lately, therefore proper testing and results will have to come in the spring/summer. But the most I got my coolant temp to reach after hotlapping is 105*C, that's a big improvement in shared load (oil/coolant exchange is retained) from a few hours before where I was able to get coolant to 125*c in a few wot passes. 

I didn't buy a kit and sourced the parts myself. I used a Jeggs sandwich adapter (any 3/4-16 tpi filter plate will work). Picked up a used 13 row Mocal exchanger with lines in the classified (had it cleaned and pressure tested for $14). The cast sandwich plate from Jeggs is thicker than the common CNC aluminum plates, so a shorter filter was required to clear the IC cross tube. For that, I sourced a compatible 3/4-16 filter from a car that has limited clearance (see pic below for an assortment of compatible shorter filters). After everything, the whole thing ended up costing a bit over $100 which is a lot less then the kits if anyone wants to piece something together on a budget. 

It's horizontally mounted under the FMIC and gets plenty of clean airflow (a small bumper cut was made to expose the total core frontal area to incoming air). At some point I plan to upgrade to another wider rectangular exchanger with more rows and ideal vertical inlet/outlet. At that point I will also add a secondary remote filter I have sitting around to bump oil capacity and filtering (after the oil cooler, capacity is 5.5quarts to get right under the full mark) . I'm also working on some shrouding to maximize the results in the current configuration.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Cooler location looks great Max :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Thanks Noah! :beer:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Nice and cool! I've got the same Mocal cooler size, 13 rows I think, going on the race project.  :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Nice and cool! I've got the same Mocal cooler size, 13 rows I think, going on the race project. :beer:


Adam, it's probably fine for most, but I feel that this core size still allows the oil/coolant to raise too much after extended beating. I took the car out and got the coolant to rise to 112c after relentlessly beating on it for a good 15-20 min. That's still a bit high IMO and could be improved. 

To put it in perspective, 4g63 evos at similar power level and with the same oil capacity need at least twice that exchanger size to survive track duties. I'm adding a second exchanger with a pull fan in series so I can keep the temps in check for road racing next season. Last thing I need is to be quitting race sessions because of elevated temperature.

In in the mean time I decided to toss the busy factory grill. A mesh will bolted in its place to offer some protection without the airflow restrictions. I also boxed the oil cooler exchanger core with sheet metal to assure good amounts of air is going through it instead of around.


----------



## BoostedLTH (Mar 19, 2014)

I'm digging the valance/splitter. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ( Snip ) I'm adding a second exchanger with a pull fan in series so I can keep the temps in check for road racing next season. Last thing I need is to be quitting race sessions because of elevated temperature.


Note that adding a second oil cooler in series will double the oil pressure drop and will reduce flow volume. 

You may be better off just going to a single oil heat exchanger with more rows. Laminar fluid flow drag increases with longer row length. Adding another oil cooler in series is like running a very long skinny oil cooler, which is not good for oil pressure drops. 

You could add another oil cooler in parallel, that would give less oil pressure drop for the coolers themselves. But then it gets more complicated with additional Tee or Y fittings, elbows and extra lines. And every fitting adds a flow restriction of some amount, as does every extra foot of hose. It gets complicated.

Quote from Mocul:

*For packaging reasons it may be necessary to use two coolers, if possible connect in series although this will double the pressure drop, If parallel connections are made, unless the oil pressure drop through each is equal oil will take the line of least resistance and pass through only one, therefore pipe lengths and air flow at all times must be matched for the system to work. Two coolers in parallel will halve the pressure drop.*

Mocul UK has some good info on Oil cooler design, and cooling Efficiency vs Pressure loss:

http://www.mocal.co.uk/FAQ.html

Edit: Note the comment on " Donut coolers " ( OEM Oil to water style ) and the high pressure drops.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Great points and concerns Richard. The problem with mounting coolers in parallel is they have to be engineered to work right. Due to packaging limitations it becomes a nightmare if not near impossible to pull off properly. People racing the in DSM/Evo world have had the same concerns, but in practice have struggled to get reasonable improvements using two coolers in parallel. Most of the time, one cooler end up doing all the work, and only a marginal portion of the second is actively used. 

Another thing that has made series mounting become the preferred solution is the actual practice. In the real world, the pressure drop from adding these coolers (even in series) isn't as substantial as it is assumed on paper. In my Evo for example, twin series coolers only registered a noticeable change in pressure at idle/warm up speed. Once the rpm start climbing in normal operating conditions, there is no real measurable difference in pressure. That's why some manufacturers even claim zero pressure drop with their twin series coolers in the Evo racing community (the popular Mishimoto and the well-respected AMS dual cooler Evo upgrades come to mind). 

http://m.mishimoto.com/oil-cooler-kit-mitsubishi-evo-x.html. 


This quoted segment of Mocal's literature below describes the underlying challenges involved in parallel mounting in the real world. It's near impossible (taking into account the many variables and packaging limitations) to get around this without really engineering the cooler.

"unless the oil pressure drop through each is equal oil will take the line of least resistance"


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Is it not possible for you to just put a fan on the oil cooler as it is right now? That should help tremendously.

4cefed4 had to it a while back.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Nope, no real estate! I have also not seen a fan that is suitable for this type of small rectangular exchangers.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

As usual you've done your homework Max :thumbup: As long as pressure drops are under control, then I see no reason not to plumb an additional cooler in series. 

As you've already run this successfully on your Evo... actual field testing trumps theory every time. Good info.


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Nope, no real estate! I have also not seen a fan that is suitable for this type of small rectangular exchangers.


With your location you shouldn't need a fan. They make fancy shrouded fans for rectangular exchangers, but they're pricey.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> With your location you shouldn't need a fan. They make fancy shrouded fans for rectangular exchangers, but they're pricey.


That's what I've realized Jeff. The exchanger is getting more than enough airflow where it's mounted (especially with the sheet metal shroud) -- the little 13 row is just undersized for my power level. I'm just going to add a cheap no-name 12x12 exchanger with pull fan from ebay mounted in series and call it a day. 

Any update on yours? I know you've made some progress, and the triple diamond beast is basically ready... except of course for the usual carbon fiber accents. 

I got a chance to hit the rollers on mine and dialed a nice de-tuned mode for road racing. I watered down boost levels to 27-28 psi (depending on gear), and lowered timing advance from +13.5 to +10 on Unisettings to keep it nice and safe for prolonged race sessions. Still got decent power, but it's very conservative and should be safe as opposed to the explosive grenade mode I'm using for autocross. On the road racing mode my EGT never goes above 725*C . I'm not telling anyone how much it's seeing at full boost, you and Don will have to figure it out in competition next year!


----------



## BoostedLTH (Mar 19, 2014)

Have I ever told you how much I love your car? Cause it's my favorite. Haha. It's the inspiration for when my top finally craps out too because I love the roll cage set up. And the fact that everything on the car is super functional is awesome. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

BoostedLTH said:


> Have I ever told you how much I love your car? Cause it's my favorite. Haha. It's the inspiration for when my top finally craps out too because I love the roll cage set up. And the fact that everything on the car is super functional is awesome.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Lol, thank you! Here is a teaser video of the car on the rollers just for you (conservative road race mode).


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2013)

Jesus with the amount of dyno pics you post you would think you have one in your garage. Its a 4 hour drive to the closest one for me.


----------



## BoostedLTH (Mar 19, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Lol, thank you! Here is a teaser video of the car on the rollers just for you (conservative road race mode).


....I'm gonna need a minute.... 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Good lord... Your car makes me weak at the knees! 

I've been slowly reading through the entire thread again while I've had the chance today... I can't wait to get me/my car to some kind of competitive level (provided my wife doesn't kill me, haha). I've actually been writing down a bunch of questions to PM you and Deckmandubs... I'm doing everything within my power not to completely tear into the car for at least the better part of this year. :laugh:


----------



## youngblood7868 (Nov 12, 2012)

Your car is my inspiration for my 06 tt 225...I love how ypu built your car man


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=73gdvTjKRKY&feature=youtube_gdata_player


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

What is that, a gearwrench? :laugh:


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Like!!! Looks like the arm would need to be modified to reach far enough to the driver side?


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

good work max!!! get that beast on racetrack:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> What is that, a gearwrench? :laugh:


:laugh:



Converted2VW said:


> Like!!! Looks like the arm would need to be modified to reach far enough to the driver side?


Nope, the mount is in the center of the windshield. I get about 175* of motion which is close enough to a full 180 to cover the whole windshield. :thumbup:




BR_337 said:


> good work max!!! get that beast on racetrack:thumbup:


It'll see plenty of action when we get out of the winter freeze here in the Northeast. :beer:


----------



## BoostedLTH (Mar 19, 2014)

This may be a simple-minded question, but besides aesthetics, what benefit does a single wiper conversion have?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

BoostedLTH said:


> This may be a simple-minded question, but besides *aesthetics*, what benefit does a single wiper conversion have?


No other reason needed for Max


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

In a track car like mine, the 4lbs weight reduction (especially when shaving weight that high on the chassis) makes it worth the effort. Each HP is responsible of carrying 7lbs in my car, piling up little mods like this one is how it got there...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> No other reason needed for Max


Some hellaflush stancing is next :laugh:


----------



## aircooled56 (Jul 6, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> In a track car like mine, the 4lbs weight reduction (especially when shaving weight that high on the chassis) makes it worth the effort. Each HP is responsible of carrying 7lbs in my car, piling up little mods like this one is how it got there...


Wish I could say 1 to 7! So many people over look this, but then again we are on the extreme end of the spectrum :laugh:


----------



## BoostedLTH (Mar 19, 2014)

That makes so much more sense. Thanks for clearing that up. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Haven't been posting much and feeling a bit of cabin fever with the harsh winter we're seeing here in the northeast. However, I've been piling parts for a few cool projects I have in store for when we get a break from the cold. 

1) I'm doing a suspension makeover with some interesting new components to go along with an improved revalve of my RSS Clubsport inverted front struts. 

2) A 3.5" aluminum short exhaust system (gases exiting right past the driver's seating position per the rules). This will shave around 35 lbs.

3) I will also be bringing aboard a complete aero package with front spliter, class-legal rear spoiler, and a diffuser.


... and a little dyno action from a few months ago for those like me that are tired of the winter 



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_nqmI9Snhp8&feature=youtube_gdata_player











Graph from that run


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

What is this Dynojet ****? :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> What is this Dynojet ****? :laugh:


It was some free pulls to compare two dynojet rollers at the same altitude and near-identical ambient temp. As you know, I normally don't use dynojet except to test before/after results with a change or mod, and the inability to put a steady state load on the car makes them useless for real tuning. However, I couldn't pass on free runs and help clear the air on a heated discussion in the 1.8t technical (you know... the usual pointless bickering that goes on there).


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Nice numbers Max :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> Nice numbers Max :thumbup:


Thanks Noah! It's pretty decent numbers for a 2,600 lbs car, especially when it's on a safe road course de-tuned mode at lower boost. Can't wait for racing season


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I couldn't pass on free runs and help clear the air on a heated discussion in the 1.8t technical (you know... the usual pointless bickering that goes on there).


I skimmed the front page and didn't see any topics that would fit that description. Cliff's?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> I skimmed the front page and didn't see any topics that would fit that description. Cliff's?


It wouldn't be on the front page unless bumped, the whole ordeal is from a couple months ago. I'll text you a link!


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Haven't been posting much and feeling a bit of cabin fever with the harsh winter we're seeing here in the northeast. However, I've been piling parts for a few cool projects I have in store for when we get a break from the cold.
> 
> 1) I'm doing a suspension makeover with some interesting new components to go along with an improved revalve of my RSS Clubsport inverted front struts.
> 
> ...



What are your plans on the diffuser? I made my main section of mine a few weeks ago, and am starting on sealing off the rest of the area down there. Just want to bounce ideas off of you! 

Hell, even the front splitter. My car is officially *DONE* with daily duties... So it's time to start getting funky with it. :beer::laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

225TTed said:


> What are your plans on the diffuser? I made my main section of mine a few weeks ago, and am starting on sealing off the rest of the area down there. Just want to bounce ideas off of you!
> 
> Hell, even the front splitter. My car is officially *DONE* with daily duties... So it's time to start getting funky with it. :beer::laugh:


Well, my plans are a bit more extreme as I won't have the rearward portion of the exhaust to deal with. This will give me space for a one-piece main blade witch essentially makes it more effective, but also straightforward to fabricate. What I'm also doing is cutting the rear bumper (horizontal plane) to allow the diffuser to be wider than just the width of the valence section. What I'm doing is using the space left open by the removed valence and continuing that cut on both side as if I was making space for a wider valence that would be almost the entire width of the bumper. From there, I will make my horizontal blade, and then attach my inner strakes and and finally add my two outer vertical fences/end plates. :beer:


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Snap!!!! 


I had/still dealing with brainstorming ideas with being able to seal the area up with the muffler and bumper, but I was trying to retain a subtle, daily-not-so-over-the-top kind of look to it. The gloves are off now, though. I may still button it up down there and see what happens. 


It would feel so nice to hack the bumper up and go nuts like you're planning!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

225TTed said:


> Snap!!!!
> 
> 
> I had/still dealing with brainstorming ideas with being able to seal the area up with the muffler and bumper, but I was trying to retain a subtle, daily-not-so-over-the-top kind of look to it. The gloves are off now, though. I may still button it up down there and see what happens.
> ...


If it's no longer a daily driver and you don't plan to make it one anymore, taking my approach would make it a lot easier to build and much more effective. Navigating around the muffler is a job and what have kept me from attempting building a diffuser before. What are your plans for the rest of the package, rear wing, front splitter?


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Thanks Noah! It's pretty decent numbers for a 2,600 lbs car, especially when it's on a safe road course de-tuned mode at lower boost. Can't wait for racing season


Safe tune, 2,600lbs....what is there not to love!


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> If it's no longer a daily driver and you don't plan to make it one anymore, taking my approach would make it a lot easier to build and much more effective. Navigating around the muffler is a job and what have kept me from attempting building a diffuser before. What are your plans for the rest of the package, rear wing, front splitter?


I'm going to start stockpiling parts here shortly... End goal would be mildly upgraded (in the engine department, I want to keep it as reliable as possible there), *GOOD* coilovers, all bushings, etc... Similar to yours, honesly just in coupe forum. I want to run a turn down at the end of my midpipe (should be past my seat), and do full front splitter/full size rear diffuser, and I'd love a functional rear spoiler. Not a scene-boy over the top or gawdy one. I've really been keeping up with that race setup thread in the 1.8t forum.

I'll still drive it places (like sowo or the grocery store), but I've always wanted to build a sort-of time attack car. I think the TT is such an amazing and underrated car. I'm ready to start milking the potential out of it.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Max, can't wait to see when you are done. My car has been on jack stands all winter waiting for me to install my parts collection. Garage is unheated and it was -10 here this morning. Have been spending too much time plowing my drive way getting wood in to my stove and working, come on sun.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Hey Ted, we have been hit pretty hard in the northeast too. I can't wait to be able to start doing some work to get the current projects finished. I'm tired at looking at some good parts that deserve to be on the car. 

A little bit of what I have in store for next season:

5" 800 lbs front swift springs to go with my newly revalved front RSS Clubsport coilovers. I went with shorter 5" so my perches are higher and not interfering with the inner rim and tire (freeing inner room for wider wheel/tire combo). I have no clue why companies that design coilovers for the platform all follow each other with 6-7" front springs.:screwy: And for people that are not in tune with suspension trends, swift springs are the best thing since slice bread - lighter, more stroke due to less coil count, and more consistent than any other conventional springs in existence. 












Aluminum 3.5" muffler that weighs in at a whopping 1.7 lbs. This will be at the core of a short exhaust that cut the system's length in half and shave some substantial weight











Fresh 5-point harness to replace the expired 4-point I had before. This is great as they can be recertified when the tag expires, and I no longer have to worry about the gamble of not having an anti-submarining strap.


----------



## Forty-six and 2 (Jan 21, 2007)

Who makes the muffler? Post some sound clips of that once is done!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

The muffler is from vibrant. They make them with various inlet/outlet sizes all the way up to 4". The quality seems very good from trustworthy people that have used them (including the MotoIQ crew with their miatabusa project) Will definitely get some sound clip when it's done. 

http://store.starkpower.com/12V15Ah...m-Ion-Starter-Battery-FREE-CHARGER-_p_53.html 

said miatabusa project 
http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArtic...luminum-Exhausts-And-Why-I-Did-It-Anyway.aspx


----------



## Forty-six and 2 (Jan 21, 2007)

That battery makes my Braille seem like a boat anchor! I will have to make the switch.


Interesting read. You have sparked my interest in aluminum exhaust research. I am on a quest for 2500lbs or less. More aluminum will help.

I liked your hp per pound reference. It definitely puts it all into a new perspective. It made me start calculating various supercar's power to weight ratios. You aren't doing bad at all when compared.


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

:thumbup::thumbup: I'm looking forward to this autocross season!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Forty-six and 2 said:


> That battery makes my Braille seem like a boat anchor! I will have to make the switch.
> 
> 
> Interesting read. You have sparked my interest in aluminum exhaust research. I am on a quest for 2500lbs or less. More aluminum will help.
> ...


OOPS, pasted the wrong link with the lithium battery, but that's the way to go nowadays. Plenty of cold CCA with no weight is now available to the mass at budget-friendly cost. Win/win! 

Yes, lbs/HP is one of the best way to gauge and compare straight line speed, the magic number has been "7" for me. Anything with that ratio or better is just silly fast and fun (enough to get even experienced drivers in trouble if not respected). 2,500 lbs and the kind of power you'll get with your motor build will be insanely fast. 

Correct link for the alu mufflers:
http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=1022_1032_1258




Doooglasss said:


> :thumbup::thumbup: I'm looking forward to this autocross season!


Yeah man, it'll be some well deserved play time after this harsh winter. Looking forward to going back to my road racing roots as well!


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The muffler is from vibrant. They make them with various inlet/outlet sizes all the way up to 4"....


Nice collection you're gathering - thanks for sharing.

I've pieced together a Haldex friendly exhaust and been running the same series Vibrant on my car for a couple weeks now - it's pretty loud but this muffler along with a short exhaust has sure improved spool. Really caught me by surprise the first time I stepped on it actually.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Nice collection you're gathering - thanks for sharing.
> 
> I've pieced together a Haldex friendly exhaust and been running the same series Vibrant on my car for a couple weeks now - it's pretty loud but this muffler along with a short exhaust has sure improved spool. Really caught me by surprise the first time I stepped on it actually.


Nice, what was your approach to join the steel portion of the exhaust to the aluminum one? What did you use to strap/support the muffler? I'm trying to avoid welding bracket rods to the aluminum and want to only use straps to hang it in strategic spots. Did you take some pics of yours?


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Nice, what was your approach to join the steel portion of the exhaust to the aluminum one? What did you use to strap/support the muffler? I'm trying to avoid welding bracket rods to the aluminum and want to only use straps to hang it in strategic spots. Did you take some pics of yours?


Well, my exhaust is in various states of change at the moment so no finished pictures yet... but I just used an S4 sleeve clamp to attach the muffler to a short piece of exhaust after a stainless Vibrant resonator. Since the muffler is aluminum it doesn't have much leverage on the clamp and has stayed in place.

I actually don't have any of the exhaust hangers welded in yet either so I'm using 24 gauge galvanized steel strapping (with the holes in it) to wrap around the muffler and then have fastened the strapping to the floor pan with a nut and the existing threaded bolts that are in the pan from the factory. This is temporary but because of the light weight it's held up to daily duties.

I haven't used this product before but here's a hanger that you can clamp on your muffler... http://www.pciinc.com/index.php/muffler/hanger/kitsss/

Or you could make something similar to attach to your exhaust pipe - which would give you lots of mounting location flexibility. The price on these hanger rods seems silly but these guys have all the parts to make a clamp style hanger... http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=1022_1070


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Well, my exhaust is in various states of change at the moment so no finished pictures yet... but I just used an S4 sleeve clamp to attach the muffler to a short piece of exhaust after a stainless Vibrant resonator. Since the muffler is aluminum it doesn't have much leverage on the clamp and has stayed in place.
> 
> I actually don't have any of the exhaust hangers welded in yet either so I'm using 24 gauge galvanized steel strapping (with the holes in it) to wrap around the muffler and then have fastened the strapping to the floor pan with a nut and the existing threaded bolts that are in the pan from the factory. This is temporary but because of the light weight it's held up to daily duties.
> 
> ...


Thanks buddy, looking at how light this thing is with piping included, I'm only going to need two supports for the entire DP-back. I'll put one midway and one at the muffler outlet before the turndown. Likely going with what you have posted in the first link. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

We got a sliver of spring today in NY and was able to do some work. Mounted my revalved front coilovers with the new springs, and adjusted the top plates for max camber/caster. Looking forward to more days like this! 

No bling, but lots of bang:


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

:thumbup::thumbup:opcorn:
Awesome buddy. Following !!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

BR_337 said:


> :thumbup::thumbup:opcorn:
> Awesome buddy. Following !!


Thanks man, way more to come in the next couple weeks! :beer:


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Max do you have a particular tire recommendation for a weekend car that gets occasionally tracked?

Rain traction would be preferred but not #1

I just completed my 2nd track weekend (HPDE) and absolutely loved it.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Luis, we talked quite extensively about street tires capable of holding their own at the track, and still provide good wet traction, in the 1.8t technical forum. Tire technology is always changing and what may be the tire du jour today can be totally eclipsed in performance but the next generation of tires from another manufacturer. However, I think that what I said then still holds at this point in time: 



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Dunlop Direzza ZII --> then Hankook Ventus R-S3 or BF Goodrich Rival --> and finally comes the rest (proxes R1R, Potenza RE-11A, Ecsta XS, Neova AD08R, in no particular order).
> 
> The ZII is hands down the best street tire overall and what I'd recommend. One of the other top contenders can perhaps be slightly better in one aspect, but overall (dry grip, sidewall stiffness/responsiveness, feedback, breakaway characteristics, wet performance, wear, price etc.) the Dunlops have held the street crown since they introduced their Z1 *specs years ago. They are THE gold standard and fit exactly your requirements for a street tire. :beer:





Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The ZII (replaced the Z1* specs) have amazing longitudinal grip. The combination of large thread blocks and sticky compound give them outstanding ability grip in straight line. Like I said, they are at the top of the food chain in every performance category, and that's what make them the best performance street tire overall.


And here is a link to the thread in question, I also touched a bit on track tires that can kind of handle some street duties as well:
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...dvice-High-HP-street-use&highlight=Star+specs


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Thanks Max, will read! I'm also considering a set of 17" enkei rpf1 for track duty


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

RPF1's are the shizzle, my favorite wheel ever by a long shot! :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

ZII's are what I run on my daily. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> ZII's are what I run on my daily. :thumbup:


Good man... with these tires, the streets become a test track!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Time to let the cat out of the bag! I've been working with AEM electronics and will be doing the testing for them on their infinity engine management system. 

The Infinity EMS is plug-and-play for our motor, this means no wiring, splicing, or associated witchcraft. A few necessary sensor input are all that's need to be plugged in (MAP, MAF, Wideband O2 etc.). But where it gets fancy is the unit I will be doing testing for is built to also keep the Haldex integrated (as it would be with an OEM ECU), and also use the factory Bosch sensors. 

It's awesome to have the VE-based tuning technology of the AEM infinity finally available to our motor and AWD system in one package. I will have more details and some pics by next weekend when the install is done. Stay tuned! :beer:

Cool dyno video showing the amazing capability of the VE-based infinity EMS:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LkdEGeVWZgk


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

That is great Max! I am eager to see how you find it, I would be very interested in doing it for the track car.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

VE based = volumetric efficiency?


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Time to let the cat out of the bag! I've been working with AEM electronics and will be doing the testing for them on their infinity engine management system...


Very cool - I've been eyeing these up... looking forward to hearing more :thumbup:


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Tuned, that may be just what I need for my setup!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> That is great Max! I am eager to see how you find it, I would be very interested in doing it for the track car.





All_Euro said:


> Very cool - I've been eyeing these up... looking forward to hearing more :thumbup:





tedgram said:


> Tuned, that may be just what I need for my setup!


Awesome guys! I'm their 1.8t liaison, and once this is fully tested, maybe I can arrange something for those interested. In any case, make sure to contact me if/when looking at AEM stuff. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> VE based = volumetric efficiency?


Yes, as in volumetric efficiency based tuning model. 
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xou5u9DaH2Q

I know you understand the concept, but I'll explain it for those that might not know what we're talking about and don't care to watch the linked video. Some high end Motec EMS does that too, but the principal behind this type of engine management is that it relies primarily on VE calculations for the specific motor to control everything. Once you dial or tune that single VE table (very simple and quickly done), the EMS knows exactly how much air is entering the motor at all time. This means that it can deliver the exact preset fuel or timing demand for the application (no need to rely on deviation from a target to make reactive-type corrections to keep fuel/timing on target). 

This makes tuning way more simple (even too simple), since all you have to do is dial/tune the VE map. With that done, the system basically does the rest for you since it knkows the mass of air filling the cylinders, and your specific fuel/timing demand. That's also why AFR target is always reached regardless of environment or issues with sensors (illustrated in the video posted where they were unplugging major sensors in the midddle of a dyno pull, and fuel/timing and power delivery were not affected). This thing even does flex fuel on the fly if an ethanol content sensor is installed -- just fill any blend of gas/ethanol and it knows exactly what to do keep desired fuel/timing/boost on target for you. Pretty amazing technology if you ask me!


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

I just jumped for joy like a school girl.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Max, any idea if the AEM Infinity will have no lift shift/2 step capability? I know you're in the early stages, but just curious.


----------



## Tempes_TT (Oct 24, 2010)

I know what _IM_ doing when its time to switch over to e85!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

225TTed said:


> I just jumped for joy like a school girl.


I'm super excited about it too! :laugh:



Tempes_TT said:


> I know what _IM_ doing when its time to switch over to e85!


Definitely man, this will make the process painless and easy to switch back and forth between blends. Let me know when you're ready to make the jump. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Max, any idea if the AEM Infinity will have no lift shift/2 step capability? I know you're in the early stages, but just curious.


Yes it does have the capability and more. 2-step feature is standard, but it is 3-step capable though with advance feature, plus anti-lag as well as NLS are configurable. 

Here is a video showing the capabilities for stationary 2/3-steps:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=crEYpfyZN1M

and for the ricer in you Adam:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LQ746jY6_oc


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

:laugh: I fully to drag and track the project, so I need both. :thumbup:


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yes it does have the capability and more. 2-step feature is standard, but it is 3-step capable though with advance feature, plus anti-lag as well as NLS are configurable.
> 
> Here is a video showing the capabilities for stationary 2/3-steps:
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=crEYpfyZN1M
> ...


I now:

A: Can't wait for this to be released.

B: Want a 2jz. :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

225TTed said:


> I now:
> 
> A: Can't wait for this to be released.
> 
> B: Want a 2jz. :laugh:


I think we all have option B in our whish list!  :beer:


----------



## velocitychris (Jul 16, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yes it does have the capability and more. 2-step feature is standard, but it is 3-step capable though with advance feature, plus anti-lag as well as NLS are configurable.


Very, very exciting. Count me in - was figuring that this would be the year that I will need to start learning more on this topic and didn't really know where to start. Now I do!


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Max, are you cheating on me?? :laugh:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

[email protected] Performance said:


> Max, are you cheating on me?? :laugh:


He won't be the first, or the last. :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

velocitychris said:


> Very, very exciting. Count me in - was figuring that this would be the year that I will need to start learning more on this topic and didn't really know where to start. Now I do!


:thumbup::beer:



[email protected] Performance said:


> Max, are you cheating on me?? :laugh:


Hey bud, never! You have helped me and my car so much that I'll forever be a GTS fan. The AEM standalone opportunity came looking for me (AEM litterally reached out to me) and I couldn't let them hanging. GTS for life! 



20v master said:


> He won't be the first, or the last. :laugh:


Rough crowd! :laugh:


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

What is the projected cost for this set up? How much easier would 2.5 swaps be with a stand alone for the motor while maintaining all the other systems with original computers. (darn, I just bought a spare block to start building a 2.0 stroker because it seems like 2.5 swap is too much pain in the arse, oh well I might be out the $50 I paid for it and go back to considering the 2.5 swap with stand alone)


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I can't talk about projected pricing here as this is a purely non-advertising thread sharing my journey with the car as an enthusiast (last thing I want is to have it locked and having to start over like I have in the past). PM me and I'll give you my email contacts so I can tell you what I know concerning pricing and things of that nature. 

As for swaps, it is a bit more complicated since you'd have to somehow hybridize sensor outputs from the donor motor to an existing TT harness to retain all the functionality of the nicely made plug-n-play jumper harness. With that, done it would be just like tuning the 1.8t it was intended to operate. Just input the number of cylinders, injector size, fuel pressure etc., and populate the airflow/VE map. This Infiny EMS has the capabilty to run that engine to 90% potential (provided that you have the harness situation squared away) in a couple of hours. :beer:


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Max, what are your thoughts on running 16's with slicks?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

225TTed said:


> Max, what are your thoughts on running 16's with slicks?


Who makes 16" slicks? Down size to Mk4 11.3" brakes and run 15's, many more tire options.


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

20v master said:


> Who makes 16" slicks? Down size to Mk4 11.3" brakes and run 15's, many more tire options.


Ahhhhhh, didn't know that. I just wound up with a really good score on some 16x8et35 forged bbs wheels. Look like rz's, and were a factory audi wheel.


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Just checked tirerack. some 245/45 Hoosier's sounds kinda lovely. And I wouldn't have to downgrade my brakes and they weigh nothing....


Worst case, I clean them and make a profit.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Sorry, I was thinking drag racing slicks, I now assume that's not what you are looking for. :laugh:


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

20v master said:


> Sorry, I was thinking drag racing slicks, I now assume that's not what you are looking for. :laugh:


Oh no worries!! haha. I'm picking them up tomorrow afternoon! I'm excited!!! 

Pic for reference:









Forged, 16x8 et35. I have a good friend who can dual drill them for me. I'll end up running a 245/45 on them. While I honestly don't think it'll look bad, it'll be kind of old-schoolish. I'm just in it for the loss of rotating mass.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Before I say nice score, what's the confirmed weight? I kind of agree with Adam although he was referring to drag racing which I know nothing about -- 16" is a size that I would never choose to run for many reasons (tire and wheel availability being the main ones). Just like 14", 16" is the odd sizes that nobody runs in the racing world... unless you have to. The talk in the pit is always why would anyone use a 14" combo when you can run 13's or 15's. 

If they clear your calipers, are as light/strong as they need to be for track duty, and the price is right, then slap a set of 245 Hoo-Hoo on them and be a happy camper. Otherwise, skip! opcorn:


----------



## BoostedLTH (Mar 19, 2014)

Not entirely sure here, but wouldn't those rub with a 245/45 tire...? I know my 245/45/17 rubs with my 17x8 et35 MSW wheels. Only near full lock, but rubs none the less. Is that just a non-issue for your application, or does the 16" diameter have something to do with offset as well? I can't imagine it would, but I'm still learning about all of this?
Side note: they look pretty good!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Your sig says 17*9, but your post says 17*8. Also, where do they rub? On the liner, fender, or strut? Are you using spacers? How low are you? I run 245/45 on 17*7.5 OEM with 20F/25R spacers and never rub.


----------



## BoostedLTH (Mar 19, 2014)

17x8. It's a typo in my sig I keep forgetting to correct. Mine run on the inner liner, no spacers, and they rubbed both when I was on H&R springs and now that I'm on coilovers. 
Like I said, I'm still learning about all of this, so I could be misunderstanding. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

BoostedLTH said:


> Not entirely sure here, but wouldn't those rub with a 245/45 tire...? I know my 245/45/17 rubs with my 17x8 et35 MSW wheels. Only near full lock, but rubs none the less. Is that just a non-issue for your application, or does the 16" diameter have something to do with offset as well? I can't imagine it would, but I'm still learning about all of this?
> Side note: they look pretty good!



Rubbing in a track/motorsport application is a non-issue. If you need to run a tire size (which is usually dictated by the amount of power, weight of the car, and rule allowances), you make room for it! 

How in the world do you think I fitted 315's all around on 10.5" wheels and stock fenders if tinny 17x8 wrapped in 245's were the limit?


----------



## BoostedLTH (Mar 19, 2014)

Hahaha I see^ thanks for the clarification!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Before I say nice score, what's the confirmed weight? I kind of agree with Adam although he was referring to drag racing which I know nothing about -- 16" is a size that I would never choose to run for many reasons (tire and wheel availability being the main ones). Just like 14", 16" is the odd sizes that nobody runs in the racing world... unless you have to. The talk in the pit is always why would anyone use a 14" combo when you can run 13's or 15's.
> 
> If they clear your calipers, are as light/strong as they need to be for track duty, and the price is right, then slap a set of 245 Hoo-Hoo on them and be a happy camper. Otherwise, skip! opcorn:


I see about the oddball sizes... On a decent note, they're only 15.5lbs or so... Not too shabby for the width. If they don't fit/look way off on the car/etc. I'll just polish them up and flip them for a super cool profit. which will of course, fund stupid things for the TT.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

BoostedLTH said:


> Hahaha I see^ thanks for the clarification!


Retro pics for sh*t and giggles:


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Since your talking wheel and tire sizes, what sizes are optimal for light tracking on a 17x8 wheel. I would like as wide as possible, but some threads I read were suggesting tire tread shouldn't be wider than the wheel. Tire Rack lists tread width and in most cases this would limit me to a 225 or 235 max. Is wider always better?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

ticketed2much said:


> Since your talking wheel and tire sizes, what sizes are optimal for light tracking on a 17x8 wheel. I would like as wide as possible, but some threads I read were suggesting tire tread shouldn't be wider than the wheel. Tire Rack lists tread width and in most cases this would limit me to a 225 or 235 max. Is wider always better?


Yes! :laugh: On an 8" wheel, you can run a 255 easily. As I said above, I'm running 245 on the OEM 7.5" wide wheels with spacers. What you can fit will depend on how low you are, aka if you want the tire still in the fender.


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

20v master said:


> Yes! :laugh: On an 8" wheel, you can run a 255 easily. As I said above, I'm running 245 on the OEM 7.5" wide wheels with spacers. What you can fit will depend on how low you are, aka if you want the tire still in the fender.


Wowza. What size spacers? That's the bees knees.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

225TTed said:


> Wowza. What size spacers? That's the bees knees.


20mm front/25mm rear. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yeah, I ran 245 and 255 at some point on the stock wheel. The 55's had a slight pinch and the 45's where near perfectly squared on the shoulders on the 7.5" of mechanical support. For 8" wheels I'd say go for 255 or 265 for performance if you can, but don't loose sleep over them if you can find good or cheap deals on 245's.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

:thumbup: thanks, awesome cars hope to see them in person one day.


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Well... turns out they're rg063's... 15x7.5. They're mint and stupid light. I was going to flip em, but the wife wants them for her tdi. She's one of those tdiclub types... all about the mpg's. Haha.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

225TTed said:


> Well... turns out they're rg063's... 15x7.5. They're mint and stupid light. I was going to flip em, but the wife wants them for her tdi. She's one of those tdiclub types... all about the mpg's. Haha.


Well, then there is this (and the good old Enkei RPF1 never stop providing amazing performance/value):
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...d-in-a-wide-light-17-quot-wheel-(not-a-fs-ad)


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Well, then there is this (and the good old Enkei RPF1 never stop providing amazing performance/value):
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...d-in-a-wide-light-17-quot-wheel-(not-a-fs-ad)


Was thinking of the rpf1 route as I had a set of 17x9's and they were amazing, BUT...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Some standalone ECU pron below. I'm waiting for a break in the weather to dive into the install and start with the beta testing:

ECU












Jumper harness



















3.5 bar/50 psi true manifold pressure sensor (MAP). Comes with 1.8t conversion pigtail to stay 100% PnP with the factory harness. The decision however was made to not support the Vag pressure sensor for its obvious performance limitations.


















Bundle:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Figgin to be a pahty up in heyah!!!!


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

:beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::laugh:


----------



## Tempes_TT (Oct 24, 2010)

Buuuuuh! :heart:


----------



## Forty-six and 2 (Jan 21, 2007)

Very nice! I'm jealous.


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

That is drool-worthy, every bit of it looks top spec and something to be excited about :thumbup:


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Fantastic, can't wait.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Figgin to be a pahty up in heyah!!!!





225TTed said:


> :beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::laugh:





Tempes_TT said:


> Buuuuuh! :heart:





Forty-six and 2 said:


> Very nice! I'm jealous.





l88m22vette said:


> That is drool-worthy, every bit of it looks top spec and something to be excited about :thumbup:





tedgram said:


> Fantastic, can't wait.



:beer::beer:


----------



## youngblood7868 (Nov 12, 2012)

I didn't even now they had a pnp harness for this standalone???


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

youngblood7868 said:


> I didn't even now they had a pnp harness for this standalone???


Yes they do! It litterally took me 10 minutes to remove/install the unit today with the PnP harness jumper (might take normal street cars a little longer since I don't have a rain tray and my ECU has been chastity brace free for a long time). 



Harness Jumper plugged in











Unit installed with ECU tucked in


----------



## MCPaudiTT (Nov 26, 2006)

Looks great, Max. VERY interested in this, and how easy it is to mod/tune/tweak to be "right" (hopefully a quick/easy process?)!


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

Nice Max, been thinking about going stand alone. My gonzo tune isn't bad but the car still feels like it has more to give and I'm not keen on sending my ECU across the country everytime I want something adjusted.

Keep it up bro!!!:beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

MCPaudiTT said:


> Looks great, Max. VERY interested in this, and how easy it is to mod/tune/tweak to be "right" (hopefully a quick/easy process?)!


One of the point and advantage of VE-based tuning is simplicity. The tuning/tweaking process rely on a single airflow map or VE table. Once that map is properly populated the ecu basically does the rest (until you change hardware that alters the ability for the engine to move air, then the VE table need to be adjusted to reflect the change). 

For example I got my car started and running yesterday on E85 with zero setup and tuning. There is a 1.8t basic layout loaded in the library and I used that (it gives the ECU basic 1.8t info like firing order, number of cyl etc.). Lots of things like throttle body size, coilpack dwell, cranking and warm-up injection pulse width etc. are wrong for my car, but istill started it, idled, and drove decently well. The only thing I inputed was my injector flow since I run 630cc/min ones that are double the size of the preset factory ones. 

BTW, I'm happy to confirm that Haldex integration is a success!!!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vIf83Tc4le0



Dowski12 said:


> Nice Max, been thinking about going stand alone. My gonzo tune isn't bad but the car still feels like it has more to give and I'm not keen on sending my ECU across the country everytime I want something adjusted.
> 
> Keep it up bro!!!:beer:


Yeah, the tuning world just got bigger for our 1.8t with this new option (competitors are already coming out of the bushes with other products in response to this, and desperately trying to corner a piece of the market).


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

So with this haldex integration, is there no longer a need for a haldex controller tune? Or does it just make everything happy as it should be with an oem ecu?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

No, just sending the proper data via CAN to the Haldex controller module. The Haldex engagement algorithms are not ECU controlled, but built in controller itself. This standalone ECU keeps the controller happy so standard function is retained (some other options didn't give any love to us Haldex people and an aftermarket standalone Haldex controller was needed).
*
Edit:* I seems that some OBD port funtion is even retained. Other modules (besides ECU) can still be accessed and communication is intact. ECU related codes function is obviously through the Standalone Com port now.


----------



## MCPaudiTT (Nov 26, 2006)

Awesome!!!

I've got an "extra" motor sitting in the garage right now, guess it needs a new brain!

Any idea on when it will be available for purchase? Idea on cost for us "non-privileged" commoner folk???

opcorn:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Mike, the unit should be available for purchase shortly (now that I have tested and confirmed full Haldex integration). Retail pricing for the full PnP bundle with all the bells and whistles is around $1,800, but check with me first when you're ready.


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

Can things like launch control and no lift shifting be tuned using this standalone and programming?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Dowski12 said:


> Can things like launch control and no lift shifting be tuned using this standalone and programming?


Hell yeah!!! It doesn't just do it, but does so in a high tech way. 3-step launch control with configurable soft cut, antilag, NLS, etc.


----------



## Dowski12 (Nov 2, 2011)

Why couldn't this come out 6 months ago. I dont want to take anything away from Gonzo tuning but there are certain things like the fuel tables being too lean in the lower revs, or codes that needed to be deleted that I have to send my ecu cross country to have them adjusted, It's more hassle than anything. With this its just a session in the garage and everything is as it should be. Definitely the next on my list. Thanks MAX, keep the info coming.


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

What about emissions testing? Will the car still pass inspection? 

Or are you going to have to swap in a standard ecu with a tune, set rediness, get it inspected, and then put your aem back in?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

MKllllvr28 said:


> What about emissions testing? Will the car still pass inspection?
> 
> Or are you going to have to swap in a standard ecu with a tune, set rediness, get it inspected, and then put your aem back in?


Look who's still lurking, what's up my man! 

In states that require plugging to an OBD port, it won't pass inspection - back in my standalone days, aftermarket ECUs used to be able to pass in a sniffer/visual state. Nowadays with the new laws, I'm not sure if a standalone can legally pass inspection in any state (but don't quote me on that, it's not like I'm keeping up with these things). 

As for me, the stock ecu isn't going anywhere (I even put it back in its cage). So inspection is a matter of unplugging the harness from the Infinity and plugging it in the stocker... a 60 sec affair since I don't have a rain tray.


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Jul 20, 2011)

Dowski12 said:


> Why couldn't this come out 6 months ago. I dont want to take anything away from Gonzo tuning but there are certain things like the fuel tables being too lean in the lower revs, or codes that needed to be deleted that I have to send my ecu cross country to have them adjusted, It's more hassle than anything. With this its just a session in the garage and everything is as it should be. Definitely the next on my list. Thanks MAX, keep the info coming.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Ha.


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Look who's still lurking, what's up my man!
> 
> In states that require plugging to an OBD port, it won't pass inspection - back in my standalone days, aftermarket ECUs used to be able to pass in a sniffer/visual state. Nowadays with the new laws, I'm not sure if a standalone can legally pass inspection in any state (but don't quote me on that, it's not like I'm keeping up with these things).
> 
> As for me, the stock ecu isn't going anywhere (I even put it back in its cage). So inspection is a matter of unplugging the harness from the Infinity and plugging it in the stocker... a 60 sec affair since I don't have a rain tray.




:laugh: I've been hiding out. 

I found a low milage 180q that needs a lot of love on the outside and a heart transplant. It's been sitting in storage since last summer. 
I was sitting around with the wife trying to decide what to do with it and I popped in here to see what the old crowd was up too.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

MKllllvr28 said:


> :laugh: I've been hiding out.
> 
> I found a low milage 180q that needs a lot of love on the outside and a heart transplant. It's been sitting in storage since last summer.
> I was sitting around with the wife trying to decide what to do with it and I popped in here to see what the old crowd was up too.


Nice, it's always good to see some old timers coming back. You should make an "I'm back" thread, it will motivate you to get some work done on the car. :thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

MKllllvr28 said:


> I found a low milage 180q that needs a lot of love on the outside and a heart transplant. It's been sitting in storage since last summer.
> I was sitting around with the wife trying to decide what to do with it and I popped in here to see what the old crowd was up too.


You mean like this one that I'm saving?


This?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Not much of an update but I spent 30 min today working on my cold start and idle. E85 paired with a small battery that doesn't see too much action, can be a task to get started when it's below 60* C. The 70-85% of ethanol in the blend has a flash point of 61* C, meaning that it's just along for the ride under that threshold and not really contributing to starting the car. A few tweaks and I have it starting better than it ever did before while on E85.

I also spent a little time refining the idle characteristics - it's not perfect yet as it still hunts low occasionally, but it's solid for the little time invested in it. For those that don't know, it requires a balancing act of VE, lambda, and timing cells to get to perfection. It's great to have control though. 

One other thing I also did (which coincidentaly helps with idle too) was tune the coil dwell/charging-time for my GM truck coils. I've been wanting to fine tune this for a while, and it's nice to know that I'm now extracting all the juice out of the powerful GM coils. 












Also ditched the VAG MAF sensor, it served me well but it's time to cut all the unnecessary fat in the bay. I was maxing the TT sensor out on a 3" ID S4 housing already, so it was pointless to keep (even as a tool to measure increase/decrease in airflow with new mods). Since I was in there, I removed the DV recirculation hose, and plugged the port... atmospheric venting from now on. I was going to take pics, but it started raining forcing me to call it a day. I'll edit the post to show the clean up work.


----------



## Forty-six and 2 (Jan 21, 2007)

I have only had the pleasure of tuning one motor from the ground up. It's a very rewarding process. Keep posting this type of info as you go. opcorn:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yeah Matt, it's pretty fun! I've done it myself before in a few cars using various softwares (from open-source ECU tuning to full fledged standalones), but this VE-based EMS from AEM takes the process to another level of cool. 

I have not gone too deep into the power tuning yet because I'm waiting for an ethanol content sensor to arrive in the mail. Once that's plugged in, making me full FlexFuel, I'll really dig into the tuning process. I'll do my best to document as much as I can for the community. :thumbup: :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I came up with a neat way of joining the aluminized steel downpipe to the rest of the exhaust, which will be all aluminum. The reason for worrying about the joints is that aluminum flanges (both bolt-on and V-banded) tend to warp and fail in forced induction exhaust applications. Also, in practice, when mating aluminum/steel flanges together, the aluminum welds at the flange are prone to failing over time -- this is because of the difference in expansion and contraction rate of the two flanges put constant stress on the weaker aluminum welds. 

What I did was make a 3" steel flange that transitions to 3.5" but with the same ID/OD as the aluminum muffler inlet. So, how do you mate the two when they're the same size? Simple, cut slots into the steel flange and heat it up in the oven so it can expand - on the aluminum side, the muffler inlet is wrapped in dry ice so it could shrink as much as possible. It worked like a charm, it was a press fit and once both cooled down it's not going anywhere. For good measure, I put a T-bolt over it to make it permanent (double-nutted so the clamp never loses tq from vibration). 

Now all that's left to do is to tune the decibel levels. If I can't pass 95 db at 50 feet, I'll add a second muffler in series. I'd rather do that than add a heavy steel resonator after the downpipe (a steel resonator probably weigh more than the entire aluminum portion with two mufflers). With the full length cat-back out of the way, I can make som progress and hopefully finalize my rear diffuser project. eace:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Funny - I was just thinking about this today... my exhaust is apart and the S4 clamp I was using bent the aluminum muffler a little out of round. Good idea with the slip fit connection :thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Nice work on the zero tolerance muffler fit. :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Funny - I was just thinking about this today... my exhaust is apart and the S4 clamp I was using bent the aluminum muffler a little out of round. Good idea with the slip fit connection :thumbup:





20v master said:


> Nice work on the zero tolerance muffler fit. :thumbup:


Dropped 32 lbs of exhaust with the project today, fits like a glove too. However, it's very loud. I'm going to have to add a second aluminum muffler to bring the noise down to around where it was before.


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

20v master said:


> You mean like this one that I'm saving?
> 
> 
> This?



Very similar :laugh:


























Any who. I'll buzz off for now. I'll put up a thread when Im closer to actually doing something with it.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Video of idle characteristics after dialing it in to get rid of all the rev hunting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chDvIr5j3uw&app=desktop


*Edit*:
Video of refined idle with lambda at 1.0 -- needless to say I'm satisfied with the idle on what's essentially a track toy
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nuRGsU7qRCo


----------



## velocitychris (Jul 16, 2011)

That is very cool. When you end up doing a full review of the AEM, I'd love to know what the learning curve will be for a 'NO custom tuning experience, but eager to learn' perspective might be. It looks very, very exciting, though.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

velocitychris said:


> That is very cool. When you end up doing a full review of the AEM, I'd love to know what the learning curve will be for a 'NO custom tuning experience, but eager to learn' perspective might be. It looks very, very exciting, though.


Chris, this is the most user friendly and easy to use software I've used to date. There is really zero learning curve if you have experience with tuning (just familiarize yourself with the GUI) -- for a totally green person, I can see the learning curve being very short. The VE based tuning makes it really easy. A main VE table, a target timing table, and a lambda table is all that is really needed to get a car running better than the typical canned stage tune. The rest of the stuff is really fancy bells and whistles that you can play with later as you get more comfortable with tuning. The fact that the PnP comes with a 1.8t session pre-loaded as a base file, makes it super easy for the novice to get going. For example, this is say 100 times easier and more straightforward than using Maestro (which is Alpha-N based with some voodoo sprinkled on it). :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

MAF and DV recirculating hose out of the picture:


----------



## velocitychris (Jul 16, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Chris, this is the most user friendly and easy to use software I've used to date. There is really zero learning curve if you have experience with tuning (just familiarize yourself with the GUI) -- for a totally green person, I can see the learning curve being very short.


Fantastic - count me in! :wave:


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Being able to run with a quality MAP/MAF-less and running the DV's to atmosphere is worth purchasing the AEM... Let alone being able to tune the car! :laugh:





On a scale of 1 to MegaSquirt, how does this rate?


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Looks good Max!


----------



## Rford71 (Sep 1, 2011)

Looks real good!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

225TTed said:


> Being able to run with a quality MAP/MAF-less and running the DV's to atmosphere is worth purchasing the AEM... Let alone being able to tune the car! :laugh:
> 
> On a scale of 1 to MegaSquirt, how does this rate?


MS has improved a lot over the years, but it's a different class of standalones. To compare this you'd need to bring mames like Motec, Haltech, or other top shelf EMS. 



DeckManDubs said:


> Looks good Max!





Rford71 said:


> Looks real good!


:beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Take two on the aluminum exhaust. It was too loud and needed more muffling, especially at 3.5" ID piping from cat delete-back. I added a resonator in the mid-pipe (cat delete pipe) and will give it a try. I have a feeling a second aluminum muffler will still be needed to get the decibels at 50 feet in check. V2 after adding a resonator:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Are you going to run a turn down? I have been seeing a lot of the GT3's and stock Corvettes's running them to re-direct the noise at Lime Rock with its silly 87db limit.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yes, there will be a turndown (really a turnaway from the mic's location). It will be a clamp-on piece so I can easily move it from the natural facing-down to facing-away while at the track. I haven't clamped it on yet since I might have to add a second alluminum muffler. :thumbup:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

:thumbup:


----------



## youngblood7868 (Nov 12, 2012)

Awesome stuff!


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

As much a pain as those decibel limits may seem it just reminds me how I lost my favorite track back in the 90s. So at that time I worked about 3 miles away from the old Detroit Dragway and on the weekends if it was humid you could hear some of the crazier cars even 3 miles away. I used to run my Mustang up there right after work and run a few passes for the whopping $15 that they would charge back then. Then someone built new condos about half a mile away and people were just shocked to find out that it was kind of loud on the weekends when they were racing (LOL maybe they sold all the units in the winter so no one noticed the track) but it wasn't long before they shut the track down and we had to drive an hour to the next one that just became crowded and you got much fewer passes in.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

bwdz said:


> As much a pain as those decibel limits may seem it just reminds me how I lost my favorite track back in the 90s. So at that time I worked about 3 miles away from the old Detroit Dragway and on the weekends if it was humid you could hear some of the crazier cars even 3 miles away. I used to run my Mustang up there right after work and run a few passes for the whopping $15 that they would charge back then. Then someone built new condos about half a mile away and people were just shocked to find out that it was kind of loud on the weekends when they were racing (LOL maybe they sold all the units in the winter so no one noticed the track) but it wasn't long before they shut the track down and we had to drive an hour to the next one that just became crowded and you got much fewer passes in.


The drag strip is about 2 miles the way the crow flies from my buddy's house where my project car is. I hear them racing all the time while I"m wrenching. That's just motivation. :laugh: Luckily, I can drive the car around the neighborhood to shake it down and right back in the basement to work on things. That way when it's ready, I can just go straight to the drag strip!


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Check this out, it's about 2 miles from my work right now and I pass by it all the time. The city of Pontiac is a crack infested bankrupt turd like Detroit right next to one of the most expensive cities in Michigan to live in, go figure. Anyway, it makes the land cheap, there are several 100+ acre former GM sites that are abandoned and they plan on building this car lover's Mecca there. The video describes in a way I can't.
http://www.m1concourse.com/media.php


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Orlando speedworld is 1.5 miles from me through the woods (5mi. on roads). 


I absolutely LOVE the weekend sounds... it's something to look forward to.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

225TTed said:


> Orlando speedworld is 1.5 miles from me through the woods (5mi. on roads).
> 
> 
> I absolutely LOVE the weekend sounds... it's something to look forward to.


It's been a few years, is the short bus still parked out front on Colonial? :laugh:


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

20v master said:


> It's been a few years, is the short bus still parked out front on Colonial? :laugh:


When they're prepping for Crash-o-Rama!! :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

You guys are lucky to have tracks not too far. For us on Long Island, you have to travel at least 2 hours to get to a track :banghead:


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> You guys are lucky to have tracks not too far. For us on Long Island, you have to travel at least 2 hours to get to a track :banghead:


Did you click on that link in my post? You too can have a getaway. They are building condos with private garages and a private track. It's nearly sold out. You could just get one and spend your weekends with your car. LOL 
It's in my backyard and if I didn't want to retire in a few years on an island I might've been tempted by this. Oh well, on May 19th I'm flying to Monaco for the Grand Prix, I know it's a street circuit but I feel like I will be visiting one of the world's greatest and most historic tracks. (and yes I have been to the Nurburgring only to find out my piece of crap rental BMW was limited to 200kmh)


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

My nearest track is 4 hours away.


----------



## hunTTsvegas (Aug 27, 2012)

So, I've watched AEM's video on Volumetric Efficiency Tuning for the Standalone that you're testing and I have to say, they broke it down simple enough for ME to understand. The biggest problem is going to be price point, especially with my car being a "weekend toy" and not necessarily a track monster. Because of that, aside from shipping my ecu somewhere or driving a distance for dyno tuning, most will be stuck with canned tunes. Nevertheless, patiently waiting more AEM tuning updates/videos!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

hunTTsvegas said:


> So, I've watched AEM's video on Volumetric Efficiency Tuning for the Standalone that you're testing and I have to say, they broke it down simple enough for ME to understand. The biggest problem is going to be price point, especially with my car being a "weekend toy" and not necessarily a track monster. Because of that, aside from shipping my ecu somewhere or driving a distance for dyno tuning, most will be stuck with canned tunes. Nevertheless, patiently waiting more AEM tuning updates/videos!


:thumbup: Cut my hand on the lathe and had to get a few stitches, I'm waiting for them to be removed off my hands to resume playing with things.


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> :thumbup: Cut my hand on the lathe and had to get a few stitches, I'm waiting for them to be removed off my hands to resume playing with things.


Ouch! Hopefully it's a quick healing process. :beer:


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Careful man!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> :thumbup: Cut my hand on the lathe and had to get a few stitches, I'm waiting for them to be removed off my hands to resume playing with things.


Lathe? Be careful man, we don't want you to end up as a star in one of those work place safety videos.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Definitely sounds worse than it is, should've been more careful though. Lesson learned! :facepalm:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> :thumbup: Cut my hand on the lathe and had to get a few stitches, I'm waiting for them to be removed off my hands to resume playing with things.


Yikes!



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Definitely sounds worse than it is, should've been more careful though. Lesson learned! :facepalm:


"Just a flesh wound!" Be careful with lathes, I have seen some pretty bad injuries from folks who dont use them everyday. Any questions on how to do stuff safely Max, you know how to reach me!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> "Just a flesh wound!"


Exactly what it is! 



DeckManDubs said:


> Be careful with lathes, I have seen some pretty bad injuries from folks who dont use them everyday. Any questions on how to do stuff safely Max, you know how to reach me!


Really is something that I should've sent to you Noah, but decided to do it myself. Oh well, you live and you learn! :beer:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Exactly what it is!
> 
> 
> 
> Really is something that I should've sent to you Noah, but decided to do it myself. Oh well, you live and you learn! :beer:


:beer::beer:

FYI superglue works on small flesh wounds


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> :beer::beer:
> 
> FYI superglue works on small flesh wounds


Lol at superglue, to me it was nothing but a glorified scratch. The wife, who's in the medical field, freaked out and had me upgrade to stitches. :what:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Full front end refresh done today. Wheel bearings, ball joints, and steering rod ends are all checked out of the to-do-list. All went well except for one of the steering links that rusted internally and basically welded itself into the rod end. After a few forbidden swearing words, I brought the cavalry and got it freed up. Feeling real good about the readiness of the car for road racing. Alignment, brake fluid flush, and tires are next!

Frozen rod end, after the high speed cutter did its thing:










Grew tired of the Jam nut on the steering links. If you do alignments as often as I do, they tend to deteriorate and start rounding themselves from the constant locking/unlocking. Added a full high grade hex nut for better longevity and increased surface for a wrench to bite:










Built myself a nice pressure bleeder for the upcoming brake servicing. Doesn't need a 100 pumps to build pressure like the common stuff sold - swivel cap - long reach so 
the bottle can get to all 4 tires and be next to me. Really the ultimate one-man pressure bleeder.


----------



## Rford71 (Sep 1, 2011)

nice work as alway Max!:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Thanks Rob!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Installed a new sealed iconel EGT probe that replaces the regular one that was in there. This one is better suited to deal with the inferno of a hybrid spinning at full speed.










Blocked the empty muffler tip hole temporarily until the rear valence gets chopped up for a diffuser









Today was nice and I took her out for a long spin at highway speed, the handling characteristics is out of this world, even without an alignment.


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

Looks like it's ready to seriously hurt ego's.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

^^^ Hopefully it's not my ego because the expectations are high...:laugh:


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

Frozen rod end, after the high speed cutter did its thing:











I really thought I was the only person that ever had to do this... My wife kept coming outside and asking me what the hell I was doing. :laugh:


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

I resemble that remark .


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Hey Max, what dust boots did you use in your struts? Want to do the same and the bump stops won't fit into steering rack boots without major trimming.

Edit: looks like H&R supply one with the Clubsports. Didn't see the logo on my cell phone. Looks like I'll either look for a skinnier bumpstop or trim down the factory one.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

ticketed2much said:


> Hey Max, what dust boots did you use in your struts? Want to do the same and the bump stops won't fit into steering rack boots without major trimming.


It's the dust boots that came with the H&R RSS coilovers. Since it's an inverted piston design, unlike conventional struts the bump stop is internal. Therefore it's a non-issue with my setup.

In your case with external stops, you could either trim the stops or find boots that are narrow enough to fit inside the coilover springs while clearing the stops. Another alternative (which is what I'd do in your position) would be to buy a pair of those shock assembly covers. They work well and protect the whole assembly including the rod, spring, and threaded portion of the body. 

http://m.ebay.com/itm/381210965307?nav=SEARCH


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Another alternative (which is what I'd do in your position) would be to buy a pair of those shock assembly covers. They work well and protect the whole assembly including the rod, spring, and threaded portion of the body.
> 
> http://m.ebay.com/itm/381210965307?nav=SEARCH


I had thought about that and wasn't sure how well they would hold up.

Thanks


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

:beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Not the prettiest welds, but a custom secondary muffler is fabricated to complete the aluminum exhaust and knock down the db level. The space I have in that particular section of the tunnel would not allow another biggy 3.5" Vibrant aluminum muffler to fit well and be "tucked in" enough IMO. This one is tailor made for the real estate and should drop right in.


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Good stuff right there max :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

BR_337 said:


> Good stuff right there max :thumbup::thumbup:


Thanks Freddy! 

I welded the secondary muffler this afternoon and it fits like a glove. Didn't get a chance to start and run it though...


----------



## 225TTed (Nov 28, 2014)

That's pretty damn awesome. :beer:


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

:thumbup::thumbup:

BTW, 
wanna add some STD motorsports decals to the racecar :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

BR_337 said:


> :thumbup::thumbup:
> 
> BTW,
> wanna add some FTD motorsports decals to the racecar :thumbup:


We can make that happen! I'm assuming you'd want black or red since your car is white?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Finished the exhaust project with a clamp-on turndown that can be rotated as needed to face away from the mic at the track. The exhaust is quiet for a track car, much quieter than the one it is replacing. I'm very happy about how it all turned out since the entire cat-back is only 7 lbs and flows much better at 3.5" in diameter. 

I'll take some better pics once I get the car on a lift, the tone is nice and deep with some rumbling/popping on deceleration (if I can find a volunteer, I'll do some fly-by sound clips).


----------



## Forty-six and 2 (Jan 21, 2007)

Very nice! What is the max decibel you are allowed to be at? Is love to here a fly by.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

It varies from track to track. The goal was to be under 90 db since this will get you to pass at most tracks. A few tracks have 85-87 db limits, but the loophole at these strict places is to turn the turdown away from the mic's location to fool it.


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> We can make that happen! I'm assuming you'd want black or red since your car is white?


black :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

BR_337 said:


> black :thumbup::thumbup:


On it buddy, I'm going to have a few dozen cut. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Sound clip of the aluminum exhaust note at idle:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DKKcMlit0GE&feature=youtube_gdata_player


----------



## Forty-six and 2 (Jan 21, 2007)

That sounds really nice. I'm hoping I will have room for one when time comes. Any fears of burning out the packing?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

You should have room, even if lowered more than me, to run a pair of aluminum mufflers. There are a few spots where OEM components went that leaves plenty of room to mount the mufflers. My challenge was to make the exhaust as short as allowed while staying db compliant... the joy of building to rulebook allowances. 

I'm not too concerned about burning the packing (at least not more than I would on a regular muffler). The vibrant unit is proven as it's used by many turbo cars that are abused, and the custom one is packed with steel. But like anything, time will tell. I'll report if there is any failure down the road. :beer:


----------



## 03'GTi (Aug 13, 2013)

Soooo, Question.. If you had the chance, would you have gone with something like a gt28rs or is the GTT setup a solid setup for track use. (in/out corners)


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I actually had a chance (when my stock turbo blew) to go with a small 28 series turbo. My 2 choices were a gtx-2863r or a stock-frame GTT hybrid. For my relatively low power target, I choose the GTT hybrid because it would get me into the powerband earlier, and still make 350+ AWHP. Other things that swayed me were the lower cost to build a hybrid -- most of the existing components could be re-used too which makes a build much more friendly with labor, fabrication, and the wallet (intercooler piping, exhaust maninfold, downpipe, TIP, etc. can be used). So far, it's been solid and have exceeded my expectations for a track setup.


----------



## 03'GTi (Aug 13, 2013)

I was thinking about running the GTX from gonzo, or a real gt2871 for track/street car use. Something quick with quicker spool and a decent amount of whp. I appreciate your response, either way rods and clutch is a necessity. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Went to MR Performance, my favorite performance shop in Long Island yesterday. Installed new custom drag swift springs, replaced blown tie rod end, and did a custom drag alignment on Nick Fotiades's wild shop beast. The intercooler on this monster was literally used as a table for my lunch, that's how thick it is. 




















Also got a chance to drive the TT there with me, and did the alignment on it. Very productive day, while hanging out with other gearheads. Alignment is done with some specs I wanted to try out this season:

Front:
Negative 5 deg of camber (from -3.8 previously)
Zero toe

Rear: 
Negative 1.6 deg of camber (-1.3 before)
1/16" of toe-in (1/8" before)


The bump in static front camber is because I'm sticking with R-compounds (at least for now), and they really like, and work better, with that much camber on a McPherson steering axle. I'm dialing out some rear toe-in in anticipation of adding rear aero grip. The idea is to make the rear looser to get more rotation on the slow stuff, but rely on the added aero grip to keep the rear end in check at higher speed. I can already tell the difference, braking hard from 90 mph, the unloaded tail is much more lively than before. Demands some attention with some minor steering correction to keep straight. 


The TT feeling shy being surrounded by an army of EVO, Subaru, and Skyline. 



















All aligned ... tracking straight like an arrow


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Like!

Can't wait to hear your impressions after some track time


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Thanks Luis, excited to get it out there. We're just starting (literally this week) to get warm enough weather in the Northeast for cars with race tires. Next event opening, I'm registering so I can be forced to finish the little things that need to be done (brake fluid flush, external wastegate and torn steering link boot replacement). :beer:


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

That sounds just like me lol

We had a beautiful 84 F weather weekend at the track (which is closing forever by the way) and could definitely feel the difference from cooler February on the power


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Project Aero is in full swing. 

Fabbed a legal spoiler for SCCA Street Prepared, and Prepared classes. Airfoil wings are not legal in these classes, so in order to get downforce at low speed (like auto-x) spoilers attached to the rear deck is the weapon of choice. AoA is unrestricted and anything up to 10" tall is legal (as long as it stays within the body lines looking from above). 

They are nobody's cup of tea in terms of look, but highly efficient even at low speed. If you're looking to be competitive in classes with spoiler allowances, they become an ugly necessity. I decided to go with lexan in mine, but some people fab them out of aluminum sheets or alumalite. I prefer lexan because it allows rearward visibility and the third brake light is still visible for street driving legality. 

Testing at 25-70 mph there is rear grip on tap - the more you push, the more planted the tail becomes. The downforce and load resulting from the spoiler alone is buckling the trunk lid at the mounts even with large fender washers supporting it. I'm adding reward support braces to aid the forward ones and prevent further damage to the trunk. There is so much more rear grip that a front spoiler has to go on right away to restore a more neutral balance. It can be spotted in the rear facing pics, but I chopped the rear bumber in preparation for building a diffuser. I have to put that on the back burner though and shift my focus to the front with its own spoiler to neutralize the excessive effect of the rear one. 


Base mounted

























With forward supports

















A few examples of cars running that type of spoiler:


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Project Aero is in full swing.
> 
> Fabbed a legal spoiler for SCCA Street Prepared, and Prepared classes. Airfoil wings are not legal in these classes, so in order to get downforce at low speed (like auto-x) spoilers attached to the rear deck is the weapon. AoA is unrestricted and anything up to 10" tall is legal (as long as it stays within the body lines looking from above).
> 
> ...


Looking good! Where did you get the lexan cut and what angle did you end up going with?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> Looking good! Where did you get the lexan cut and what angle did you end up going with?


Thanks Jeff! 

I cut the lexan myself with the trusted FP-approved high speed rotary cutter from HF. It went through it like butter with zero shattering at the cut like you'd have with some other cutting tools. Right now I'm sitting at about 70* with the spoiler and the downforce vs drag feels perfect up to 100 mph.

This is my second cut however from the sheet of Lexan. On the first one, I went with the maximum 10" allowance and it was too much, and kinda looked a bit too ridiculous on the TT (the low speed downforce was insane, but drag was more noticable at 60+ mph, even with lower AoA). That made me decide to go with less surface area (8.5" in the center and 9" on the curved outer portions) and raise the AoA like the CSP miatas seem to do. It is working like a charm and the drag/downforce coefficient is right on the money at usable speed. I can always lower the AoA if/when needed, and overall drag coefficient should be improved when the diffuser is added to the mix. 

BTW, I have enough extra for another large one like mine and at least a pair of what's FP legal for your body style. Let me know if you want some to play with on your car. The XP-style airfoil gentleman agreement is only for one season -- after that gloves are off and I'm cracking down on aero and missing turbo restrictor plates on you ladies. :laugh:


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Thanks Jeff!
> 
> I cut the lexan myself with the trusted FP-approved high speed rotary cutter from HF. It went through it like butter with zero shattering at the cut like you'd have with some other cutting tools. Right now I'm sitting at about 70* with the spoiler and the downforce vs drag feels perfect up to 100 mph.
> 
> ...


Sure, I'd love some to play with. I have a few ideas for getting it mounted up, was just holding off on aero until the car is... running. And I don't know what you're talking about with illegal aero, and I refuse to put a restrictor plate that's the same size as my turbo inlet in place lol.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> Sure, I'd love some to play with. I have a few ideas for getting it mounted up, was just holding off on aero until the car is... running. And I don't know what you're talking about with illegal aero, and I refuse to put a restrictor plate that's the same size as my turbo inlet in place lol.


No problem, you can pick it up whenever you want. 

Our carbon-fabulous triple diamond friend will destroy us if we don't crack the whip on the rules. I see airfoil spans and canards exceeding a widebody. And the idea of enforcing the restrictor rule is not for us with peanut turbos, but to level the playing field against the ones showing up with 55mm compressor inlets and sustaining ridiculous TQ to redline. We can't be building to XP specs and look to compete squarely in FP with FP-legal cars... how would you feel being a naturally aspirated cars in the class (there are a couple in the region)? One season to get to tame the wild beasts...

Some inspiration for a spoiler mount on a hatch:


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

Very cool, I like how you followed the line and used a clear material, it looks good man!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Thanks Eric!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

The car has been having all kind of weird symptoms with some sputtering under load. My fuel pump relay died, so that made me focus my attention on fuel delivery. To rule out a weak factory in-tank I ordered that Deatchwerk 265 L/H drop-in pump. It is a nice option with some decent flow, also allowing me to delete the secondary inline contraption in the bay. Installed it, and the problem was still there however. I then looked at my fuel filter since it has not been changed in a while. The thing was really clogged and required a good amount of pressure to flow anything through it (I could not blow through it, that's how clogged the thing was). Car runs much better now, starting is easier, and the sputtering under load is gone. 

I have an event this weekend with my buddy coming out with his FP evo X, so we shall see how she runs. It's good to do local shake down before heading out to meaningful events. Hopefully I can iron out all the little kinks in one weekend and gauge the front balance requirements with the added spoiler. 


DW65v for AWD cars










Factory surge bucket and stock pump out










Stock vs high flow









OEM pump removed, inside view of the factory surge tank









High flow dropped in









Flow chart









Bad night time cell phone pics of the car with the ongoing aero package work. Larger/slicker lower vent block offs, and rear spoiler can be spotted


----------



## burk_art (Mar 24, 2006)

*Lower vents*

Max, I really like the lower vent block-off, I've got a bumper cover I've been playing with - splitter and such - and toying with doing something similar to the vents but my conversation with myself is something to the effect that they're good for brake cooling and function well for that at relatively slow speeds, as opposed to the aero value derived from the block-off at high speeds - thoughts?
Will


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Will, my thinking is that they are not where I'd ideally locate my duct feeds. I always tell myself, when starting a project from scratch (which is much different than improving on an existing system), to make it as efficient as I possibly can. The duct's feed (in my case obviously since I have the air dam and asplitter in the works) are better if placed at the base of the splitter. Since you're working with a spare bumper, you can go all out as well. There is also real estate issues with efficiently routing the ducting if using the lower vents, especially if you have FMIC piping in the way.

The lower vent area is very busy and turbulent, large block off plates to smooth the region and reduce frontal drag will help things overall. It might not be a big thing in itself, but small improvements adding up as part of a system is what will make the areo package perform well IMO. :beer:


This is where my brake duct feeds will be placed (maybe closer to the center so it's more of a straight path for the ducting to the brakes).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Found a new sweet spot for the battery relation. I've moved it from the trunk to the space vacated by the convertible top motor. There is a tray there that is perfect for tucking in a battery and freeing valuable trunk real estate. eace:










I also got to drive the car around and the beast feels really good, the handling is really impressive from where it started. 









As much as I wanted to race the car this weekend. Most of my time was spent working on a different beast. The fact that I just realized that I have a front tire starting to show some cord didn't help the situation, so I decided to take that puppy out instead (my buddy had to pull out from the event, so the car was available).

Not the TT, but a worthy replacement. Real Motorsport double adjustable coilovers with custom Madmax specs, external reservoirs, true independent rebound and compression valving etc. Authentic full Varis widebody package (wing, skirts, spoiler, canards, flares, etc). Tucking 315 rubber all around like they didn't exist. Plenty of power and lots of traction with a very good AWD system.


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

That battery relocation is freakin perfect, very nice! Also, there's something very special about seeing external reservoirs in a dirty engine bay


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

l88m22vette said:


> Also, there's something very special about seeing external reservoirs in a dirty engine bay


Lol, my buddy tried to clean the engine bay but I refused to let him... 'because racekor'. That thing is going to be a monster when the handling is sorted. Even with much the more exotic (and expensive) coilover, the handling and grip levels are nowhere near the TT right now. Was fun to toss it around though.


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

That thing looks mean Max! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Converted2VW said:


> That thing looks mean Max!
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Hit a milestone, 2,600 lbs wet with the 75 lbs top still on the car (the top gets removed when racing). That puts me at 2,525 lbs race weight, that's just a few round of weight reduction away from getting to my 2,400 lbs goal for the car (for now). At least I know I can get there... will miss the interior however.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

She's becoming tin can'ish!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> She's becoming tin can'ish!


That's the idea! All you see in the Prepared class that I compete are incredibly light and fast tin cans with post-apocalyptic stripped down interiors. It's the winning formula, so I'm definitely not out of place with mine. 






























Edit: Found videos online of Mike's FP evo (aka Smoking Tires) and his evo redefines tin can. Very revealing to see the often-talked-about chassis flex in real world racing...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mP_Ve3LJD0Q


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Nice work on the weight reduction!

I was going to tease you about keeping a little bling around the shifter but I suppose you need the boot and ring in place to keep water out of the cab


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

It's hard to decipher through this long thread. Could you start a new one with a title like "weight reduction" and list all the mods and deletes that do simply that, reduce weight. I would love to just go through that list and see what I can definitely live without.


----------



## Rford71 (Sep 1, 2011)

bwdz said:


> It's hard to decipher through this long thread. Could you start a new one with a title like "weight reduction" and list all the mods and deletes that do simply that, reduce weight. I would love to just go through that list and see what I can definitely live without.


have you seen the thread?

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...ng-to-reduce-the-TT-s-weight&highlight=weight


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Great job on the weight savings Max! Doing some more on mine before the next event, trying to hit under 3000lbs with me in the car without going too crazy. 2600lbs would be wild


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Rford71 said:


> have you seen the thread?
> 
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...ng-to-reduce-the-TT-s-weight&highlight=weight


Yes I have, it's a good one. I was hoping for more like that, ditching weight is better than adding horsepower as the handling characteristics usually improve. Anyone know of a budget conscious lightweight rotor upgrade? I drive my car as a daily at least every other week so I am not ditching heated seats, AC or the spare anytime soon. I am going to ditch the rear seats and get a lightweight battery. Anyone know the weight of the stock side mount intercoolers vs going to a FMIC?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

bwdz said:


> Anyone know the weight of the stock side mount intercoolers vs going to a FMIC?


Very little if any. The obvious heavy hitters include wheels, seats, and battery. Have you removed the counter weight behind the rear bumper cover? For lightweight brake rotors, "budget friendly" doesn't mix.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

20v master said:


> Very little if any. The obvious heavy hitters include wheels, seats, and battery. Have you removed the counter weight behind the rear bumper cover? For lightweight brake rotors, "budget friendly" doesn't mix.


You have to break my spirit with "no budget friendly" options. My front brakes are in good shape but thought about doing that BBk in the rear with Boxster calipers in the front. Would love to stay around $1k total with lighter rotors


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Nice work on the weight reduction!
> 
> I was going to tease you about keeping a little bling around the shifter but I suppose you need the boot and ring in place to keep water out of the cab


Thanks bud, yeah the ring is staying as it is what keeps the rubber boot in place. 

What I plan on doing however is move the entire shifter assembly up a couple of inches. This will make shifting while turning much more straightforward -- it will require drilling two holes in the firewall for cable to pass through inside the cabin, and spacing and bolting the shifter assembly above the tunnel. Now that I don't have the heater/blower assembly in the way, it's should be a very easy project to pull off. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

bwdz said:


> It's hard to decipher through this long thread. Could you start a new one with a title like "weight reduction" and list all the mods and deletes that do simply that, reduce weight. I would love to just go through that list and see what I can definitely live without.





bwdz said:


> Yes I have, it's a good one. I was hoping for more like that, ditching weight is better than adding horsepower as the handling characteristics usually improve. Anyone know of a budget conscious lightweight rotor upgrade? I drive my car as a daily at least every other week so I am not ditching heated seats, AC or the spare anytime soon. I am going to ditch the rear seats and get a lightweight battery. Anyone know the weight of the stock side mount intercoolers vs going to a FMIC?


Maybe I should take the time to make a detailed post on that weight reduction thread if it's going to be helpful to others. As 20v mentioned, you're not going to save weight going with a FMIC (especially if you keep the structural cross tube). Most FMIC are heavy, I run an stock evo FMIC for that very reason. I have nice 3.5" core units available to me, but can't justify the added 15 lbs on the front nose (even if it's passing on much better charge cooling). 

Things that I would suggest dumping are the plastic wheel liners (they are not needed and add up to good chunk of weight). A lighter, more straightforward performance exhaust, lighter seats (the factory ones are boat anchors). And one of those newer lithium batteries, my buddy just got one for his evo and for the price/performance ratio, they are a must nowadays. The thing weighs less than 2 lbs and starts the car after a week of inactivity without a problem. 

This is what I ran as an exhaust for years in my 225 quattro before moving to an short aluminum one. The straight path with single muffler and single outlet allowed to save a bunch of weight (and gain performance) over the factory dual outlet setup. Something similar can be built rather easily by any competent shop (mine happen to be up for grabs for cheap too ).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

DeckManDubs said:


> Great job on the weight savings Max! Doing some more on mine before the next event, trying to hit under 3000lbs with me in the car without going too crazy. 2600lbs would be wild


Thanks Noah! Yeah, the way the car moves, handles, and stops at that weight is definitely a wild feeling for a TT. Hopefully you don't become addicted with lightness like me - I'm looking at shattering my class minimum weight soon, and start strategically adding rear ballasts to make weight.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

bwdz said:


> You have to break my spirit with "no budget friendly" options. My front brakes are in good shape but thought about doing that BBk in the rear with Boxster calipers in the front. Would love to stay around $1k total with lighter rotors


If your considering running Boxster's, make sure to use steel mount brackets. The aluminum ones will fail even on street cars. As for rears, stock rotors and calipers with good pads are plenty to overcome the grip of rear tires even with ABS. 

To do fronts is about $1500 or so with good pads. Pagid RS4-4's are what I have run for the past three years with great success. They kill rotors, but do very well for how long they last and hot/cold bite. There is zero fade. They normally run about $350 or so for a front set and about $300 for rears. Hawk HP+'s are another good pad, but are hard to get for Boxster calipers in my experience.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

$350 for a set of Boxster front Pagid RS4-4's seems a bit high. Without too much searching I found them under $250 from several USA suppliers. 

PFC and Carbotech would be a good choice as well.

x 10,000 for the STEEL mounting brackets. :thumbup:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Chickenman35 said:


> $350 for a set of Boxster front Pagid RS4-4's seems a bit high. Without too much searching I found them under $250 from several USA suppliers.
> 
> PFC and Carbotech would be a good choice as well.
> 
> x 10,000 for the STEEL mounting brackets. :thumbup:



There was a shortage last year when I was chasing down a set, the only folks that had them was Pelican Parts which charge a bit more. Spec Boxster guys go through them like crazy. I have heard great things about Carbotech but have not tried them out yet.


----------



## Chickenman35 (Jul 28, 2006)

^ Ah... that's makes sense. Supply and demand.

That's why I like a caliper such as 4 or 6 Piston WilWood Superlites. Pad choice is always plentiful and Circle Track suppliers always have competitive prices on both Pads and Calipers. PFC 01's or 11's for Superlite calipers typically run $175 a set. I've seen them on sale for $150. Even the Grand National III ( caliper ) pads can be found for as little as $210... and those pads are freakin' HUGE!!

Mind you...Superlite pads are pretty darned big as well.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Thanks bud, yeah the ring is staying as it is what keeps the rubber boot in place.
> 
> What I plan on doing however is move the entire shifter assembly up a couple of inches. This will make shifting while turning much more straightforward -- it will require drilling two holes in the firewall for cable to pass through inside the cabin, and spacing and bolting the shifter assembly above the tunnel. Now that I don't have the heater/blower assembly in the way, it's should be a very easy project to pull off. :beer:


Seems like a cool idea... the cables between the shifter and trans would just run straight instead of angle up through the tunnel and so it would be a little shorter too I'm guessing. Looks like you might already have a B&M shifter - wonder if you can combine it with a Sigma6 and have something like a 3mm throw between gears


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Replaced a dead alternator that was intermitently charging and wrecking havoc on electronics under load. Replaced the driver's side front axle, the CV joint got destroyed on my last attempt to race. Hopefully, that's it for casualties for this season because I'm getting tired of breaking and fixing parts on this thing. 

On a positive note, I spaced out my front fenders almost two inches to cover the front tires. No more front tires poking outside of the bodywork, the rear will eventually be flared. The fender mod should help with drag at speed too (at least on paper).

I haven't decided if I'm going to Waterfest or racing locally this weekend. My co-driver doesn't seem too enthusiatic about traveling to NJ for WF -- if we stay local, he can bring out his evo and we can go at it in the prepared class. Decision, decision...


Fender mod:


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

car looks great max, alternator surely wasn't happy since it mainly sees above 5k rpms lol probably didn't help it's demise 

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Max, quick question on tires

I'm about to jump on a new tire/wheel combo for both track and street use.
Car is not track dedicated so there is some component of looks into this...

Wondering, which tire/wheel size would you go with 17" or 18"?
Weight wise, there are only 9 lbs difference between the 2 set ups so this is not a discriminating factor to me.
So the question becomes, sidewall, do I want more or less?

Considering running Ultra high Performance Summers (Michelin PSS, BFG Sport Comp-2, or Dunlop Direzza DZ102)

Thanks!


----------



## SteveCJr (Aug 3, 2008)

Not that my opinion matters much, but I say 18 is a good compromise between appearance and function. 19 is too large for decent handling / feel and 17s look kinda small IMO. If you don't mind the look of 17" wheels, I would say go with that.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I am old school so I might be the wrong person to ask. To me, 18" is like what 20" sounds like to a younger kid looking to buy track wheels/tires. Personally I would never go bigger than 17" (heck, I'm in the process of downsizing in my car, but that's a different story). 18" wheels/tires weigh more, cost more, and don't offer any noticeable performance advantage over 17's. Since you plan to get to the track with your car, the biggest consumable is tire and it could get expensive real quick (especially when you become faster). Another advantage of the smaller wheel/tire combo is that street civility is improved because sidewalls tend to have higher profile. The only thing that 18" has going for it is the look, and even that is debatable depending on the demographics. 

My recommendation is the Dunlop Direzza ZII star specs (or the regular ZII if you want a bit more life and less grip). Best all around performance street tire there is, they will transform the car. 

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Dunlop&tireModel=Direzza+ZII+Star+Spec


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Thanks for the reply Max.

Sounds like sidewall size may not be as important as I had originally thought, or at least it's not as relevant for the occasional track rat.

Interesting choice of tires! the 17" Direzza ZII are the most expensive and the heaviest tires of all the tires I was researching on!

Looking at tirerack (price is for 4 shipped) - Treadwear - Classification:
Dunlop Direzza ZII - 235/45/17: $701 - 200 Extreme
Dunlop Direzza DZ102 -225/45/17: $450 - 460 Ultra High
BFG Comp Sport-2 - 225/45/17: $489 - 340 Ultra High
Michelin Pilot Super Sport - 225/45/17: $629 - 300 Max 

Of course I have not tried any of these, so I can't really comment on performance.
The only reference I have is some online tests of the Michelin PSS and the BFG CS2.

The ZII is the only Extreme Perf Summer tire which likely accounts for the price and the low treadwear rating.
Trying to find a balance between $ and personal level of performance is not easy. At my current level I'm almost tempted to go with a more entry-level tire and move up as skills develop.
At the same time I want to be able to go all out from the get go! decisions!


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

SteveCJr said:


> Not that my opinion matters much, but I say 18 is a good compromise between appearance and function. 19 is too large for decent handling / feel and 17s look kinda small IMO. If you don't mind the look of 17" wheels, I would say go with that.


Thanks SteveCJr. I agree fully.
I'm leaning towards the 17" just for $ reasons.


----------



## SteveCJr (Aug 3, 2008)

Converted2VW said:


> Thanks SteveCJr. I agree fully.
> I'm leaning towards the 17" just for $ reasons.


Very understandable. I can justify my new wheel purchase because in theory, they will pay for themselves over time because of the cheaper tires. A few years back when I was looking for a set of new winter tires for my 18" oem wheels, I was able to find a new set of 16" wheel and tires for the same price as just the tires.


----------



## kai.od.ua (Aug 16, 2009)

Hi Max.
Could you pm your email. I've got some question about Madmax products. 
Thanks.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

kai.od.ua said:


> Hi Max.
> Could you pm your email. I've got some question about Madmax products.
> Thanks.


You got a PM with contact info!


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

Did you use spacers? Can we get some detail shots through the fender gap, see what the hood looks like, etc? If I was a cat I'd be dead by now :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Eric, I am not home by the car for two weeks so I can't take new pics now, but hopefully the ones I already had can show it clearly enough. 

There is an inward lip on the side skirts that the lower fender bolts to. I just folded that lip outward instead of being inward, and that took care of the bottom.

At the top, the first forward/leading bolt and hole is used, the middle is left unused, and the back one is spaced out with a flat spacer with two holes drilled in it (the back of the fender rotates outboard over the leading bolt).

PS: there are an upper and lower bolts by the door. I intended to space those out as well. But after securing the fender and seeing how solid it is mounted, I just left those unused. I folded the flimsy mounts out of the way for a cleaner look, but that could be reversed by bending them back into oem location.

Close-up shot









Top view of how the hood meets the fender


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

Thanks for the shots Max and hacking up the hood is gnarly, as always I love the DGAF form over function approach


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

l88m22vette said:


> Thanks for the shots Max and hacking up the hood is gnarly, as always I love the DGAF form over function approach


If there was a trophy for the most DGAF TT owner, I'd be contending for it with my most hacked up TT. The form is already down the drain, it's all function for me at this point. :laugh:


----------



## ChoctawSlideTeam (May 10, 2010)

Hey, quick question. Rods? I'm assuming the bottom end is built, but didn't see anything in the thread about it?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yes, I have drop-in IE rods that's it, everything else is stock inside of the bottom and top end. :beer:


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

1. Which aem infinity ECU part numbers list are you using? (harness and ecu and and what is the replacement the Vag pressure sensor part number/manufacturer?)

2. Did you ever figure out what porche brakes you are going to be using? Part #s? (I will be running 18s and am interested in the largest porsche calipers I can run (6 pot or more) also interested in what rotors are available to work with the porche conversions (i prefer front/rear vented sloted with no drilled holes- will have them cryoed)- I am still trying to find a link to the brackets that i read somewhere in this forum some company is making.

3. Why is it better to not recirculate the air back into the exhaust (in reference to your comment about blowing it to the atmosphere etc)?

Just finished reading this entire thread- awesome.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

LilNipper said:


> 1. Which aem infinity ECU part numbers list are you using? (harness and ecu and and what is the replacement the Vag pressure sensor part number/manufacturer?)
> 
> 2. Did you ever figure out what porche brakes you are going to be using? Part #s? (I will be running 18s and am interested in the largest porsche calipers I can run (6 pot or more) also interested in what rotors are available to work with the porche conversions (i prefer front/rear vented sloted with no drilled holes- will have them cryoed)- I am still trying to find a link to the brackets that i read somewhere in this forum some company is making.
> 
> ...



1. The TT-specific part numbers are (you choose between the 6H or 8H ECU depending on your need):
30-3903
30-3903-00
30-2130-50

PM me for more info on the Standalone 

2. I am not going to run Porsche calipers. I will likely end up using Willwood calipers front and back

3. Atmospheric venting eliminates the restriction created by the bypass gases re-entering the exhaust stream. In some cases (90* angle where the bypass pipe joins the main exhaust, and not far enough downstream) it can seriously choke the exhaust flow and cause a good chunk of power. Any restrictions in the exhaust is not ideal, so I avoided it.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Small update of what I've been up to with the car during off season:

Made some composite headlight block offs. They save 15lbs of polar weight (also high above the center of gravity) and can be bolted on the car at the track in less than 5 min (headlights are modified to be able to come out with 2 bolts each and without removing the front bumper).



























Also got most of the work done on my rear diffuser project. Center section fabricated and mounts made. Need to extend my end strakes, and fill the upper gap with aluminium or ABS plastic, but it's mainly sorted now.


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Looking good Max!!!
What was the design based off of? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Thanks Luis! The design (although not complete as this is just the center section) isn't based off anything. Just built around some key points I wanted to implement on a rear diffuser:

- as many strakes as possible
- no more than 13 deg AoA and ideally at 10 deg
- being able to go through driveway inclines without having to remove it or destroy it
- lightweight, strong, adjustable, and easily removable


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Wow, coming along nice Max! Did you produce the diffuser yourself or have someone make it? I was thinking about getting in touch with S-factor to have something similar made unless you have another recommendation. Need one of those fancy air brakes too!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> Wow, coming along nice Max! Did you produce the diffuser yourself or have someone make it? I was thinking about getting in touch with S-factor to have something similar made unless you have another recommendation. Need one of those fancy air brakes too!


Jeff, the diffuser is another Madmax production ... it's against FP rules to have parts made by a company, it's a builder class . Put a design on paper, cardboard templates, order a sheet of aluminum, get some flat aluminium stock at Home Depot for brackets, get some hardware, and get to work. 

I still have a nice section of lexan somewhere saved for you to make your air brake.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Can you show the integration of the rear diffuser from underneath?
Where are you bolting it to? How does it keep the underneath air flow? etc.


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

did you already hack your headlights apart?. Ill trade you mine! my leveling motors are frozen lol
I like the new diffuser additions  
I would like to do something similar but I don't want it seen from the rear. I have a large cavity where the stock exhaust mounted. 

I need to pick your brain about tires sizes. I'd really like to run something wider like a 255 but idk how it will clear the coil over 

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> Can you show the integration of the rear diffuser from underneath?
> Where are you bolting it to? How does it keep the underneath air flow? etc.


In the front it bolts to a flat transverse aluminum bar that is mounted to the frame by some brackets. In the rear it's held by L brackets I made. 

Keep the underneath air flow? The whole point of it is to speed up, smooth out, and direct/difuse the air with limited turbulence when leaving the body (kind of like multiple expansion chambers working together). This is also just the center section, there will be two main end plates that keeps the rear tire overspill from entering the difused airstream.

This is what it looks like from underneath

















This pic shows the AoA (7-10 deg being the ideal range for this sort of setup) and rearward mounting bracket


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Feb 2, 2015)

Absolutely genius, if you don't paint it, it will shine the sun light onto competitors behind you. :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Gonzalo1495 said:


> Absolutely genius, if you don't paint it, it will shine the sun light onto competitors behind you. :laugh:


Now, that's an idea! :laugh:


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Hahahaha it's looking good Max!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Converted2VW said:


> Hahahaha it's looking good Max!


Thanks! Here are some better day pics. End plates mounted, braced, and painted -- also added some extra bracing to the diffuser. I was able to stand on it at the middle, it bowed slightly but took the weight like a champ. I scrapped the aluminum filler for the gap and will go with some ABS plastic instead, much easier to form and will look cleaner.


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

Looks great man!


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

It does look great Max. I will have to start putting my parts collection together next month .


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Looking good Max :thumbup:


----------



## taverncustoms (Feb 18, 2011)

Will this make a difference at Auto-X speeds? or are you road racing now?

BTW looking amazing keep it up.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> ...End plates mounted, braced, and painted -- also added some extra bracing to the diffuser. I was able to stand on it at the middle, it bowed slightly but took the weight like a champ. I scrapped the aluminum filler for the gap and will go with some ABS plastic instead, much easier to form and *will look cleaner*.


Good to see some updates - nice work! I like how you can easily swap your headlights and covers depending on the need. You should consider painting them black if you haven’t already. Any idea of what your front/rear weight percentage is sitting at? I think the TT came 60/40 from the factory.

The diffuser turned out really well. Since your exhaust doesn’t exit out back anymore you could probably fit a panel between the diffuser and the differential to smooth out the airflow back there a little more - was thinking of doing this to mine eventually. “will look cleaner”... I like the sounds of that and want to comment on it but I’m kind of speechless atm  A good speechless but...


----------



## tomde (May 12, 2010)

Videos, more videos....

opcorn: :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

racin2redline said:


> did you already hack your headlights apart?. Ill trade you mine! my leveling motors are frozen lol
> I like the new diffuser additions
> I would like to do something similar but I don't want it seen from the rear. I have a large cavity where the stock exhaust mounted.
> 
> ...


Drop me a text Mike for the headlight stuff.

You are basing your judgement of the diffuser on an unfinished work. It will look a lot more tame when finished with no giant gap back there. 

275 wide tires can fit without much work, past that you need to get clever.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

l88m22vette said:


> Looks great man!





tedgram said:


> It does look great Max. I will have to start putting my parts collection together next month .





TheDeckMan said:


> Looking good Max :thumbup:


:beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

taverncustoms said:


> Will this make a difference at Auto-X speeds? or are you road racing now?
> 
> BTW looking amazing keep it up.


I haven't done any testing with the diffuser added, but I don't see why it would not work at solo speed. The rear spoiler made a huge difference, so much so that I could not loose the rear on course even when I tried... damn thing is just glued to the ground. 

Car has been setup for road racing too. I plan on hitting as many local tracks as I can this season. I only did two last season but chewed an axle after 8 laps on one event, then blew the turbo outlet hose at the end of the first session on the other. :banghead:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

All_Euro said:


> Good to see some updates - nice work! I like how you can easily swap your headlights and covers depending on the need. You should consider painting them black if you haven’t already. Any idea of what your front/rear weight percentage is sitting at? I think the TT came 60/40 from the factory.
> 
> The diffuser turned out really well. Since your exhaust doesn’t exit out back anymore you could probably fit a panel between the diffuser and the differential to smooth out the airflow back there a little more - was thinking of doing this to mine eventually. “will look cleaner”... I like the sounds of that and want to comment on it but I’m kind of speechless atm  A good speechless but...



The headlight are already painted "sinister" black. I haven't had the car on individual scales in a while. With all the work (front splitter still need to go in), I'm waiting to be done before I corner weigh it again. 

There will be more flat-paneling down the road but I'm doing it in stages, now it's time to focus on the front. The issue with extending the diffuser forward is the moving components. At full droop the rear links would interfere with a full width extention. The center section can be extended, but not a priority IMO unless all the middle section of the underbody is being done. 

Headlight deletes










Semi finished look, already 10 times cleaner. Lol










Here you can see how the links droop down, the small center section left is kind of small to be attacked alone. I'll do it together with the area in front of the diff.


----------



## ChoctawSlideTeam (May 10, 2010)

Fantastic work. Looking forward to hearing about this season results/experience.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The headlight are already painted "sinister" black. I haven't had the car on individual scales in a while. With all the work (front splitter still need to go in), I'm waiting to be done before I corner weigh it again.
> 
> There will be more flat-paneling down the road but I'm doing it in stages, now it's time to focus on the front. The issue with extending the diffuser forward is the moving components. At full droop the rear links would interfere with a full width extention. The center section can be extended, but not a priority IMO unless all the middle section of the underbody is being done.


Nice - the black headlights really suit this beast. Makes sense about waiting to weight in... looking forward to seeing what the corners tip in at.

Ya, I imagine it’ll be really time consuming the getting each panel to fit and mount right. I’m only part way through my exhaust - takes so much time working off the ground like it looks like you’re doing too :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

ChoctawSlideTeam said:


> Fantastic work. Looking forward to hearing about this season results/experience.


Thank you Sir! I sure will share my feelings on the transformation... hopefully all positive.



All_Euro said:


> takes so much time working off the ground like it looks like you’re doing too :beer:


You can say that again, it's some serious monkey business to tackle certain jobs without a lift. :facepalm:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

And it begins! Now that my rear diffuser is finished, time to focus on the front with a functional splitter. 4x8 sheet of alumalite (enough to also make a spare), and some adjustable spoiler struts are on order. Should be fun!!!


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Converted2VW said:


> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





TheDeckMan said:


> :thumbup::thumbup:


Thank you gentlemen! 

Splitter is cut and mounted. I actually did two versions, one that is class-legal for SCCA F-Prepared and a wider/bigger one for open track days, time attack etc. The hardest part was making chassis-mounted mounts that are structurally sound to take the load that will be placed on it at speed. I am waiting on some adjustable struts/support rods to properly brace the overhang, but as it sits it's solid and I can stand on it. After that, it needs painting and rubber edging to finish off the rough cut. Not bad for a day's worth of toying around!


----------



## Tempes_TT (Oct 24, 2010)

Beautiful! :beer::thumbup:


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

That looks solid Max! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Looking great max:thumbup:
I had a lot of fun building and testing mk2 aero . Excited to do same with the quattro :beer::beer:


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> In the front it bolts to a flat transverse aluminum bar that is mounted to the frame by some brackets. In the rear it's held by L brackets I made.
> 
> Keep the underneath air flow? The whole point of it is to speed up, smooth out, and direct/difuse the air with limited turbulence when leaving the body (kind of like multiple expansion chambers working together). This is also just the center section, there will be two main end plates that keeps the rear tire overspill from entering the difused airstream.



Sorry, I didn't word it well. I meant connecting the front to the rear to keep the flow under the car up to the diffuser. Maybe you don't need to make a center section.

Also, isn't aside from unlimited class aren't undertrays and diffusers illegal? I don't know all the rules, just curious.

Otherwise, very functional even if not the most aesthetically pleasing but who cares if it is fast


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> Sorry, I didn't word it well. I meant connecting the front to the rear to keep the flow under the car up to the diffuser. Maybe you don't need to make a center section.
> 
> Also, isn't aside from unlimited class aren't undertrays and diffusers illegal? I don't know all the rules, just curious.
> 
> Otherwise, very functional even if not the most aesthetically pleasing but who cares if it is fast


The center section and side skirts will be addressed at some point. I am in SCCA F-Prepared which allows some aero but limits things. For example a front splitter is allowed but must stay within the outer frame of the body (looking from above).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Converted2VW said:


> That looks solid Max!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





BR_337 said:


> Looking great max:thumbup:
> I had a lot of fun building and testing mk2 aero . Excited to do same with the quattro :beer::beer:


Thanks guys, with paint and some rubber edging it's coming together rather nicely. I have some struts to add, but the car with all the aero work is starting to look like the proper track rat that it is. :laugh:


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Lov it! 
Max what did you use as edger on the splitter?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Freddy, I used truck door protective edge molding from the parts store. I have used that stuff for years on cut/chopped fenders and it works great. Apply cold and then a quick run with the heat gun to activate the internal glue and it's on for good. What I should also say is that I have never used it on this specific location -- so zero testing or experience on how it will hold up to being scrapped. If it fails I will move to something more heavy duty like this:


http://www.steelerubber.com/extra-small-edge-trim-seal-70-3597-99


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Looks amazing!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Freddy, I used truck door protective edge molding from the parts store. I have used that stuff for years on cut/chopped fenders and it works great. Apply cold and then a quick run with the heat gun to activate the internal glue and it's on for good. What I should also say is that I have never used it on this specific location -- so zero testing or experience on how it will hold up to being scrapped. If it fails I will move to something more heavy duty like this:
> 
> 
> http://www.steelerubber.com/extra-small-edge-trim-seal-70-3597-99


That stuff looks legit .however , I'm gonna try door edger first like you. 
Thanks for the info man. I'm gonna call you later to pick your brain about control arm opinions for the Quattro


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

BR_337 said:


> That stuff looks legit .however , I'm gonna try door edger first like you.
> Thanks for the info man. I'm gonna call you later to pick your brain about control arm opinions for the Quattro


No problem! Hit me up, we need to catch up. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Forward over-fender flaring (needs finishing/painting):



















Splitter overhang support rods added:










Air filter fresh air feed:



















Tow straps:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Love it.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Love it.


:beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Got a lithium battery to replace the already-light Deka ETX-20 battery I've ran for years. The small Dekas have served me well over the years, but it's time to catch up with technology. Lithium batteries are the way forward!

- Stronger

- lighter (by a lot)

- faster charging

- holds charge for much longer period when not in use (has a built-in cuircuit board that will cut-off discharge and current draw to guarentee enough juice for next start up).

The one I am using is from Starkpower -- no known relationship with Anthony Starks except that these batteries also power Iron man. It weighs 3 lbs, for a 12lbs of weight saving. Also cranks the car faster than the Deka even without a full charge, so I'm thrilled.


Battery









Size comparison (lithium has a smaller footprint)









Old one mounted









New one mounted













.


----------



## EuroSpic_TT (Apr 24, 2012)

nicee, ive heard alot of good things about those batteries but have no experience with them yet. is your filter mounted directly on to your turbo?:thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

EuroSpic_TT said:


> nicee, ive heard alot of good things about those batteries but have no experience with them yet. is your filter mounted directly on to your turbo?:thumbup:


Hey Juan, yeah the lithium battery technology is way ahead of the conventional one. For example this little guy I just fitted cranks out about 800 CCA which is more than double what the one it's replacing could deliver. They really do pack a punch and are smart batteries with internal circuit board that regulates and balance the cell's work, they also have built-in low charge cut-off when inactive to always guarantee having enough juice at re-start. 

The filter is mounted on turbo inlet to eliminate the need for a TIP, this limits intake restrictions and pressure drop to an absolute minimum.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

I looked around, is that battery really around $400? Little rich for me if that is the going rate unless you can share where we can get a better deal. I'm a religious follower of your weight reduction thread. Mine is a semi daily driver so I choose what I can live without based on the weights you have listed.


----------



## jsmith2015 (Mar 7, 2015)

It must be crazy to be at the point where ten pounds makes a difference.

Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk


----------



## MCPaudiTT (Nov 26, 2006)

www.starkpower.com doesn't show any specific batteries (including the one posted) as being available, and I can't find any other sources. Max, where did you get the battery, and how much was it?


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

When the difference between wining and losing is tenth of a second every pound counts.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

bwdz said:


> I looked around, is that battery really around $400? Little rich for me if that is the going rate unless you can share where we can get a better deal. I'm a religious follower of your weight reduction thread. Mine is a semi daily driver so I choose what I can live without based on the weights you have listed.


Hey bud, it's way less than $400, their website is weird and a nightmare to navigate. They got optimistic when they first started and launched all kind of battery sizes and specs. Most got pulled out and discontinued due to the lack of sales, and they kept key batteries that most people were buying. Contact them if you want something with a specific CCA and they'll point you towards the one with the closest spec. Most of my track buddies for example run this 1.5 lbs - 300 CCA one, it's fine and on par with the typical small battery everyone uses (Braille, Deka, etc). 

http://store.starkpower.com/12V12Ah...m-Ion-Starter-Battery-FREE-CHARGER-_p_51.html




MCPaudiTT said:


> www.starkpower.com doesn't show any specific batteries (including the one posted) as being available, and I can't find any other sources. Max, where did you get the battery, and how much was it?


Mike, I scored the battery on a trade with a friend. He got it when the company had all kind of battery specs available, so it's likely one of the discontinued models. Best bet is to contact them!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

jsmith2015 said:


> It must be crazy to be at the point where ten pounds makes a difference.
> 
> Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk


Ten pounds in itself never makes that big of a difference (unless you're racing a 100 whp spec miata). It's overlooking 10 lbs here and 10 lbs there that ends up killing you. If every 10 lbs of weight reduction is seen as too expensive, too difficult, or not available, you will never get anywhere. 

For example, my minimum class weight for an AWD turbo car is 2,450 lbs. The last time I had my car on the scales, it was under 2,600 lbs. I could have easily said "it's close enough" and not do the headlight deletes (15 lbs), lighter small battery (12 lbs), remaining bitumen (9 lbs), new front wheels (8 lbs), and lighter tubular subframe (10 lbs) -- But tackling these otherwise small individual reductions got me *54* lbs closer to ideal weight overall... which is huge for the purpose of the car. 



tedgram said:


> When the difference between wining and losing is tenth of a second every pound counts.


Hey Ted! :thumbup: :beer:


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Is 300 CCA enough to start the car on a cold Michigan winter morning?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Yes, 300 CCA will start a 4 banger at any temperature. The question is will it have 300 CCA on a cold winter morning after sitting overnight or for a few days. I have used small batteries around 300 CCA year round in NY -- in really cold winter mornings, you can tell they struggle a bit to turn the starter at full speed, but always start (even on E85). Just plan ahead if you are going to leave the car not running for a while, a tender is needed (especially in the cold months) because they loose charge quickly. Definitely a compromise, and you have to make adjustments in your habits to run these specs on a battery in a daily driver (habits like running electronics after the motor isn't running must be modified so you have enough juice for the next restart). :beer:


----------



## MCPaudiTT (Nov 26, 2006)

On a related note, I have not driven my car in about 5 months. I put a trickle charger on it after about 3 months, but it faulted out saying the battery could not hold a charge. I had to move the car yesterday, and the battery was STONE COLD DEAD. Not a bit of charge, light, any sign of life with the key in the start position.

So.. Every now and again if we let my wife's C70 sit for over a week, it "acts" dead too. The battery isn't dead, but it won't crank. Usually I can use a jumper battery and by removing a terminal, connecting the jumper, futzing around for 15 minutes, I can get it to spring to life (incidentally, I can crank right off the battery in the car after it starts once, so it is some oddball electrical issue, not a dead battery). In any case, I tied to do this a few months back and had my "trusty" lead acid jumper battery plugged in an "read to go"... Or not - it was dead (guess it reached end of life) too... I still got the car to crank, can't remember what I did at this point. BUT, i gave up on lead acid as a jumper battery and decided to give this a try: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00D42AFS8?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_search_detailpage
Sure looks like it could not possibly be up to the job... I never tried it, but figured it can't be worse than a dead lead acid battery anyway! She now keeps this in her car.

Long story long, my car was stone cold dead. I had this new charger battery all charged up. Let's give it a shot! It fired right up, NO issue. Given the size and weight of this thing I truly could not believe it! Over the moon happy with the performance, and I think I have bought my last lead acid battery....


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

those little jump packs do have alot of juice. turned over my friends 11.5:1 Comp mustang with a dead battery.


----------



## MCPaudiTT (Nov 26, 2006)

I think I found some affordable Lithium options... http://www.batterytender.com/s.nl - type "LITHIUM" in the search box and they have 4 different LCA sizes available from 120 to 480. Amazon carries them at a decent discount to the Retail price...


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Hijacking thread just to get your opinion Max, I lowered my car on Bilstein coilovers about 1.25 inches on every corner. I am looking at purchasing 18X8.5 ET35 rims that I really like and just want a little more tire under there than a 225 so thinking of running a 245//40/18s which are a tad taller (want a little more sidewall for potholes). Do you think those will clear? I am running poly bushings in every single position of every control arm and trailing arm, I aligned the car and only put in 1.35 camber in the front and run 1.1 in the rear, the car still understeers just a tad. My car has the 21mm front sway bar (that's what size wrench fit on it). Any suggestions? Oh yeah front toe is .05 and rear is .01 caster set at factory settings I believe it was 7.6 or so in the front. I have access to a top of the line alignment rack at a buddy's shop after hours so I can align it a dozen times if need be.


----------



## deltaP (Jul 26, 2011)

opcorn:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

bwdz said:


> Hijacking thread just to get your opinion Max, I lowered my car on Bilstein coilovers about 1.25 inches on every corner. I am looking at purchasing 18X8.5 ET35 rims that I really like and just want a little more tire under there than a 225 so thinking of running a 245//40/18s which are a tad taller (want a little more sidewall for potholes). Do you think those will clear? I am running poly bushings in every single position of every control arm and trailing arm, I aligned the car and only put in 1.35 camber in the front and run 1.1 in the rear, the car still understeers just a tad. My car has the 21mm front sway bar (that's what size wrench fit on it). Any suggestions? Oh yeah front toe is .05 and rear is .01 caster set at factory settings I believe it was 7.6 or so in the front. I have access to a top of the line alignment rack at a buddy's shop after hours so I can align it a dozen times if need be.


Make sure your ball joints are slid all the way outwards in the slots in the front control arms. Front toe should be 0.00, dial it out. Slight rear toe in aids in stability and confidence in transitions (I have a slight toe out in the rear currently, and I hate it!). Modify your OEM rear swaybar as seen HERE. Shoot for -1.5* static camber in the rear. That size tire should be okay, but depends on brand. I'm running 245/40/17 on 17x7.5 wheels right now with no issues, even with 20mmF and 25mmR spacers, also on PSS coils, lowered slightly more than you.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

That is pretty nifty on the sway bar trick. My balljoints are not all the way out, I tapped on them till I had both sides at exactly 1.35 degrees, took a while to get them exact and even to .01 degree. I felt like more might be hard on the tire wear. If I drop the rear a tad more it should increase the spring pressure, right? I'll leave the camber same after dropping and do the sway bar bit and see if that gives me more neutral handling. Of course I'll 0 the toe on the front. Thanks again for the expert input. Next up is losing some weight without too much compromise in comfort.
BTW, these are the rims I want to run, I'd get 17s if I saw them in 17 with our bolt pattern. Anyone know if these are heavy or reasonably light wheels? http://www.ebay.com/itm/252154031053?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
I just like that they look like factory wheels from a newer model and don't want to run adapters of any sort.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Adam pretty much covered your questions on the alignment. The only thing I will point out is that you could go ahead and max out the front ball joint on their slots for more static camber. At the levels possible on the stock hardware, there is zero concern for increased wear... if anything you will even out the wear characteristics between straighline and cornering. You won't see accelerated wear due to camber unless running north of -5 deg on a turning axle. 

Lowering the rear will not change the spring rate characteristics unless you were compressing and preloading them at rest (which is impossible in the back of the TT Quattro). What you will be doing however is reduce the amount of available travel that is already very limited in the back. So, proceed with caution! :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Not much of an update, but removed the rest of the sound deadening bitumen across the car. Major PITA for not much in return (5.4 kg for a couple hours of cursing and cleaning), but glad that's behind me. 

Best method for me was the heat gun and a sraper. Comes out cleanly in patches..

















Bag of patches of that junk removed 









Fresh front rubber turned up, and going to get mounted on a pair of 7.7 kg Enkei RPF1s. 










Moved the small lithium battery back to the front. It was making no sense anymore to relocate to the back when the battery is so light and having the relocation hardware weighing more than the battery itself. Will have to rethink and redo my battery cutoff switches, but that will wait for later. Another 2kg removed!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Haha, you've been on the UK forum too much, quoting things in kg's. :laugh: Murica! :bs:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Haha, you've been on the UK forum too much, quoting things in kg's. :laugh: Murica! :bs:


Yeah you're right, it also doesn't help that naturally I think in metric. Imperial is really BS, but you learn to live with it in Murica.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Adam pretty much covered your questions on the alignment. The only thing I will point out is that you could go ahead and max out the front ball joint on their slots for more static camber. At the levels possible on the stock hardware, there is zero concern for increased wear... if anything you will even out the wear characteristics between straighline and cornering. You won't see accelerated wear due to camber unless running north of -5 deg on a turning axle.
> 
> Lowering the rear will not change the spring rate characteristics unless you were compressing and preloading them at rest (which is impossible in the back of the TT Quattro). What you will be doing however is reduce the amount of available travel that is already very limited in the back. So, proceed with caution! :beer:


You guys rock. I realized that about the rear springs after I wrote the post. I will play with sway bar after I add front camber to see if that balances it out, I'm what you would call a "late breaker" into a corner so maybe my driving style affects it a bit as I ask the front to do a lot. Can't wait till the new track opens here in the spring and try it out for real.
Any thoughts on those rims? Weight is a bit of concern if anyone knows it and can I run the 245s on it without any problems?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I don't have much to say about the wheels because, just like you're faced with, there is zero info on them except size and bolt pattern (not even a manufacturer model # for a prospective buyer to research). From experience, they're likely boat anchors that are not suited for anything where performance is important. I would pass!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Happy Easter my TT people!


----------



## LilNipper (Jun 13, 2015)

PM sent


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Have you taken it to any autoX events?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

18T_BT said:


> Have you taken it to any autoX events?


Not yet, it has not been warm enough for any auto-x or track events for me (slicks are pretty useless in sub-65 deg F). I am also waiting to do a tubular subframe swap which will require some setup adjustments and new alignment. I am also brewing some evil plan for the rear that involves replacing the trailing arm with a tube-link, so not quite ready to roll out for the season. :beer:


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

So I took your advice and increased the front camber. Car is fantastic now, it just starts to step out in the rear before the front lets up, very controllable. I had a friend in the car on one of those 270 degree on ramps at around 70mph, he could not believe how the rear end just gets stepping out and essentially does a slight tail out power slide. SOooo much fun now, love the Bilstein coilovers and all the poly bushings make it feel so connected.


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

bwdz said:


> So I took your advice and increased the front camber. Car is fantastic now, it just starts to step out in the rear before the front lets up, very controllable. I had a friend in the car on one of those 270 degree on ramps at around 70mph, he could not believe how the rear end just gets stepping out and essentially does a slight tail out power slide. SOooo much fun now, love the Bilstein coilovers and all the poly bushings make it feel so connected.


Does the camber adjustment have to be done on a rack or can you just adjust the lower joint without affecting the toe?


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

toe is effected everytime camber is changed


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

racin2redline said:


> Does the camber adjustment have to be done on a rack or can you just adjust the lower joint without affecting the toe?


I have free access to a rack so I just do it myself. Shops usually charge around $50 for just a front end adjustment. Loosen everything up and retighten it before you go to the shop just so you know it will move around easily when you get there and they won't charge you any extra. If you do a 4 wheel, loosen the rear trailing arm bolts and set rear toe at zero.


----------



## racin2redline (Sep 25, 2008)

bwdz said:


> I have free access to a rack so I just do it myself. Shops usually charge around $50 for just a front end adjustment. Loosen everything up and retighten it before you go to the shop just so you know it will move around easily when you get there and they won't charge you any extra. If you do a 4 wheel, loosen the rear trailing arm bolts and set rear toe at zero.


so elongated lower ball joint holes also adjust toe
I ask because I tried sliding them all the way open recently and it looked like it also adjusted the tow out a little. which would make sense but just making sure 

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

bwdz said:


> So I took your advice and increased the front camber. Car is fantastic now, it just starts to step out in the rear before the front lets up, very controllable. I had a friend in the car on one of those 270 degree on ramps at around 70mph, he could not believe how the rear end just gets stepping out and essentially does a slight tail out power slide. SOooo much fun now, love the Bilstein coilovers and all the poly bushings make it feel so connected.


Nice, I'm glad it worked as intended and you like how it improved the car! :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Latest mod, raising the shifter box! It's something I've been wanting to do for a while in the TT, and I don't know why it took me so long to get it done. Shifting at the track while cornering can become interesting due to the distance between the steering and the low shift lever with box mounted under the tunnel.

It's a common and easy mod on most car, but as usual it's a bit more complicated in the TT. Our shifter box is bottom mounted with the cables going under the tunnel. So in order to raise the box, exhaust and propeller shaft need to be dropped, and a firewall hole is required for the cables. Once that's done, it's a matter of raising the shift box to the desired height. For me this comes at about 3" higher than stock, and that makes a world of a difference. Shifting is easier, more fluid and natural... the way it was intended to be if you look at the interior pics of the original TT concept. It won't make the car faster, but will without a doubt make driving it fast much easier and consistent.

Standard box dropped











New placement



















Raised box


----------



## Cookiez (Apr 7, 2014)

always interesting to read about cornering oriented mods instead of only scene mods. Looking forward for future updates!

Do i remember correctly if i read about you and usrt trying to come up with rear coilovers and aluminium front hubs? If so, any news?


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

shes startin to look like a real racecar with that shifter


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Cookiez said:


> always interesting to read about cornering oriented mods instead of only scene mods. Looking forward for future updates!
> 
> Do i remember correctly if i read about you and usrt trying to come up with rear coilovers and aluminium front hubs? If so, any news?


We're always brewing some evil plans Scott and I. I was pretty set on converting to MK5-up aluminum front control arms and spindle for this season. Scott and I were going to mock up everything and make a conversion "kit" for the fabricated bits (brake relocation and rearward control arm inner mounting points bracket, etc.). Plans have shifted however with the tubular subframe hitting the matket. I still plan on converting to the aluminum mk5 knuckle at some point, but this season I'm testing these:


Tubular subframe and control arms (both pics are prototype versions that were later revised and upgraded a few times) 
























stevemannn said:


> shes startin to look like a real racecar with that shifter


I agree, it's getting harder (inside and out) lately to fly under the radar. The usual reaction to the car has shifted from "cute little Audi" to "this is beast"!!!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Now that's a new control arm design. Why bolted together and not welded?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

20v master said:


> Now that's a new control arm design. Why bolted together and not welded?


Caster can be adjusted independently without adding deflection/binding on the lateral plane inner joint.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Caster can be adjusted independently without adding deflection/binding on the lateral plane inner joint.


:thumbup:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

That is the way to go with the control arm design, very close to the 996 cup arm setups. I would make the rear inserts with allowance to change the anti dive angle on them with different combo's of washers, should help a bit with torque steer.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Man, I just replaced my rusty cradle with a spotless California one. What is the ballpark cost on the cradle and control arms?


----------



## Cookiez (Apr 7, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> We're always brewing some evil plans Scott and I. I was pretty set on converting to MK5-up aluminum front control arms and spindle for this season. Scott and I were going to mock up everything and make a conversion "kit" for the fabricated bits (brake relocation and rearward control arm inner mounting points bracket, etc.). Plans have shifted however with the tubular subframe hitting the matket. I still plan on converting to the aluminum mk5 knuckle at some point, but this season I'm testing these:
> 
> 
> Tubular subframe and control arms (both pics are prototype versions that were later revised and upgraded a few times)


Have been watching the thread over on the r32 forum and it sure looks like a nice upgrade.
Still considering coilovers in the rear?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

TheDeckMan said:


> That is the way to go with the control arm design, very close to the 996 cup arm setups. I would make the rear inserts with allowance to change the anti dive angle on them with different combo's of washers, should help a bit with torque steer.


It's funny you're bringing anti dive angles, I have wrestled with the idea on this design, but gave up as it not as easily achieved as you'd think. The biggest problem I was faced with was that you'd need to compensate and offset the outer base angle (base where the ball joint bolts to) to prevent ball joint deflection/binding at rest. Yes, that can be worked on with a tubular design being built from scratch -- but how do you know what fixed offset to use when the end-user has a pretty wide range ability to adjust the anti dive angle? At the end, I gave up as anti dive and lift characteristics take a back seat for me when compared to other things like roll center positioning for example. The TT/R32 platform does not have enough bad dive/lift characteristics IMO to warrant the trouble (stiffer springs are a much easier alternative too).


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

bwdz said:


> Man, I just replaced my rusty cradle with a spotless California one. What is the ballpark cost on the cradle and control arms?


1,300 Can dollars for the craddle and control arms. So roughly 1,000 US dollars.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Cookiez said:


> Still considering coilovers in the rear?


Yes, and will do it at some point, it's simple enough to remove the rear struts and send them to Bilstein to have the perches ring base cut into them and perches added. What has stopped me so far is that I am also going to replace the rear trailing arm/spring base with a tube link. So there is a bit of added fabrication needed for me (it'll help with rigidity and greatly lower rear unsprung weight).


----------



## Cookiez (Apr 7, 2014)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Yes, and will do it at some point, it's simple enough to remove the rear struts and send them to Bilstein to have the perches ring base cut into them and perches added. What has stopped me so far is that I am also going to replace the rear trailing arm/spring base with a tube link. So there is a bit of added fabrication needed for me (it'll help with rigidity and greatly lower rear unsprung weight).


That sounds really interesting, especially when you add the tubular arms, count me in if there needs to be some sort of list to get the ball rolling.

My only concern is the mounting points, are that one bolt at the top (top of strut into chassis) really able to withstand the forces from the whole system? Since i imagine that the spring in its separate location handles a great deal of the forces with the original setup?


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> 1,300 Can dollars for the craddle and control arms. So roughly 1,000 US dollars.


Seems pretty reasonable, I spent 200 on a used cradle (it is like new though) plus some more on just bushings. Still have the old control arms. Will look into doing this over the winter if you have it out and available. I'm totally hooked on adjusting my suspension now. The new track that will be open soon near me will also have a skidpad for testing so I can really mess around as my buddy with the alignment rack is only 1 mile from the track.


----------



## MCPaudiTT (Nov 26, 2006)

Max, is the bolted "leg" held in place only through bolt torque, or is it splined? Seems like just torque would not be enough to keep the adjustment fixed... If not just bolt torque, could you post a photo of it disassembled so we can see how it works?


----------



## artur vel 2 hoot (Nov 25, 2006)

Great thread Max :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

What is your solution for '' taller'' tie rods required when control arm mounting points are raised ?
I keep eye on this subframe for some time but have no time to dive into that tie rods '' situation'' and it's kind of holding me back from pulling a trigger ..
I know they offer stock fitment option but if I spend that money I want additional benefits.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

artur vel 2 hoot said:


> Great thread Max :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
> 
> What is your solution for '' taller'' tie rods required when control arm mounting points are raised ?
> I keep eye on this subframe for some time but have no time to dive into that tie rods '' situation'' and it's kind of holding me back from pulling a trigger ..
> I know they offer stock fitment option but if I spend that money I want additional benefits.


This, My subframe should be here sometime, and am interested in this also


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

MCPaudiTT said:


> Max, is the bolted "leg" held in place only through bolt torque, or is it splined? Seems like just torque would not be enough to keep the adjustment fixed... If not just bolt torque, could you post a photo of it disassembled so we can see how it works?


Mike, the main plane/tube is really what's important. The triangulating tube is only there to prevent longitudinal movement of the main tube through its range of motion. Ever seen what Saturn did in their SC/SL front control arm design? Longitudinal restraint of the swing control arm is provided by having the antiroll bar bolting to it (Let's just say that dynamic toe changes where more than usual). The design is not new, and as Noah mentioned very common with other platforms. The triangulating tube don't need to be rigidly bolted, just prevent the main swing tube from moving in the longitudinal plane. 

Here is a more finished pic of the arm.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

artur vel 2 hoot said:


> Great thread Max :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
> 
> What is your solution for '' taller'' tie rods required when control arm mounting points are raised ?
> I keep eye on this subframe for some time but have no time to dive into that tie rods '' situation'' and it's kind of holding me back from pulling a trigger ..
> I know they offer stock fitment option but if I spend that money I want additional benefits.


The latest subframes have all of that worked out within the design. It is done by altering the mounting points for the steering rack to match the altered control arm pick up points. So nothing needed!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

One-Eight GTI said:


> This, My subframe should be here sometime, and am interested in this also


Brad, I got all the details worked out on yours, so nothing is needed and there is zero bumpsteer introduced!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Cookiez said:


> My only concern is the mounting points, are that one bolt at the top (top of strut into chassis) really able to withstand the forces from the whole system? Since i imagine that the spring in its separate location handles a great deal of the forces with the original setup?


The rear upper strut mount is well boxed in and I don't see have any concern with that. If anything it's the standard lower mount that need attention. A longer bolt with a nut does solves the issues with hub threads giving out from load (happen to me on both sides). BTW, I know someone on QW that has rear coilovers for years, but he still use some springs in the stock location for some odd reason. 


Eugene's rear coilover setup









Rear upper strut mount is decently boxed up


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Brad, I got all the details worked out on yours, so nothing is needed and there is zero bumpsteer introduced!


Sweet. Thanks Max


----------



## Ephry73 (Feb 18, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Mike, the main plane/tube is really what's important. The triangulating tube is only there to prevent longitudinal movement of the main tube through its range of motion. Ever seen what Saturn did in their SC/SL front control arm design? Longitudinal restraint of the swing control arm is provided by having the antiroll bar bolting to it (Let's just say that dynamic toe changes where more than usual). The design is not new, and as Noah mentioned very common with other platforms. The triangulating tube don't need to be rigidly bolted, just prevent the main swing tube from moving in the longitudinal plane.
> 
> Here is a more finished pic of the arm.


Oh baby! Are these going to become available to the public?
Awesome thread!


----------



## artur vel 2 hoot (Nov 25, 2006)

WOW , that control arms are sick .. Very nice and thoughtful design :thumbup:



Ephry73 said:


> Oh baby! Are these going to become available to the public?
> Awesome thread!


+1 





Marcus_Aurelius said:


> The latest subframes have all of that worked out within the design. It is done by altering the mounting points for the steering rack to match the altered control arm pick up points. So nothing needed!


Thanks for reply Max
It's that mean that steering rack mounting points have been raised ?
I've seen that done in ''other'' tubular subframe but I'm concerned that raised rack may interfere with my Down Pipe cuz my flex section is right above steering rack.. Will have to check closer for celerance I guess 

:beer::beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Ephry73 said:


> Oh baby! Are these going to become available to the public?
> Awesome thread!


Yes, they will, PM me for info.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

artur vel 2 hoot said:


> Thanks for reply Max
> It's that mean that steering rack mounting points have been raised ?
> I've seen that done in ''other'' tubular subframe but I'm concerned that raised rack may interfere with my Down Pipe cuz my flex section is right above steering rack.. Will have to check closer for celerance I guess
> 
> :beer::beer:


Yes, that means that the rack mounting position have been raised to mimic the the increase in control arm pick up point height.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Installed!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)




----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Wow, that looks great! Can't wait to see your scrub radius test now


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Looks good Max :thumbup:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

I'm doing my alignment today with the new tubular adjustable front control arms. It's really nice to be able to set caster and camber exactly where I want. I also went one step further and ventured into dialing some anti-dive and pro-lift into it! Never thought in a million years I would have the ability to do this in a MK1 TT... exciting time to be running this platform!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Got camber?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Not that much! :laugh:


----------



## Silver TT (Jan 26, 2015)

Hey man, your control arms look great. Did you run a model in an FEA program to check the stress? What's your safety factor?


----------



## GrampTT (Apr 10, 2015)

Silver TT said:


> Hey man, your control arms look great. Did you run a model in an FEA program to check the stress? What's your safety factor?


I was thinking the same thing the other day, but more along the lines of RTB testing (Run it Till it Breaks ), with intervals of N DT.


----------



## Silver TT (Jan 26, 2015)

I would use one of the hardness tests on the OEM control arm to first get a yield stress estimate. Then I would 3-D model the OEM control arm as closely as possible. Then use the FEA simulation to find the load which yields the OEM control arm - and use that load in the new control arm FEA simulation. Then you know it's at least as safe as the OEM arm. You could check the appropriate spec to find the min SF for the OEM arm.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

GrampTT said:


> I was thinking the same thing the other day, but more along the lines of RTB testing (Run it Till it Breaks ), with intervals of N DT.


The run until it breaks does work well, but requires extensive use as well as ability of checking it via inspection processing to ensure fatigue/movement is not happening. This is where computer simulation really comes into play. Hundreds of hours of track abuse would most likely suffice, but that might take many years to accomplish, let alone if anything else happens that causes the car to get written off prior to finding the actual usable life span of a part. 



Silver TT said:


> I would use one of the hardness tests on the OEM control arm to first get a yield stress estimate. Then I would 3-D model the OEM control arm as closely as possible. Then use the FEA simulation to find the load which yields the OEM control arm - and use that load in the new control arm FEA simulation. Then you know it's at least as safe as the OEM arm. You could check the appropriate spec to find the min SF for the OEM arm.


This is a solid process when able to fully model a factory arm. One of the big things is to ensure that it was a brand new arm that was never used to ensure no abnormalities. 

These race arms will most likely be perfectly fine for the use Max is using them for with inspections prior to every event. When it comes to suspension components, I prefer to avoid welds at all costs. Because of issues with welding controls this is the reason the OEM's moved to solid forged arms to ensure a more stable manufacturing process.


----------



## Don® (Oct 11, 2011)

Nice setup 

What material are these arms made from?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Donato sighting!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Silver TT said:


> Hey man, your control arms look great. Did you run a model in an FEA program to check the stress? What's your safety factor?





GrampTT said:


> I was thinking the same thing the other day, but more along the lines of RTB testing (Run it Till it Breaks ), with intervals of N DT.


They are not my control arms, they are from FmFab in Canada. I consulted with the technical aspect of the design and the implications to the geometry... now I'm just being the primary test mule. I believe in actual real-life testing as that always throws variables that FEA seem to overlook (been there many time with parts that look good in simulation and let you down at the track when really under abuse -- the RC correction kits for example). Time will tell, so far so good though with one event in the books and as much street driving as I can find time for. :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Don® said:


> Nice setup
> 
> What material are these arms made from?


Chromoly tubing. 



20v master said:


> Donato sighting!


Unicorn sighting! :laugh:


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

FM fabrication in Canada makes them. It comes with raised control arm perches for proper roll center control.

More info here: http://www.fmfabrication.ca/subframes


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Cannot wait to install mine. There a kick ass subframe


----------



## Converted2VW (Apr 8, 2009)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Cannot wait to install mine. There a kick ass subframe


This! More info on that subframe looks light and strong


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Converted2VW said:


> This! More info on that subframe looks light and strong


It's lighter than stock and solid


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Cannot wait to install mine. There a kick ass subframe


Brad, it's a bitch on the AWD cars and needs a few tweaks to fit. 

1) The subframe with the raised suspension pick up points is no-swaybar affair. I would advise anyone trying to run this to just delete the damn bar, because it's pita to make it work with a front bar. 

2) The rear main crossbar will contact with a 3" DP. I will contact Fred so it could revise this point with a notch, but otherwise the DP needs a little tweaking to clear. 

3) Steering rack heat shield has to go or they will occupy the same space.

4) The factory rear bushings on the control arms being deflection joints are now a pain to angle and slide through. For my car with tubular arms with free articulation it's easy, but stock TT arms are a battle to fit. Once fitted they're fine, but I suggest the hybrid type rear bushings or tubular control arms with this to avoid inventing new curse words. 

So really some heads up on what to expect with the install. If one can get past the tweaks needed, this thing is a game changer!

PS: I'll post some pics of the trouble points, and how it fits on a TT with OEM control arms.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Bummer, guess I'll have to deal with that stuff when the time arrives. My car will need a 3 inch down pipe . I'd really like to keep my front swaybar also.


----------



## Don® (Oct 11, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Chromoly tubing.
> 
> Unicorn sighting! :laugh:


:laugh: I'm around lurking in the shadows...

It's great they're made from Cr-Mo, it's what I was going to suggest they be made from :thumbup:


----------



## jsmith2015 (Mar 7, 2015)

Hey Marcus what did you end up doing with your vac system after ditching the tip and maf.

Im taking the leap to standalone and maf and tip are first parts im shedding

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk


----------



## jsmith2015 (Mar 7, 2015)

Also im having a tough time decerning what parts from aem i need to order and if they have integrated haldex yet

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

jsmith2015 said:


> Also im having a tough time decerning what parts from aem i need to order and if they have integrated haldex yet
> 
> Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk


I can tell you this from Max's post in the 1.8t forum, the haldex works because it's not taking info from Ecu. Its getting most of its info from abs controller and communicates through can bus. So yes haldex works


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

One-Eight GTI said:


> I can tell you this from Max's post in the 1.8t forum, the haldex works because it's not taking info from Ecu. Its getting most of its info from abs controller and communicates through can bus. So yes haldex works


Except Max's 01 Roadster doesn't have CAN BUS.


----------



## MCPaudiTT (Nov 26, 2006)

The Gen1 Haldex is quite "dumb", it needs only power and a couple sensors to run (wheel speed, brake light switch). It does NOT use any bus, on any MK1 vehicle.

Early MK1 cars DO have CANBUS, but a VERY limited implementation. '03 and later have a more robust implementation, but still pretty limited. Today's cars have all the lights, etc done over CANBUS, and literally up to 100 "ECU Modules" talking to each other...


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Oops. Ok no canbus. Just abs controller 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

jsmith2015 said:


> Hey Marcus what did you end up doing with your vac system after ditching the tip and maf.
> 
> Im taking the leap to standalone and maf and tip are first parts im shedding
> 
> Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk


 All that's needed is one line to FPR, wastegate control, PCV, BOVs (I run a pair). 



jsmith2015 said:


> Also im having a tough time decerning what parts from aem i need to order and if they have integrated haldex yet
> 
> Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk


I am sending you a PM with details on the ECU. :thumbup:


----------



## jsmith2015 (Mar 7, 2015)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> All that's needed is one line to FPR, wastegate control, PCV, BOVs (I run a pair).
> 
> 
> 
> I am sending you a PM with details on the ECU. :thumbup:


So di you have block breather and valve cover under vacuum ?

Or do you just have dump tubes now ?

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

Just wanted to check in and see how the new front control arms are working out....any opinions after some usage?
Thanks


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Hey bud, so far so good with the control arms! Nothing unusual, the hardware has not backed off, everything looks straight. The only thing I can report is that they're a bit noisier than OEM when crashing in potholes -- not loud or clunky, but you know they're there (less noticeable than metal camber plates for example). :beer:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Two months to the day with no updates, I thought we might have lost you, Max.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

No, still there Adam! Forum is dead though, so I haven't found the motivation to be posting in a ghost town. Lurking status for me since nothing interesting is happening on the TT board.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Fall is coming, aka MY racing season. I'm about to get started on my project again for the umpteenth time, so I'll give you some eye candy soon enough.

PS The Brits aren't doing anything interesting either.


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Hey bud, so far so good with the control arms! Nothing unusual, the hardware has not backed off, everything looks straight. The only thing I can report is that they're a bit noisier than OEM when crashing in potholes -- not loud or clunky, but you know they're there (less noticeable than metal camber plates for example). :beer:


Thanks Max....good to hear. I've lived with the ground control plates for several years now, really not an issue, even on my back country roads.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> No, still there Adam! Forum is dead though, so I haven't found the motivation to be posting in a ghost town. Lurking status for me since nothing interesting is happening on the TT board.


Couldn't agree more. I still pull it up on a weekly basis just to check in and be inspired by someone doing something neat to their car but it is slim pickings anymore. Darn work gets in the way so I have just been collecting parts for when I get time. Stroker is sitting there on the shelf and I just hope I can get around to it in the winter. I did post recently about my crappy brakes and after a flush and some other recommended services decided to upgrade to Boxster calipers which are on the way ($100 for the pair from Ebay) and I ordered the brackets from PureMS along with some stainless lines, hoping to get the brakes to feel like my Boxster.


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Feb 2, 2015)

20v master said:


> Fall is coming, aka MY racing season. I'm about to get started on my project again for the umpteenth time, so I'll give you some eye candy soon enough.
> 
> PS The Brits aren't doing anything interesting either.


Only because you're not there to antagonize them :laugh:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Gonzalo1495 said:


> Only because you're not there to antagonize them :laugh:


You do a good enough job without my help. :laugh:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Haven't posted in the thread in a while but many interesting things coming this off season. Here is a pic of my finished shifter box relocation. Knob placement is perfect for racing (within finger reach of the wheel) and makes the shifting so much more natural. The box is raised off the floor, and an extension is added to the rod (courtesy of our very own Noah at Phenix Engineering), and finally I slightly shortened the throw from factory for an ideal shift feel.


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Feb 2, 2015)

opcorn: Looking forward to seeing the improvements you have coming for this beast brotha!


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

Max..two questions, I see on your web site you intend to make and sell the Ball Joint Relocating Plates. Is that still something you are looking into? I think you were running these in BSP, are they legal for that class?

Also, converting to E85, any other internal upgrades necessary beyond the rods?
Thanks...enjoying the thread


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

blackfnttruck said:


> Max..two questions, I see on your web site you intend to make and sell the Ball Joint Relocating Plates. Is that still something you are looking into? I think you were running these in BSP, are they legal for that class?
> 
> Also, converting to E85, any other internal upgrades necessary beyond the rods?
> Thanks...enjoying the thread


I've scrapped that project since it was discovered that using MK2 ball joints gave a good chunk extra camber and a bit of caster too. More wallet friendly mod and totally DIY. Yes, I run the extended ball joint in Street Prepared -- using the MK2 ball joint is also legal. 8J0 407 365 / 8J0 407 366. The only modification needed is a slight elongation of one of the bolt hole on the Mk2 ball joint.


































Rods are truly the only required internal that needs attention. Besides that, a set of exhaust valves is a good insurance policy, but not a must have upgrade (still haven't installed mine). Everything else is overkill IMO and that money could be spent elsewhere.


----------



## burk_art (Mar 24, 2006)

That's interesting on the MKII joints, Max; I'll try those next time - just installed new MKI's. That shifter looks great btw - I've been toying with an extension to mine but worthless without shortening the throw.


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

Cool....thanks for the info max. Any idea on how much additional camber? I might be looking at that wrong, but wouldn't it yield more camber with the elongated hole on the other end of the slot?


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

blackfnttruck said:


> Cool....thanks for the info max. Any idea on how much additional camber? I might be looking at that wrong, but wouldn't it yield more camber with the elongated hole on the other end of the slot?


If you look at the pic of it bolted to the LCA, it looks like with the inward bolt in the max extended position, the other two bolts line up with the furthest outward part of those two slotted holes. Different bolt spacing MK2 vs MK4/TT. 

Max, are these ball joints from a MK2 TT, or MK2 VW?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

4ceFed4 said:


> If you look at the pic of it bolted to the LCA, it looks like with the inward bolt in the max extended position, the other two bolts line up with the furthest outward part of those two slotted holes. Different bolt spacing MK2 vs MK4/TT.
> 
> Max, are these ball joints from a MK2 TT, or MK2 VW?
> 
> ...


8J parts are MK2 TT's.


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Good stuff max . 
Lmk when you wanna come test that thing here at road Atlanta 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

blackfnttruck said:


> Cool....thanks for the info max. Any idea on how much additional camber? I might be looking at that wrong, but wouldn't it yield more camber with the elongated hole on the other end of the slot?


From what I read in other threads it adds -.5 camber over MK 1 ball joints. Good stuff:thumbup:


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

ticketed2much said:


> From what I read in other threads it adds -.5 camber over MK 1 ball joints. Good stuff:thumbup:


Hmmm...just a half a degree...doesn't seem like that much.

From this article...about -.7

http://audittracecarproject.blogspot.co.uk/2015_03_01_archive.html


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

blackfnttruck said:


> Hmmm...just a half a degree...doesn't seem like that much.
> 
> From this article...about -.7
> 
> http://audittracecarproject.blogspot.co.uk/2015_03_01_archive.html


Good thread. Thx for posting it 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

It might already be somewhere in this thread, but is there any published proper alignment specs for the TT for autox use?
I see there was a PDF on the first page, but the link is dead now.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> If you look at the pic of it bolted to the LCA, it looks like with the inward bolt in the max extended position, the other two bolts line up with the furthest outward part of those two slotted holes. Different bolt spacing MK2 vs MK4/TT.
> 
> Max, are these ball joints from a MK2 TT, or MK2 VW?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hey Jeff, how is it going buddy? 



20v master said:


> 8J parts are MK2 TT's.


^^^ What he said!


----------



## 4ceFed4 (Apr 3, 2002)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Hey Jeff, how is it going buddy?


Going well! Car should be completely sorted in the next week or two. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

blackfnttruck said:


> Hmmm...just a half a degree...doesn't seem like that much.
> 
> From this article...about -.7
> 
> http://audittracecarproject.blogspot.co.uk/2015_03_01_archive.html


They add over a degree, about 1.7 per side. Not bad IMO from a near plug-n-play mod. You add this to some top eccentric bushings or top camber plates, and you're in business for a mild track setup. 

*After a recent discussion on FB today I went back and checked my notes. The MK2 TT ball added more camber than the 0.9 degree I originally posted. *


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

4ceFed4 said:


> Going well! Car should be completely sorted in the next week or two.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup::thumbup: Some pics please!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

BR_337 said:


> Good stuff max .
> Lmk when you wanna come test that thing here at road Atlanta
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hey Freddy, a trip to Road Atlanta wouldn't be a bad idea. In the spring! :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

blackfnttruck said:


> It might already be somewhere in this thread, but is there any published proper alignment specs for the TT for autox use?
> I see there was a PDF on the first page, but the link is dead now.


I'm assuming for street prepared or SM on R-compounds. Here is what I'd recommend (quattro):

--Front--
-4 deg camber 
3mm toe-out
+9.5 caster

--Rear--
-1.5 camber
2mm toe-in


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I'm assuming for street prepared or SM on R-compounds. Here is what I'd recommend (quattro):
> 
> --Front--
> -4 deg camber
> ...


Yup...BSP...thanks Max.


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Hey Freddy, a trip to Road Atlanta wouldn't be a bad idea. In the spring! :beer:


I would love that max . Man , you would wanna move here after experiencing RA lol You have a bed here at my place for sure . 
Maybe GTA 2017!? I think it's in April or may


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Hey Freddy, a trip to Road Atlanta wouldn't be a bad idea. In the spring! :beer:


Road Atlanta is an awesome track, just crap facilities. Come over to Barber Motorsports Park for a real treat.


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

20v master said:


> Road Atlanta is an awesome track, just crap facilities. Come over to Barber Motorsports Park for a real treat.


I love barber too. However, don't drive off the track they'll charge you for every blade of grass hahaha


----------



## YayItsBlake (Apr 11, 2016)

BR_337 said:


> I love barber too. However, don't drive off the track they'll charge you for every blade of grass hahaha


Isn't it something absurd like $25-50/sq. ft? I watched an Ama superbike do at least a grand in grass damage last time i was there. Im sure it was the only time the thought "I wish i wasn't going so fast" comes to mind. 

Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

YayItsBlake said:


> Isn't it something absurd like $25-50/sq. ft? I watched an Ama superbike do at least a grand in grass damage last time i was there. Im sure it was the only time the thought "I wish i wasn't going so fast" comes to mind.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk


Barber doesn't charge for grass, but does charge for guardrail/Armco damage. I think that's just an internet rumor that has never been squashed. I saw this in a Chumpcar notice from last year (2015).

"Contrary to popular belief Barber MSP does not charge you for damaging their
grass but they do charge you to damage done to the track or barriers. "


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Yeah ,I know... I was just teasing lol 

Max, check out who's here 










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

Max...I see you put your fans on a switch, did you go direct to the fan connector or the fan module, I've been wanting to do this myself. any pics of the hookup?
Thanks

Also....did you figure out the best setup for the rear connection on the front control arm? Number of spacers...top and bottom?


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

The mk2 balljoints are not a direct fit but I think earlier in this thread Max explains how to modify the holes in the control arm to make it happen. They will allow you to run more camber. I run 2.7 degrees in the front on the street and I do wear out the inside of my front tires prematurely, from what I hear from other people their experience is different than mine and they say that at 3 degrees or so it does not wear out too fast but I am just sharing my own experience. Having said that running higher front camber is the only way to make the front end stick on these IMO as they are front heavy. When you say you run a staggered set up one has to assume that you are running wider on the rear which is a terrible idea, if anything you should run wider in the front.


----------



## hunTTsvegas (Aug 27, 2012)

C-Mann said:


> Bwdz are you running -2.7degrees in the front and is that with the mk2 ball joints or with the mk1 ball joints? The staggered 19's are a carry over from my mkiv jetta afyer I sold it and I do plan on running maybe wide 17's or 18's later. Also I didn't think running staggered on the TT would be an issue because of the rear independent suspension? The main problem I'm having now is the inner tire wear mainly on the front but that's without the new coilovers and bushings & bearings being refreshed & alignment & new tires which is why I want to get everything right before I go get an alignment. I read up on Max's "Let's talk TT suspension" last night and saw that suggestions for street performance are about what I have now with exception to the mk2 balljoints which came up in this thread. All that being said I'm thinking the only additional things I may need are the mk2 balljoints and to modify the stock rear swaybar to make it adjustable and maybe polyurethane front and rear swaybar bushings and whatever's recommended for alignment settings. This will be my daily along with my Allroad so I just want good street performance and canyon runs and without accellerated inner tire wear.


Maybe it's just personal opinion but there's no need to run mk2 ball joints for a street car. Max's situation is a little different as it sees very heavy track use. I still use MK1 ball joints with Coilovers, Defcons, Poly Bushes, factory sways, etc and have no issues on twisty roads at moderately excessive speeds. Again, I think it would be different if I were to track my car but being just a street car with no track use, not much of a point. Reiterating, all my own personal opinion. Someone else may be able to quantify a better reason to use MK2 ball joints on a daily street car.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Mine are MK1 original style balljoints just pushed all the way out in the holes. You can get quite a bit of camber that way. I have access to a friend's shop with an alignment rack so I played around a few times before I found my "happy" balanced setting. I have the bilstein coils and all poly bushings throughout.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

I have poly in all the control arms front and rear and the trailing arm as well. I am lowered about 1.25 inch, reread Max's suspension article if you need to know why you don't go lower than that in the front. I haven't noticed any wear but I have only had them in there for about 12k miles or so and I was very liberal with copper grease when I installed the bushings. I still get no squeaks from the suspension even on 0 degree temp days here in Michigan. I will have the car up in the air soon as I am getting some funky feedback from the rear end recently over bumps so something might have wore down or moved on me so it's back in the air and on the alignment rack.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Passive steer? First I ever heard of it but hey you learn something new everyday. Something feels off in the rear right now, I just need to get it up and look around as well as recheck the alignment. It could be as simple as my wore out tires, meaning wore out on the inside as I rotated them from the front a little over a month ago.


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Feb 2, 2015)

I fitted the MK2 balljoints recently. I wouldn't say the camber is excessive to where you can't run it on a street car for fun. On a daily I wouldn't recommend it. My car is my project car so no worries there.


----------



## bwdz (Jan 21, 2015)

Since my car is not slammed I just use the offset bushings in the rear and am able to adjust the camber that way. They don't give you the range that adjustable arms will but were plenty for me and I still am not maxed out on them if I lowered it a little more.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

No offense guys, but this is Max's thread. Obviously he's the resident suspension guru, but if you're going to start a discussion about your own car, it needs to be in its own thread. :beer:


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Max, any difference between b6 and the TT as far as the rear sway mod? im on ohlins 700/1200 rates. I'm planing on doing unless you don't recommend it on my chassis?

:beer::beer:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

BR_337 said:


> Max, any difference between b6 and the TT as far as the rear sway mod? im on ohlins 700/1200 rates. I'm planing on doing unless you don't recommend it on my chassis?
> 
> :beer::beer:


If there is room to drill on the ends of the bar, and the OEM links can reach said new holes, no reason not to. Looks like those B6 endlinks are super short and limited on access though.


----------



## kai.od.ua (Aug 16, 2009)

Hello Max.

Any news about mk5 aluminium knuckle conversion?


----------



## formerly silveratljetta (Feb 6, 2007)

kai.od.ua said:


> Hello Max.
> 
> Any news about mk5 aluminium knuckle conversion?


Do tell...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

kai.od.ua said:


> Hello Max.
> 
> Any news about mk5 aluminium knuckle conversion?





formerly silveratljetta said:


> Do tell...


I've had the knuckles here for a while but never got to doing the conversion. Reminds me that I need to get to it and have this finished.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Off season has been dead for me as I haven't touched anything on the long 'project' list for the car in a couple of months. Before it got too cold last year I added a rear LSD from MFactory. I had plans to install the front right after, but found that my transmission has more backlash than I would like to see. So I decided to go for a rebuild with taller o2m TDi gears and drop the front LSD in at the same time.





























A few weeks ago I got a chance to finish a project that I have wanted to do for a while, my own stage one rear brake upgrade. Custom lightweight 300mm two-piece rotors, Steel brackets to move the OEM rear caliper away radially to gain more leverage. The reason is I wanted lighter than any other kit made for the rear, parking brake retained, and full bolt-on (there is no need to grind the knuckle like the ECS kit or use shims, redrill PCD, or use spigot rings to fit).





























This week we got a nice break in the weather here in New York (Meruca), and I attacked the rear spare tire hump with guns blazing. I don't own a spare tire, and that thing isn't necessarily light. So I chopped the damn thing off.  I will save some weight, make the rear stiffer with bracing, and have a removable service door which will make changing the Haldex filter a breeze. Seems like a win-win proposition to me. I also took the opportunity while working back there to install the forward portion of my diffuser that has been sitting around the garage for ages. The project isn't finished because I ran out of wrench time, I need to triangulate/brace the top and rivet an aluminum plate to cover the hole.


*Chopped*










*Rear subframe posts cross-braced, and forward diffuser section bolted up*









*
Rearward top braces fabricated an mocked up. Bracing came out pretty good and it's solid. I was thinking of triangulating with a cross bar, but I don't think it's necessary seeing how tigid it is.* 










*
I used existing structural studs on the rear trunk panel for rear anchoring of the side braces.*










*Finished*


----------



## Cookiez (Apr 7, 2014)

Nice Work on the brake kit, is this something you would be able to svare details on for the purpose of copying your setup or Even better. A kit you would sell?

Always looking forward to Updates on your project!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Cookiez said:


> Nice Work on the brake kit, is this something you would be able to svare details on for the purpose of copying your setup or Even better. A kit you would sell?
> 
> Always looking forward to Updates on your project!


Available on Madmax's website! :thumbup::thumbup:
http://www.ftdmotorsports.com/?page_id=122


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Nice update Max :thumbup:

I plan on cutting up my spare tire area one of these days too - nice to see how you’re approaching the bracing. Jealous of the rear diff and brake upgrades!

That FTD site is looking is looking a little more dangerous now too... good to see


----------



## formerly silveratljetta (Feb 6, 2007)

Liking the rear disc setup max. Is there any weight savings over the stock rear discs?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Looking Good!


----------



## kai.od.ua (Aug 16, 2009)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I've had the knuckles here for a while but never got to doing the conversion. Reminds me that I need to get to it and have this finished.


Dear Max,
VAG community awaiting for innovation


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

formerly silveratljetta said:


> Liking the rear disc setup max. Is there any weight savings over the stock rear discs?
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Richard, there is a weight saving with the drilled disc option (2 lbs). The plain disc setup (with bracket and everything) came to the same weight as the factory rear disc. So you lower the rotational mass, improve the rear braking TQ by 15%, and tremendously improve the look. 













tedgram said:


> Looking Good!


Thanks Ted, shocked to see you around! 



kai.od.ua said:


> Dear Max,
> VAG community awaiting for innovation


On it!


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

The rear brake setup looks good Max :thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

TheDeckMan said:


> The rear brake setup looks good Max :thumbup:


Would look better in a box on my doorstep. :laugh:


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

20v master said:


> Would look better in a box on my doorstep. :laugh:


A good way to put some tax return money to use


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

TheDeckMan said:


> A good way to put some tax return money to use


The man says they are on the way!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

TheDeckMan said:


> The rear brake setup looks good Max :thumbup:


Thanks Noah... some top machining from you on the brackets helps! :beer::beer:



20v master said:


> The man says they are on the way!


:wave:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

17.5" convex interior mirror, Spa racing exterior mirrors, side air dam spats, new front wheels and tires mounted and painted. A few more things and it'll be ready for race season, getting excited!


17.5" wide angle convex interior mirror 























































Side air dam spats



















Spa exterior mirrors





































Wheels/tires 17x10 at 16 lbs 10 ounces wrapped with new 315 slicks


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

20v master said:


> The man says they are on the way!


:laugh:



Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Thanks Noah... some top machining from you on the brackets helps! :beer::beer:
> 
> :wave:


:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Max, that car looks great! Awesome work buddy. 
I'm finally done (For Now ) with my build and had few questions for you :

Last Saturday I went to track for shakedown of the new chassis. I was very satisfied with what I built However, you can tell on the video below I had pretty good understeer on corner entry on the hair pins and mid corner on the carrossels . 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1xabnAQF1X0

I'm running Stasis ohlins mortorsports 2 adjustable. I have it sent per Stasis recommendations..










To me is a bit too stiff up front vs the rear on rebound and compression. 034 Motorsports upper control arms and drop links will be here Monday. 
I'm currently running these. http://steinjager.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=29432Don't I dunno if you ever herd of them but they are junk compared to 034s .. 

Would stiffen the rear and Soften the front along with your rear sway mod will help rotate her better ?
How about alignment settings max ? Should I do what you remembered previously to someone else few pages back ? Keep in mind my car is mainly a track car not autocross..
Thanks in advance 
Here some pics for reference bud 🍻🍻

Here more info on my build 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...tro-race-car-powered-by-MALONE-TUNING-*/page3


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Double post.


----------



## kai.od.ua (Aug 16, 2009)

Max, did you get wider front after mk 2 ball joint conversion? Or you just get extra camber?
It's important for me because my camber plates give me 2.4". Ball joint position on idf control arms at maximum "+". I can't use them because with more negative camber I will be wider. But I don't want it due to tyre- fender clearence.


----------



## kai.od.ua (Aug 16, 2009)

If someone can answer me. Please, do.


----------



## blackfnttruck (Jul 4, 2004)

Not totally sure, but i would think in order to get additional camber, you need to push the axle out, unless you push the top in.


----------



## kai.od.ua (Aug 16, 2009)

Hi guys!
Max, any news concerning aluminium knuckles upgrade?


----------

