# 1.8t with K04 TFSI Turbo..



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

So may not be everyone's cup of tea, but we have been running a stock TFSI k04 on a 1.8t audi A3 for a little over a week now, with very promising results.

The car, a trackcar, was originally running 354bhp on a 1.8t K04 hybrid and now has been converted to a Tfsi.

Benefit being the integral manifold to turbine housing, freer flowing and all round better design that the old k04.

We designed and made an adaptor that bolts directly to the 1.8t cylinder head and allows OEM fitment of the TFSI turbo's. So far we are only running it at 1bar on actuator pressure and it's flowing equally as well as the old setup and will be mapped very soon to test the max limit.. 

Then we will fit a custom made TFSI hybrid and aim for over 400bhp ..

Here is the link to the original thread if anyone would like a read..

http://www.audi-sport.net/vb/a3-s3-forum-8l-chassis/109831-prawn-bigals-a3-track-car-106.html


----------



## Gonzzz (Apr 27, 2010)

Interesting. I was thinking of re-engineering the K04-001 hotside housing to make it flow better.

With your solution, you need a new downpipe and lines, and a turbo. With my solution, you need neither.

A F23 has actually the same wheels as a S3 K04-2283. The only difference is that the compressor wheel is one mm smaller on the inducer and exducer. Exhaust wheel is identical.

The difference in power is because of the restrictive hotsides.


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

This isn't up against the K04-001! regardless of how much you port it you will never make the figure this makes.
Yes the F23 has the same wheels , nearly, but it is hugely limited by the hotside flow..

This is will be comparable to the K04 hybrids on the 1.8t but with a hybrid tfsi hopefully knock the 1.8t hybrids out the water... 

the major benefit is the spool time, if we can make similar power to a gt28 but with faster spool then it'll be winner,


----------



## Gonzzz (Apr 27, 2010)

I said re-egnineer the hotside. Not port it.


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

oh wow..

That would be good.. if you can get a k04 sized scroll on the K03 then it'll be a winner..

Couple of companies have done it to the K04 but charge 1000$ for the pleasure, I looked into it last year but the developmental costs just made it unacceptable... we've had 315bhp out of a K03 recently ( UK power ) and I think that satisfies most, want more then it's cheaper to run a K04 setup..


----------



## Gonzzz (Apr 27, 2010)

Most of the K04-2283 hybrids suck. The F23T is a heat pump with an oversized billet compressor wheel and a stock turbine.

The only one that's worth looking at is the Loba400. Spool will much slower than a 2.0T, though.
20v's don't flow as much, plus lower CR, and lower displacement.


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Ive developed a hybrid similar to the Loba 4xx but with out the silly price tag..

we're making 1bar at 3200 rpm at present, and I expect full boost Ie 21-24psi at around 3500 rpm on this setup.. Of course it'll be slower than the 2ltr admittedly but equal to K04 and better than a GT turbo..


----------



## StaceyS3 (Sep 22, 2012)

This tfsi setup is definately already looking to be a wicked setup and im sure like you say once prawns is mapped it will blow the normal k04 hybrids out of water :beer:

Interesting times ahead 

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## superkarl (Dec 18, 2012)

anyone that thinks they can get the same or more out of a ko3 or ko4-23 frame hotside is a moron. 

You only have to look at what the TFSI guys achieve to see the potential in this and that we could have nearly if not just as much as they can from their cars, even if there is 200cc discrepancy. 

The hybrid will be the game changer. Lots of people want a nice 400hp ish daily driver, enough to be quick, whilst not being too far to spend that extra on hardware that one would on a 500hp+ setup.
I am one of those people, i spec'd a gtx2867r for my 1.8t, and looking at the Greeks that have already done this for the past couple of years, and prawns progress in the UK, aswell as the TFSI hybrids, it kinda makes my turbo a poor choice, definately so in T25 format. 

The way these things spool, like OEM ko4 setups, whilst still hitting 360hp levels in stock format, and 400+ in hybrid, whilst revving to and beyond 7k, will make for one heck of a fast car, even compared to cars pushing out a little more from a 'big' turbo.


----------



## Gonzzz (Apr 27, 2010)

Have you ever had a K03 hotside in your hands? That sh*t is restrictive as f*ck!

One would be a fool not to think that's the single most restrictive point of current gen hybrids.


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

JohnnyAlpaca said:


> Have you ever had a K03 hotside in your hands? That sh*t is restrictive as f*ck!
> 
> One would be a fool not to think that's the single most restrictive point of current gen hybrids.


Agreed it is very restrictive, are you talking on the 1.8t hybrids or the tfsi ones as I'm confused what's been discussed here.. The 1.8t stock turbo's are finite even as hybrids.. Fitting a tfsi is hopefully going to give good power, without the usual issues of lag ,cost and fitment..


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

Beachbuggy said:


> Agreed it is very restrictive, are you talking on the 1.8t hybrids or the tfsi ones as I'm confused what's been discussed here.. The 1.8t stock turbo's are finite even as hybrids.. Fitting a tfsi is hopefully going to give good power, without the usual issues of lag ,cost and fitment..


Its much more then just the volume of the scroll. It also has alot to do w/ geometries. If you dont know how to distinguish A/R needs based on scroll diameters in relation to radius and volute sizes, you can easily end up w/ something that doesnt work very well at all. Case in point are the eliminator series as well as Garrett's .86ar housing. Its quite a balancing act that takes much R/D


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

This is on the old map.. Basically 370ish looks very possible..


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

Beachbuggy said:


> This is on the old map.. Basically 370ish looks very possible..


Get that tune dialed in and feed it corn juice!


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

warranty225cpe said:


> Get that tune dialed in and feed it corn juice!


wish we had it in the UK


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

what on earth is Corn Juice chaps?

Almost 1000 miles on this setup so far, and it's feeling fantastic, much nicer boost response than the previous 023-2283 hybrid, and a better drive on part throttle.

Given that EGT's were very healthy, and it was making just 18psi at peak power, I think there's a good bit more to come from this once mapped


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Prawn said:


> what on earth is Corn Juice chaps?


E85


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 18, 2009)

I would love to feed my S3 with some E85


----------



## spartiati (May 19, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> I would love to feed my S3 with some E85


What sort of timing advance are you running? Looks alittle rich in the midsection. Is the ecu requesting that much fuel?

I think if you can get boost to hit 22 and taper to 20by red line with a healthy timing curve and maybe a slightly leaner AFR you can approach the 400BHP mark. Water meth injection will make a nice difference as well if you aren't running it...


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

Hi Spartiati, 

the ECU is currently not mapped for this turbo at all, hence the strange fueling in places. the map on the car at the moment is for the previous k04-023 hybrid, we just dyno'd it on sunday to get an idea how how it was running and what scope there was to take it further.

It's running 25.5 degrees of timing advance at the top end, and has water meth running, but it still runs 25.5 degrees with no timing pull with the meth switched off, so there are definitely gains to be had still from the timing. Boost like you say should be happy at 22psi or so as well.

Looking forward to getting the map tweaked to suit this turbo and hopefully pushing for 380ish!


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> I would love to feed my S3 with some E85


My F23 on E85 RIPS! Im never going back to gasoline.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 18, 2009)

Not that easy to get in the uk guys


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Been watching this since someone text me a link to the build, it's a very interesting idea and get an A+ for thinking out of the box! The things that bugs me are the result posted above, 260TQ and 200HP at 4000 rpm. Maybe it's the relatively low boost, or the lack of a refined mapping (not that I have a fine tuned mapping myself), but the numbers don't seem too indicative of a very fast spooling setup. Am I missing something here? I'm not just looking at raw numbers, but I would expect to see everything shifted to the left to show a response improvement over the current K04-02X frames (including hybrids) that are pushed.


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

I think there are a few things at play here that are making the results appear different to expected.

First off, Bills dyno is a strange one with regards to torque. I've been around the UK and run my car for comparison on almost all the major known UK dynos in the VAG scene, and we've worked out that at Bills, Torque is under read by 16% compared to all others, peak bhp seems largely the same wherever I go, although at varying RPMs, but at Bills, torque under reads by pretty much bang on 16%, on a range of different cars too.

That would suggest that the 4krpm figure is more like 300lbft and 230bhp at present.

Also, this is still on the map from the old 023-hybrid, which had to be held back on spool up until 4500rpm before it could be allowed to spool fully, because any earlier than this and surge became an issue, so the map is still pulled back until 4500rpm. that's why after the initial boost levels out, it picks up up again from 4500rpm.

The first peak is down to the map being for a different turbo, so boost control isn't dialled in, the second peak is where the reigns are released from the surging days of the old turbo.

thirdly, and this one I don't understand at all, on road road I am seeing 20psi at 3krpm, yet on the dyno that doesn't occur until about 3500. No idea on that one!

On the road, spool feels just the same as the old 023 hybrid, but without the worry of surge that was a constant issue on the old setup.

hopefully, when it's mapped it's full potential will shine through the the apparent oddities will be resolved.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> I would love to feed my S3 with some E85


you have the injectors for it I believe.. monstors!


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

oh, and one final thing, haha.

the map on there was done baring in mind that it's a track car, so rather than an aggressive lairy delivery it was mapped to be as smooth and linear as possible, I requested peak power and torque to be as high up the rev range as possible, which probably explains a lot to!


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Been watching this since someone text me a link to the build, it's a very interesting idea and get an A+ for thinking out of the box! The things that bugs me are the result posted above, 260TQ and 200HP at 4000 rpm. Maybe it's the relatively low boost, or the lack of a refined mapping (not that I have a fine tuned mapping myself), but the numbers don't seem too indicative of a very fast spooling setup. Am I missing something here? I'm not just looking at raw numbers, but I would expect to see everything shifted to the left to show a response improvement over the current K04-02X frames (including hybrids) that are pushed.


the slope of the spool can be shifted to the left if a longer harder ramp rate was being run on the dyno.. like a taller gear up a steeper hill. It was run in the same mode as it did previously to compare like for like. on the road, it does produce boost earlier in the rpm range in the taller gears when loaded.

compared to the k04-023 hybrid its replaced its a comparison snapshot on same mapping. Remap for it will be 5th sept I believe. We are all intrigued to see what it does.
It shows good promise. The turbo is well understood at the end of the day its a std K04-064 unit currently with 1bar actuator.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Prawn said:


> oh, and one final thing, haha.
> 
> the map on there was done baring in mind that it's a track car, so rather than an aggressive lairy delivery it was mapped to be as smooth and linear as possible, I requested peak power and torque to be as high up the rev range as possible, which probably explains a lot to!


You're loosing me more and more! Why on earth would you want to water down power delivery on a track car? Civility is the least of your concerns in that environment. Unless you have traction limitations (which should be optimized on a car built for the track), I don't see the point. You're using the mapping to take away most of what the turbo swap potentially has to offer over the conventional K03/K04. 



badger5 said:


> the slope of the spool can be shifted to the left if a longer harder ramp rate was being run on the dyno.. like a taller gear up a steeper hill. It was run in the same mode as it did previously to compare like for like. on the road, it does produce boost earlier in the rpm range in the taller gears when loaded.
> 
> compared to the k04-023 hybrid its replaced its a comparison snapshot on same mapping. Remap for it will be 5th sept I believe. We are all intrigued to see what it does.
> It shows good promise. The turbo is well understood at the end of the day its a std K04-064 unit currently with 1bar actuator.


Like I said, I was not looking at the raw numbers but rather response improvements in the TQ/HP delivery (over the previous turbo). I like the fact that you used the same gear and roller setting so there is a usable reference point. Like you said, the setup shows potential and we're all intrigued to see where this goes. :beer:


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> You're loosing me more and more! Why on earth would you want to water down power delivery on a track car? Civility is the least of your concerns in that environment. Unless you have traction limitations (which should be optimized on a car built for the track), I don't see the point. You're using the mapping to take away most of what the turbo swap potentially has to offer over the conventional K03/K04.


Things must be VEEEEEEEEEEERY different over in the USA compared to the UK :wave:

Peaky aggressive power is utterly useless on track, all it does it spin the wheels up and upset the balance of the car.

Smooth and linear delivery is what's required on track, where the revs are above 5k for 90% of the time, the difference in the upper rev range between something like this and a ko3/ko4 is night and day. On track I only run 1 bar and ~290bhp, it makes for a much nicer drive.
in all probability we will probably tame it down in the midrange to keep the power useable.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> You're loosing me more and more! Why on earth would you want to water down power delivery on a track car? Civility is the least of your concerns in that environment. Unless you have traction limitations (which should be optimized on a car built for the track), I don't see the point. You're using the mapping to take away most of what the turbo swap potentially has to offer over the conventional K03/K04.
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, I was not looking at the raw numbers but rather response improvements in the TQ/HP delivery (over the previous turbo). I like the fact that you used the same gear and roller setting so there is a usable reference point. Like you said, the setup shows potential and we're all intrigued to see where this goes. :beer:



Track car is front wheel drive.. Traction is one of his concerns hence the progressive delivery request.

Unlimited traction, kick in early torque will be much higher as it is on tfsi's (not as high as them being non stroker but....)

Track would be spending its time 4krpm upwards most of the time.
20mins on track will be taking its toll 

Switchable boost maps would be the ideal.. wideband ftw Prawny


----------



## superkarl (Dec 18, 2012)

Prawn don't forget the americans definition of track driving, they blast around a carpark littered with cones, and class that as 'autocross', or something. 
They dont have the luxury of the likes of silverstone, anglesey or cadwell.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> Track car is front wheel drive.. Traction is one of his concerns hence the progressive delivery request.
> 
> Unlimited traction, kick in early torque will be much higher as it is on tfsi's (not as high as them being non stroker but....)
> 
> ...


Not looking to take a turbo discussion off-topic but traction issues with "being FWD" as the excuse screams a lack of suspension/tire/LSD development to me. I hear it all the time, but I've built some pretty powerful FWD track machines and grip/traction is never an issue with enough meat on the ground (wish I could say the same about torque steer though :laugh. BTW, I'm from the "no-compromise" school of prepping track cars, if you couldn't tell by my cars, mods, and posts. 

Anyway, subscribed for results of this one! :thumbup:


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Not looking to take a turbo discussion off-topic but traction issues with "being FWD" as the excuse screams a lack of suspension/tire/LSD development to me. I hear it all the time, but I've built some pretty powerful FWD track machines and grip/traction is never an issue with enough meat on the ground (wish I could say the same about torque steer though :laugh. BTW, I'm from the "no-compromise" school of prepping track cars, if you couldn't tell by my cars, mods, and posts.
> 
> Anyway, subscribed for results of this one! :thumbup:


I have no traction issues when I use the right tires. On E85 I'll lose traction even with the diff' but not on DR's on a prepped track 

Also adjusting my suspension to be much higher in the rear than normal, and running the rear tires at 50+psi fronts at ~20-28psi made all the difference in the world. Instead of just raising the coils I added a spacer (aka hockey puck with a bolt and some big washers) so I would still have the stiffness in the rear from the compressed springs.  Making cheap race land ultimo's perform like good coils, ghetto style yo!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

superkarl said:


> Prawn don't forget the americans definition of track driving, they blast around a carpark littered with cones, and class that as 'autocross', or something.
> They dont have the luxury of the likes of silverstone, anglesey or cadwell.


Want to reconsider that statement? As far as I know we Americans have more road courses than any country in your continent. Don't tell me that you're trying to compare Europe as a continent to a single country, but to educate you, the US has some pretty developed and iconic circuits. 
http://theracingline.net/racingcircuits/UnitedStates/index.html

As far as autocross, it's not understood by many, as it is a driver's sport. Driving abilities (not the car) is what is mostly judged and counts. The inputs per second in autocross isn't matched by any other form of car racing and that's what makes it great for real drivers, but horrible for the challenged or those that hide behind their cars. And FYI, the SCCA solo (auto-x) Nationals is the biggest Motorsport event in the world with an average of 1200+ cars/drivers competing (not a typo) every year for a week for the past 20+ years. Beat that in terms of competition, attendance, and racing at it's purest form. :wave:


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 23, 2008)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Want to reconsider that statement? As far as I know we Americans have more road courses than any country in your continent. Don't tell me that you're trying to compare Europe as a continent to a single country, but to educate you, the US has some pretty developed and iconic circuits.
> http://theracingline.net/racingcircuits/UnitedStates/index.html
> 
> As far as autocross, it's not understood by many, as it is a driver's sport. Driving abilities (not the car) is what is mostly judged and counts. The inputs per second in autocross isn't matched by any other form of car racing and that's what makes it great for real drivers, but horrible for the challenged or those that hide behind their cars. And FYI, the SCCA solo (auto-x) Nationals is the biggest Motorsport event in the world with an average of 1200+ cars/drivers competing (not a typo) every year for a week for the past 20+ years. Beat that in terms of competition, attendance, and racing at it's purest form. :wave:


I still consider it an equestrian sport  JK...

The auto-x is not a 100% driver's sport. Hardware has alot to do with it as well. Some cars have a hard time getting out of their own way no matter who is driving it. Some vehicle bodies are just plain agile which will give you a distinct advantage over the next guy. But I do get what you're saying


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> I still consider it an equestrian sport  JK...
> 
> The auto-x is not a 100% driver's sport. Hardware has alot to do with it as well. Some cars have a hard time getting out of their own way no matter who is driving it. Some vehicle bodies are just plain agile which will give you a distinct advantage over the next guy. But I do get what you're saying


Having done it competitively in various platforms, I can say from experience that with comparable talent, car-prep will at some point come into play. However, dump the average road racer in a high end sport car and they'll get schooled by a real driver AKA autocrosser in a stock Ford Focus (and this is coming from a road racer that started autocrossing less than a decade ago).


----------



## Gonzzz (Apr 27, 2010)

I know how to settle this!

Someone should borrow my MK1 1.6l NA Diesel and do some autocrossing in it. We'll see how far 52hp gets you


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> traction issues with "being FWD" as the excuse screams a lack of suspension/tire/LSD development to me. I hear it all the time


I know where you're coming from Marcus, and I myself have that exact same argument many times a week on the UK forums, because I struggle LESS with traction at 350bhp than the majority of UK guys struggle at just 250bhp, because of the extensively developed setup.

We're running a Quaife ATB, kw V3's, Full early TT (small bush) front end running gear with eccentric caster altering bushes, fully adjustable pillowball top mounts, and an aggressive alignment setup for maximum cornering capability, along with either 240 section Yokohamma medium compound slicks, or 235 section 60 treadwear R-compound track tyres.

Despite all that, NOTHING is going to fully hook up in 2nd gear if the torque goes from 100lbft-350lbft in the space of 500rpm, as is possible with these fast spooling turbos.

Still, as you say, we are going off topic here! eace:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Prawn said:


> I know where you're coming from Marcus, and I myself have that exact same argument many times a week on the UK forums, because I struggle LESS with traction at 350bhp than the majority of UK guys struggle at just 250bhp, because of the extensively developed setup.
> 
> We're running a Quaife ATB, kw V3's, Full early TT (small bush) front end running gear with eccentric caster altering bushes, fully adjustable pillowball top mounts, and an aggressive alignment setup for maximum cornering capability, along with either 240 section Yokohamma medium compound slicks, or 235 section 60 treadwear R-compound track tyres.
> 
> ...


Should see how ridiculously wide I have to go (especially in the front) in my car to get full traction at all time with a haldex AWD which is predominantly FWD with some rear assist. So, yeah setup (or a lack of it) have a lot to do with how people interpret power delivery in the 1.8t world.




315 wide r-compounds


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Should see how ridiculously wide I have to go (especially in the front) in my car to get full traction at all time with a haldex AWD which is predominantly FWD with some rear assist. So, yeah setup (or a lack of it) have a lot to do with how people interpret power delivery in the 1.8t world.
> 
> You done any testing with Haldex controllers? 50/50 torque.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Heh, I disagree with this statement. I'm definitely not a seasoned auto-x'er but from the little bit that i've done some years ago, it starts becoming an exercise in muscle memory under a very finite set of conditions as you're doing it alone and against the clock. You are practicing working a routine and it fine tunes certain skills. Road racing has many more variables and its namely due to the fact that you are on the course with other ppl and you're just not negotiating around a track alone. Its much more a thinking game in planning your attack. Doing all this in sometimes triple digit speeds adds another element. Both forms of racing have their merits but I dont consider one superior over the other as they both hone in on very different skill sets. Road racing to me is a bit more exhilirating because you are much closer to maxing out your car.


Well, I'm a seasoned road racer (SCCA pro and FIA road racing licence at some point) and most people making comparison between the two sports don't even have real road racing or Solo experience. HPDE is nothing but road racing with training wheels on, just like local autocross in a parking lot full of novices have little to do with an SCCA National even or a ProSolo. Getting point-by passes on a road course with a babysitter/instructor next to you isn't any indication of what's involved when competitively racing and no line is given to you, even the bad ones. Same goes for difference between some random club setting an "autocross" vs a real SCCA national event where you're competing against national-caliber drivers in national-caliber prepped cars.


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Gulfstream said:


> You done any testing with Haldex controllers? 50/50 torque.


I've looked into it extensively! The orange/competition controllers are nice because they allow to keep engagement under braking but are too aggressively mapped for hairpin type slow turns. The "blue" labeled controllers are better than the stock mapping, but lack the ability to keep the rear engaged under braking. I've also looked into standalones controller replacements, but they're not legal for my racing class. BTW 50/50 TQ split wouldn't ideal at all times and loose the smartness of the technology. :beer:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> I've looked into it extensively! The orange/competition controllers are nice because they allow to keep engagement under braking but are too aggressively mapped for hairpin type slow turns. The "blue" labeled controllers are better than the stock mapping, but lack the ability to keep the rear engaged under braking. I've also looked into standalones controller replacements, but they're not legal for my racing class. BTW 50/50 TQ split wouldn't ideal at all times and loose the smartness of the technology. :beer:


Keeping rear engaged through the corner is where it's at. What do you think is best if you don't have to worry about class rules?

Competition or standalone?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Gulfstream said:


> Keeping rear engaged through the corner is where it's at. What do you think is best if you don't have to worry about class rules?
> 
> Competition or standalone?


Best doesn't exist! Something with blue labeled mapping, but with ability to stay engaged during braking would be pretty sweet if it existed. 

Stock = OK, but a bit slow and don't provide enough rear engagement based on throttle application (slip mostly and feels reactive) 

Blue = better than stock in terms of reaction to slip as well as providing TQ to the rear based on throttle application. 

Competition = Super aggressive and allows binding/skipping in tight or slow corners (think 4x4 mode). However, allows the rear to stay engaged with the brakes on (which is a pretty nice feature in terms of track performance). 

Standalone = permanent engagement at a preset ratio front to rear. Being user programmable is good, but not intelligent or adaptive to the always changing conditions as the stock or remapped units are. Great for a drag car, but would need to compromise certain condition to optimize for other ones.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Not looking to take a turbo discussion off-topic but traction issues with "being FWD" as the excuse screams a lack of suspension/tire/LSD development to me. I hear it all the time, but I've built some pretty powerful FWD track machines and grip/traction is never an issue with enough meat on the ground (wish I could say the same about torque steer though :laugh. BTW, I'm from the "no-compromise" school of prepping track cars, if you couldn't tell by my cars, mods, and posts.
> 
> Anyway, subscribed for results of this one! :thumbup:


also not wanting to derail...
I run a fwd racecar myself. >600bhp on tap, and am quite familiar with traction and its limitations.

anyhows: btt


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Want to reconsider that statement? As far as I know we Americans have more road courses than any country in your continent. Don't tell me that you're trying to compare Europe as a continent to a single country, but to educate you, the US has some pretty developed and iconic circuits.
> http://theracingline.net/racingcircuits/UnitedStates/index.html
> 
> As far as autocross, it's not understood by many, as it is a driver's sport. Driving abilities (not the car) is what is mostly judged and counts. The inputs per second in autocross isn't matched by any other form of car racing and that's what makes it great for real drivers, but horrible for the challenged or those that hide behind their cars. And FYI, the SCCA solo (auto-x) Nationals is the biggest Motorsport event in the world with an average of 1200+ cars/drivers competing (not a typo) every year for a week for the past 20+ years. Beat that in terms of competition, attendance, and racing at it's purest form. :wave:



forgive Karl.. he is but young


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Should see how ridiculously wide I have to go (especially in the front) in my car to get full traction at all time with a haldex AWD which is predominantly FWD with some rear assist. So, yeah setup (or a lack of it) have a lot to do with how people interpret power delivery in the 1.8t world.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


those are some phat ole boots on there.. Damn!
you dont have the same laws re tyre poke from wheel arches in the US?


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

badger5 said:


> those are some phat ole boots on there.. Damn!
> you dont have the same laws re tyre poke from wheel arches in the US?


Not in the SCCA class that I compete in, but other classes like Stock, Street Touring, etc. have such limitation in the rulebook. In my case, if I wanted to be compliant to any class, I could make/add flares, but I never felt the need since I know that I'll never compete in any class slower than what I'm currently legal for (there is also a company in the UK that makes wide fenders for the TT that I always had my eyes on... someday). :beer:


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

*378bhp*

Ok. So just back from Holiday and not seen any updates, so to fill in. the Car was mapped properly last week, 378Bhp was the final figure with more to come we believe as there is some sort of restriction somewhere. It's believed to be in the OEM charge pipe which is pretty dam small and I think around 51mm at the inlet of the pipe where as we really need to run a 63mm one. This is in hand and I already have the Flanges cut and ready to make up a proper sized charge pipe which will hopefully release a few more bhp but to be honest a consistent 370bhp/350lbs is far more than we expected and really is far far better than the old 1.8t hybrid and yet still has the similar spook characteristics which is the most important thing..

Roll on the Hybrid...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Beachbuggy said:


> Ok. So just back from Holiday and not seen any updates, so to fill in. the Car was mapped properly last week, 378Bhp was the final figure with more to come we believe as there is some sort of restriction somewhere. It's believed to be in the OEM charge pipe which is pretty dam small and I think around 51mm at the inlet of the pipe where as we really need to run a 63mm one. This is in hand and I already have the Flanges cut and ready to make up a proper sized charge pipe which will hopefully release a few more bhp but to be honest a consistent 370bhp/350lbs is far more than we expected and really is far far better than the old 1.8t hybrid and yet still has the similar spook characteristics which is the most important thing..
> 
> Roll on the Hybrid...


Any graphs to show the spool characteristics and area under the curves?


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Any graphs to show the spool characteristics and area under the curves?


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Beachbuggy said:


>


which ones are which dan?
comparing the previous hybrid to the k04-064 one?


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

Sorry Bill, not entirely sure but pretty sure this shows 2 runs..

Yellow and orange is bhp.
Purple and blue torque

Dark blue boost.

If that's not correct then apologies I took it of prawns thread having read it that way.. Niki's graphs always seem a little bit more mysterious than yours Bills! I much prefer the simple layout your dyno produces


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 1, 2009)

spartiati said:


> What sort of timing advance are you running? Looks alittle rich in the midsection. Is the ecu requesting that much fuel?


And what about airflows? You mind sharing logs? A few months ago I was sent this dyno sheet from a customer in Spain who paired an -064 with his Ibiza. He was seeing 275+ grams at the MAF:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Beachbuggy said:


> Sorry Bill, not entirely sure but pretty sure this shows 2 runs..
> 
> Yellow and orange is bhp.
> Purple and blue torque
> ...


difficult to make out whats going on with those plots I do prefer mine for sure.. easy to see whats going on when making comparisons


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> And what about airflows? You mind sharing logs? A few months ago I was sent this dyno sheet from a customer in Spain who paired an -064 with his Ibiza. He was seeing 275+ grams at the MAF:


airflow logs from prawnys wont mean anything. its an agu ecu. me3.8 and the maf is not scalable like the me7 stuff so numbers are arbitrary and max'd also i believe


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

As Bill said, my prehistoric ECU can see a max of 187gs, which with my VR6 MAF tube would equate to around 258g/s in normal figure. it reaches this level and maxes the sensor out at around 5k rpm, from there on it's blind.

Plot above is just various runs from the mapping session Bill, all runs showing a slight lean out at the very top end with the 3 bar FPR. After this we switched to a 4 bar FPR and re-scaled to keep it safe and rich at the top.

I'll try and get Niki to overlay the old graph onto this one, although the previous runs wern't hooked up to the boot input so that won't be available to compare sadly.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Prawn said:


> I'll try and get Niki to overlay the old graph onto this one, although the previous runs wern't hooked up to the boot input so that won't be available to compare sadly.


comparison to k04-02x hybrid is whats wanted prawny

should'nt be too difficult to compare if niki can get his dyno software to do as close to my plots as possible... so full picture is clear.... boost, fueling, power, torque.....


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 1, 2009)

Prawn said:


> As Bill said, my prehistoric ECU can see a max of 187gs, which with my VR6 MAF tube would equate to around 258g/s in normal figure. it reaches this level and maxes the sensor out at around 5k rpm, from there on it's blind.


And before it reaches that level the non-linear scaling makes it increasingly inaccurate. The measurement gamut favors "normal" driving, naturally. So lacking a wideband ECU and a big housing, it's all guesswork. Frustrating.


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> And before it reaches that level the non-linear scaling makes it increasingly inaccurate. The measurement gamut favors "normal" driving, naturally. So lacking a wideband ECU and a big housing, it's all guesswork. Frustrating.


I know what you mean Doug, but i don't find it too frustrating. I think comparing MAF logs between different hardware and cars could sadly be a bit of a waste of time 

Whilst we're all agreed that dyno results USA-UK arn't really comparable, I don't think there's any greater correlation between MAF logs either.

Dan proved that when he got very excited about a hybrid flowing 292g/s, only to find it returned just 255bhp on the dyno. One of the early CR hybrids also flowed in the ~280g/s region I seem to recall but made 314bhp on the dyno, so MAF logs don't always correlate to power at all in these non standard appllications.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Prawn said:


> I know what you mean Doug, but i don't find it too frustrating. I think comparing MAF logs between different hardware and cars could sadly be a bit of a waste of time
> 
> Whilst we're all agreed that dyno results USA-UK arn't really comparable, I don't think there's any greater correlation between MAF logs either.
> 
> Dan proved that when he got very excited about a hybrid flowing 292g/s, only to find it returned just 255bhp on the dyno. One of the early CR hybrids also flowed in the ~280g/s region I seem to recall but made 314bhp on the dyno, so MAF logs don't always correlate to power at all in these non standard appllications.


agree 100%

airflow logs dont correlate a lot of the time, as dont usa to uk dynos for same hardware

more so on the tfsi cars with assorted intakes as their maf tubes are non std and change the reported airflows such that they dont compare well.

dyno ftw... same dyno tho.. lol


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 1, 2009)

Prawn said:


> Whilst we're all agreed that dyno results USA-UK arn't really comparable, I don't think there's any greater correlation between MAF logs either.
> 
> Dan proved that when he got very excited about a hybrid flowing 292g/s, only to find it returned just 255bhp on the dyno. One of the early CR hybrids also flowed in the ~280g/s region I seem to recall but made 314bhp on the dyno, so MAF logs don't always correlate to power at all in these non standard appllications.


My take on those instances is that more g/s don't necessarily translate to more power. Not on a small-frame turbo. Yes, it's sexy to have 280+ g/s charts to show off, but I think the returns are diminishing rapidly as the airflows escalate past 260.


----------



## codergfx (Jan 11, 2009)

Beachbuggy said:


> So may not be everyone's cup of tea, but we have been running a stock TFSI k04 on a 1.8t audi A3 for a little over a week now, with very promising results.
> 
> The car, a trackcar, was originally running 354bhp on a 1.8t K04 hybrid and now has been converted to a Tfsi.
> 
> ...


thats exactly what i am doing on my 1.8t audi soon to be put together most likely with e85 we will see what i will put down. If i dont like the way it performs gt3076r time lol


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

*Update*

Bit of an update

Downpipe is done and engine with turbo is fitted.











And installed









Good news is that the hybrid k04 is performing well under testing..
[email protected]

This was in a stock actuator ,which we knew would hinder so an uprated is being fitted..400bhp is on the cards.


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

Beachbuggy said:


> Bit of an update
> 
> Downpipe is done and engine with turbo is fitted.
> 
> ...


Awesome results. Pardon my ignorance if this has been answered already, but what's the spool like?


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

suffocatemymind said:


> Awesome results. Pardon my ignorance if this has been answered already, but what's the spool like?


On the stock version it's the same .. 3250-3500rpm full boost..

The hybrid on the tfsi is only very slightly later.. So I'd imagine it'll be the same


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

Any further news on this Dan? I'm REALLY looking forward to seeing how the hybrid version turns out!

We need to meet up too and go for a blast


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Beachbuggy said:


> On the stock version it's the same .. 3250-3500rpm full boost..
> 
> The hybrid on the tfsi is only very slightly later.. So I'd imagine it'll be the same


wow, i get full 20 lbs by 3100-3200rpm on my Hx27w . love this thing  ill post video sunday 

btt :thumbup:


----------



## Beachbuggy (Jul 6, 2013)

So nearly there, exhaust is done, nice 2.5" charge pipe is done, front is on the car, just a few wires to connect up, dv pipe to make.

I have started making a larger inlet, large port but figure I'll see how it goes on a stock manifold with an r32 TB first then upgrade to the larger one.

Been a bit slow as a few other hybrids have been on test. K04, k03 and tfsi.. All new designs with new specs.. Currently on version 7 of the k04 , version 6 needs to be tested and version 4 of the tfsi.. Think I might have done the most r&d on these turbos ever! Slows the actual process of building my own car..


----------



## Prawn (Jun 21, 2006)

Beachbuggy said:


> So nearly there, exhaust is done, nice 2.5" charge pipe is done, front is on the car, just a few wires to connect up, dv pipe to make.
> 
> I have started making a larger inlet, large port but figure I'll see how it goes on a stock manifold with an r32 TB first then upgrade to the larger one.
> 
> Been a bit slow as a few other hybrids have been on test. K04, k03 and tfsi.. All new designs with new specs.. Currently on version 7 of the k04 , version 6 needs to be tested and version 4 of the tfsi.. Think I might have done the most r&d on these turbos ever! Slows the actual process of building my own car..



2.5'' charge pipe sounds good, i think that and an inlet manifold (when I get round to it!) Should unlock 390bhp from mine!


----------



## MetalMan1 (Dec 19, 2011)

Bumping this thread, hoping one or more are willing to post updates!


----------



## a sneeky spork (Jan 10, 2012)

got any pics of the adapter plate used ? I saw some with the turbo wanted to see the stud placement with the mk4 and mk5 overlap


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

One fitted to an Audi A4....
Beach Buggy Turbos adaptor plate. K04-064 turbo


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)




----------



## RallyeBourne (Aug 28, 2013)

Okay, so what would be needed to do this with an AEB 1.8T?manifold from which car? Turbo from which car?


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

RallyeBourne said:


> Okay, so what would be needed to do this with an AEB 1.8T?manifold from which car? Turbo from which car?


turbo pictured is K04-064, from a Leon Cupra, Audi S3, (tfsi)
manifold adaptor was from Beach Buggy turbos

A4 fitment required an outlet lug chopping off and redrilled and a downpipe reweld at top to new flange and position change.
Charge pipe outlet adaptor and associated charge pipework, and inlet etc....

Oil and water lines mix of modified std A4 and made ones.

owners build thread is here if interested>> http://www.audi-sport.net/vb/a4-s4-...progress-thread-std-scroll-eliminator-16.html


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

Nice work around Bill! 















I really like this idea. OEM reliability and not a chinese turbo like others are offering on this site etc. :thumbup:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

18T_BT said:


> Nice work around Bill!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


that was very much the brief on this one..
it was running an eliminator, but its bearings fell out! literally.. poxy thing.. ran stupid hot also as the hotsides dire..

k04-064 genuine bw unit, with ported manifold, and 15psi actuator fitted..
On my own Seat Leon TFSi which runs this turbo as std, 18psi see's mine do 370bhp/370lbft

We were getting 320bhp from the 2871 eliminator from same boost before it fell apart..

fingers crossed this works nice and reliably.
its on a stroker AEB motor, with 3658 cams also, water meth etc


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Sep 17, 2013)

What a great concept, with impressive results indeed.  Our UK brothers killing it in the K0X game fo sho


*Text for orders and customer support 24/7 908-259-4860*


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

[email protected] Performance said:


> What a great concept, with impressive results indeed.  Our UK brothers killing it in the K0X game fo sho
> 
> 
> *Text for orders and customer support 24/7 908-259-4860*


those crazy greeks did it first

:thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Sep 17, 2013)

badger5 said:


> those crazy greeks did it first
> 
> :thumbup:


Shhhhhhhhh, their egos and gold chains are big enough already Bill 


*Text for orders and customer support 24/7 908-259-4860*


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

[email protected] Performance said:


> Shhhhhhhhh, their egos and gold chains are big enough already Bill


:laugh:

blinging

:thumbup:


----------



## ejg3855 (Sep 23, 2004)

*FV-QR*

Whats the reliability of that adapter plate/flange? IT seems to just capture the manifold and hold it in place? 

Any more details on this part ?


----------



## [email protected] Performance (Sep 17, 2013)

badger5 said:


> :laugh:
> 
> blinging
> 
> :thumbup:


::laugh:


*Text for orders and customer support 24/7 908-259-4860*


----------

